A Series of Unrelated Thoughts

Glancing back at couple of my peers blog entries from the past (as well as a few of my own), has led me to believe that one of the chief dangers of studying the constant struggle for justice and 'humanity' in the relationship between humans and animals is that it becomes dangerously easy to lose respect for the human race. In times of war, it is pretty standard practice for by-standers to take sides entirely. You are either a yankee or confederate, Nazi or Allie. These readings that we do, while full of rich information that can promote good discussion and even action, are capable or rending the reader for his cornerstone of identity: WE ARE HUMAN! To write us all off as slanderers, viruses, or general disturbers of nature promotes a grossly inaccurate definition of what it means to be a human. I would argue that humans are all born with a potential for both good and evil. We are every bit as capable of growing and flourishing as we are of destructing.
/Rant. I'm not sure if this is going to tie in with my actualy DB entry at all, but I felt like had to say something.

Ok, here we go. John Berger's speculative work, "Why Look At Animals?" defines what a human is by the following: "What distinguished man from animals was the human capacity for symbolic thought, the capacity which was inseparable from the development of language in which words were not mere signals, but signifiers of something other than themselves. Yet the first symbols were animals. what distinguished men from animals was born of their relationship with them." (797). As a linguistics minor, I have always been fascinated with language and speech production. Let's imagine for a second that you are a base, observant being, capable of nothing of nothing but seeing, hearing, and smelling. Now, suddenly, you gain the ability to touch. What do you do? You walk around and touch the things that you had previously observed. You become aware of the feel of the ground beneath your feet, you feel the wind on your neck, you feel the warmth of the sun. Then, you notice that there are others just like you around. You can't interact with them yet, but you see/hear/smell/and feel them there. Finally, you are granted the ability to produce and comprehend language. What do you do? You interact with those around you. You begin to converse with the beings that you had previously noted. How do you do this? By relating a cohesive thought to someone else in terms of the environment around you. This is what Berger is talking about when he talks about how our first symbols were animals. We share this planet with animals, so in order to communicate effectively at all, we almost have to use animals as a linguistic tool. We are comparative beings, by nature, meaning linguistic originality really isn't our thing.


Also, on a slightly unrelated note, I find it pretty interesting that we are just now becoming enthralled with observing nature closely. We discussed earlier whether or not we thought that Fiction or Non-fiction was best suited to help 'mend peoples views' of animals. I almost feel like the best way to educate people about the true nature of animals (meaning their capacities for feeling, lower-forms of speech, ingenuity, and survival) is by studying them in their natural habitat. "People whose livelihood depended on animals naturally noted the economically valuable traits of their stock, but otherwise animals were rarely closely observed." (801). The invention of things like the television, and high definition cameras and photography have revolutionized the way we understand animals. It should be no mystery as to why people rarely observed and studied animals previously: it required them to go SO far out of their way to do so. Now, however, with the help of the TV, and shows like Planet Earth and Life (barring Oprah's terrible narrating), we can almost instantaneously step into the natural world without leaving the comforts of our own home. Suddenly, we are able to look at the natural behaviors and struggles of animals in their own habitats. It not only lists facts to me, but it SHOWS me things as well.



And finally, I wanted to take a quick look at the verse out of Genesis that shows up on page 809 of our course packet.
"And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered." -Genesis 9:2
A couple people have mentioned this in their posts so far, but I feel like it is being taken slightly out of context. First of all, it is important to not that this is a translation. Genesis, contrary to popular American belief (this might be slightly sarcastic...), was NOT written in English. Secondly, the word "fear" and "dread" are used in almost identical fashions when used to describe how Man should feel towards God. Of course we should fear Him! To not do so would be stupidity in it's purest form. Fear boils down to one thing: capacity for harm. I don't fear a sunflower because it can't pick up a shovel and chop me down. If a sunflower could think and speak, however, I'm sure it would fear me a little bit for the reason mentioned above. Fear is the acknowledgment of respect. I fear/treat my dogs with respect because I know that at any moment they could go beserko and bite me. In the same way, animals "fear" humans because we are, by nature, capable of horrendous things. History has proven to humans are greatly more capable of incredible things than animals. We can build bridges, planes, skyscrapers. We can plant, use tools, speak. We can make music, poetry, art. We can do almost anything we want. Animals, on the other hand, can't. They can do some of these things, but I've never seen a dog that can fly and air plane, or talk to his mom who lives 250 miles away. This is the basis of the fear/respect that Genesis is talking about.