Panel 4: Eco-critical Cultural Production(s)
THE WORLD IN 2050: CREATING/IMAGINING JUST CLIMATE FUTURES
A NEARLY CARBON-NEUTRAL CONFERENCE
Panel 4: Eco-critical Cultural Production(s)
After Nemo: Animated Film and the Consequences of ‘Cute’ for Ocean Life
Justyna Poray-Wybranowska and Rachel Levine, York University and University of Toronto
We use Finding Nemo to examine the relationship between popular media depictions of animals, and human consideration of the non-human world. We argue that a more equitable climate future requires imagining alternate models of relationships with nonhuman beings and environments, and that a key way to attempt this task is to take seriously the type of fictional stories which shape how young audiences come to ‘know,’ and subsequently relate to, non-human animals (more).
Networked and Compassionate Eco-Noetic Environments – Art, Technology Design and Education Beyond Utopia
Lila Moore, Cybernetic Futures Institution
This talk introduces the idea of how research and practice from the fields of networked performance and learning, VR, and cyberception demonstrate that new technologies and methodologies can evolve and improve our involvement with the body-mind, one another, and the environment to transform the narrative of the Anthropocene (more).
Still Something Other: Graffiti and Ecology in the Context of Extreme Weather
Evan Gromel, University of Calgary
This presentation considers graffiti as what ecotheorist Timothy Morton has coined “ambient art.” The presentation illustrates the possibility of discovering an ecological mode of art within a form of expression traditionally perceived as a type of social capital, and thus the possibility of a world where earnest ecological consciousness can emerge from where it was once understood to be purely simulated, or outright dismissed (more).
Technocraft: Feminist Materials
Kara Stone, University of California, Santa Cruz
This talk will be a post-mortem by the artists of Technocraft discussing the process of creating the piece as it relates to re-considering women’s histories in technology, and the digital’s relationship to materiality and the earth. The talk will include photos and videos of the art piece which is composed of a deconstructed computer that we then reconstructed or replicated with traditional crafting techniques, and hung piece by piece (more).
Have questions or comments? Feel free to take part in the Q&A!
Before posting, you must first register. Note that questions and comments can be intended for individual speakers, the entire panel, or anyone who has posted to the Q&A. Respond directly to a particular question/comment by way of the little “reply” below it. The vertical threadlike lines are there to make it easier to see which part of the discussion (i.e. “thread”) you are taking up. You can choose to be notified via email (see below) whenever a question, answer, or comment is posted to this particular Q&A. Because the email notification will contain the new comment in its entirety, you can both follow the discussion as it is unfolding, as well as decide whether you would like to step in at any point. You can choose to receive email notifications for as many of the conference Q&A sessions as you like, as well as stop notifications at any time. Because the Q&A sessions will close at the end of the conference, all email notifications will also end at this time. Although only registered conference participants can pose questions and make comments, Q&A sessions are visible to the public and will remain so after the conference has ended, as we hope that they will become cited resources.
Hello virtual audience! Justyna and I are delighted to be “here” (we’re currently in different provinces in Canada) with all of you. We really look forward to your feedback and questions.
We came to this topic from a shared experience of ‘hitting a wall’ with our undergraduate students. We are fortunate to teach students in a varied number of disciplines, but have been consistently bewildered by our students’ general rejection of animal welfare in the case of animals they do not personally know. Generally, our students claim to “love” animals. This seems to mean dogs and cats, as they tend to use humor to justify eating or wearing other animals. Their professed love of animals seems sincere, but limited, and lacking in an ethical imagination.
We have often discussed this defensive humor, and the role of humor in representing non-human animals, more broadly. The treatment of non-human animals (not just dogs and cats) is of significant ethical concern to us both; we take it as a serious matter. Yet, we *need* humor and a little lightness to keep our students’ attention… too grim the presented reality, and their defensive hackles go up. We decided to put our minds to why and how it has come to be so common to treat the welfare of farmed* animals as a ‘joke.’ We looked to how animals are represented to children in film, and particularly films that carry a moral message about animal welfare and the proper role of the human. We found childrens’ films to be rife with paradoxical messages, but decided that Nemo presented a particularly compelling case since the film would seem to have inspired the precise human behaviors it condemned, and further, these behaviors would seem to turn on a human belief in their inherent goodness. It also presents us with urgency, since the destruction of marine habitats is an enormous, and often overlooked, threat to climate stability.
We would particularly appreciate questions, comments, and feedback from audience members who have successfully met minds with students on the topic of animal welfare, and specifically the welfare of animals in distant, abstract environments – animals that students could never naturally ‘know,’ and whose protection would necessarily mean that students cannot view them in captivity. As we mention, we believe that distance and concealment are large contributing forces to climate change. How do we encourage an increasingly visually-inspired and increasingly digitally connected cohort of young people to care about something with which they can’t develop an aesthetic connection?
*we see this term as not limited to agriculture and fur use, but including all animal populations that are mass-manipulated for human benefit
Hi Rachel
Thank you for the stimulating presentation. I have been teaching a class on cinema and ecology for the last 4 years for the BA students of a programme in religious studies, mysticism and spirituality. For most of them, the course is the first time they critically engage with film and theories of film in an interdisciplinary context. I also refer in the class to mainstream films that have manipulated the ‘cuteness’ of animals.
Initially the students were surprised when they realized that they didn’t notice how these films manipulate the images of animals and the viewers. But once they are shown examples, they can see beyond the humor and the manipulation. Developing aesthetic connection with another unknown creature is the role of the film-maker. The aesthetic language that will generate a connection with an unknown creature has to be based on compassion and not on cuteness. Animals are not that ‘cute’ in nature or in any other environment, and when people discover that, they easily abandon the animals. Anima Mundi by Godfrey Reggio is a rather rare example of a film which does not humanize animals, make them look cute or manipulate them. It shows nature in a way that may enable the development of aesthetic sensitivity in the viewers. It creates a sense of awe and respect or even compassion for the animal. It’s not a Hollywood film but the students should be able to watch and discuss a variety of film styles to develop aesthetic awareness or connection.
