Mixing Without Pain
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MIXING WITHOUT PAIN Karen Davis Jim Harter. Anima1.l: 1419 The University of Maryland Copyright.Free IUwtratioru. New York: Dover, 1979 College Park am a deep ecologist. I value Nature for its own sake. I see other, nonhuman beings as subjects of an infinitely precious and unique life, as wanting and able to live their own lives, and as having the right to do so, just as we do ourselves. I relish John Muir's thought that "even a mineral arrangement of matter [may] be endowed with sensation of a kind that we in our blind exclusive perfection can have no manner of communica tion with."1 Like Aldo Leopold, I yearn for the day when the role of Homo sapiens will have changed "from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it."2 I share Arne Naess's passion for an ecological maturity that COMMENT Between the Species 33 Winter 1989 Mixing Without Pain will allow people to "experience joy when a human future without violence in it and other life forms experience joy and sorrow seems frankly to fight shy of the whole idea of when other life forms experience sorrow," that such a future. I mistrust an ecovision that will enable us to "grieve when living beings, encourages disdain for the weak and helpless including landscapes, are destroyed."3 I do not creatures of the world - the "genetic have to be convinced that wilderness and goofies"7 and "man-made freaks" such as farm wildlife have a right to exist or that what is animals and other domesticated members of needed nowadays, ecologically, is not so much Earth's community. Violence sanctified by "hands-on experience" as "hands-off." I reject Myth is no more acceptable to me than vio the assertion of human superiority over other lence rationalized in terms of the scientific life. I take the fact of my belonging to an Model. The fact that the Myth is "encompass animal species as basic to my existence and ing, intuitive, comforting, involving," whereas my experience. the Model is "limited, cold, manipulative, I am also an animal rights person. I believe distant from reality" does not solve the that human and nonhuman animals both problem. 8 For the unconsenting victim of have rights. I think that animal liberation is Myth or Model, these distinctions are moot. human liberation, and vice versa. I share John Violence directed against nonhuman animals Bryant's dream in Fettered Kingdoms of finding is recommended by Sessions and Devall as "a "a place where humans, trees, water and wild way to encourage maturity" if done with the life mix without pain" and of creating "a "proper attitude." Hunting and fishing, they world of peace, where we could walk amongst say, can enable us to develop "a sense of place the other creatures of this planet without and intuitive understanding of the connec them fleeing in panic at the merest whiff of tions between humans and nonhumans human scent."4 Does our dream make John together with a respect for the principle of Bryant and me sound more like shallow senti biocentric equality" as this principle has been mentalists than deep ecologists? laid down by ecotopian philosophers Aldo In their book Deep Ecology, George Ses Leopold and Arne Naess.9 I do not think, sions and Bill Devall define deep ecology as though, that any of these men have me, a "a way of developing a new balance and woman, in mind for this sanguinary discipline. harmony between individuals, communities, Rather, they sound like men talking as usual and all ofNature."5 An essential part of this to other men. way, said Arne Naess, coiner of the term deep A few years ago, ecoholist philosopher J. ecology, is "to ask deeper questions."6 My Baird Callicott write an article which proto question has to do with the deep ecology typically asserts that the concept of animal movement's macho mystique. I wonder to liberation conflicts not only with the anthro what extent deep ecology is an ecological dis pocentric assumptions of Western moral phi guise for machismo fantasies. I find that being losophy, but with the biocentric assumptions an animal rights person gets in the road of my of modem environmental ethics as character being a deep ecologist. I find that being a ized in Aldo Leopold's "land ethic."IO Far from woman also gets in the road. It's the nature of prohibiting human predatory activities such the consciousness that's obstructive. as hunting, fishing, and meat-eating, the land I mistrust a philosophy that cannot imagine ethic vigorously promotes these things if done Between the Species Winter 1989 Mixing Without Pain with the, as it were, "proper attitude." Unlike sumed as a matter of course in deep ecology John Muir, who neither hunted nor fished and discourse to be that of hunters. Yet why