Limited Return in a Limitless Situation

After a three month hiatus, I've returned to talk about an incredibly interesting essay by Wednell Berry in Harper's Magazine. The essay, entitled "Faustian Economics", explores the ignorance most Americans have regarding the limited nature of our resources and the huge push that capitalism must make to maintain this myth. Our desire to continue to American way of life, Berry says, transforms our perception of science as a limitless field of knowledge that will solve all of our problems by figuring out new ways to convert different resources into energy -- a truly flawed perception that parallels the condescension that science usually presents toward religion: the notion that something will save us from our challenges and that we need not change our life to conform to the will of the time. Now, tragically, even the most enlightened among us rely on technology to "solve" the problems of global warming and resource reduction, spinning our capitalistic practices in various "low-impact" ways in order to lessen to dent on the sum total.

All this talk of limitlessness reminds me, of course, of Virilio and Baudrillard, and the way in which technology distances us from the problems that face us (and which are in part created by technology itself). What remains in the American mindset, says Berry, is a complicated notion of unity and freedom juxtaposed with a particular individuality inspired by late capitalism.

If we go back into our tradition, we are going to find a concern with religion, which at a minimum shatters the selfish context of the individual life, and thus forces a consideration of what human being are and ought to be.
This concern persists at least as late as our Declaration of Independence, which holds as "self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." Thus among our political roots we have still our old preoccupation with our definition as humans, which in the Declaration is wisely assigned to our Creator; our rights and the rights of all humans are not granted by any human government but are innate, belonging to us by birth. This insistence comes not from the fear of death or even extinction but from the ancient fear that in order to survive we might become inhuman or monstrous.

This last line is powerful. Considering the distancing-effect of technology, the isolation of individuals in space against one another, the drive for survival constantly ignores the notion of becoming inhuman or monstrous because we are not fully aware of the consequences of our actions (or consumptions). Our national resources, depleted, are now imported through sketchy treaties and alliances with governments known to have heinous human rights records. Not only is our consumption monstrous, we are exponentially compounding monstrosity by the consequences of our consumption abroad -- not to mention destroying the world's ecosystem and encouraging global warming at an alarming rate. Berry's basic assertion is that we need to change the way we live in the world, and I agree. We cannot merely change the products we consume, we must change the way we understand consumption and our impact on the larger world. While this idea is almost cliched at this point, it needs to be driven home: through our ignorance of limitlessness, we are making the world ever more monstrous.

When Technology Kills Aesthetics

Technology and the market have combined to destroy a beautiful thing: the polaroid.

It's interesting that the instantaneity of the polariod just isn't instant enough for us.

Two Landscapes Speak

From Heart of Darkness

The great wall of vegetation, an exuberant and entangled mass of trunks, branches, leaves, boughs, festoons, motionless in the moonlight, was like a rioting invasion of soundless life, a rolling wave of plants, piled up, crested, ready to topple over the creek, to sweep every little man of us out of his little existence.

It is interesting to juxtapose this quote, which obviously describes a distinctly un-urban landscape, with the onslaught of things that modern urban life fills itself with. Things pile up, forcing themselves into every conceivable space, taking up all available terrain, just as tree limbs, vines, and creepers take over the jungle's open spaces. Heart of Darkness can surprisingly tell us something of our own modern experience: in the scramble to bask in the sun's rays, the lifeblood for the greenery of our planet, the world becomes shrouded in darkness by the sheer massiveness of the takeover; so too with urban space and the human scramble for real estate and useable space -- the world can be shadowed by buildings or consumed by "beautification" and "gentrification," leaving the few remaining spaces in a sort of darkness, but in its modern, noisily apparent form.

MUNI Drivers

There is a sign on the bus that is positioned directly behind the driver toward all of the passengers:

"Information gladly given but safety requires avoiding unnecessary conversation."

You can tell I've been reading a lot of Paul Virilio when I immediately find this sign ripe with meaning. It is incredibly telling of our disconnected present. Drivers, Who are necessarily (for now) human beings, are produced as computers -- able to communicate information but off limits as far a real, intimate connection goes. Safety is the reason given for this disconnection; it dictates that "accidents happen" when people connect, that casual conversation is "unnecessary" for the situation and should be avoided. Thus, the bus merely becomes a mode of transportation -- a very pragmatic conception -- instead of a social space where the city's inhabitants interact and coexist for several minutes a day. As mere transportation, individuals are isolated in a trajectory that simultaneously privileges and fears the accident: in order to preserve our precious, comfortable human lives in the age of technoscience, we must neutralize the spontaneous and potentially creative forces that we are capable of, silencing ourselves, locating ourselves in isolated seats, looking forward, alone.

More Virilio in a space with another purpose, which is currently unclear to me.

3rd World Farmer

One of my favorite blogs, Pruned, called my attention to a game called 3rd World Farmer.

The game is, as one could probably decipher, in the "third world." The point of the game is to raise your family and increase your earning potential. The game simulates common third world problems such as drought, revolution, and corruption, which all affect your ability to make a living. It goes into surprising depth for a flash-based simulation: you raise children who can either go to school (and so be available less for work) or get married and leave the farm (but earn a nice dowry), there are infrastructural building opportunities, and aging is a factor. To go directly to the game, click here (but look over the hunger related subtexts at some point).

The game must be a bit too easy once you get the hang of it, as I won in 26 turns. But the high scores reveal a much deeper obsession with actually making that Saharan farm worth millions. All intelligent people will understand this isn't a simulation per se, but a metaphor for the hardships and catastrophes faced by "third world" farmers. (Now you too can toil the African soil, but from the comfort of your first world nation.)

Blogs, Frustration, and a New Idea

I am attempting to engage with questions of sustainability, consumerism, and what I call new "techniques of existence" in the technoscientific age. What concerns me most is the co-optation of "green," "environmental," "sustainable," and so on by business. That isn't to say that I am not guilty of buying so-called green products, but the sort of ignorant consumption that is promoted by blogs in general is quite disturbing.

For instance: today, I was searching for hacks and diy projects related to electronics and technology in general; eventually, through several tangents of RAID kits and wandering in the dark as to the fundamentals of modification and hardware hacking in general, I came across a "green hacks blog". What the "hacks" suggested, however, amounted to a basic tips sheet on how we can change our consumption habits to be more sustainable. What the blogger clearly misses is his reliance on his current lifestyle. He fails to see that consumption itself is a blight.

Combining these two ideas: a blog/site that offers step by step ways to reduce consumption of resources and encourages the development of symbiotics in human/earthly life.

For example:

an electronic switch stepup that allows circuits in the home to be shut off entirely. this would allow devices that are constantly connected to electric outlets, such as televisions and appliances, to be cut off from power flow entirely. The reason for this is that televisions and appliances have circuits that constantly use energy even when not on. So, besides computers and clocks and whatever else needs a bit of constant electricity, the rest of the power in the home could be totally shut down.

Maybe I'll get some more ideas later.