Wrap-up

What to say about this class? From Cronon, to the nature documentaries, to video games, and everything in between, we explored nature and its portrayal in various forms of media. More amazing than the number of things we've looked is quite possibly our lack of an answer to the question, just what is nature?

Is it something within the realm of human thought and control, or is it something beyond our abilities to comprehend? Is it a benevolent deity that provides for all of our needs, or is it a destructive force that we fight with our lives? Is it something we follow, or something we oppose?

I remember in high school, the process of finding an answer on multiple choice tests involved the process of elimination, and there would usually be a choice that reads "all of the above." We've never really ruled out any of options that nature can be, and it is tempting for us to pick the answer "all of the above."

And that's not necessarily a bad choice. After all, nature can be whatever we choose it to be. Moreover, perhaps the single definitive thing we've learned isn't what nature is, but where it is. Nature is everywhere. It sounds a little cliche, a la children's TV shows, but I think I speak for everyone when I say that this class, like any good class, has made us more aware of the topic at hand. And to recognize that nature is in places we've perhaps never thought to look before--the farmer's market, video games, our backyards--is a really profound statement.

Lastly, I'd just like to say thanks to all who made up our class, and good luck on future endeavors!

~Tim Yu

Prius as a Status Symbol, and Nothing More?

I don't like hybrids. I'll start with that. They aren't the least bit fun to drive. In some ways they are downright scary to drive. There is no physical connection between the brake pedal and the wheels. If something goes wrong, or the car shuts down, you will drift to a stop, and that is the best you can do. People seem to drive them horribly, for whatever reason. I can't tell you how many times I have had a Prius ten feet from the back tire of my motorcycle, on the freeway.

Priuses have been marketed with more efficiency than the actual car. The silly "cheese wedge" shape has become synonymous with "Green." In fact, the main reason that the Prius outsells other hybrids is that it looks like a hybrid. Toyota has been able to convert the Prius into a status symbol which portrays the owner as "Forward Thinking" or "World Minded," but most of all, "Green." In fact, in a 2007 survey of Prius buyers, 57% cite “Makes a Statement about me” as a reason for buying a Prius. (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/business/04hybrid.html) That is nearly double the percentage interested in “Higher Fuel Economy” (36) or more than double for “Lower Emissions” (25). “Distinctive Styling,” in other words, the “Cheese Wedge” hybrid design, also ranked highly, at 33%.

In the article, several customers are quoted after buying Priuses.
“I really want people to know that I care about the environment,” said Joy Feasley of Philadelphia, owner of a green 2006 Prius. “I like that people stop and ask me how I like my car.” Mary Gatch of Charleston, S.C., chose the car over a hybrid version of the Toyota Camry after trading in a Lexus sedan. “I felt like the Camry Hybrid was too subtle for the message I wanted to put out there,” Ms. Gatch said. “I wanted to have the biggest impact that I could, and the Prius puts out a clearer message.”

I cannot imagine being that pretentious with a car. Those owners show the same level of “Snobbiness” as charactures of owners of high end executive cars. I can’t help but think about the “Are you an environmentalist, or do you work for a living?” bumper sticker we talked about in class. Priuses have made being “Green” a status symbol.

In reality, Priuses do not offer as significant energy savings over other cars as they are purported to have. They also require more resources to build, and therefore energy, to build. Even disregarding that fact, they are still a new car, and therefore have to be built. That takes resources, which would not have been used if the old car is kept. The gas mileage isn’t that much better either.

In the US, we think in terms of Miles Per Gallon, rather than in terms of Gallons/100Miles. Because these are reciprocals, this creates a skewed perspective, which assists in marketing. For example, 14 to 20 MPG, which saves twice as much fuel over a given distance as the improvement from 33 to 50 MPG. Every year, the average driver will travel about 10,000 miles. In a Prius, we’ll assume that it gets 45 MPG, which is 2.22 Gallons/100 miles. During the year, that corresponds to about 222 gallons of gas used. My 1995 VW Jetta has about 150,000 miles, with many more to come (at least 100,000), gets 30 MPG on the freeway. That is 3.33 Gallons/ 100 miles, and 333 Gallons a year. So the Prius only saves about 100 gallons a year. That may seem significant, but compared to the amount of energy used to make a new car, that is nothing. For the purposes of this post, I will assume that energy is roughly proportional to cost. If a new prius costs $25,000, it would be a fair estimate to compare that cost to about 1000 gallons of gas. In the ten years that you own the car, it could save about the cost of the car. However, the Jetta cost less to start with, at about $17,000, and will last for at least twice as long. So, at 15 years old, and 150,000 miles, it would be “Greener” to keep the car for another ten years, and not relegate it to a car crusher.

