Interlude of a Story You Haven't Read Yet

When the air is fifty-five, and the sky a photographic blue, when all noises have ceased but the infrequent fluttering of a grasshopper, on his own, in a meadow (and even he travels sheepishly among the quietude); when the breeze is calm and gentle, and the seashells of your ears no longer shout the roar of oceans, but only whisper the placid ponds of beavers – do you feel as I do, dear reader, that the earth really is our home? Do you know in your heart, just as I know in mine (in this ephemeral bliss, before that knowing dissipates), that she actually likes us, and enjoys us, and wants us to be here?

I wish we could find a moment like that, you and I, and dwell in it everlastingly. Or, if not that long, long enough to look into each other’s eyes for awhile and refresh our souls in peace.

I am sorry I have been away for some time. When our dear brother left to make himself a soldier, I went away with him, and even now I cannot stay with you long. The air is hot; it swelters; our brother sweats in a desert tent; he sits with armed comrades …

… it is dangerous here. Bombs fly, bullets fall, women scream …

… the quiet trees of the Highlands are what I miss most, and the gentle folk, also … and Melodie …

You should know there is a girl here, too. She wears a blue scarf. Peter sees her on the streets sometimes, when he and his friends are on patrol, and their gazes sweep one another, like machine gun fire. But Melodie …

… I will return as soon as I can. I know you understand that someone must watch over our dear brother until he returns safely home, and I hope that Callistos has been taking good care of you in my absence. I hope that all is good and pleasant in the Highlands, as it always was, and always will be, and that Trinity gleams just as bright as ever in the east … the buildings are crumbled and dusty here, and I’m sick of them … the sun chars everything in sight … there are burnt bodies, in piles, grimace-locked teeth shining out of them … they … … I have to go away, they are calling me … give my love to Melodie, if ever you should see her …

(from what is currently p. 239 in my novel, and probably will be some other page when I'm done)

Love,

graham

Don't Believe the Double Bind

Anthropologist Gregory Bateson (et al.)'s theory of double binds provides a useful analogy for the economic conundrum we're in today (and this whole discussion will operate on the level of analogy - I don't know anything about psychology.) Bateson initially began to explore doube bind scenarios within the context of studying schizophrenia, and concluded that what is often diagnosed as schizophrenia is not so much a disorder of the brain qua biological organ, but is rather a kind of confused communication that is the result of repeated exposure to double binds during childhood. In essence, schizophrenia is something like a coping mechanism that attempts to handle impossible communication situations.

Several features constitute a double bind scenario:

1) The receipt of two messages or commands that are contradictory; to obey one means to disobey the other ("Do this, but only because you want to")
2) The contradictory messages are at different orders of abstraction (in the above example, there is a verbal command "Do this" but there is also a non-verbal implied command ['if you don't do this, I'll be disapointed in you, or I'll punish you']
3) The messages come from a respected person or a person of authority (the messages cannot be ignored)
4) The 'victim' of the contradictory messages is unable to perceive and comment upon the fact that they are contradictory (otherwise he or she could 'escape' the situation by saying 'Look, what you're telling me to do just doesn't make sense; get yourself straight or I'll just ignore you")

Repeated exposure to these kinds of impossible communication situations as a child often leads to schizophrenia, according to Bateson and his colleagues (of which hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized speech, etc, are symptoms.)

Ok, what does this have to do with our economic crisis?

1) We are receiving two contradictory 'commands': a) we need to restart consumer spending by whatever means necessary (trillion-dollar bailouts, tax breaks, etc) and b) we need to move beyond our culture of consumerism which is destroying the planet, and is ultimately responsible for the economic crisis. But we cannot try to re-accelerate consumer spending and thus rescue the economy AND stop being a culture of consumers; these are mutually exclusive activities.
2) These commands reside on different layers of abstraction, in a sense or they come from very different spheres of thought; the specialized discipline of economics tells us (via the mass media) that the 'solution' to the crisis is to induce consumer spending (i.e. demand). On the other hand, our conversations with our friends, our religious reflections, or 'big picture' meditations on 'what life is really about' tells us that consumer culture must end quickly, or deforestation, biodiversity loss, global warming, topsoil depletion, aquifer depletion, etc, will have gone too far.
3) We cannot ignore these messages. Implied with the command to restart consumer spending is the non-verbal threat 'Or we will all lose our jobs' or 'None of us will be able to retire' or, worse, 'We'll face food shortages because grocery stores and shipping companies and large-scale industrial farms won't be able to access credit.' And the command to transcend our culture of consumption carries with it the obvious injunction 'Or all of the ecosystems on which we rely absolutely will be destroyed.'
4) As a society, we seem largely unable to comment on the contradiction of these two commands.

