"But the contact with pure unmitigated savagery, with primitive nature and primitive man, brings sudden and profound trouble into the heart. To the sentiment of being alone of one's kind, to the clear perception of the loneliness of one's thoughts, of one's sensations--to the negation of the habitual, which is safe, there is added the affirmation of the unusual, which is dangerous; a suggestion of things vague, uncontrollable, and repulsive, whose discomposing intrusion excites the imagination and tries the civilized nerves of the foolish and the wise alike."
Conrad has an amazing ability to describe something horrendous, dark and disturbing with beautiful language and intense imagery. He also has a deep understanding of the complexities of the human mind, the savage as well as the civilized. In this piece, he tells the story of two men who are sent to a site within the forests of the Congo, a site that has little to no value or interest to their Director. He simply wants to get rid of them for a while. These two men are thrown into a completely different environment, one in which their civilized ways are of no use to them. The utter darkness, the unfamiliarity of this site strikes fear into these mens souls, shakes them up. They feel immediately the savage nature that surrounds them. They are repulsed by this, cling to their sanity and civilization, to each other as the only familiar and safe place to be. But as time wears on, they are slowly eaten away by the darkness surrounding them, begin to lose their control, and show signs of that wild, bestial nature that Conrad believes exists in us all. An animalistic nature, one of instinct and survival.
It's funny, because when I had to read Heart of Darkness and watch the movie Apocalypse Now in high school, I was bored out of my mind, didn't understand a word he was saying. Now, after watching and reading of the utter cruelty and evil that was committed upon the peoples of the Congo...now, I understand and appreciate Conrad's writing and analysis. Maybe it's time to give Heart of Darkness another read.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Blessed Unrest-Paul Hawken
"Indigenous cultures keenly sense that they are judged by the terms of a Darwinian bias: namely, that there are higher and lower peoples, and that because one's culture is not European or modern, one's history is not as distinguished or valuable." -Hawken. page 94 Blessed Unrest
"Social Darwinism is a belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die. The theory was chiefly expounded by Herbert Spencer, whose ethical philosophies always held an elitist view and received a boost from the application of Darwinian ideas such as adaptation and natural selection."
(http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/eh4.shtml)
What really boggles my mind is why Europeans think that they are so much higher on the totem pole than other peoples. The fact is that all peoples have their strenghts and weaknesses, skills and knowledge that are vital to the area that they inhabit. Some are more inclined to have agricultural skills, knowledge of the seasons, which plants and animals flourish and which perish depending on the weather and other factors, some have knowledege of medicine, whether synthetic or organic, some have knowledge of languages and literature, trade and bartering skills, money skills in general, how to make a profit...there are so many different trades and tricks out there, and it is absolutely amazing how some peoples have adapted to their environment, become so in tune with their surroundings that they are able to tell which times are best to fish judging by the phase of the moon. Europeans and the U.S. enjoyed the benefits of the Industrial Revolution, where we learned to make stronger, faster, more productive equipment, resulting in a more luxurious lifestyle than most others would have (actually we just had more stuff). So my point is this: how are we any better than indigenous people, people with the resourcefulness and perseverance to learn their land and the ways of the environment, to really make a connection with what they need to do to survive? This does not mean that they are superior to us in any way. Americans and Europeans have learned the ways of technology, advanced medicine, mass production, schooling in a multitude of subjects as diverse as psychology, mechanical engineering, biochemistry, sociology, Shakespeare, and women's studies. As a result of our environment, we became who we are today. No one should be made to feel inferior because of who they are, no matter their strenghts or weaknesses. Social Darwinism is a sick joke. The beauty of the human race is our diversity, our utter uniqueness and ability to adapt and change. However, we are all humans, and well all deserve respect and fair treatment. We all share this Earth, for as long as it is here for us.
"Social Darwinism is a belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die. The theory was chiefly expounded by Herbert Spencer, whose ethical philosophies always held an elitist view and received a boost from the application of Darwinian ideas such as adaptation and natural selection."