Lila,
Thank you for your comment and the film recommendation.
Interesting that you mention the religious studies program as a productive setting — I have had similar “success” with my students in courses exploring the relationship between spirituality/worldview, and ecology. These courses prepare students to think about the non-human world with the same tools that they might have normalized for contact with the world of spirit: awe, as you say, and wonder, marvel, and also a humility or humbleness. The trouble for me has been getting students who didn’t ‘sign up’ for that type of experience (students in other courses) emotionally and intellectually ready to think that way. So, the resistance or use of humor that I mention, I think, is not simply limited to not wanting to rethink a relationship with eating flesh or wearing fur… it is a resistance to what might be an enormous phenomenological and ontological shift for many.
Thinking about animals as pets, or as cute, requires really no shift at all for most students who’ve come up through Western education. Pet animals are constantly used as teaching tools: domestic dogs are being used quite frequently now in elementary school reading programs, many elementary schools have a class pet to teach ‘care,’ (where does it go when the year ends?) and of course, animals like Cat and Dog are used to teach little ones the alphabet. But what alphabet is complete without zebras? So charismatic, exotic animals and pet animals often get tied up in childrens’ early learning and are possibly hard to disentangle… hence why “owning a Nemo” seems a reasonable impulse and decision.
You’ve given me a lot to think about. Thanks again for commenting!
Hi Rachel,
I would like to clarify, that the ‘success’ that I suggested is the ability to convey to the students that the mainstream films that they watch and enjoy, including images of cute and funny animals that these days are enormously popular in social media, can be watched and perceived critically. They then can begin to question how and why the animals are being humanized to support and promote dominant worldviews, social and political agenda, commercial aims, gender issues, etc. Students of religions and contemporary spiritualities are not necessarily more perceptive or sensitive to aesthetics, visual depictions or data. In fact, from my experience, the majority are more ‘comfortable’ with Hollywood films as texts to work with. For this reason, I have mentioned a film like Anima Mundi that could be a challenge to watch for students who usually watch Hollywood films. I have also mentioned it because I suspect that viewers of Anima Mundi may not feel the need or desire to possess any animal featured in the film due to its aesthetic sensibility. I address the desire to possess, control and overpower animals, including dangerous and exotic ones, with my students using examples from feminist and gender studies.
I agree with you that there “is a resistance to what might be an enormous phenomenological and ontological shift for many,” therefore, I suggest that exposure to different film genres could be utilized in combination to address the resistance and assist in that ontological shift. It may not be effective for all students, but it may have a longer term subliminal or even direct impact on psychological and behavioural patterns of some students. This, of course, is one strategy, out of many, that could be experimented with to develop aesthetic sensitivity and connection to exotic creatures.
I am currently co-authoring an article on film, ecology and theology and will be happy to send you a link after it’s published. Many thanks again for sharing your thoughts and concerns.
HI Lila,
Yes – if there was any confusion, I’d also like to clarify that by “success” I mean critical (re)thinking!
You refine my point well when you say “Students of religions and contemporary spiritualities are not necessarily more perceptive or sensitive to aesthetics, visual depictions or data.” You’re absolutely right, and I realize it would be remiss (and deeply problematic!) for me to suggest that students committed to these studies have any inherent skills or orientations that others do not. Thanks for prompting me to clarify that.
I’d love to read that article when it’s published!
Hi all, Rachel, Lila, Kara. about classes and communications with students, I teach a class on US Literature (again: we are “americanos” too, we feel, in Argentina) and I generally teach Native and African American authors. For the past two years, I have been teaching the course on ecology crisis (my chat here in the conference about Dwellings by Linda Hogan is in part fruit of those classes). What I can see is that the kids (here unversity education is free of charge in the better institutions, which are public, my University is one of them, Universidad de Buenos Aires) feel absolutely impressed by something which at first I had to fight to be able to do: the relationship between the books we read and the world around us, not only in the States but in our country. There are moments where certain students do not want to accept a different view of history, of the relationship with nature, of… the importance of nature and the fact that we do not own it as a species, etc. I do not teach cinema but have a quantity of articles on US cinema and generally make comments about that to the students. I do want to teach them to watch and read critically and to see what the film or book is saying in a deeper way. I studied, for instance, the “happy endings” in different films and also what films by Disney were say ing about a number of issues and I do have a study on the way Dances with Wolves works as regards the western genre. What I see in students, what I like most than anything else is when I see that they start to make critical readings too… Thank you for the exchange, the dialogue, it made me think of a number of things.
I like your point here about being critical of happy endings, Márgara. The plot arc is perhaps more important than the content, I think, or am beginning to think. Maybe this is why JM Coetzee’s “Disgrace” gets picked up a lot in animal studies classes: it’s relentlessly discomfiting, and there’s no redemption for the pro/antagonist. It sits with you. The happy ending, on the other hand, does some absolving work for the audience. I am going to make a point to focus on the narrative unfolding in the future, and have the students really pay attention to what “work” is done by each tense change/ plot point/ point of view shift, etc., and how this work serves or undermines various (for lack of a better word) agendas.
Just in response to your mention of the university system in BA: my mother is from BA and a lot of my family is there, still. My cousins have had remarkable university educations. I am impressed by the political consciousness that the young people share (although given the political legacy, it makes sense), and the eco-consciousness as well. (Although eating steak is a hard-fought cultural tradition, surely).