In addition, the batteries for a Prius are made from nickel, mined in an area of Canada so devoid of life from the acid rain caused by smelting, that NASA used it for training for the Apollo missions. Conventional, non-hybrid cars, such as clean diesels, or well tuned petrol engines do not have this unfortunate component. Diesels in Europe comply with stricter emissions laws, and can still return nearly 70 MPG.

When trying to do your part to keep the world clean, think about what you are actually doing. If your old car works, keep it. Do the math. If you want that status symbol, buy some “Carbon Credits” to show that you care. At the very least, those don’t cause acid rain.

Rhetoric R1B Present and Future

It is hard to believe that we are coming to the end of this class; it feels as if we have only begun. Well, i guess this class is just the beginning for me. When I entered this class in January, I have to admit I was a little surprised by its loose format. I had expected this class to be very structured, controlled and quite honestly boring. I know that sounds weird, especially considering that my major is Rhetoric, but I only choose this class for its time i.e. not for the topic. I was actually dreading the first day with a passion because I worried that this class was going to be run by crazy hippies who wanted me to be a tree hugger. It's not that I didn't have respect for nature; it's just that I never really had any interest in the rhetoric of the environment; all I cared about was law and politics. Luckily for me however; I was wrong. This semester in Rhetoric R1B has been extremely interesting. I have learned more about the environment and how I interact with it than I ever could have thought imaginable. What I remember most about this class though is the readings. Besides the boring readings in R1A, this was my first academic class which required non textbook based analysis and I was happy to find that I actually enjoyed the readings we were assigned.

Here are my top five favorite readings:

5. Ch. 1 and 2 of Dumping in Dixie by Robert Bullard. THis reading was the most interesting of all of our readings, because it made me think of nature in a completely different way. Prior to this class, I would never have thought that a nuclear wasteland could be nature.

4."Domesticating Nature on the Television Set" by Greg Mittman. Anything written about television or technology instantly interests me and as such, this was a fun, quick and memorable reading.

3."Sharing Suffering" by Donna Haraway. Although I didn't appreciate this excerpt initially, over time I found that Haraway's way of thinking had begun to influence me and my choices.

2."In Camp on the North Fork of the Merced"by John Muir. John Muir has to be one of the most interesting people we learned about in this class.

1."To Build a Fire" by Jack London. I chose this reading as my favorite not because of what it taught me about nature, however rich it was; but rather because of the style of writing the author employed in it. I remember getting chills (no puns intended) when I first started to suspect that the guy might die, and when he did, I was absolutely shocked.

More surprising to me than the fact that I enjoyed the readings however, was that I actually learned some valuable skills and information from the readings and discussions in this class. At first, I didn't really think that this class was going to give me any new rhetorical skills, but as the class progressed, I found myself picking up multiple new tricks and catchphrases to deploy in my arguments. The WA sessions and readings also provided me with some amazing examples and information on how to write better.

Overall, however, my favorite part of this class was most definitely my classmates. Despite the fact that I talked way too much, my fellow classmates accepted me and, unlike many of my previous English/debate classes, they actually listened to my arguments.

I will truly miss everyone in this class and regardless of what I do or become, I will take the lessons I have learned in this class on with me into my future and use them as best as I can .

Captain Planet and Toyota Prius: Well we are Doing Something to Help...Right?

Both Captain Planet and Toyota Prius claim to be "Eco-friendly". However it was made clear that event though Captain Planet and the Prius had the title they did not mean that the result and effects of these two products were truly improving ecological state of the planet. Captain Planet actually shows that humans can't improve the ecological issues alone and need some sort of magic rings and a supernatural being (Captain Planet) to actually have an impact in the improvement of the environment crisis. Then for Prius it is not as gas efficient as it states and it also creates a lot of chemicals that harm the earth. The list goes on, on how these products only have the title and don't necessarily do or have the result as expected.

It was also made clear that they both were advertised as such because people are more likely to by or watch something that claims you ll make a difference or you will help fix an issue. They feel as if they are demonstrating they care. What I found interesting however that the buyers of these two products are the same type of people. They are types of people that want to feel like they are helping improve a popular issue without doing the work. They do it because they feel the societal pressure to do something that will helps the environment, but don't see the actual positive or negative effects.

If they truly cared why is it they just go along with the advertisements and buy a Prius, or just let there child watch Captain Planet just because of the title thinking your actually teaching your child something without putting the effort. When this happens instead of helping they are perpetuating the cycle of environmental destruction in a indirect. It is until we stop having the mentality of- I am doing something don't judge me- to actually caring and taking the time to research what we actually consume and support that there will be a advance in the ecological issues.

Pandora on Earth?

Last Friday I finally got the chance to catch up with pop culture and watch Avatar. My friends have been raving about the movie and telling me that it was super legitimate and worth watching not one, not two, not three, but maybe four times--all in IMAX. When I first watched the trailer for Avatar, I thought that the plot was going to be as cheesy as how they usually make the nachos in movie theaters. In my head, it just sounded like a guy who wanted to prove himself, joins some corporate endeavor, thinks he's some double agent with the natives on this new planet, falls in love, and joins his lover dearest. What I didnt realize was deep the movie was. It definitely incorporated a line out of the cliche book with urging us, humans, to really take care of our environment. But, in reality, I took away so much more from this blockbuster than just that.