The result is something like social schizophrenia - as a society we are experiencing hallucinations (e.g., visions of the recovery of the economy in 2010, renewable energy replacing fossil fuels, etc), delusions (believing we are smart enough to fix the system), and disorganized communication & activity (trying to restart the consumer economy with trillion-dollar bailouts, while simultaneously trying to build a renewable energy economy; recycling, buying 'green' and talking about the environment, while simultaneously hoping that the economy will recover, our investments will improve, etc.)

Let's call a contradiction a contradiction and begin having serious discussions. To start, we are afraid of the consequences of economic depression (we are unable to escape the first command), because we believe that our ability to secure our basic needs (food, water, shelter, clothing, community) depends on the health of the consumer economy. Right now, it does, for most of us, but it doesn't have to. We can actually all grow our own food, catch and clean our own water, build our own shelter with our own hands, and forge our own communities, all without the restoration of the "growth" economy (permaculture has proven this.) So let's ignore the first command. Now we have escaped the double bind and can talk rationally. We still want to stop consumer culture (the second command) and save the planet. Permaculture also does this.

Love,
graham

Nine Things that Icelanders Love

But first, I wanted to share this picture of a black bear spotted in our neighborhood. Just kiddin', it's only one of a several cats running a protection racket on Helgamagra Street.

Ok, things that Icelanders love, based on several weeks of careful observation by me:

- Cruising downtown in their Range Rovers, while casually munching ice cream cones

- Not making eye-contact

- Rolling up their pants, especially when it snows a lot

- (Related) Wearing sweatpants everywhere (and rolling them up when it snows a lot)

- Moving to Reykjavik

- Fishtailing on the icy streets at every opportunity, even when no one is watching to be impressed. They genuinely just love to fishtail on the ice. They love it for it's own sake. It's an end in itself.

- Drinking coffee and using their library voices at soccer games

- Leaving their strollers outside while they go inside for a cup of coffee and a chat with an old friend. Yes, the baby stays in the stroller, outside, in the snow, while mommy goes inside for "awhile." I'm not making this up. This has been witnessed many times.

- Flying airplanes during torrential downpours of snow and heavy wind (same impulse as fishtailing on icy streets)

- And last, but certainly not least, owning cats. They love owning cats. Everyone has a cat. That's just what they do in Iceland.

I'll keep my eye out for the tenth thing that Icelanders love, and will keep you posted ...

Love,
graham

Which Problems Are Human Problems?

So there's this spider called the European water spider, and throughout its long and illustrious history on our planet, it has faced what I call "European water spider problems" -- specific problems that it must solve in its daily life of being a European water spider. These problems are related to - and maybe almost identical with - problems that other creatures must solve, but because those other creatures aren't European water spiders (they don't have quite the same body structure, or anatomical advantages and pitfalls with which to face the world, etc), the problems they face aren't quite "European water spider problems." What are "European water spider problems" then? They are things like: 1) how shall a European water spider avoid predators? 2) how shall it provide for the safety of its eggs 3) how shall it breathe enough oxygen or 4) eat enough food, etc. The problems are many, and a European water spider must solve them in the context of its every day existential situation qua European water spider.

With that introduction, I wanted to point out one elegant solution the European water spider has developed to solve many of its problems: an underwater air bell woven from the spider's own silk. It stores oxygen in this air bell which it traps with tiny hairs on its legs, and is therefore able to live its entire life underwater - though, like other spiders, it breathes oxygen and doesn't have lungs. From the link I indicated above: "The silk membrane allows oxygen to diffuse in from the water and carbon dioxide to diffuse out, so the spiders do not have to replenish the air supply often." And this air bell system allows the European water spider to 1) avoid land-based predators 2) protect its eggs underwater 3) while also breathing the oxygen it needs and 4) eat its food in relative safety. Does the air bell solve every survival problem the European water spider faces? No, but it's an elegant solution to many of them. It is elegant in its simplicity, multi-purposeness, availability (the spider uses its own silk to create the air bell), ease with which it is spun, the little maintenance energy it requires, and effectiveness.

So what about "human problems"? We are faced with daily existential questions, such as: 1) how shall we avoid predators? 2) how shall we provide for the safety and health of our children? 3) how shall we breathe clean air? 4) where will we get food to eat? -- and many more. They are similar to "European water spider problems," but must be solved in a way that harmonizes with human nature rather than European water spider nature.

Thus far, we haven't developed many elegant solutions. For example, 25,000 people die every day from starvation. That is a failure of human problem-solving.

Are our problems more complex than that of the European water spider? I doubt it. Human politics, for example, is complex, but think about how many other species European water spiders must interact with. I don't think our problems are more complex - I think our solutions are, and that's the problem. Our "solutions" look something like the picture above, rather than like a silken air bell.

Where am I going with this? I think permaculture is an elegant human solution to complex human problems, something in the same vein as what the European water spider is capable of.

Love,
graham