I seem to have problems with posting the comment sometimes. Let me try again… I was not talking about critizing that the endings are happy… I meant critique in the sense of thinking them over. Howard Zinn says in one article I translated here that if you are writing political literature or making political films (in the postive, not partisan sense of the word policial: art work that wants to promote change in certain ways), you need to have if not a happy ending, a hopeful ending. The critical view which finishes with complete disaster, is counterproductive because it will make you think that nothing can be changed. So I do like “happy endings” of a certain kind. No. My article was to differenciate between happy endings which are there to tell the audience that everything is fine and good always triumphs and happy endings of the other type, and in this second type, I include most African and Native US books that I like…, where the struggle is possible.
Hi Rachel,
Thank you for an insightful talk. In your conversation with Lila you each mention spirituality being a tool useful in understanding. The notion of viewing the non-human world in the same light that one relates to “the world of spirit”, as you say, is a concept that I think should be implemented more often in ecological education. If we can find a means of sharing this feeling so that it resonates with even non-spiritual people, I think this could be a hugely effective leap in the critical thinking of animals as they relate to us. Viewing them as something to marvel at, yet respect with humility, as you say, is something that I feel is profoundly essential in re-wiring our mindset of the natural world. So much of our education relies on establishing a relationship with that which we are studying, whether that be through ecological field work and data collection, or painting a canvas. This relationship often thrives when it is hands-on, allowing the learner to better understand their subject. More often, I suppose it is in this way, that we seek to find a part of ourselves. This perhaps is another aspect that drives the desire to interact with animals on a personal level—people feel the need to find themselves reflected in something non-human. Finding a way to tear ourselves apart from this need, or as you said, rethink what it means to care, is a perhaps necessary but difficult change. If we completely eliminate seeking personal relationships with non-human life, it may be more difficult to express their importance. Much in the way people began to appreciate land through the National Parks system (though this has been exploited in many ways as well), these immersive personal relationships with nature are what stir the hearts of some of the greatest conservationists. I suppose it is all about balance and finding the best way to manage our relationships with non-human life? Perhaps we need to utilize methods that prioritize educating people on the damage we have caused to our natural world from issues such as the Finding Nemo dilemma, while creating more opportunities for eco-minded connections with the natural world around us. Your and Justyna’s talk really got me thinking, thank you.
This is also what comes with certain world views in indigenous peoples where animals are relatives. That concept can change all your views about it. It is in the book I studied for the Conference and in almost every poem, short story, play and novel I read by Native US authors, studied also in Eugenio Zaffaroni’s La Pachamama y el humano, in 2012. As Linda Hogan says in that book, Dwellings, we have broken the Treaties with Earth and it is difficult to get it back. I think certain films such as Miyazaki’s get much more to the point there because they come also from different world views, Oriental, in this case.
Lila: I have just finished watching your video… It made me start thinking of many things. Let us say, now, that there are big coincidences between the utopian environment you describe and characteristics of many world views (this is Lucien Goldmann: what one group of humans gives to the next generation as instructions to read the world, a way of reading it which is always communitary, of the group, not individual) by Native US groups, world views one can trace in the literatures. First: the idea that Western philosophy and world views are binary and therefore they lose big parts of reality, the ones that cannot be inserted in the small squares of classifications or in none of the two members of a binary pair such as good versus evil; masculine versus feminine; life versus death; or worse, humans versus Nature. So… what one can see in these books (fiction or the kind of strange book Dwellings is) is an augmented reality as the one you describe in the video. And this would take us to the complete awareness of our belonging to Nature, not being its/her owners. This includes the awareness of being part of a community which includes place, the place your community lives in as a relative, as a character, an importante one. That is one thing that troubles me about comunitas (we would say it with one m) in your description: the lack of place, natural place which is your relative, your family and without which you are never complete as an individual or a group. As I am not very Internet or technology driven myself…, I would not know how to solve that very important problem. . The rest, the non hierarchical nature, the community awareness, the new ideas and perceptions, I find fascinating. Thank you very, very much for the opportunity to listen to your work
Margara,
Thank you so much for the feedback. I understand the binary nature of Western philosophy and in my reply to you on your panel’s page, I mentioned current practices of Western spiritualities that distance themselves from this dominant worldview. I find your perception of Dwellings, the book, as augmented reality fascinating, and yes, as a creative thinker and maker this is the type of environments that challenge our senses and perceptions and could alter the way, and the context, through which we see and experience the world and our place in it. I have more to say and express regarding it and your comment has inspired and empowered my efforts; hence, I am very grateful.
With regards to communitas, it is not a place in my comprehension, or according to Victor Turner, but a liminal state of mind that transpires during rituals, ceremonies and also during creative activity, meditation, dance, etc. It is also an altered state of mind, a spiritual feeling of great depth, which makes one feel deeply connected with all there is. Not everyone in this world has a solid home or community. There are many circumstances where people are isolated and alienated from a home or community. Communitas allows one to feel one with, and belonging to, the Earth and all cosmic life regardless of whether one has a home, family, community or biological parents, etc., in any given moment. Every human being deserves to feel this belonging regardless of material or social circumstances. I take this issue into account as my work engages with the themes of violence and compassion.
I also argue, based on research, that during online group activity (such as networked performance, ritual and study), communitas is, under certain conditions, sometimes felt or experienced amongst participants in different geographic locations. What brings them together is still a visceral experience, a form of augmented environment, where local and non-local activity merges.
