Scan barcode
11corvus11's reviews
902 reviews
Feather Trails: A Journey of Discovery Among Endangered Birds by Sophie A H Osborn
5.0
This is going to be a ranting, rambling review full of animal liberationist opinions as it's impossible for it not to be with how many feelings, some old and some new, were awakened by this beautiful book. The author and I have many agreements and a few disagreements, so be careful not to project all of my opinions onto her writing if I happen to convey this jumbled mess without enough organization. Sophie A. H. Osborn's Feather Trails is a standout in the genres it spans (memoir, nature writing, science, and more.) The writing is excellent, engrossing, and drew me in completely, making me feel like I was there. Her ability to immerse the reader with details about locations, visuals, feelings, experiences, etc is strengthened by her simultaneous ponderings on what things are like for the individual birds of the species she worked to support and conserve. Her passion about birds and conservation is clear and reading this book added to my own passion and understanding.
Learning Osborn's history with peregrine falcons had me thinking of every time I have had the luxury of seeing this no longer endangered bird with the awe of knowing they may never have had a chance without people like her and the challenging work they did. The stories of the alala crows tore at and touched my heart. You can tell from my name that I have a soft spot for corvids and to know these crafty creatures are extinct in the wild is devastating. Learning how the remaining individuals in captivity still maintain some wildness and ability to enjoy life makes the reality easier to digest. The section on the California condors was by far the hardest, yet still full of beauty. The pitfalls and absolute cruelty and callousness of so many humans, how they killed so many birds, and damaged conservation efforts over and over has infuriated and haunted me since.
Frankly, I already found the propaganda of hunters all being the "greatest conservationists" to be gross. Taking a history where regulations had to be created and rigidly enforced because hunting drove many species to, or close to, extinction (including deer, canada geese, and other now abundant species,) then rebranding the entire story with hunters as the heroes is dishonest at best. (Not to mention how current subsets of conservation that are partly funded by hunting licenses end abruptly when their ability to kill who they want when they want, or the profits of loggers and ranchers, are affected.) After Osborn telling the stories of lead poisonings, individual condor by condor, all dying extremely prematurely, while the NRA and "conservationist" hunters clung (and still cling) to lead shot because "gun rights" frankly made me so infuriated by this hunting propaganda that I could barely breathe. For the record, Osborn herself does not claim to be anti-hunting, just anti-lead ammunition. Osborn's stories of individual birds, their relationships, explorations and adventures, and the short lives they did get to lead made out for a book that is not purely trauma. However, it is never easy to read sensitive, thoughtful, honest accounts of how we got here, where we have succeeded, and where we have failed. That honesty leads me to my next point.
I often go in to books about the greater than human world open-minded but with low expectations. There are tons of books out there that disappoint, not so much in their lack of research and information, but in their objectification of their subjects. I am so tired of reading books that treat birds and other animals as a monolith of beings with no personalities and only a single minded focus (usually reproduction.) I did not know much about Osborn before this book (because I am out of touch, she is in fact a rather large name in ornithology and conservation.) I was pleasantly surprised by how she told these stories for a variety of reasons.
Despite sometimes falling into the dreaded "it" designation that many humans continue to give animals, Osborn focuses on each bird that she worked with and knew as an individual being. We learn about their personalities, how they interact with one another in different ways, how human interference affects things, and so on. She also does not shy away from the ethical conundrums of working with endangered birds. While I don't always agree with her, I found so much value in her discussion of the realities of how righting human wrongs can be very complicated. From DDT and lead contamination to the introduction of feral cats and killing birds to feed other birds, Osborn does not shy away from discussing her feelings and overall ethics (topics often woefully absent in science literature.) She discusses her uneasiness with the practice of killing quail to save falcons and how seeing a feral cat be killed to protect other species taught her to transition her own cats to be indoor only. I did not notice her analyzing the killing of cows for condors, though, which I think could have pushed the ethical convo further when discussing animal agribusiness and its contributions to climate change and species extinction- especially given the focus on hunting (which presently has less overall impact than animal exploitation agribusiness.) Not only do the wastefulness, greenhouse gases, land use, groundwater pollution, etc, cause issues, but many vulture species have become endangered due to poisoning from drugs given to cows, but I digress.
