[1]In the human realm everything either is, or can be made to appear, connected to everything else.
~Donald M. Michael (Gunderson, p. 472)
Acknowledging the mythic construction of connectedness, interdependence, and mutuality serves (1) as the foremost premise of ecology and (2) to circumscribe the distinctly human element of ecology.
Invoking the grandiose discourse of myth seems rather presumptuous, even a little haughty for an
introduction. Maybe I find the avenue all the more troublesome given its
exhaustive implementation within the realm of critical theory. Within the
Painting coven, “myth as program” is common currency, often over-fetishized and
weighted with self-interest. Alas, while the art world continues to nurse
its distasteful, postmodern hangover, post-structuralism’s resuscitation of
narrative may still pose viable considerations within other critical spheres.
Utilizing myth as a living,
functioning form of cultural narrative recognizes the distinctly human faculty
which constructs and imbues a platform with moral and political significance.
Our propensity to construct narrative does not denigrate the perceived
intricacies of experience, but emphatically relates the nature of the human
condition as inextricably interlinked with our environment. It would be a
gross misrepresentation to discuss this human factor as purely a mediating
element, or as a wholly external entity. When we speak of “intangible ecological
value,” we are speaking of social values, of shared responsibilities, and of
the basic tenant of ecology; we are speaking of the concept of community.
Space is rarely conceived free of social definition (Erickson, p.10). The
desire for familiarity, sociability, and connectivity tempers the dynamics of
(perceived or imposed) complex, causal connections. Because our
“humanity” inevitably complicates theory and practice, ecology is a field
reasonably rich in passions, speculation, and conflict, all ensnared with
technical information. Such investment and specialization can pose as
hindrance or act a site of convergence, hosting substantive dialogue and
facilitating generative conversation.
As cultural creatures, language is an invaluable apparatus for the
proliferation concepts and cause for action. Thus, objectivity is
something of an impossibility. Though we may valiantly attempt to subvert
our anthropocentric understanding of the “nonhuman,” “the world outside of ourselves”,
with great futility we must apply metrics and return to a human scale.
One can amass and collect endless amounts of data, but analysis is hardly
neutral. And this is why education is paramount. We are not simply
agents, and we do possess the ability to qualify how we
affect change; how we respond to “the other.”
[2]
In the end, we will conserve only what we love,
we love only what we understand, we will understand only what we are taught.”
~Baba Dioum
(Giller, p.224)
Education is precious, otherwise, what's a siphonophore?
Well, you wouldn't encounter a siphonophore in freshwater... a siphonophore is a marine invertebrate.
[3]So, please, pardon the (allegorical) pun, but it brings us to the case in point: Time to introduce some terminology and clarify the parameters of the field study.
Refs--
Collier, Boyd D. Dynamic Ecology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973. Print.
Erickson, Donna L. MetroGreen: Connecting Open Space in North American Cities. Washington: Island, 2006. Print.
Giller, Paul S., and Björn Malmqvist. The Biology of Streams and Rivers. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1998. Print.
Gunderson, Lance H., C. S. Holling, and Stephen S. Light. Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions. New York: Columbia UP, 1995. Print.
Images
[1] Detail from, The School of Athens, Raphael http://faculty.isi.org/media/images/catalog/originals/The_School_of_Athens_detail.jpg
[2] Personal Photo, June, 2012
[3] Siphonophorae, Ernst Haeckel
http://0.tqn.com/d/animals/1/0/O/j/428px-Haeckel_Siphonophorae_77.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment