Monday, August 17, 2015

7 billion Others: The dreams and fears of humanity plus an agenda

The selected stories of thousands of individuals in 7 billion Others illustrate themes such as Being at home, Family, Fears as well as Nature and Climate voices.

These stories from across the world resonate with the class I teach on cultural anthropology. They invite the students, and indeed us all, to listen into the lives, the hopes, and dreams of the human condition.



When you experience this well-designed video installation, keep in mind a caveat:  There is a point of view of the project developer, Yann Arthus-Bertrand - part climate change ideologue and part wealth redistributionist. The latter theme will be the focus of his new movie, Human. The upcoming movie echoes themes voiced by Godfrey Reggio in his trilogy about developed and underdeveloped countries and a world in chaos:  Koyaanisqatsi, Powaqqatsi, and Naqoyqatsi (the Qatsi trilogy).

You may well agree with Bertrand's perspective - or not. But in either case, his perspective ought to be transparent to the visitor.

The Museum of Photographic Arts orients itself, in part, as a center for visual learning. To avoid the problem of subliminal or social-action bias, MOPA could install an informational kiosk that plays short videos explaining the alternative perspective. So, for example, one can be for fighting pollution with or without assumptions about human-caused climate change.  Or, one can be for lifting individuals out of poverty while arguing that any success is due to capitalism or to socialism. From a pedagogical perspective, one should present alternative narratives so that one can judge if the photographic narrative is overly narrow or excessively broad in understanding what affects the human condition. The Museum may state it is only interested in the art of photography; yet this particular exhibit, and others before it (Prix Pictet 2012), espoused agendas for social and environmental change that fit a partial understanding of these phenomena. The issue of a lack of transparency will be explored further in the comments below.



Climate Change Perspectives:  True believers versus Realists

Many scientists and politicians argue that the science is settled: humans affect climate (note that 'affecting pollution' is often confused with 'climate,' but the distinction is an important one). Let's call those who believe that humans affect climate in a significant way the true believers since their minds are made up. Many other scientists and politicians are skeptics (which is the bedrock assumption of science): humans may affect climate, but show us the data as well as the various computer models that massage the data. Let's call this group the realists.

You may find yourself in one group or the other, but the question is one of pedagogy. How should one teach this subject matter, especially with photographs and associated text as narrative? It ought to be a startling and open-minded adventure. The problem is that myth-making and news hype get in the way. Recall the prediction that human caused climate change would cause an increase in seasonal hurricanes? That proved to be unsupported with seasonal hurricanes being far, far less. Recall the prediction that the Himalayas would begin to melt in 35 years? That proved to be a typo.

What then? It's time to explore.

In 7 billion Others, the dominant perspective about nature and climate change is: 1) nature is cuddly (few, if any, talk about hurricanes, volcanoes, pestilence, disease, etc.); 2)  and that those who take issue with the anthropogenic view of climate change either do not care or are from another planet.

As one pages through the remarks of individuals from around the globe, the sense is that nature is wonderful and a sense of joy. I happen to agree with that perspective, but I would likely give voice to the terrible in nature as well. If the idea to be conveyed is that nature is something to be cherished, fine. No problem, but say so. Don't carry over the one-sided dimension into the assumed corollary that whenever nature is damaged it is the result of human activity. Yes, the Gulf Oil spill several years ago was the result of human action, but nature has extensive oil seeps as well. And, even then, scientists were surprised that much of the Gulf Oil spill disappeared in the water due to nature's own cleansing process.





From views on nature, 7 billion Others leads to views on climate change. Some individual views do show skeptical positions, but the dominant frame of reference is one of those adhering to human-caused global warming. If you don't believe in global warming, one interviewee claims that you must be from another planet. 



Not only is the question about whether one's belief puts one in the category of being from another planet, those who resist the perceived needed change lack empathy.



It is true that many of us are indulgent in our personal desires, but this extends to those who see themselves as the caring. That sounds counter-intuitive and hard to believe - that those who say they care about equality often act in ways that demonstrate the opposite, particularly if it affects their own lifestyle.

A recent news article reports that several states are underwriting the affluent in buying more expensive electric cars at the expense of the poor; the less affluent are taxed to support the affluent's life style. One can argue that this tax policy benefits us all - we all breathe the same air; but one can also argue that the user should pay, especially so when there is an unfair tax on the poor. Question:  Who should paying for the electric car charging station? Those who use it or everyone, including the less well off who cannot afford electric cars. Again, you may or may not agree with either policy, but that policy and its social costs should be transparent. In this instance, those claiming to care about X should explain how their benefit of owning an electric car actually helps X (who can't afford an electric car) rather than hurts X. 