The film's protagonist is Jake Sully, a paraplegic former Marine, who is on the planet Pandora where a corporation is mining a precious mineral called unobtainium. After a fiasco occurs, Jake is separated from his group and ends up being incorporated into one of the native tribes living on Pandora. The tribe's spiritual leader instructs her daughter, Neytiri, to teach Jake the ways of their people. From there, Jake sees just how impressive the way that the tribe interacts with nature. They describe it as a "neural network" where all of the Pandoran organisms are interconnected. When they hunt for food, they say a few prayer-like phrases after slaying the animal. When they walk through the forest floor, their steps light up the ground. When they go home, their home sweet home is a tree. When they go to sleep, palm-tree-like fronds wrap themselves around their bodies. Pandora, although CGI-enhanced, seemed like such a magical world. I wanted to live there myself, despite how childish that might sound. It made me think if this "magical world" was possible here, on Earth, and if it is a place we really would want to live in.

Even though everything is so brightly colored, pure, and appealing on Pandora, I feel that we won't be able to reach that environment ourselves. We have reached a stage where we rely so heavily on technology and we are so wrapped up in work that nature feels like a separate entity from our daily lives. Vacations and retirement are points in time where we can connect to nature but they are merely points in the future that we yearn for. I'm not advocating for us to unearth what we have built and go back to the basics and retreat to the forest and live our lives there. It's just that after watching Avatar, I wonder if we, as an entire tribe if you will, would be happier if we saw ourselves as a piece of nature; the notion that our souls and our existence is an extension of Mother Earth. The movie conveyed that the natives on Pandora are beyond the idea of eco-friendliness. Instead, they truly appreciate and honor nature for what it provides for them. If we saw ourselves as a part of nature, some more consciousness would go behind our actions. Demolishing forests to build metropolitan landscapes and exploiting nature as money-making tactics would all seem sickening if we saw nature more as something living with us and a part of us. I was taken aback at the feeling of disgust and anger when I watched the corporation pellet bombs and bullets at the indigenous tribe on Pandora. I felt like I was watching a human being tortured. It goes back to what we read and discussed in class about incorporating nature into our lives and seeing it in a new light where work goes hand-in-hand with nature. Maybe we need a paradigm shift where we not only see nature as something we need to give back to but as something we need to learn to live with and form a stronger appreciation for that bond between all living things and nature. Maybe then we will have Pandora on earth and I wouldnt wish I was ten feet tall, green-eyed, and blue.

Response to Manufactured Landscapes

When I first heard/read that we were watching a film called, "Manufactured Landscapes," I didn't think much of it. I didn't give much thought as to what "manufactured" might mean and as for "landscapes"? The word just brought to mind something scenic--vague, I know, but I wasn't thinking very deeply on the title.

That's why when the movie began I didn't have very many expectations. I remember the beginning shot, though (who wouldn't? it was an annoyingly long shot). As the camera moved through the factory in China, I kept on thinking, "When is this going to end already?!" Was the evocation of this emotion an accident or was that the purpose of the directors? And if it was purposeful, why would they choose to do that? To bring attention to the congruency of the working environment? Random thought: the Great Plains. Like how the Great Plains is (from my limited knowledge) grass for miles on end, it's the same way with the manufacturing factory? I really don't know. Maybe that was one of the "landscapes" they were going for? It would make sense since it was also a "manufacturing" plant. It'd be nice if someone could enlighten me with why they thought that they would use such a long first scene.

The other scene that caught my attention (and this one from actual interest instead of boredom!) was, as Crystal already mentioned in her post, the scene of the recycling... area. I don't really know what to call it, but this radically changed my view of what recycling is. In my mind, my image was that recycling was done in a plant... somehow. I never really worked out the details in my head. But to see people living in that industrial waste? It shocked me. The photo that shocked me the most was probably the one of the old woman sitting beside First World recyclables. My first thought was, "Did that stuff harm her health?" For all I know, it very well could have. It was just disturbing. Even though we're told all the time to recycle (especially her in Berkeley), looking at where our waste goes... is just disturbing.

Does recycling really make for a "better world"? Maybe. For our sphere of the world, at least, it takes away some of the guilt--but for the ones where these recyclables go to? I don't know... you could say that it helps their economy, but I just... really don't know.

Edward Burtynsky's photographs

For those of you who are interested in looking at more of Burtynsky's work, here's a link to his web site.  As I posted in my comment to Crystal, do you think the way that his photographs render these "manufactured landscapes" beautiful and almost abstract detracts from his environmentalist message?