Thank you for the way you clarified communitas to me. I was not using the word like that…, sorry. I think there is theory here I do not know…, because I do not particularly study religion or spirituality, but literature and I have been more interested in the way literature can talk against the whole poststructuralist trend of reading and be written to and for a dialogue with the world outside text, the world in which the author lives. Dwellings and I should say most of the books I am interested in do this. So… now that I understand what you meant by “communitas”, you are right about the “place” of “place” there. What I meant, though, is that in these American (in the sense of the Americas) cultures, I think most of them, place, a specific place where the community lives, is a relative, part of the family and therefore, as regards ecology, they do not move (because they cannot live far away, not healthily at least) and they are able to see the changes for the worse as regards ecology. There is a novel by Linda Hogan also, called Solar Storms which describes the need to go back to a place to heal it (it has been contaminated) and to heal oneself and there are plenty of ceremonies there where the communitas you talk about is present. But I do understand the difference now.
Rachel, I feel that is a very important subject matter not really very much explored around here. And my son, who is now 28 years old is almost a zoologist (zoólogo…, in Spanish, no time to see if that is the word in English, sorry). He has travelled to Antarctica to work with animals there. You are right…, in general there is no deep thought on the way the films work. Maybe it could be of great help to compare Nemo with a film made in a different culture, Ponyo, by Mishasaki, Japanese or his other impressive films, Princess Mononoke and Nausicaa…, who also talk about contamination and animals but not in an ocean environment. And, Lila, for you, those films also turn around ceremonies… I think it is worthwhile to think about these types of representations and what they express. I have not studied those films but the animals presented there are anything but “cute” and that maybe part of the problem, I feel. In her book, Dwellings, Hogan also talks about animals that, in Western societies, are linked with “evil”: bats, wolves, etc.
Hello Margara,
I am familiar with the ceremonial aspect of Mishasaki’s films. I teach a course on Film and Ritual which explores the various manners ritual is employed by, and depicted in, a variety of film genres and styles. The first woman who theorized the ritualistic form in film and art was Maya Deren. Hence, you triggered my interest in Hogan’s aesthetic sensibility and it’s potential application through educational and creative practice. Plus, its indeed vital to address, as you writes, animals linked with “evil”: bats, wolves, etc”.
Many thanks!
Another book you may try (though as Gunn Allen says, all Native Lit is ceremonial in practice so this is endless) is The Turquoise Ledge by Leslie Marmon Silko, where she retells encounters with animals (mostly bats and serpents in Tucson, Arizona…) a very ceremonial, non fiction book not of the same kind as Hogan’s Dwellings at all but with a lot of what your are seeking, I think.
Thank you!
Hi Rachel and Justyna!
Watching your talk just now, I am struck by the way you begin your talk with the differentiation many people make between animals for food and animals as pets, and how for (I think, most) people these are both forms of consumption. This is obvious for those animals that become food, but for pets it is more complicated. I think the consumption mode of many pet owners is evidenced by how many pets end up discarded after they have lost their novelty. The pet owner has essentially “consumed” the “petness” of the pet and is then compelled to dump it either in a shelter, in a forest or lake, or sometimes literally in the garbage or down the toilet.
I think films exacerbate this by creating a consumptive experience. We go to the movies to watch films and consume popcorn and candy snacks, and often people consume (purchase) material products as souvenirs after the movie as part of the experience. So as you mention Finding Nemo had a message about leaving fish in their habitats, the consumptive experience of film going is hard to resist. The “cute” is a part of this. That Hollywood films is so much about spending large amounts of money and making large amounts of money, consumption is built into the creation and dissemination of this media form. I really liked the end of your talk where you suggest that “caring about climate futures means critically rethinking what what it means to care” and that an “ethic of responsibility …does not require personal relationship as proof”. These are such astute points when it comes to our relationship with animals, but I am wondering if these two points can somehow be extended to re-envision the film-going experience as consumption, to create a contemplative experience as an ethical challenge, rather than an overwhelming consumptive experience?
Thank you both for your talk. I really enjoyed it.
Hi Selena,
The question you raise is one that Rachel and I were struggling with while working on this project. It is crucial to recognize the links between the consumption of animals as pets, as food, and as objects of desire in a film or in advertisements. I agree with you when you talk about how these types of consumption are enacted thoughtlessly, or at least without critical reflection on their consequences. It would be great if audiences were more ethically concerned with the real issues the film raises. Though there certainly is something about the context in which films are consumed today (sitting quietly in a dark room and snacking on treats while taking in the narrative) that does not invite critical reflection, but instead passive absorbtion of the story. I do wonder whether this setting influences what we do with the film.
Rachel and I wanted to make it clear in our presentation that we’re not condemning the film or the film industry – we’re criticizing the culture of passive uncritical consumption which continues to aggravate current environmental crises. We want people to be more conscientious movie-goers who consider the implications of their consumptive actions, and who – if they are motivated to act because they care – really reflect on the most productive way of putting into practice that ethics of care.
Thanks again for your comment. I’m interested in what you think could be done to change people’s responses, or at least to redirect them.
I think it might also be worth thinking about whether there are environmentally-sound (as much as possible) ways to have a personal relationship with an animal without owning it as a pet. One inspiring model is the “adoption” program (more of a sponsorship program) that takes place at wildlife sanctuaries or orphanages. An example that springs to mind is the Sheldrick Wildlife Trust in Nairobi. Here, visitors – even just web visitors, if they can’t make it to Nairobi! – can sponsor an orphaned baby elephant, or an adult, with monthly donations. They receive a portrait of the elephant for their wall, and updates from the elephant’s caregivers. However, this relationship is predicated on a responsible knowledge of the substrate conditions that make the elephants adoptable to begin with (the slaughter of members of their pod for economic gain) and how local people and governments are involved in rehabilitation and education efforts. So this is a way to enjoy the cute, and consume to, but to think.
CERTAINLY poaching is a complicated issue – just like with the practices that lead to coral bleaching, vulnerable peoples are the ones recruited to do the “dirty” work and often make little gains.