She discusses the human fault for introducing non native species in much more honest ways than many scientists, though in my opinion she still put too much blame on said species at times for endangering other animals by condoning their slaughter. The big picture is more complicated than that. In reality, humans (aside from introducing said species in the first place) have far worse impacts than any feral cat. Overfishing/hunting, habitat destruction, pollutions, animal agribusiness, etc are all massive threats to birds and other animals. Even the first humans who traveled outside Africa to colonize other continents began to cause imbalances, extinctions, etc upon arrival (no shade to folks just trying to survive without this knowledge centuries ago.) With European colonization, industrialization, etc, those problems were intensely magnified. Yet, humans believe that we and our luxuries are worth more, so we call the other animals "invaders" and blame it all on them. Osborn is unafraid to have this discussion which I truly appreciate, even if she and I disagree on a fraction of the solutions.
Osborn also is willing to acknowledge the ethical conundrums in terms of conservation, study, and breeding of endangered species. She does not shy away from the reality that handling birds is stressful. I have seen bird banding posts with people taking selfies with terrified animals or claiming they're "smilin for the camera!" (I support banding research efforts, for the record, and respect the efforts of scientists to reduce stress as much as possible. Unfortunately, nonconsensual contact with other animals is sometimes needed for conservation and research. I also support questioning everything we do without another animal's consent and how we characterize those actions.) Osborn discusses the practice of separating animals who choose one another as partners in order to place them with another animal with a higher chance of breeding. This is a practice I oppose, but I see the logic. She does not discuss artificial insemination as much as one should as it ranges from stressful to horrific depending on the species. I think zoos playing a part increases the problem (reminder: wherein the majority of animals are not endangered and are bred/purchased just for entertainment/profit.) Zoos tend to want to breed species so that they have more of that species to display in captivity, despite the fact that the stresses of the zoo tend to hinder various species interest in breeding. You can see the difference between zoo-run conservation and other types not driven by profit in this book and elsewhere. Even so, the Alala crow efforts are important and sometimes a zoo will hold the only members of an endangered or extinct-in-the-wild species available and thus one must work with them in order to participate.
In terms of herself, Osborn is excellent at describing her strengths, shortcomings, successes, and mistakes along the way. She discusses being a woman in the sciences and which people were her allies vs which ones treated her as subservient. She interrogates her own biases and examines her feelings. Rather than drawing conclusions that all emotion is bad in science, she examines which way her emotions may lead her and why. I don't know if she realized she was using this sort of wisdom around feelings or if it is just evident to me as an outsider. Afterall, isn't the desire to care for and conserve an entire species partly an emotional one? Humans are an extremely emotional species, much like many other animals. I think we benefit far more from these discussions than we do from humans who think that emotion has no place in the sciences (as if that would even be possible with us involved.) But, again, I digress.
I've written plenty and have filled this review with so much of what this book brought up for me because I haven't been able to stop thinking about it every day since I finished. I hope that Osborn's style is a trend in writing that will continue in science, conservation, nature, etc topics. It not only draws people into the worlds of other animals, but it pushes us more towards possible solutions. The planet would not have lost so many of its species with more efforts like that of Osborn. With her and those like her still out there, maybe many still have a chance.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
Learning Osborn's history with peregrine falcons had me thinking of every time I have had the luxury of seeing this no longer endangered bird with the awe of knowing they may never have had a chance without people like her and the challenging work they did. The stories of the alala crows tore at and touched my heart. You can tell from my name that I have a soft spot for corvids and to know these crafty creatures are extinct in the wild is devastating. Learning how the remaining individuals in captivity still maintain some wildness and ability to enjoy life makes the reality easier to digest. The section on the California condors was by far the hardest, yet still full of beauty. The pitfalls and absolute cruelty and callousness of so many humans, how they killed so many birds, and damaged conservation efforts over and over has infuriated and haunted me since.
Frankly, I already found the propaganda of hunters all being the "greatest conservationists" to be gross. Taking a history where regulations had to be created and rigidly enforced because hunting drove many species to, or close to, extinction (including deer, canada geese, and other now abundant species,) then rebranding the entire story with hunters as the heroes is dishonest at best. (Not to mention how current subsets of conservation that are partly funded by hunting licenses end abruptly when their ability to kill who they want when they want, or the profits of loggers and ranchers, are affected.) After Osborn telling the stories of lead poisonings, individual condor by condor, all dying extremely prematurely, while the NRA and "conservationist" hunters clung (and still cling) to lead shot because "gun rights" frankly made me so infuriated by this hunting propaganda that I could barely breathe. For the record, Osborn herself does not claim to be anti-hunting, just anti-lead ammunition. Osborn's stories of individual birds, their relationships, explorations and adventures, and the short lives they did get to lead made out for a book that is not purely trauma. However, it is never easy to read sensitive, thoughtful, honest accounts of how we got here, where we have succeeded, and where we have failed. That honesty leads me to my next point.