Perhaps the truck owner loves his truck, regardless of how it impacts the physical environment; electric car owners may think similarly, regardless of how it impacts the social environment.

A complement to 7 billion Others: Creating a dialog
Moving beyond a critique of the views embedded in 7 billion Others, a center for visual learning could include the following brief perspective that challenges the underpinnings of the installation. 

What if climate change is something other than those who would have us fear carbon, CO2 and an assumed rate of temperature change that would bring environmental calamity beyond what nature has done for billions of years?

Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, presents a useful counter-perspective, grounded in science.


What they haven't told you about climate change


http://www.prageruniversity.com/Environmental-Science/What-They-Havent-Told-You-about-Climate-Change.html#.VcYp8LTZXi8





Without a precautionary commentary such as the one by Patrick Moore, the 7 billion Others installation works well as propaganda for its point of view, but not as an informed pedagogical approach encompassing the views of the true believers and the realists. The latter depends on the transparency of the hosting institution.

The producers' description of 7 billion Others
A ground breaking, multimedia exhibition, 7 billion Others brings voices and compelling video portraits from more than 6,000 individual interviews filmed in 84 countries by nearly 20 directors. For its premiere in the United States, the 30-week presentation will allow visitors to identify what separates and unites us by giving direct access to individuals as diverse as a Brazilian fisherman, a Chinese shopkeeper, a German performer and an Afghan farmer. These interviews touch on our most visceral emotions and pose many thought-provoking questions and answers that speak to the human condition.  Created by Yann Arthus-Bertrand 


The Museum of Photographic Arts [MOPA] will continue showing 7 billion Others through mid September 2015.

19 comments:

  1. I disagree with the notion that the earth is cuddly. i think because of that notion man kind has a view that the nature is weak and should be conquered. i don’t think i would describe nature as cuddly it should be something respected and yes at times feared.

    ReplyDelete
  2. We should take better care of the earth, we have the means to live with less waist. The problem is, getting people from their opposite and entrenched points of view together on neutral ground so we can work forward to solve the problem at hand.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do not believe in full that nature is wonderful and a sense of joy. I believe that at times, nature is a sense of joy in its calm state and can be wonderful to enjoy. On the other hand, nature causes disaster and chaos and cannot be a sense of joy in this state. It must be respected and appreciated for both its calm state and the chaotic.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I do not fully agree with the idea of nature being wonderful and a sense of joy. I believe that, in its calm, nature can be wonderfully beautiful and enjoyed. On the other hand, nature can also be chaotic and disastrous. In this state, nature can't be a sense of joy. In the end, nature must be respected and appreciated for both its calm and chaos.