must who considered the human desire for animal this be so? After all, shouldn't being hunted, flesh a "depraved appetite,"11 Leopold was an and what it feels like to be hunted, be avid hunter who "did not see that his land counted as an authentic part of the wilder ethic actually ought to prohibit hunting, ness experience? By what appeal do we deny cruelly killing, and eating animals."12 this part to ourselves? It may be replied that A moral theory of the environment, based the human being in the role of hunted upon Leopold, could thus be advanced that ani~al runs contrary to Nature. Humans would regard nonhuman animals as beings hunt; they are not hunted, except by noxious "to whom ethical consideration is owed and insects. Still, we may ask with John Muir, yet not object to some of them being slaugh "How about those man-eating animals - . tered (whether painlessly or not) and eaten, lions, tigers, alligators - which smack their others hunted, trapped, and in various other lips over raw man?"l1 ways seemingly cruelly used."13 A salutary For refusing to inflict pain and death on his type of humanity would be one which rel "earth-born companions and fellow mortals" ished the chase, ate animal flesh with . of the woods and streams,lB Muir was patron "respect," and which cultivated a healthy tol ized by his otherwise admiring, deep ecology erance for (others'?) pain. Although modern minded biographer MichaelP. Cohen, who society could not be expected to recrudesce writes in The Pathless Way that Muir "was the Stone-Age ethos in its pristine form, still never aware'of the significant bond forged this ethos might be not inelegantly adapted between hunter and hunted, when a man by future human societies seeking a more became a part of the flow of energy in direct contact with Nature than what we in Nature." In Cohen's estimate, Muir lacked Western culture now have.l 4 "insight into violence." By contrast, Aldo Here in a nutshell is the ecotopian vision Leopold's interest in hunting may have made to which the deep ecology core constituency him more sophisticatedly savvy "of the role of seems essentially to subscribe. Moral and cul predators in ecologi<;:al communities." Muir, tural simplicity are equated with an ersatz though, "despite frequent contact with Indian primitivism. Courage and relish thrive on culture ... did not think about hunting as an ritual pain and death. There does seem to be enlightening activity."19No, he did not. One a limit, though, as to just how far into the reason is that Muir had insight into human wilderness Ecotopian Man is willing to go. So violence. He recognized the "indivisibility of far I know of no deep ecologist, rio ecoholist, . violence.''Zo Muir wrote: "From the shepherd who advocates, asa way to ecological maturi with his lambs to the red-handed hunter, it is ty and "identification with all life,"15 acting . thesame; no recognition of rights - ()nly the part of the hunted in a hunt. Deep murder in one form or another."21 ecologist Dave Foreman's desideratum that . An article in Defenders magazine throws a his dead body shall be food for carrion, not lurid light on hunting as "an enlightening pickled in a lead coffin, dodges the question activity" in Indian culture. It says that "The of how he would care to die)6 In fact, the Indians' favorite method of bear hunting was role of humans in the sacred chase is pre- to force a bear out of its den with flaming Winter 1989 35 . Between the Species Mixing Without Pain torches."22Is this the sort of thing Bill Devall shape ourselves into something new. We can has in mind when he opines that "For at least become ecopersons. Together with gentle men forty thousand years, humans have hunted we can be a voice not only for Life but for bears, yet in primal societies bears were lives - for all the soft and innocent lives who treated with respect and honor due a god" ?23 are at our mercy. What kind of a god? The Dionysian god To be this kind of a voice requires us to rec whose fate was ritually symbolized in tribal oncile the rights of animals and the rights of ceremonies in which humans and nonhumans wilderness, the preciousness of individuals and were "honored" by being tom to pieces? Shall communities, as Karen DeBraal and Susan we resurrect an ersatz version of that drama? Finsen have said that we might if we commit Where should atavistic recrudescence stop? our hearts and minds to the effort.2BAs Why should it stop, if it brings us closer to ecopersons, we can seek diligently for ways to "Nature" and allows uS to renew the sensa mix with other lives without bringing them tions of our Mythic Past? pain.29 "Squalling life, animal and human, Wild animals have an honorific status in announces itself at our mercy."30 Are we lis deep ecology.