Now, would a similar sponsorship arrangement work for a little animal that could fit in a house? Not as easy, but I think yes, it could!
Conflict of interest declaration: I sponsor an elephant named Murit at the Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, and indeed, her picture is on my wall.
Impressive, yes, Rachel.
Selena, This has a lot to do with the discussion Zaffaroni makes in La Pachamama y el humano, his book in 2012. Where he talks about making animals objects. He is interested in the law, he is a judge…, but he compares this with the cosification of slaves and women so there is a lot to explore there.
Technical blunder – sorry folks. My name above should appear as “Rachel Levine, University of Toronto”.
Hello, and thank you for taking the time to watch the video. The list of references is available on a separate webpage, see link below the YouTube video. I look forward to discussing your comments and answering questions as well as relating to other talks and speakers. It is great to be part of this creative panel of Eco-critical Cultural Production(s).
Lila,
The ideas you introduce in your presentation are fascinating. The notion that creating these (artificial) online environments can generate (real) shared emotion among people separated by screens or geographical distance has so many interesting possible applications.
Being able to generate this sense of communitas is so important when it comes to getting people to come together to achieve a common goal. You talk about the use of such eco-noetic communities to produce what I think of as online art installations, or records of shared, deeply personal sensory experiences. I wonder if there has ever been an attempt to harness these techniques for educational purposes.
I’m very interested in the issues you address. Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this subject.
Thank you Justyna for the feedback. I would like to clarify my presentation as I didn’t want to overload the video with too many ideas. The notion of noetic environments derives from a broader framework of research and practice and it is primarily aimed for educational purposes although it has a creative aspect and potential. As part of my post-doctoral project, I have developed a vision of an educational online platform which is termed as The Cybernetic Futures Institute. I am currently re-editing my post-doc thesis which will be published in Technoetic Arts. In this article, I explain the noetic, cybernetic system and ritualistic structure of the platform and the educational methodologies which could be implemented by utilizing it for learning and creative or any other cultural processes. Last May I led a workshop which took place as part of a Masterclass led by members of the Planetary Collegium. The participants were an international group of MA/PhD students with interest in the arts, science, technology and consciousness studies. They received a protocol from me including bibliography and filmography, and the sessions took place online and offline. Based on the experience, I realized that I needed at least 3 full days to arrive to a point where serious learning happens. However, I was truly moved, but also encouraged to explore further, by the fact that the participants’ feedback at the end of the process included that it “was during the workshop that we learned to work as a team” and each of them felt “deeply connected”. Obviously, I am trying to integrate learning with genuine teamwork, however, I am also interested in activating the stages of communitas, which according to research, carry the seeds of unbound creativity in a noetic space, which in essence is compassionate. At this stage, I am developing short courses or learning experiences for this online structure. I will let you know when my article is ready. I will probably send you another reply as I would like to explain and share additional thoughts and links. Thank you again for your feedback.
Lila: I have just finished watching your video… It made me start thinking of many things. Let us say, now, that there are big coincidences between the utopian environment you describe and characteristics of many world views (this is Lucien Goldmann: what one group of humans gives to the next generation as instructions to read the world, a way of reading it which is always communitary, of the group, not individual) by Native US groups, world views one can trace in the literatures. First: the idea that Western philosophy and world views are binary and therefore they lose big parts of reality, the ones that cannot be inserted in the small squares of classifications or in none of the two members of a binary pair such as good versus evil; masculine versus feminine; life versus death; or worse, humans versus Nature. So… what one can see in these books (fiction or the kind of strange book Dwellings is) is an augmented reality as the one you describe in the video. And this would take us to the complete awareness of our belonging to Nature, not being its/her owners. This includes the awareness of being part of a community which includes place, the place your community lives in as a relative, as a character, an importante one. That is one thing that troubles me about comunitas (we would say it with one m) in your description: the lack of place, natural place which is your relative, your family and without which you are never complete as an individual or a group. As I am not very Internet or technology driven myself…, I would not know how to solve that very important problem. . The rest, the non hierarchical nature, the community awareness, the new ideas and perceptions, I find fascinating. Thank you very, very much for the opportunity to listen to your work
Lila: I have just finished watching your video… It made me start thinking of many things. Let us say, now, that there are big coincidences between the utopian environment you describe and characteristics of many world views (this is Lucien Goldmann: what one group of humans gives to the next generation as instructions to read the world, a way of reading it which is always communitary, of the group, not individual) by Native US groups, world views one can trace in the literatures. First: the idea that Western philosophy and world views are binary and therefore they lose big parts of reality, the ones that cannot be inserted in the small squares of classifications or in none of the two members of a binary pair such as good versus evil; masculine versus feminine; life versus death; or worse, humans versus Nature. So… what one can see in these books (fiction or the kind of strange book Dwellings is) is an augmented reality as the one you describe in the video. And this would take us to the complete awareness of our belonging to Nature, not being its/her owners. This includes the awareness of being part of a community which includes place, the place your community lives in as a relative, as a character, an importante one. That is one thing that troubles me about comunitas (we would say it with one m) in your description: the lack of place, natural place which is your relative, your family and without which you are never complete as an individual or a group. As I am not very Internet or technology driven myself…, I would not know how to solve that very important problem. . The rest, the non hierarchical nature, the community awareness, the new ideas and perceptions, I find fascinating. Thank you very, very much for the opportunity to listen to your work.
Sorry, my name above should appear as “Lila Moore Cybernetic Futures Institute”. I look forward to discussing your comments and answering questions as well as relating to other talks and speakers.
