Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.15 AVERAGE
4.15 AVERAGE
Terjemahan enak dibaca. Hanya saja, gaya bahasanya bisa bikin melelahkan dengan kalimat-kalimatnya yang panjang dan banyak klausa sisipan. Ejaan ada yang kurang tepat pada penulisan nama lokal spesies (bukan nama ilmiah). Contohnya, badak sumatra (benar) ditulis badak Sumatra (salah).
Excellent book on the history and science of extinction as well as the impact of humans on the Earth and its inhabitants. Each chapter examines a different aspect of the overall issue, but they all build on each other. Informative, science-based, and very readable without being preachy; extremely important issue, given the rapid pace at which we are altering our environment.
Overall very informative and well written. My only critic is that the author ends by saying that we need to be hopeful, but neglects to give me reason to be hopeful. I think there should have been a 14th additional chapter regarding what the average citizen can do to help.
If time is a spiral, a slow unwinding and rewinding consisting of mass diversification and extinction events, then what we're witnessing is the total rupture of time; the snap of hundred million year process into mere centuries, decades and days; the catastrophe of globalisation, resulting in space-time compression, and the disjunction of global traversal with total isolation. Capitalist fragmentation at its most obscene level.
Elizabeth Kolbert provides a wide survey of geological, evolutionary and ecological principles, and their modification, acceleration and reversals due to modern human practices (she cites studies of fossils, oceans, corals, forests, frogs, islands; as well as visiting the prominent sites that these studies took place in). I couldn't help but notice that our scientific understanding of natural processes came about at the same time these process were being disrupted by capitalism. It's almost as if we only noticed the exuberance of life through its disappearance; constructing a museum to all the beings displaced by to the construction of the museum itself.
Kolbert, unfortunately, doesn't develop her findings towards a critique of European imperialism (primitive accumulation, the profit motive, the unsustainability of economic growth, commodification, pollution, periphery-dependency, etc). This is understandable, if disappointing, like many things in popular science. The imperative to present scientific facts as neutral effaces the political and economic systems at the root of such phenomena. This, however, traps us in the pessimism of knowledge without praxis; of power without resistance. We know the effect of globalisation but not the cause, and without the cause we cannot mobilise to effect social, political and ideological change.
For example, poachers are mentioned a number of times by Kolbert, but we never hear about why these people are poaching (what is the economic situation of the poachers), who they are poaching for (what is the economic situation of the buyers), and what such a loop generates for all the nations involved. When did poaching begin? Was it from a periphery nation (Congo) towards a centre nation (Britain)? What ideological force engendered animal bodies and deaths as desirable? Hunting may have always been a part of human culture, but its particular configuration as an international and commodified system of trade certainly is not. One look into King Leopold's exploitation of the Congo is all you need to see how inextricable capitalism, imperialism, racism, slavery and mass extinction are.
By failing to historicise these seemingly cruel and selfish acts, Kolbert unintentionally scapegoats bad individuals (the poachers) in lieu of identifying the unjust and headless system (capitalism) they live under. But poaching is a system of capital and control, made desirable through circuits of consumption, and made possible through violent colonisation.
Would recommend reading alongside Naomi Klein, David Harvey, Murray Bookchin, Aimé Césaire and, of course, Greta Thunberg.
Edit: Actually she does provide compelling arguments later in the book that humans as a species drove megafauna and neanderthals to extinction through hunting and competition. However, the pace of such events were over thousands of years, which does not compare to the rate of extinction under capitalism.
Elizabeth Kolbert provides a wide survey of geological, evolutionary and ecological principles, and their modification, acceleration and reversals due to modern human practices (she cites studies of fossils, oceans, corals, forests, frogs, islands; as well as visiting the prominent sites that these studies took place in). I couldn't help but notice that our scientific understanding of natural processes came about at the same time these process were being disrupted by capitalism. It's almost as if we only noticed the exuberance of life through its disappearance; constructing a museum to all the beings displaced by to the construction of the museum itself.