    ReplyDelete
  5. regardless of the views that people may hold in regards to the concept of nature. It is one of the universal forces known to us that humanity has yet to understand fully and one which effects each of us equally on a daily basis, and of all the scientific institutions tasked with studying the different variation of natural phenomenon. We may never fully understand its complexities. The idea that nature is seen as a "soft" force by many when they are asked about their feeling towards nature. Is entirely a cultural phenomenon and deals with each individuals interactions with nature and cultural underpinnings since the day they were born. In my background, I have been lead to believe that "nature" or the forces that act upon the world that are distinctly non-human can appear in a billion different ways and in a million different scenarios as it has no conscience towards its choices of destruction, we as humans can only adapt to it as we have since our inception. Nature is the power to equate the balance of life at anytime it chooses. There will be tsunamis in the future as sure as there will be droughts and monsoons to quench those droughts. We have adversely effected earths natural control settings by over polluting. Science will attempt to show/protect us from its forces. Inevitably we will be force to face those consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree to a certain extent that nature is beautiful yet at the same time nature must be ugly. When a beautiful baby is born it must endure the pain and the ugly process of birth. Some peoples opinions of nature make it sound like a stuffed teddy bear. In my opinion I feel most people place themselves above nature which in turn lead us as a human species to be the worst thing that ever happened to this world. When nature feels we have run our course it will dispose of us without breaking stride. We need nature, nature does not need us. An example I have experienced with nature and it beautiful power is when I surf. The wave is beautiful in its movement and formation but once you are sucked into the wave no matter how strong you think you are it throws you around like a rage doll. This beautiful wave has the power to destroy anything in its path. This is the beautiful and ugly world we live in.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree that nature is beautiful but we must not forget how ugly it can be. In order for a beautiful baby to be born it must in endure the pain and ugly process of birth. In my opinion I feel a lot of human place themselves above nature which has lead us as a species to ruin this planet yet when nature is done with us it will eliminate us without breaking stride. There are very few groups of people who live in tune with nature which has lead to the current dilemmas we now face as a human race. My personal experience with the beautiful and ugly side of nature lies within the waves we see when we stare out into the ocean. When I surf I admire the movement and formation of a wave yet once I'm sucked into it, it throws me around like a rag doll and it wouldn't matter how strong I was. A wave has beauty and enough power to destroy anything in its way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, I found a few things interesting here.
    1. Humans do affect our planet. Fact. Whether or not humans are the cause of "climate change" is debatable, global warming is happening due to excess carbon emissions. Fact. The skeptic in me asks....what would be the consequence if humans decided to radically transform our approach to expansion? If we funded and pushed solar power, alternate building materials, working WITH the land as opposed to using the land....what would happen? Is it safe to assume that lowering the possibility of risk (meaning harming our planet in anyway) would help us thrive longer?
    2. Patrick Moore frustrated me. The scientific community has made FACT that we affect our planet negatively. He is poking holes in this fact to create a level of doubt. People who are uneducated or not self motivated will side with doubt due to fear. Fear of change, fear of the unknown. What is his motive? Why does it matter to him? Who is he speaking for?
    3. After all these questions, I revert back to humor. George Carlin has an interesting perspective.....
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't believe that nature is all good and fun. Nature does have it good times however nature can have its bad times and with people some of them don't care about nature and our environment while others do and care for the future of the earth.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Climate change is "small change" Like the coins in your pocket, Small change adds up to big money!! If you have wondered how you can help effect climate change and came away without an answer, consider doing something small. Example.. Walk more instead of driving. This burns less fossil fuel, pollutes the atmosphere less and as one person causes a miniscule change in climate, Imagine if millions did this!!. There is a way for people to make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Since the banning of humans from setting foot on the Galapalapas islands the turtles are striving to regain territorial control and reproduction activity has increased. Researchers and scientist still patrol the island. I think they should not be on the island either. Maybe check back in 100 years to do research. Big emphasis on maybe!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Since the banning of humans on the Galapalas island the turtles are striving to regain territorial control. And reproduction activity has improved. Researchers and scientist still patrol the island. Which I think they should not be stepping foot on the island either. Maybe return to the island in 100 years. Big emphasis on maybe!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I believe nature should be respected and admired at all times not just only when it gives us beautiful weather and nice sunsets, but also when it createschaos and destruction.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Godfrey Reggio's article was put rather well, in the sense of freedom of meaning. I thought of choice of my opinion values. He left his art and the aid of music to speak for itself and give the audience the same value of choice. Yann Arthus- Bertrand's film was rather unusual in one sense, but, educational in another. Godfrey's article and Bertrand's film go handinhand. People voicing there needs and form of means.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I believe that humans and nature are at fault for the environmental change. I like that the article has facts that supports both points of views. In one side the Earth is suffering by the errors of the humans and I agree with the article that some people would not change if it affects their own lifestyle. In the other side environmental disasters have been also involved in the destruction of nature like as mention hurricanes and volcanoes.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In my Biology class we discussed issues with overusing resources in today's world. One issue causing overuse is the rapid growth in the number of humans on earth over the past 200 years. We have been using natural resources (trees, oil, , land, gas etc.) and polluting at such a significant rate that there is a fear of possibly losing some in the near future. However, the issue doesn't seem so much as a planetary issue as it is a "privileged" issue. What I mean by privileged is that, third world countries don't have to worry about over-using natural resources and polluting the air because they don't have enough to begin with. So I feel like if the powerful states/countries that have significant resources should regulate how much is used and for what purposes. It is also an issue of how individuals should limit themselves on using what they need opposed to what they want.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I believe that we humans are at fault when it comes to the destruction of the planet. Most disasters that happen in the world are our own doing. Without realizing it every day we have habits that factor into this. Using hairspray in the morning, or flicking a cigarette butt out of the car window are just a few big things we do to hurt this home of ours. I agree that at times the earth can be cuddly, and I am so amazed and blessed with all the stars in the night sky and sunsets we are able to see every day.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I believe that we humans are at fault when it comes to the destruction of the planet. Most disasters that happen in the world are our own doing. Without realizing it every day we have habits that factor into this. Using hairspray in the morning, or flicking a cigarette butt out of the car window are just a few big things we do to hurt this home of ours. I agree that at times the earth can be cuddly, and I am so amazed and blessed with all the stars in the night sky and sunsets we are able to see every day.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This was a well written blog I really liked how it was un biased and presented compliments as well as critiques on 7 billion others. I am naturally skeptical so I appreciated how the point of view of Yann Arthus-Bertrand was pointed out. All in all I think 7 billion others is a good project that will raise a lot of questions about the human condition but will ultimately fail to answer those questions.

    ReplyDelete

Please share your thoughts with a kind intent