I often go in to books about the greater than human world open-minded but with low expectations. There are tons of books out there that disappoint, not so much in their lack of research and information, but in their objectification of their subjects. I am so tired of reading books that treat birds and other animals as a monolith of beings with no personalities and only a single minded focus (usually reproduction.) I did not know much about Osborn before this book (because I am out of touch, she is in fact a rather large name in ornithology and conservation.) I was pleasantly surprised by how she told these stories for a variety of reasons.
Despite sometimes falling into the dreaded "it" designation that many humans continue to give animals, Osborn focuses on each bird that she worked with and knew as an individual being. We learn about their personalities, how they interact with one another in different ways, how human interference affects things, and so on. She also does not shy away from the ethical conundrums of working with endangered birds. While I don't always agree with her, I found so much value in her discussion of the realities of how righting human wrongs can be very complicated. From DDT and lead contamination to the introduction of feral cats and killing birds to feed other birds, Osborn does not shy away from discussing her feelings and overall ethics (topics often woefully absent in science literature.) She discusses her uneasiness with the practice of killing quail to save falcons and how seeing a feral cat be killed to protect other species taught her to transition her own cats to be indoor only. I did not notice her analyzing the killing of cows for condors, though, which I think could have pushed the ethical convo further when discussing animal agribusiness and its contributions to climate change and species extinction- especially given the focus on hunting (which presently has less overall impact than animal exploitation agribusiness.) Not only do the wastefulness, greenhouse gases, land use, groundwater pollution, etc, cause issues, but many vulture species have become endangered due to poisoning from drugs given to cows, but I digress.
She discusses the human fault for introducing non native species in much more honest ways than many scientists, though in my opinion she still put too much blame on said species at times for endangering other animals by condoning their slaughter. The big picture is more complicated than that. In reality, humans (aside from introducing said species in the first place) have far worse impacts than any feral cat. Overfishing/hunting, habitat destruction, pollutions, animal agribusiness, etc are all massive threats to birds and other animals. Even the first humans who traveled outside Africa to colonize other continents began to cause imbalances, extinctions, etc upon arrival (no shade to folks just trying to survive without this knowledge centuries ago.) With European colonization, industrialization, etc, those problems were intensely magnified. Yet, humans believe that we and our luxuries are worth more, so we call the other animals "invaders" and blame it all on them. Osborn is unafraid to have this discussion which I truly appreciate, even if she and I disagree on a fraction of the solutions.
Osborn also is willing to acknowledge the ethical conundrums in terms of conservation, study, and breeding of endangered species. She does not shy away from the reality that handling birds is stressful. I have seen bird banding posts with people taking selfies with terrified animals or claiming they're "smilin for the camera!" (I support banding research efforts, for the record, and respect the efforts of scientists to reduce stress as much as possible. Unfortunately, nonconsensual contact with other animals is sometimes needed for conservation and research. I also support questioning everything we do without another animal's consent and how we characterize those actions.) Osborn discusses the practice of separating animals who choose one another as partners in order to place them with another animal with a higher chance of breeding. This is a practice I oppose, but I see the logic. She does not discuss artificial insemination as much as one should as it ranges from stressful to horrific depending on the species. I think zoos playing a part increases the problem (reminder: wherein the majority of animals are not endangered and are bred/purchased just for entertainment/profit.) Zoos tend to want to breed species so that they have more of that species to display in captivity, despite the fact that the stresses of the zoo tend to hinder various species interest in breeding. You can see the difference between zoo-run conservation and other types not driven by profit in this book and elsewhere. Even so, the Alala crow efforts are important and sometimes a zoo will hold the only members of an endangered or extinct-in-the-wild species available and thus one must work with them in order to participate.
