Although I may not have had the same amount of experiences tromping through the outdoors while playing as a kid, I definitely relate to what you are describing. Midland Point was a place where I played outside a lot for sure, but as a kid, I found lots of places, where ever my home was, to play outside in nature. It didn't matter to me if it was some beautiful seemingly untouched creek found in a forest somewhere or frogs in the ditch pipes beside the road(granted that may have been more dangerous :)), I loved it all and all gave me the same feeling of exploring and loving our world. I'm not entirely sure what that says about me or about nature, but I think it may have a lot to do with the idea that nature associated at all levels of human influence is still nature. And to those who love it, they'll love it no matter what the situation. Also, regarding your philosophical question Daddy, "did i explore nature or did it explore me or am i exploring myself?" I think that you've created nature, as most people do, myself included, as an other. It's an idea that stems from the romanticism and spiritual overtones that were infused with the outdoors from the late 19th century. Romping through the woods, creeks, fields, wetlands and hills of Ontario is certainly a positive experience. It can make you feel and think so many things, but it's important to understand that those emotions and feelings are products of our own creation of the idea of nature. For example, 180 years ago people living here's ideas of Ontario 'wilderness' were very different then our own. Europeans found the forests daunting, isolating, couldn't wait till the wetlands and forests were cut down, cleared out and dried up so that their lives weren't so hard--they also thought large tracks of forest caused tornadoes... The native cultures didn't have an idea of nature the way we do now either, not that they weren't without their own landscape management practices, but they didn't have the idea of nature as an other, something separate from where they were living and working. Its important to recognize that our current idea of nature and wilderness is a created one because then we can be aware that we are creating an 'other' category for it, something separate from ourselves, that we can go visit and see, but not something that embraces us in our everyday lives. Nature is all around us, we are a part of nature, the tree out my window is still a tress (a large and magnificent one at that) where a family of squirrels plays on the jungle gym of its branches and burrows warmly in its hollows. It is true that where humans are there is less biodiversity, but that should not let us forget that our cities and towns are nature sites as well. If we view nature as something separate from humans, either it, or us, are ultimately doomed (probably be us...). But if we recognize that we are a part of nature and it fits into our everyday no matter where we are, then we are bound to not take on a responsibility for something else but instead, looking after nature becomes looking after ourselves. Separating nature by glorifying the outdoors without humans in it, however tempting it may be, is a practice that comes with dangers as it distances human culture from the environment leading to practices that aren't sustainable. Just some thoughts, you've probably heard most of that, if not all of that, before. So I think then that during your wilderness play adventures and excursions it was an opportunity for self exploration, human cognitive, almost meditative, indulgence.
david suzuki has a half-haida grandchild. the haida believe people are an extension of the land, the way that hills and creeks and trees are. take the land away, and you take the people away too.
science tells us that people are made of stardust and water created billions of years ago. every breath you take was breathed by dinosaurs. part of that breath becomes fixed for a few weeks in your cells, part of the eternal dance of energy.
i believe the scientific view and the aboriginal view are complementary and a way of the future. like suzuki's grandchild.
we've been under darwin's sway for over a hundred years--competition of the individual, survival of the fittest.
but there's a 'new' idea--cooperation. from ecology to library coffee shops, cooperation and collaboration are everywhere
david suzuki--himself a scientist--recognizes that current science is reductionist, limited. it describes parts very well but lacks the power to explain the whole.
so, yes, the 19c western view of nature as 'other' coupled with the 20c belief in the supremacy of technology is dangerous, life-threatening.
hopefully, new ideas will give us a better future.
btw, the creator of pokemon, satoshi tajiri, besides having aspbergers--go figure--explored nature as a kid. pokemon was his response to japan's increasing urbanization and loss of habitat.
Although I may not have had the same amount of experiences tromping through the outdoors while playing as a kid, I definitely relate to what you are describing.
ReplyDeleteMidland Point was a place where I played outside a lot for sure, but as a kid, I found lots of places, where ever my home was, to play outside in nature. It didn't matter to me if it was some beautiful seemingly untouched creek found in a forest somewhere or frogs in the ditch pipes beside the road(granted that may have been more dangerous :)), I loved it all and all gave me the same feeling of exploring and loving our world.
I'm not entirely sure what that says about me or about nature, but I think it may have a lot to do with the idea that nature associated at all levels of human influence is still nature. And to those who love it, they'll love it no matter what the situation.
Also, regarding your philosophical question Daddy, "did i explore nature or did it explore me or am i exploring myself?" I think that you've created nature, as most people do, myself included, as an other. It's an idea that stems from the romanticism and spiritual overtones that were infused with the outdoors from the late 19th century. Romping through the woods, creeks, fields, wetlands and hills of Ontario is certainly a positive experience. It can make you feel and think so many things, but it's important to understand that those emotions and feelings are products of our own creation of the idea of nature. For example, 180 years ago people living here's ideas of Ontario 'wilderness' were very different then our own. Europeans found the forests daunting, isolating, couldn't wait till the wetlands and forests were cut down, cleared out and dried up so that their lives weren't so hard--they also thought large tracks of forest caused tornadoes... The native cultures didn't have an idea of nature the way we do now either, not that they weren't without their own landscape management practices, but they didn't have the idea of nature as an other, something separate from where they were living and working.
Its important to recognize that our current idea of nature and wilderness is a created one because then we can be aware that we are creating an 'other' category for it, something separate from ourselves, that we can go visit and see, but not something that embraces us in our everyday lives. Nature is all around us, we are a part of nature, the tree out my window is still a tress (a large and magnificent one at that) where a family of squirrels plays on the jungle gym of its branches and burrows warmly in its hollows. It is true that where humans are there is less biodiversity, but that should not let us forget that our cities and towns are nature sites as well.
If we view nature as something separate from humans, either it, or us, are ultimately doomed (probably be us...). But if we recognize that we are a part of nature and it fits into our everyday no matter where we are, then we are bound to not take on a responsibility for something else but instead, looking after nature becomes looking after ourselves.
Separating nature by glorifying the outdoors without humans in it, however tempting it may be, is a practice that comes with dangers as it distances human culture from the environment leading to practices that aren't sustainable.
Just some thoughts, you've probably heard most of that, if not all of that, before.
So I think then that during your wilderness play adventures and excursions it was an opportunity for self exploration, human cognitive, almost meditative, indulgence.
david suzuki has a half-haida grandchild. the haida believe people are an extension of the land, the way that hills and creeks and trees are. take the land away, and you take the people away too.
ReplyDeletescience tells us that people are made of stardust and water created billions of years ago. every breath you take was breathed by dinosaurs. part of that breath becomes fixed for a few weeks in your cells, part of the eternal dance of energy.
i believe the scientific view and the aboriginal view are complementary and a way of the future. like suzuki's grandchild.
we've been under darwin's sway for over a hundred years--competition of the individual, survival of the fittest.
but there's a 'new' idea--cooperation. from ecology to library coffee shops, cooperation and collaboration are everywhere
david suzuki--himself a scientist--recognizes that current science is reductionist, limited. it describes parts very well but lacks the power to explain the whole.
so, yes, the 19c western view of nature as 'other' coupled with the 20c belief in the supremacy of technology is dangerous, life-threatening.
hopefully, new ideas will give us a better future.
btw, the creator of pokemon, satoshi tajiri, besides having aspbergers--go figure--explored nature as a kid. pokemon was his response to japan's increasing urbanization and loss of habitat.
ReplyDelete