Kolbert, unfortunately, doesn't develop her findings towards a critique of European imperialism (primitive accumulation, the profit motive, the unsustainability of economic growth, commodification, pollution, periphery-dependency, etc). This is understandable, if disappointing, like many things in popular science. The imperative to present scientific facts as neutral effaces the political and economic systems at the root of such phenomena. This, however, traps us in the pessimism of knowledge without praxis; of power without resistance. We know the effect of globalisation but not the cause, and without the cause we cannot mobilise to effect social, political and ideological change.
For example, poachers are mentioned a number of times by Kolbert, but we never hear about why these people are poaching (what is the economic situation of the poachers), who they are poaching for (what is the economic situation of the buyers), and what such a loop generates for all the nations involved. When did poaching begin? Was it from a periphery nation (Congo) towards a centre nation (Britain)? What ideological force engendered animal bodies and deaths as desirable? Hunting may have always been a part of human culture, but its particular configuration as an international and commodified system of trade certainly is not. One look into King Leopold's exploitation of the Congo is all you need to see how inextricable capitalism, imperialism, racism, slavery and mass extinction are.
By failing to historicise these seemingly cruel and selfish acts, Kolbert unintentionally scapegoats bad individuals (the poachers) in lieu of identifying the unjust and headless system (capitalism) they live under. But poaching is a system of capital and control, made desirable through circuits of consumption, and made possible through violent colonisation.
Would recommend reading alongside Naomi Klein, David Harvey, Murray Bookchin, Aimé Césaire and, of course, Greta Thunberg.
Edit: Actually she does provide compelling arguments later in the book that humans as a species drove megafauna and neanderthals to extinction through hunting and competition. However, the pace of such events were over thousands of years, which does not compare to the rate of extinction under capitalism.
Eh, it was fine. There's something about the author's prejudices/attitude that I didn't like
informative
reflective
medium-paced
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
informative
fast-paced
*No more long reviews for a while, I'm sorry. Thesis stress and limited time are to blame...*
"Though it might be nice to imagine there once was a time when man lived in harmony with nature, it's not clear that he ever really did."
So, aside from being among the biggest biology nerds the world has to offer, I picked up this book had the same title as one of my favorite songs, which is The Sixth Extinction from Ayreon. However, I truly love natural history and am fascinated by evolution to an almost obsessive note, haha. The part us humans play in this sixth extinction interests me, but also frightens me a lot. This book kind of helped me 'deal' with the prospect of a sixth extinction, which in inevitable, sadly.
The author beautifully switches between short stories about her venturing to the ends of the world to meet scientist who are working hard to understand the mass extinction, but also scientist who try to preserve the species affected by it all, scientist who mapped the damaged that has been done to nature so far. On the other hand there is a lot of information about past mass extinctions, natural history, the discovery of the concept of extinction, when it was discovered, how and by whom. Truly, a fantastic book to read. Both enjoyable and informative! I loved it!
"Though it might be nice to imagine there once was a time when man lived in harmony with nature, it's not clear that he ever really did."
So, aside from being among the biggest biology nerds the world has to offer, I picked up this book had the same title as one of my favorite songs, which is The Sixth Extinction from Ayreon. However, I truly love natural history and am fascinated by evolution to an almost obsessive note, haha. The part us humans play in this sixth extinction interests me, but also frightens me a lot. This book kind of helped me 'deal' with the prospect of a sixth extinction, which in inevitable, sadly.
The author beautifully switches between short stories about her venturing to the ends of the world to meet scientist who are working hard to understand the mass extinction, but also scientist who try to preserve the species affected by it all, scientist who mapped the damaged that has been done to nature so far. On the other hand there is a lot of information about past mass extinctions, natural history, the discovery of the concept of extinction, when it was discovered, how and by whom. Truly, a fantastic book to read. Both enjoyable and informative! I loved it!
Science was never my strong suit in school, but this book grabbed my interest from the beginning. It is readable, accessible, descriptive, and it made me think about the impact humans have made on the planet and other creatures. It does cover a lot of background and history, so someone who is an expert in one of these fields might not get as much out of the book as general readers. Since I don't plan on being a scientist, I am pleased with what I learned and think this would be a good book for a book club, if I was still in one.