In terms of herself, Osborn is excellent at describing her strengths, shortcomings, successes, and mistakes along the way. She discusses being a woman in the sciences and which people were her allies vs which ones treated her as subservient. She interrogates her own biases and examines her feelings. Rather than drawing conclusions that all emotion is bad in science, she examines which way her emotions may lead her and why. I don't know if she realized she was using this sort of wisdom around feelings or if it is just evident to me as an outsider. Afterall, isn't the desire to care for and conserve an entire species partly an emotional one? Humans are an extremely emotional species, much like many other animals. I think we benefit far more from these discussions than we do from humans who think that emotion has no place in the sciences (as if that would even be possible with us involved.) But, again, I digress.
I've written plenty and have filled this review with so much of what this book brought up for me because I haven't been able to stop thinking about it every day since I finished. I hope that Osborn's style is a trend in writing that will continue in science, conservation, nature, etc topics. It not only draws people into the worlds of other animals, but it pushes us more towards possible solutions. The planet would not have lost so many of its species with more efforts like that of Osborn. With her and those like her still out there, maybe many still have a chance.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
Jamaica Ginger and Other Concoctions by Nalo Hopkinson
4.0
Nalo Hopkinson ranks in the top tier of my favorite scifi and speculative fiction authors. I have read most of her excellent novels, but she stands out as an author whose short story collections actually end up being my favorites in her repertoire. Falling in Love with Hominids is one of the best short story collections I have read by either a single or multiple authors. Naturally, I was excited to see Tachyon putting out a new collection by Hopkinson: Jamaica Ginger and Other Concoctions. Nisi Shawl also aided Hopkinson and cowrote one of the stories in the collection as well.
While this collection did not hit as hard as Falling in Love with Hominids for me personally, it is still a strong collection that spans genres as Hopkinson is known to do. There are a couple stories that can be found in other collections, but many of these are ones that were written for specific projects- including a TED talk fiction performance by multiple authors gathered by Neil Gaiman- that are not so easily accessible. I really enjoyed that they included Nalo's words before each story, describing where the stories came from and what her writing process was. It enriched the experience of reading the book. Her description of the aforementioned TED story entry was the longest and most interesting in its discussion of how the stereotypical boundaries of science fiction must often be surpassed when marginalized characters are present. Hopkinson is also excessively humble in some of her assessments of stories. There were ones that were not her favorite that I ended up liking quite a lot.
The best stories in the collection in terms of my own tastes were Broad Dutty Water: A Sunken Story inspired by a Jamaican folksong and real life horrors of flooding, the satirical Clap Back telling truth through fiction about exploitative arts, Repatriationabout a very special type of cruise, and my absolute favorite San Humanité which somehow, despite being only two pages, gripped me and left me craving an expansion of it into a full novel. I do not think I have ever felt that way from a 2 page story before. There are plenty of other excellent stories that people who are fans of all sorts of genres will enjoy as well.
Nalo Hopkinson is not just groundbreaking in her telling of stories with characters not often centered in SSFF genres, though that is definitely a draw for me. She is a damned good writer who continues to evolve with time and this collection is a good example of the many places her fiction has gone. I look forward to the next entry in her writing career, hopefully sooner rather than later.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
While this collection did not hit as hard as Falling in Love with Hominids for me personally, it is still a strong collection that spans genres as Hopkinson is known to do. There are a couple stories that can be found in other collections, but many of these are ones that were written for specific projects- including a TED talk fiction performance by multiple authors gathered by Neil Gaiman- that are not so easily accessible. I really enjoyed that they included Nalo's words before each story, describing where the stories came from and what her writing process was. It enriched the experience of reading the book. Her description of the aforementioned TED story entry was the longest and most interesting in its discussion of how the stereotypical boundaries of science fiction must often be surpassed when marginalized characters are present. Hopkinson is also excessively humble in some of her assessments of stories. There were ones that were not her favorite that I ended up liking quite a lot.
The best stories in the collection in terms of my own tastes were Broad Dutty Water: A Sunken Story inspired by a Jamaican folksong and real life horrors of flooding, the satirical Clap Back telling truth through fiction about exploitative arts, Repatriationabout a very special type of cruise, and my absolute favorite San Humanité which somehow, despite being only two pages, gripped me and left me craving an expansion of it into a full novel. I do not think I have ever felt that way from a 2 page story before. There are plenty of other excellent stories that people who are fans of all sorts of genres will enjoy as well.
