This post is my replicated comment to a topic which migrated from this Wendell Berry post on my Vox blog, to Wordpress's more user friendly comments previously only available in this unrelated post.
I think the truth of the American Indian is in between idyllic romanticism and dehumanizing labels like savage. Is there anything wrong or "less than" in hunting and gathering? It is my understanding that the Indians taught the Pilgrims how to farm corn and other crops. I don't really trust the propaganda that was used to justify their extermination and removal to reservations. I recognize the culture clash, but I feel the Russians and the French dealt with it better, though they still brought devastating diseases to them.
Also, is it being less than human to be nomadic? To not be tied to one location nor consider land as something to be owned? What was so great about America was how wide open, vast, and varied it was. The cowboys enjoyed this quality for a short while before the settlers fenced and railroaded it off. People can be said to be good stewards of the land if they are careful not to leave scars and litter in their wake.
You make a good point about there needing to be tons more land for a nomadic, less possessive ownership of the land way of life. The Indians were also territorial though, the Plains Indians probably less so. I find the nomadic territorial idea interesting. It's more like they were ritualistically seasonal.
Perhaps the Indians influenced the American way of being nomadic. People are pretty quick to pull up stakes when the grass is greener somewhere else. It is my understanding that we travel around more than most people.
Also, if the log-cabin, independent, self-reliant, tied to the land, agrarian settler is the epitome of American life, and to some extent I agree, I think we have to take the original ones in context. They moved from a crowded place to a less crowded place, and they took what they practically could, from the city - heirlooms at least. And again, is living in a crowded city a sin of those less than human? I myself live on two acres and a very quiet two-street neighborhood surrounded by cattle and horse ranches. And it's just right for me. Close enough, 6 miles, to Walmart and our unfortunately growing town that has doubled in size in the 17 years I've lived here. I pray that more settlers wont come closer though one of the ranches close to us just sold out to be a new housing development much larger than ours. But our neighborhood was a ranch 10 years ago, so what can I say?
I prefer undeveloped, natural places myself which can only now be found in State and National Parks, thanks to the forsight of Teddy Roosevelt. The prickly pear cactus growing outside of Carlsbad Caverns, btw, is delicious, though definitely prickly, and they have other naturally growing plants labeled according to how the Indians subsisted on them.
The settlers also used modern conveniences of their day. They were not relics of the past. The difference today in people trying to copy them, is that they are rejecting modern technology to a large extent. This is why I view the Amish way of life as more of a museum exhibit than as citizens of their world. I don't know why I think it's important to not be anti-modern. Rejecting our culture seems sort of passive aggressive and too negatively judgmental. Technology won over primitivity and so that's what we have. When I believed in predestination, I thought that it was God's will for it to. But now I don't see God's will so much in how circumstances turn out, but in how we live within them. Not that I'm criticizing monasticism at all. That would be too judgmental, which maybe I'm being to the Amish. Anyway, I'm not seeing circumstances as so much in a good/bad, God's was on the winner's side, way. Though Orthodox can tend more toward the victim, sulking mentality when we are oppressed. To me, anyone can pray, whether in pristine nature (even Elder Zacharias stated matter of factly that the hermit monk is not longer a feasible reality in this present world, and he wasn't sulky about it at all), on a settled, environmental improving farm, or in the city, or even at Walmart. People working in agribusiness can even be enjoying relationships with their co-workers, tithing to the Church, and be excellent parents.
Another thing about the modern agrarian movement that I've observed. Sadly independent farming (or ranching) using traditional methods will not support a family, so I see a pattern of absent dad, homeschool mom and little kids tending the farm all alone. That's not how the original settlers did it. These moms also want the kids to go to college so that they can get a more family supporting job so the kids aren't going to be able to make a living with the family farm either. It's a homeschool project instead.
Additionally there are water issues in the west. Feuds and deaths have occurred because of siphoning water off of the few piddly streams and rivers we have out here (I live in Texas). I hear lake Meade, the dammed up Colorado River that supplies Las Vegas and other cities, will go dry in a little over 12 years. The water supply for Los Angeles is very controversial, and a lot of it is used for people to have their desired green lawns in the middle of the desert. This supports your case for exploitation of land. But before that, ranchers and farmers fought over water rights too.
Kentucky, where Mr. Berry lives is naturally green and fertile. My mother in law has a beautiful garden in Pennsylvania where everything will grow that hits the ground. Fruit trees, nut trees, grapes and vegetables. I gardened in my closer to the town square home with fertile soil and grew large tomatoes and ocra easily. But where I am now the soil is too porous, non-nutritive, and there's a constant southerly strong, hot wind during the growing season. I'd have to deplete our water supply (we have a well and septic tank) to install a sprinkler system, and replace all our dirt, to even have a green lawn, which our new neighbors have done. I guess I should go to the farmer's market, but it is more expensive and out of the way. And like I said, even agribusiness lettuce helps support somebody's family.
I think agribusiness was largely a result of the famine and drought during the Great Depression. Small farms dried up and the settlers had to go work for larger farms whose technology provided more insurance against the fickle elements. It's a sad fact of life that I think is largely due to our declining, end-times age. The earth is aging and suffering the result of a lot of our non-environmental friendly, and unavoidably growing population. But more people are taking notice of this since we've run out of greener grass on the western horizon. There is more awareness and effort to make more environmentally friendly, "green" decisions by people at large. People typically have to run out of what they want before they'll alter their destructive path, me included.
No comments:
Post a Comment