(http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/eh4.shtml)
What really boggles my mind is why Europeans think that they are so much higher on the totem pole than other peoples. The fact is that all peoples have their strenghts and weaknesses, skills and knowledge that are vital to the area that they inhabit. Some are more inclined to have agricultural skills, knowledge of the seasons, which plants and animals flourish and which perish depending on the weather and other factors, some have knowledege of medicine, whether synthetic or organic, some have knowledge of languages and literature, trade and bartering skills, money skills in general, how to make a profit...there are so many different trades and tricks out there, and it is absolutely amazing how some peoples have adapted to their environment, become so in tune with their surroundings that they are able to tell which times are best to fish judging by the phase of the moon. Europeans and the U.S. enjoyed the benefits of the Industrial Revolution, where we learned to make stronger, faster, more productive equipment, resulting in a more luxurious lifestyle than most others would have (actually we just had more stuff). So my point is this: how are we any better than indigenous people, people with the resourcefulness and perseverance to learn their land and the ways of the environment, to really make a connection with what they need to do to survive? This does not mean that they are superior to us in any way. Americans and Europeans have learned the ways of technology, advanced medicine, mass production, schooling in a multitude of subjects as diverse as psychology, mechanical engineering, biochemistry, sociology, Shakespeare, and women's studies. As a result of our environment, we became who we are today. No one should be made to feel inferior because of who they are, no matter their strenghts or weaknesses. Social Darwinism is a sick joke. The beauty of the human race is our diversity, our utter uniqueness and ability to adapt and change. However, we are all humans, and well all deserve respect and fair treatment. We all share this Earth, for as long as it is here for us.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Bishop Brother Bartolome de las Casas (Casaus)-A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies
"These people would be the most blessed people on earth if only they were given the chance to convert to Christianity." -pg. 11 (of the packet we were assigned)
First off let me say that I am not against religion, of any form. I think religion is a beautiful thing, and it can do wonders for people. However, I do not believe that there is one right religion, or one that is the closest to God, or any sort of superiority as far as that goes. I do understand being biased towards your own religion, believing it to be the best, but there needs to be a certain level of respect towards other people's beliefs and feelings, especially when it comes to a subject as loaded as religion (another obvious example of a loaded subject would be politics, but that is fodder for another discussion). The people in the above quote were natives of the lands that the Spaniards were "settling." These natives did just fine without Christianity, and they would have been the same good, kind, honest people even if they had never heard of Christianity. They were blessed in that they were good people, friendly and trusting, giving people. Yet the Spaniards, who would call themselves Christians, were slaughtering these people, enslaving them, torturing them, stealing from them. Christianity isn't a label that you can choose to tout when you please, and "the so-called Christians set about stealing from the people and murdering them on the pretense of settling the area." (page 13 of the packet). I guess my point is that you don't have to be a Christian to be blessed, and just because you are a Christian doesn't make you a good person, doesn't mean you are blessed.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Citizens of the World-Martha C. Nussbaum
"The best education, they held, was one that equips a citizen for genuine choice of a way of life; this form of education requires active inquiry and the ability to contrast alternatives."-Nussbaum, page 54
The above quote comes from a piece of writing by Martha C. Nussbaum, titled Citizens of the World. This quote refers in particular to the Athenian way of thinking. These people considered freedom of choice and the ability to see and think critically about alternatives extremely important. These values are the same that we as Americans hold dear-the freedom to choose. The freedom to learn and see what choices are out there to make, and then, when we have made a choice, to carry it out. Unfortunately, not everyone, even in America, enjoy this ability. This is not only unfair, unjust, it is devastating. Especially since signing up for this class, Sustainability, I have seen and read of people that live in extreme poverty, without clean water, shelter, a steady and healthy supply of food, diseases run rampant, infant mortality rates are sky rocketing. Who would choose to live like this? I hear about all this from the comfort of a well lit classroom, surrounded by fellow college students and my professor, day dreaming about what I am going to eat for lunch, or about how much I want to go shopping, or about how much my life sucks because my boyfriend and I broke up. It's difficult to imagine living as these people do. The people of wealthy nations balk at the thought of giving up any semblance of their affluent lifestyle; and really, it wouldn't make things any better to subject others to that sort of poverty. The real solution is to give these people the ability to make a choice, to live as they would choose to, where they are. Simply giving these people clean drinking water, giving them the land they need to work and make a living, the materials they need to build sturdy houses...not everyone would choose to live as Americans do. More money, more "stuff" doesn't equal more happiness. That much is obvious in our society, with the number of suicides and depression cases in our nation. People have the right to make their own choices; no one should be robbed of that right.
The above quote comes from a piece of writing by Martha C. Nussbaum, titled Citizens of the World. This quote refers in particular to the Athenian way of thinking. These people considered freedom of choice and the ability to see and think critically about alternatives extremely important. These values are the same that we as Americans hold dear-the freedom to choose. The freedom to learn and see what choices are out there to make, and then, when we have made a choice, to carry it out. Unfortunately, not everyone, even in America, enjoy this ability. This is not only unfair, unjust, it is devastating. Especially since signing up for this class, Sustainability, I have seen and read of people that live in extreme poverty, without clean water, shelter, a steady and healthy supply of food, diseases run rampant, infant mortality rates are sky rocketing. Who would choose to live like this? I hear about all this from the comfort of a well lit classroom, surrounded by fellow college students and my professor, day dreaming about what I am going to eat for lunch, or about how much I want to go shopping, or about how much my life sucks because my boyfriend and I broke up. It's difficult to imagine living as these people do. The people of wealthy nations balk at the thought of giving up any semblance of their affluent lifestyle; and really, it wouldn't make things any better to subject others to that sort of poverty. The real solution is to give these people the ability to make a choice, to live as they would choose to, where they are. Simply giving these people clean drinking water, giving them the land they need to work and make a living, the materials they need to build sturdy houses...not everyone would choose to live as Americans do. More money, more "stuff" doesn't equal more happiness. That much is obvious in our society, with the number of suicides and depression cases in our nation. People have the right to make their own choices; no one should be robbed of that right.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Hello there!
Welcome to my weblog. My name is Gloria and I am in a class called Sustainability at Portland State University. This blog will contain my thoughts on the material we read, watch and discuss for this class. Enjoy and feel free to react and respond accordingly to any posts that elicit it. But please, let's be respectful and tasteful.
Thanks!
Gloria
Thanks!
Gloria
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)