Scan barcode
A review by cavalary
Pamantul nelocuibil by David Wallace-Wells
3.0
[EN: (RO below)]
Though “reality” did even “better”, considering how recent and yet already outdated the data is, it does a good job of pointing out how bad things are and how much worse they’re going to get, explaining thoroughly, spelling out both the urgency and the complexity of the situation. It also stresses that the disaster is of our own making and we can avoid it if only we’d make the effort, and also that the important changes are the large scale ones, laws, regulations, government intervention, while the pressure for individual lifestyle changes is more of a way for society as a whole to feel that it’s doing something while continuing to avoid the drastic and sometimes painful changes that are desperately necessary. And the inequality aspect is also pointed out, the less guilty and powerless suffering more while the more guilty and powerful can avoid the negative consequences for much longer and may even benefit.
I’m not sure what the target audience is, however. Maybe it’s an attempt to avoid the usual problem with any such work, only being picked up by those already interested and involved, but the author disqualifies himself in my eyes when he says he’s not an environmentalist, even showing disdain for environmentalists and activists in general, and continues along those lines, even stating that he’d choose economic growth despite knowing that nature pays the price and spelling out his single-mindedly, unapologetically anthropocentric stance, saying he’d agree with the loss of most of what’s generally considered nature if only humans could live well in such a world, only acting because that can’t happen. He even sees caring for other species as an excuse for not acting, or at least not in what he’d consider an efficient manner.
Otherwise, there are awfully many notes, and towards the end they also become descriptions and comments, which might have been better placed in the text itself. And, at least in this edition, the numbers for notes are oddly placed, and the months were clearly automatically translated in the notes, including in English titles and URLs and the word “may”.
[RO:]
Desi "realitatea" a facut-o si mai "bine", tinand cont de cat de recente dar deja depasite sunt informatiile, face o treaba buna in a arata cat de rea e situatia si cat de mult se va inrautati, explicand in detaliu, demonstrand atat urgenta cat si complexitatea situatiei. De asemenea subliniaza ca dezastrul e produs de noi si il putem evita daca am face efortul necesar, si ca schimbarile necesare sunt cele pe scara larga, legi, reglementari, interventia guvernelor, in timp ce presiunea de a face schimbari individuale ale stilului de viata e mai degraba o metoda ca societatea in ansamblu sa simta ca face ceva in timp ce continua sa evite schimbarile drastice si uneori dureroase care sunt atat de necesare. Si aspectul inegalitatii este de asemenea prezentat, cei mai putin vinovati si fara putere suferind mai mult in timp ce aceia care sunt mai vinovati si au mai multa putere pot evita consecintele negative mai mult timp si chiar pot avea beneficii.
Dar nu stiu care-i publicul tinta. Poate e o incercare de a evita problema obisnuita cu astfel de lucrari, parcurse doar de cei deja interesati si implicati, dar autorul se descalifica in ochii mei cand spune ca nu este un ecologist, chiar arata dispret fata de ecologisti si activisti in general, si continua pe aceasta linie, chiar spunand ca ar alege cresterea economica desi stie ca natura plateste pretul si exprimandu-si pozitia antropocentrica hotarata, fara scuze, spunand ca ar fi de acord cu pierderea celei mai mari parti a ceea ce se considera in general natura daca oamenii ar putea trai bine intr-o asemenea lume, actionand doar pentru ca asta nu se poate. Chiar vede grija purtata altor specii ca o scuza pentru a nu actiona, sau cel putin nu in ceea ce ar considera o maniera eficienta.
Altfel, sunt extrem de multe note, si spre final acestea devin descrieri si comentarii, care si-ar fi gasit mai bine locul in textul in sine. Si, cel putin in aceasta editie, numerele pentru note sunt pozitionate ciudat, si lunile au fost evident traduse automat in note, incluzand in titlurile in engleza si URL-uri si cuvantul “may”.
Though “reality” did even “better”, considering how recent and yet already outdated the data is, it does a good job of pointing out how bad things are and how much worse they’re going to get, explaining thoroughly, spelling out both the urgency and the complexity of the situation. It also stresses that the disaster is of our own making and we can avoid it if only we’d make the effort, and also that the important changes are the large scale ones, laws, regulations, government intervention, while the pressure for individual lifestyle changes is more of a way for society as a whole to feel that it’s doing something while continuing to avoid the drastic and sometimes painful changes that are desperately necessary. And the inequality aspect is also pointed out, the less guilty and powerless suffering more while the more guilty and powerful can avoid the negative consequences for much longer and may even benefit.
I’m not sure what the target audience is, however. Maybe it’s an attempt to avoid the usual problem with any such work, only being picked up by those already interested and involved, but the author disqualifies himself in my eyes when he says he’s not an environmentalist, even showing disdain for environmentalists and activists in general, and continues along those lines, even stating that he’d choose economic growth despite knowing that nature pays the price and spelling out his single-mindedly, unapologetically anthropocentric stance, saying he’d agree with the loss of most of what’s generally considered nature if only humans could live well in such a world, only acting because that can’t happen. He even sees caring for other species as an excuse for not acting, or at least not in what he’d consider an efficient manner.
Otherwise, there are awfully many notes, and towards the end they also become descriptions and comments, which might have been better placed in the text itself. And, at least in this edition, the numbers for notes are oddly placed, and the months were clearly automatically translated in the notes, including in English titles and URLs and the word “may”.
[RO:]
Desi "realitatea" a facut-o si mai "bine", tinand cont de cat de recente dar deja depasite sunt informatiile, face o treaba buna in a arata cat de rea e situatia si cat de mult se va inrautati, explicand in detaliu, demonstrand atat urgenta cat si complexitatea situatiei. De asemenea subliniaza ca dezastrul e produs de noi si il putem evita daca am face efortul necesar, si ca schimbarile necesare sunt cele pe scara larga, legi, reglementari, interventia guvernelor, in timp ce presiunea de a face schimbari individuale ale stilului de viata e mai degraba o metoda ca societatea in ansamblu sa simta ca face ceva in timp ce continua sa evite schimbarile drastice si uneori dureroase care sunt atat de necesare. Si aspectul inegalitatii este de asemenea prezentat, cei mai putin vinovati si fara putere suferind mai mult in timp ce aceia care sunt mai vinovati si au mai multa putere pot evita consecintele negative mai mult timp si chiar pot avea beneficii.
Dar nu stiu care-i publicul tinta. Poate e o incercare de a evita problema obisnuita cu astfel de lucrari, parcurse doar de cei deja interesati si implicati, dar autorul se descalifica in ochii mei cand spune ca nu este un ecologist, chiar arata dispret fata de ecologisti si activisti in general, si continua pe aceasta linie, chiar spunand ca ar alege cresterea economica desi stie ca natura plateste pretul si exprimandu-si pozitia antropocentrica hotarata, fara scuze, spunand ca ar fi de acord cu pierderea celei mai mari parti a ceea ce se considera in general natura daca oamenii ar putea trai bine intr-o asemenea lume, actionand doar pentru ca asta nu se poate. Chiar vede grija purtata altor specii ca o scuza pentru a nu actiona, sau cel putin nu in ceea ce ar considera o maniera eficienta.
Altfel, sunt extrem de multe note, si spre final acestea devin descrieri si comentarii, care si-ar fi gasit mai bine locul in textul in sine. Si, cel putin in aceasta editie, numerele pentru note sunt pozitionate ciudat, si lunile au fost evident traduse automat in note, incluzand in titlurile in engleza si URL-uri si cuvantul “may”.