Friday, September 12, 2008

NATURE ON THE RUN

It’s nothing new to suggest that nature is in a state of siege. From polar bears to coral reefs, tigers, rain forests and glaciers, the loss of natural forms are taking place. How this state of affairs is evaluated is varied such that nature may be seen as endangered, on the one hand, and, on the other, as safe and secure as it’s ever been.

I would take neither position although both have some considerable truth to them. What man’s relation is to nature is a burgeoning philosophical question and is solvable by neither the Luddites and environmental extremists nor by the business/industrial crowd that sees nature as mere raw material for manufacturing. Whereas the former extremists see nature romantically, the latter see it in terms of use and exchange value. They are both equally abstract if not parasitic.

I don’t presume to have a sanguine, salutary solution to the problem, the conflict let’s say between primordial nature and putatively civilized society. Possibly the answer lay in our recognition of our dependency upon a nature with limits. On the other hand it may lie as much in the recognition that we are of the “nature” of that primordial nature. To use it without acknowledging and taking into account both its qualitative and quantitative limits, is to deny our own nature and our own limits technologically and spiritually.

In my own town of North Tonawanda, there are a few stretches of nature remaining, several patches of wood and wetland and of course the waterfronts, Gratwick Park being the most undeveloped. When I spoke to my Legislators, Paul Wojtaszek and Andrea McNulty, regarding the preservation of Gratwick, recently on LCTV’s Access to Government, I was left feeling as I usually am after talking to most politicians: unheard, reduced and dismissed. Apparently, McNulty thought I was saying that Gratwick was a “waste” because I suggested that I couldn’t imagine what $11,000,000, presumably slated for Gratwick in the future if all works out well, could be spent on. It seems that they feel that because at one time Gratwick was a Brownfield, a toxic dump site, that all additions after the clean-up are now an improvement.

The clean-up was of course a good thing, be it as it may. A proposed new fisherman’s dock seems not to be too intrusive to the natural beauty, wildlife and water, even though many seem to fish there now without much difficulty. But it seems that eventually, Wojtaszek, indicated that restaurants were in the works for the Park.

Apparently, kite flying, fishing from shore, bike riding, various sports being played in the open fields such as toy plane flying, golf, soccer, frisbee, etc. does not sufficiently ring their bells. It seems they believe some restaurants are required for people to be “attracted” to and enjoy the Park. Why that is so, I’ll never know. Apparently enjoying nature must be mediated by food and/or alcohol served in a restaurant. Possibly people don’t know that the Park is there without ‘bells and whistles’ to remind them that they live within minutes of a beautiful river with wonderful birds, sunsets, relative peace and quite, serenity and solitude (that is, when the speed boat races aren’t in town). Of course they also obviously still fantasize the immediate area a “tourist destination”: ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching!

When commercialism enters the scene, in my opinion we have gone too far and nature becomes merely another attraction, not to enjoy, but to facilitate selling and consuming, all of which is of course handily justified by an endlessly bad economy.

I guess anyone such as myself who believes “enjoying nature” is a matter of being in and with nature itself rather than its being an accompanying adornment to the experience of consumption, buying and selling, is too weird to be taken seriously. There must be something about an unexploited space, a field without infrastructure, pavilions, parking lots and of course something being bought and sold that suggests that it’s a waste. In short to our Legislators “nature itself and being with and in nature itself” is a waste.

So in fact it is not myself who thinks that Gratwick as it is, is a waste. I love, enjoy and respect it as it is without any further "improvements." It seems that McNulty is the one who really sees it, as it is, as a waste. Wojtaszek also seemed to be bemoaning the fact that the water could not be seen from the road given the buildup of ground which is actually, as I understand, the cap on the pollutants that were not removed during the clean-up and restoration. Wojtaszek I believe was saying that the “improvements” would make the Park even more enjoyable, supposedly partly because somehow they would enable the water being seen from the road. I don’t see how that is possible and it sounds like double talk to me. I’m sure packing in several pavilions and restaurants is going to make the river more visible from the road. It just doesn’t make sense. Sports fields and restaurants can be put anywhere. Why in the middle of a bird sanctuary and in front of an incomparable river view? It seems to Wojtaszek people now only drive by Gratwick. He wants them all driving through! Why? Possibly he could put a detour sign on River Road and have everyone redirected through the Park. Or, maybe he or one of his friends in the business/legal crowd will be a future proud owner of one or two of the new restaurants. If the people can't be aware of and appreciate the beauty of Gratwick now in its relatively pristine state, when it's filled up with "civilization," they still won't be enjoying it. They'll be enjoying the distractions and Gratwick as nature will be gone. It will be a tool to make money, per usual.

The other feeling I was left with after my call-in to Access to Government is that they’ve really already got their mind made up as to what they want there: the blind progress of business as usual. I felt patronized, placated and merely an obstacle to their idea of progress. It seems making the Park look like every other part of town is unquestionably considered development and economic progress. Hopefully, maybe by the grace of God, they at least won’t put another pizza and wings joint there. Surely we have enough of those around town to satisfy any number of junk food addicts and overweight denizens of the fast food frenzy. If they put a McDonald’s there I promise to move out of town.

But at the root of such economic myopia or even blindness, I believe, is really the fear of our own nature. It is a fear of being with primordial nature, the nature which, if we manage to destroy ourselves thru ecological neglect, will remain in the end. To be with nature is to feel and know our own serenity and solitude, our own timelessness and purposeless presence in physical space. It’s much easier to obliterate our own natural primordiality, by filling nature up, covering it over, exploiting its inherent attractiveness to avoid being with that which we are minimally and eternally and will eventually return to. If we could be with such nature, independent of the trappings of supposed civilized community, we may discover that very sacred part of ourselves that technological toys and commodities cannot fill up nor satisfy. We may in fact discover it is more sacred than any of the institutions or practices of religion.

Somehow I don’t think the technocrats of progress will hear this plea. If they could, they would hear the plea of nature itself, the reality which in the end of it all will have the last word by restoring its place, its primacy and priority as the eternal Edenic garden, that is the sacred primordiality to be found even in relatively unspoiled places like Gratwick.

No comments:

Post a Comment