Nalo Hopkinson is not just groundbreaking in her telling of stories with characters not often centered in SSFF genres, though that is definitely a draw for me. She is a damned good writer who continues to evolve with time and this collection is a good example of the many places her fiction has gone. I look forward to the next entry in her writing career, hopefully sooner rather than later.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
Meet the Neighbors: Animal Minds and Life in a More-than-Human World by Brandon Keim
5.0
Brandon Keim's excellent book Meet the Neighbors seems to be one that suffers from a title and cover that don't quite match what is inside. (Though, I do love the subheading phrase "more-than-human worlds.") It's strange that the idiom, "don't judge a book by its cover" is still so popular when it is arguably less practiced today than it ever was given the wide reach of the internet and availability of graphic design. The welcome mat with all of the animals on it resembles a child's nature show to me, but Keim did not write a cutesie book about animals as one-dimensional cartoon characters. I assume the title and design were created to reach as wide an audience as possible- anyone who likes other-than-human animals and wants fun facts about them. This strategy sometimes works for sales but often results in disappointment by readers who expected something lighter.
Keim's book is grounded in reality and is written with great sensitivity, deep thought, and a level of honesty I often do not encounter in these kinds of texts- even from those whose entire goal is to de-center humans in discussions about other animals. This is not a buzzfeed-esque fun-fact book (though there are certainly many fun facts and heartwarming stories within) nor is it a book focused solely on more-than-human animal traits. The parts that mostly focused on facts about animals were the beginning sections of the book which I thought could have used more organization. This initially left me worried that I might be reading another run-of-the-mill book of animal facts, which is just fine, but moving forward took me into another world entirely. This book is includes a mixture of general info and research about other animal minds and experiences as well as discussion about how humans treat and view fellow creatures. The latter can make it tough to read at times. However, even as a person who generally has a hard boundary against reading detailed accounts of animal cruelty and exploitation, I encourage folks to push through those parts. I make exceptions to this rule when the information is used to make larger, complex points and to combat common knowledge in important ways that cannot be done accurately without including said details. Basically, when it makes me think about things in ways I had not before, I will make my way through it. I believe this book does this. It does so in ways that are exceptional in comparison to others in the genre.
We are currently in a place, at least in much of western culture, where it is super cool to talk about climate change, but not to actually take responsibility for it. It is super cool to discuss amazing fun facts about other animals, as long as we always keep them a step below us and don't challenge the ways we exploit them. It is super cool to combat threats to endangered species, including blaming other species introduced by us, as long as the threats combatted aren't human (you know, the main threat.) Even in far left circles, these kinds of neoliberal and reactionary ways of thinking are common in regards to nonhuman animals. It's even fashionable to tokenize human struggles in reasoning as to why other species do not deserve respect and consideration. This book forces the reader to confront all of these anthropocentric biases and more. Keim acknowledges the great importance of the little bits of happiness we can gain from Dodo videos while also acknowledging that we "live in a world of wounds," as he said when he generously joined VINE book club last month. Keim also grapples with conflicts and questions that are often left out on the more liberatory side of things, such as when humans should intervene to help other animals and what kind of interventions are more wasteful or disruptive than they are helpful. He consistently asks the question- what would an individual from this species think or want? He ponders things such as the differences in opinion bears vs salmon might have in regards to habitat management and how humans choose which species to focus on helping or admiring. The most illuminating parts of the book for me personally, were those that discussed introduced/non-native, "overpopulated," and/or species labeled as "pests." I had not even realized just how much bias I had internalized about certain dilemmas even as a 18 year die hard (collective liberation) vegan with a ton of animal rescue experience who knows that these things are more complicated that the anthropocentric ways they are presented.