For Kara Stone: Favorite quote from the text: “It is important to recognize the currentness of crafting and technology.” And how great is it that I can back up your video and get this quote exactly right to type it back to you, in a way I would not have been able to do if I was watching/listening to you live. Virtual conference strength, I’d say.
I once opened a box of fabric at a fabric store where I was working and found a message hand-inked on the inside of the box–in Chinese, as i eventually discovered. I tried to get it translated, but never managed to succeed with that. That you found personal markings on the insides of technology pieces does not surprise me at all. Why wouldn’t the crafters want to be known? Just as the carpenters who built the Sears Tower found a way to write their names on a part of the building not usually seen by those visiting the building.
Cool project. Thank you.
Hello Kara Stone,
Great presentation and installation! I have recently worked on making a noetic environment with Sadie Plant’s text which I will be showing at Consciousness Reframed 2016. I am interested in the way you integrate digital technology with traditional and ancient women’s craft and transforming it into a tactile ‘touching’ and ‘bonding’ experience, making the process communal and non-hierarchical. It appears that you are emphasizing the generally overlooked ‘humanized’ aspect of technology, making it organic and holistic, thus, proposing a friendly and caring way of handling technology, recycling technology and technological waste. In this way, the process that you demonstrate brings together feminist theories of digital technologies and eco-feminist thought. Although you haven’t mentioned eco-feminism (or perhaps I missed it), I would be interested to know if you have considered eco-feminist theories as part of the interweaving of theory and practice.
I am thrilled to see that compassion is such an integral part of this discussion. The dominant narrative of our present time is the Separation narrative from the Knowledge tree story in the Old Testament of the Bible. Adam and Eve are thrown out of Eden for having tasted the forbidden fruit. Enraged, Adam and Eve destroy Eden, etc.
In contrast, the Cosmic Fig Tree story in the Rig Veda of the Hindus, is not about separation, but about the realization that despite the power differentials that humans acquire over others through knowledge and technology, selfless compassion for all creation (nishikama karma) is the only true route to the happiness that we all seek. Please see, e.g., http://www.climatehealers.org/carbon-dharma-the-occupation-of-butterflies/31-the-cosmic-fig-tree . Indeed, Yoga begins with the axiom that separation is a delusion, that the divine is working through us at all times. Therefore, the “destruction” in the process of developing technology has a larger purpose: https://www.amazon.com/Carbon-Yoga-Metamorphosis-Sailesh-Rao/dp/1533019290
Hi Sailesh,
According to a number of prominent feminist scholars, the myth of separation developed long before the Bible was written. It was part of a gradual process that involved the transference of power from female goddesses to male gods. Biblical stories have many interpretations supported by external books and mystical texts. However, I tend to agree that in the West there is an underlying traumatic narrative of opposites that are perceived as set of oppositions between male and female, nature and humanity, good and evil, etc., that makes the subtle state of compassion rare, if not impossible. Still, many of us and many young people today are more receptive to experience compassion and learn from the wisdom of the East.
The story of the fig tree is beautiful and like most spiritual/religious stories, it challenges us and demands that we change. In the West, figs are symbols of the feminine, the goddess and fertility so associated with earthly and spiritual abundance.
Thank you for sharing the wisdom,
Lila
I wonder, though – and this not cheery – if Western audiences are so disconnected from each other, from animals, and from a wonder tradition that to begin imagining that ‘separation is a delusion’ is to make too quick a leap into a potentially legitimizing discourse for exploitative or violent behaviors: i.e., “it is right for me to eat meat since I am already atomistically entwined with non-human animals,” or “the universe in fact must thrive on methane emissions since it is a natural process for the cow to produce waste which then feeds the soil,” etc.
In other words, I wonder, now, if material conditions must be amended/controlled before we can “trust” a paradigm shift so large as to disrupt the underlying beliefs of modern Western culture and society.
Again, I acknowledge these are pessimistic and despairing thoughts…
Kara, to tell you the truth, after watching the video, I would say that you are kind of mistaken when you say that the project has no narrative. I understand that you mean that it has no story in the sense a video game has it (I am 59 years old and not at all drawn towards computer, less so computer games but I have seen them and know them because of my 3 kids, who are adults now), but it does tell a story. The project and its title more than anything else, does tell a whole story about hybridity, the body and the bodies involved, turning one object into something else, through art and more…
Dearest Earthlings,
Firstly I just want to say what a privilege it is to be a part of this conference panel, and beside such evident ingenuity. I apologize for getting on the ball a bit late here, but I was struck with a virus (pathogen, not computer) the first few days that put me out of commission.
A little about my presentation and what fueled it: Recently I’ve developed a general fascination with graffiti art that grew gradually, and peaked during the past Spring when I wrote a draft of a novella which involves an exploration of the phenomena on several of the same levels that I do in this more recent critical presentation. I think graffiti is one of the ultimate interstices, and/or interfaces, of the process of mimesis, and this spells potentially significant ramifications for the environmental humanities, since the human imperative behind the threat of global climate change can’t help but prompt a given person to persistently feel the need to renegotiate the relation between word and world (just think about the Paris COP treaty, for instance: one of the biggest questions from the start was its enforcement on a global level).
Timothy Morton, whose name is carpet bombed through this presentation, takes a counter-intuitive approach to this imperative by encouraging critical theory to “slow down” and carefully examine the lay of the land (so to speak) before deciding upon any course of action. Graffiti, in simple terms, can do this (I think); at its best its audience is never sure if they are looking at letters or a less systematized kind of image, and its not long before the two collapse into one another – and then, somehow, the divide seems to reappear, and text or image becomes more prominent. In fact, deconstruction (which Morton’s work is inspired by) permits neither of these possibilities in-and-of themselves – and in perceiving this sort of representation of environment what we are experiencing is quite similar to the effects of a Reuben’s Vase illusion. In this sense the ecological never fully collapses subject/object divides, but it never is wholly divided into a binary either.
This is a philosophy of ecology that puts forward a different kind of hope. Deconstruction has often been used to elucidate some of the more complex aspects of faith, since it paradoxically (at least, on the surface) permits one to strive towards particular ideals whilst simultaneously maintaining the attitude of a seasoned oncological surgeon to the structures which underlie methodical thought. On the surface this is hope in spite of itself, but this is only because hope can never be in-and-of itself. The graffiti I examine in the wake of hurricane Katrina seems to comprehend this in its own way, and I appreciate it all the more after doing this project.
Questions and comments are welcome, from the most basic to the elaborate. Have at it!
Hi Evan,
Thank you for the presentation, I will come back to it later as I am interested in articulations of concepts relating to environments. This response is with regards to ‘graffiti as something other.’
You may be interested in the work of the environmental artist Joolie Gibbs (Australia).
This is a quote from a review that I wrote:
‘Joolie Gibbs’ work and findings were inspired by the Mary River and the increased flooding in recent years around Gympie in Queensland due to climate change. Gibbs discovered that after the floods, debris on farmers’ fences produced patterns out of grasses, branches, mud, etc., which she documented in numerous photographs. These patterns, the inspiration to her visual art works, gave the impression that the floodwater communicates through visual language. Similar to graffiti, the floodwater displayed anarchic disregard of authority and ownership of public and private spaces. The floodwater seemed to regard fences as graffiti artists have regarded walls. The soundscape composed for this project by Carlotta Ferrari (Italy) is a sonic expression of this volatile correspondence between civilized, measured space and unbound nature. Describing the flood communication as ‘Flood Language’, Gibbs asks: Is it possible that the flood is doing this as an act of defiance, perhaps demanding a new relationship between nature and civilization?’
Gibbs Spresented her work during the Waterwheel World Water Day Symposium in 2014.
You will find her work and my review in the following e-book, see link:
http://blog.water-wheel.net/2015/02/e-book-water-views-3WDS14.html
Plus, could you please clarify the relationship between avant-garde art and kitsch or the context for this comparison with relation to graffiti?
Although graffiti art in its purest sense as aesthetics defies all social and cultural categories, several graffiti artists have become (pseudo avant-garde) celebrities and the phenomenon still continues.
Best,
Lila
Hi, LIla…, I did not know Joolie Gibbs but what she says copies the demand for “new Treaties” between Nature and humankind in the book I analized by Linda Hogan. Same idea, different art media.
Thank you , I will look at her work.
Hi Margara,
Yes, I agree with you as I can see the connections. Moreover, I think that we can identify a relatively new trend in the arts and across media which involves the interweaving of new cultural narratives. These new stories and images that we desperately need to counteract the dominant and outdated vision of the world blend the very old with the very new. The process is often subtle and generally ignored. There are young creative people involved who, often unknowingly, build on the achievements of (women) artists and scholars who have been paving the way for many years. The Waterwheel platform ( I sent the link) was a brilliant demonstration of that process as it included all generations, from school children to mature artists and scholars and had much respect for aboriginal ways of knowing. It was a global tribe made of different tribes involving different generations, which is a prototype structure of a balanced society. It also had a non-hierarchical component that the cyber-platform and structure generated.
Thank you Margara for your feedback.I am currently writing a paper in which I refer to your analysis of Linda Hogan. I will email you in the near future.
Thank you, Lila… Do. I would very much like to keep in touch.
Hi, Rachel and Justyna,
Sorry I am just getting to seeing your presentation, after Rachel’s extensive and helpful comments on my own presentation at the very start of the conference. The election here in the US has been quite a distraction. I’m sure you can imagine.
Anyway, I preface my comments with the statement that I know nothing about film – I study human interaction with urban environments, and my background is landscape architecture – and I have in fact not even seen Finding Nemo (nor owned a fish)! But I do enjoy crafting innovative classes, so here’s some thoughts:
I’m struck by how this film and others like it are made for the most non-critical of audiences: children. Many of the fine points made by people already in this discussion are just as true for films made for adults, but kids’ films with cute creatures are a different animal (so to speak) – no huge marketing tie-in to sell Dances with Wolves toys and themed Happy Meals, for example. As a child of the ’70s, I can easily think of popular children’s entertainment from the time that set me on a track toward environmentalism: Kermit the Frog (really, the Muppets in their entirety), Ranger Rick magazine (which may have folded long ago, but trust me). Bambi is the classic, of course, for better or worse – before my time, but still around during my childhood. As kids we do swallow these messages wholesale. As a newcomer to the level of critique of film within your presentation, I’m intrigued by the new and more sophisticated take on something that seems very mundane and innocent to me – it’s subversive, and I find that subversive is always a good place to start in classes! I’d try a “you think you know this film – but let’s really see what’s going on with it” strategy, maybe contrasting with messages from some other films, stories, TV, etc. they’d remember from childhood.
Another thought, touching on the extra “foreignness” of the ocean and ocean life mentioned above: Because the ocean is so very foreign, I find it easier to see it as a system, one complete organism (ecosystem) than terrestrial systems are. I wonder if the students would more readily grasp that, and then you’d be able to move from there to “so what does this mean for coral reefs?” and then “so what does this mean for individual fish, like cute little Nemo?” I feel like this might be an obvious strategy, but sometimes the obvious gets overlooked.
A more fanciful version would be to work the other way, from the fish in the fishbowl up to ocean health, with “what would an ecologically healthy fishbowl be like?” through some ridiculous proposals like how large a fishbowl you’d need to absorb all the CO2 you exhale in one night and how many plants you’d need in it, what happens without predator-prey relationships in the fishbowl, etc. Possibly that’s a little too out there…I like to start with a really crazy idea for a class and work back toward reality with it. Your mileage may vary. 🙂
I think the idea of the secret power of children’s entertainment is a captivating and important one for an undergrad class, particular for students from other majors. It’s important for people responsible for children to know about, and many of your students will be able to see themselves as future parents, uncles, aunts, and/or teachers. That helps connect with a more universal life experience that they see as having relevance to them, not just another class.
Hope there’s something helpful here. I quite enjoyed your video – good job making an engaging one!
Susan
Hi Susan,
Thanks for your insight into these possible teaching approaches to the film. Finding Nemo and Finding Dory are definitely works that need to be viewed with a critical eye if we are to see everything that is going on in them. Part of what makes this franchise so interesting is the way it has responded to public reactions to Finding Nemo. Following the huge spike in clownfish sales after the release of Finding Nemo, Pixar Studios made significant changes to the ending of Finding Dory to ensure that the film’s anti-captivity message wouldn’t get lost (again). The original script for Finding Dory had the main characters breaking into a marine park and choosing to remain there. However, after meeting with the production team for Blackfish (the documentary on the inhumane treatment of orcas in Sea World), the ending of Finding Dory was changed to include an escape from the marine park and a return to the ocean. This last-minute decision to drastically alter the plot of the film shows a conscious decision on the part of Pixar Studios to position themselves against marine life captivity. (It makes one wonder what kind of film would have been made had they not met with the Blackfish team…)
I think Pixar in general does a good job of making films that have some substance, and that present entertaining, non-didactic, politicised critiques of contemporary environmental problems. (Up for example deals with hunting of rare or endangered animals and Wall-E takes place in a world in which total environmental collapse has forced humans off of the planet.) You are right that these films make great teaching tools, and the best part is that they are so accessible. I use Disney movies regularly in my teaching – recently we watched a few clips from Mulan to talk about gender roles and beauty standards.
Thanks again, Susan! I look forward to using your proposed strategies in class.
For Justyna and Rachel
I thought yours was a very professional production: as a pleasure to watch it is an example of the power of the media.
Particularly valuable and innovative, it seems to me, is the use of sales figures afterwards to measure the impact of films.
As y’all said, ostensibly the film made it clear that removing fish from their habitat is very traumatic for them, yet sales rocketed after the movie, as they did for 101 Dalmatians, Babe, ratatouille rats, ninja turtles, even owls after Harry Potter. Hence I wondered who profited from these sales? How much of the profit went to Disney itself, creating at the least a conflict of interest and/or perhaps a sense of hypocrisy in the claim that removing fish from their habitat is very traumatic for them? Beneath that phrase I now hear “but very profitable for us.” Is that fair?
I cannot but recall the deception in the Disney version of the Walrus and the Carpenter in the 1951 Alice in Wonderland, a provocative example of Tuan’s thesis that “humans oppress and do violence to the very beings for which they claim the most fondness.” There the violence becomes murder, if not cannibalism, eating alive one’s own relatives.
Yet I also wonder if this profit-driven species-extinction is more obvious in is late Disney: did Disney profit much from sales of related retail stuff when Bambi was released? After all, the murder of his mother is not sanitized or even Disneyfied. I don’t know if you can measure any impact on hunting or the deer population.
I also appreciated your focus on the need for critical thinking about what it means to care. “Care” becomes all too often akin to “pity,” its seems to me. I immediately think of Aristotle’s use of pity, but in modern use it sometimes implies “disdain or mild contempt for a person as intellectually or morally inferior.” This disdain may be related to what Ngai and Tuan call the “sadistic side of cute,” and the other side of benevolence: the dangerous, violent type of amoral imagination beneath of lot of apparent human goodness. In my talk I point to Stanford’s translation of Aristotle’s eleos as not so much a “pity” as “compassionate grief,” a more honest and perhaps more useful concept, one less susceptible to cooptation by our all-consuming need for domination.
Hi Jerome,
That is an excellent point you bring up about who really profits from these movies’ portrayal of cute animals. This connection between the appearance of animals in movies and the subsequent explosion in pet sales is not a new one. Surely Disney/Pixar are aware of it, since Disney has been heavily criticized for contributing the mass abandonment of animals after big name movies like 101 Dalmatians. When asked to respond to these criticisms, Disney spokespersons have deflected blame, saying it is up to individual people to be more responsible pet owners/purchasers, and up to state to better equip animal shelters to receive inflated numbers of animals after their appearance in commercially successful films. Nevertheless, one really has to wonder if this is something Disney have figured out how to profit from. (It sure seems like something an evil Disney villain would do.)
It is really hard to say whether the earlier Disney movies had such an impact on real-world relationships with nonhuman animals, since the relevant data is difficult to track down. You do touch on something that I think makes Bambi unique, though. The hunter in the film is not explicitly portrayed as the ‘villain’ (in the same way Cruella DeVil and her henchmen or the queen in Snow White are) but he is the only (human) Disney villain to actually commit murder (Scar from Lion King is the only nonhuman killer I can think of). It is interesting, then, that Bambi’s mother’s death is not ‘Disneyfied’, as you say. It does however elicit the same sort of heart-wrenching sadness as the death of Mufasa in the Lion King. (Anyone who says they can watch that scene without getting teary-eyed is lying.) Compassionate grief does seem like a more appropriate response than pity, though I wonder to what extent films like Finding Nemo and Finding Dory elicit a feeling of grief. There is no true loss in these movies, only a triumphant sense of survival and an overcoming of great difficulties. Perhaps the tone of the films does not lend itself to the type of sober reflection necessary to experience this more productive emotion.
Thanks for your feedback; it is very much appreciated.