Hello lovely people,
Another mercifully short week has (almost) passed. This week I had a rough draft of a literature review research paper peer reviewed and got my sources approved by my professor, I dehydrated 2-methylcyclohexanol in chem lab, I learned about Jainism, and we had a guest speaker (who will be the keynote speaker at this year's Virginia Humanities Conference being held at CNU) come join our discussion in Religion & Ecology.
(Though this is completely irrelevant, I'd just like to say that I love the
idea of Jainism and their devotion to nonviolence, but I see some hypocrisy in their actions. Pouring milk onto a statue to show devotion when cows go through a lot to produce milk, and elders sitting on wooden thrones when a tree has to die to give wood seem to be glaring contradictions to what they believe in. I mean, you don't want to harm a cotton plant to make clothes but you'll cut down a tree? Hmmmmm.)
Today, after some self-absorbed pictures of my clothes, I'll be talking a little bit about this book:
Before I get to the point, I'd just like to share my outfit from today. I thought it would be horrible, but I ended up loving it!
|
This was me when I had to go outside. I love the way the layers ended up looking. Peacoat: Target, last year Cardigan: American Eagle White tank: American Eagle Scarf: Maurissa's Skinnies: American Eagle |
|
Bag: Goodwill (Lord & Taylor, $2) Booties: Aerie |
|
A better look at the outfit as I would look inside or in class. (My face looks weird because this is a cheap Walmart mirror with a gigantic warp right down the middle. College life.) |
Last night I had a lot of difficulty picking out a scarf that wouldn't clash with my cardigan, which I knew I wanted to wear. I ended up grabbing this fuchsia one out of Maurissa's wardrobe (with her permission!), thinking it would clash but not really caring because it's freezing here this week. I ended up liking it though! And yes, I know it's a LOT of American Eagle. Trust me, throughout high school that was like the only place I shopped. So my closet is 60%-40% AE and Forever 21 now. I try not to wear all one brand in an outfit, but sometimes it's unavoidable. :/
ANYWAY. I wanted to do this post to share with you guys some really interesting artwork that we analyzed as part of our group discussion in Religion and Ecology a couple of weeks ago. The book is The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Game by Paul Shepard, and the illustrations are by Fons van Woerkom and appear in the original hardback version (it's out of print now, so I'm stuck with a paperback I found on Amazon). The basic premise of the book is that we as a species have strayed from our natural role as hunter-gatherers, and that we need to re-integrate that way of life back into our lifestyle. It's kind of weird, and the author borders on being a luddite, but he makes some okay points. Anyway, a lot of the artwork really moved me, and makes some striking points about our reliance on technology and our shift away from Mother Nature. I'll share some below, with my comments on some of my favorites.
|
This is the first illustration, showing how mankind came from the Earth (debatable allusion to evolution). Men and women are seen "evolving" separately, which is supposed to indicate their different roles in a hunter-gatherer society; in general men hunted (hence the spear) and women were gatherers. |
|
Shows a hunter and a gatherer in action, doing different jobs but being intimately connected. It was impossible for more primitive societies to subsist on just game, that was hard to find, or just on foraged nuts and berries, which aren't as nourishing. |
|
A little gory at first glance, but actually super interesting. Our senses evolved the way they did specifically for us to interact with prey, the same as every other hunter. The way we hear, see, smell, etc. is all because of certain species that we depend(ed) on. |
|
Herders, at the beginning of the horticultural revolution when humans started to grow crops and herd their food animals. The hole in the abdomen represents something missing, as if they had abandoned a part of themselves in abandoning the hunter-gatherer way of life. |
|
Now we're seeing an increase in the use of technology. Note how the man is still "attached" to the Earth, but is straining to move closer to his pray with his fancy technological weapons. Also note the broken umbilical cord - he has left his nurturing origins. |
|
Moving even farther along; humanity completely cut off from nature. This "hunter" shoots from afar, never leaving his cozy artificial home. Note the umbilical cord, now attached to the inside of the cave-thingy. Technology gives man everything he needs and wants; hunting becomes a luxurious hobby. |
|
This is one the class didn't really know how to make heads or tails of. The best we got after group discussion (where all the other explanations come from) was that a younger man experiences more "modes" of existence than an older man. The younger man plays many roles, such as a spiritual participant (wearing a headdress) or being a father. The older man only knows a few modes of existence, and they are related to various periods of consciousness. |
What do you guys think of the last image? Any thoughts or interpretations that my class may have missed? It really is eating at me, but compared to the glaring messages of the others, it seems this one is very innocent and straightforward. What about the other illustrations in general? Did any one in particular stand out to you? Why?
Thanks for reading guys, and I hope you enjoy picking those images apart as much as I did. Sorry for the weird flow of this post, there was just a lot to go over. :/
'Til next time!
Found your post in searching on Fons Van Woerkum, I see it is years old. I have been fascinated by his work for a long time, and for a long time have wondered what ever happened to him. For someone prominant enought to be drawing for the NYTimes OpEd and then vanished almost entirely from google mention, seems strange to me. Anyway, if you even get this email, do you know anything about whatever happened to him?
ReplyDeleteGary