This book is what I was hoping the the book Pests: How Humans Create Animal Villains would have been. Even though MTN is not entirely about these species and conflicts, it tells multiple sides of the story in honest ways as much as a human can attempt to without being able to interview other species. I had no idea, for instance, that introduced (non-native) donkeys had rewilded in many places and helped other species survive through things like oasis digging in deserts. I had heard of "judas goats," but never knew about "judas donkeys," which were only mentioned in a footnote, but are truly one of the most heart wrenching examples of cruelty I have read about. I can't stop thinking about them, but do not regret learning this as part of the full story. I have read countless texts that explain how rats and feral cats threatened island nesting birds, which insisted that killing all of them was the only solution. Those texts neglected to mention that humans overfishing, habitat destruction, and killing of the ocean were countless times worse for said birds and everyone else. Keim also discussed how said purge of feral cats was also used to reduce competition with foxes, only to find that foxes at more threatened birds than the cats (who ate more rodents.) The culling of introduced pigs ended up taking away food from golden eagles, who then turned on the foxes, which then meant the eagles had to be "managed." I am a birder and often see people patting themselves on the back when telling people to keep their cats indoors (which I agree with for the record,) but will attack anyone who even questions how our actions affect birds (outside of the abstract or pointing the finger at other human groups- usually in oppressive ways.) We learn that feral cats are the "top killers" of birds when they aren't. We are. But, many writers (outside of animal rights and liberation niche texts) are encouraged not to talk about this as the reader needs the ability to channel the upset about what is happening onto someone else. Keim doesn't fall into that trap.
Keim also did a lot of research and got a lot of big names to interview. Bobby Corrigan on rodents for example. Again, the way he approached the book exceeds what you often find in nature and animal literature. He interviews scientists, environmentalists, lawyers, wildlife "management" services, philosophers, naturalists, animal sanctuary founders, zoo employees, and so on. He also presents one of the most honest sections on hunting and fishing- particularly westernized hunting that rebranded itself as "conservationist" (after hunting drove many species to, or near to, extinction.) I don't know if I have ever read a text that acknowledged the horrors hunters have committed, the trouble with ecosystem imbalance caused by overpopulation of certain species (and harm to other species,) the other human activities that often cause more harm but get less attention/ire than hunting (such as urbanization,) the conservation efforts of a subset of hunters, and how those conservation efforts ultimately serve hunters, ranchers, and loggers more than other animals or ecosystems (by prioritizing sport, profits, trophies, and species hunters want to kill even at cost of true balance and other species harmed by their "conservation" practices.) Keim even calls out the permission fallacy and idea of animals "giving their lives" as a way to redirect from the reality that their lives are taken. He is not claiming taking a life is always wrong, on the contrary, it is sometimes a necessity including for other species. But, he combats this view usually touted by people romanticizing hunting by claiming animals are super into being shot or stabbed for conservation, tradition, sport, trophy, food, or all of the above. It's very rare to find that level of honesty and diligent research on a topic so sensitive to many people on all sides. Keim truly seemed more interested in understanding the dilemma than taking a side.
As a bird nerd, I learned so many new things about birds from this book. Some were depressing and far more were fascinating. Yet, he also has me thinking hard about what species I am fascinated by and how that affects my actions. I have lots of photos of birds eating insects and fishes. While I have definitely felt for these animals, especially when that damned ring-billed gull held that squirming fish for ages before finally killing them, what is it about birds that attracts me? And how does that affect my actions? I'm not saying I have never considered these things, but Keim gave me new ways to think about them. One might think based on what I have said here that there is a punishing way to these thought processes, but on the contrary, I actually found Keim's outlook freeing. It is often honesty, however painful, that is much less anxiety inducing in the long run. This book allows me to see myself as part of this world- an animal among many other animals- and to examine what that means to me.
As you may be able to tell, I could write a book on this book. I want to leave some surprises for the reader as well. I highly recommend Meet the Neighbors and I hope that if you find your expectations dashed a bit, that you can move forward and take what else the text has to offer because there is a lot here that I have rarely found elsewhere.
This was also posted to my goodreads and blog
Keim's book is grounded in reality and is written with great sensitivity, deep thought, and a level of honesty I often do not encounter in these kinds of texts- even from those whose entire goal is to de-center humans in discussions about other animals. This is not a buzzfeed-esque fun-fact book (though there are certainly many fun facts and heartwarming stories within) nor is it a book focused solely on more-than-human animal traits. The parts that mostly focused on facts about animals were the beginning sections of the book which I thought could have used more organization. This initially left me worried that I might be reading another run-of-the-mill book of animal facts, which is just fine, but moving forward took me into another world entirely. This book is includes a mixture of general info and research about other animal minds and experiences as well as discussion about how humans treat and view fellow creatures. The latter can make it tough to read at times. However, even as a person who generally has a hard boundary against reading detailed accounts of animal cruelty and exploitation, I encourage folks to push through those parts. I make exceptions to this rule when the information is used to make larger, complex points and to combat common knowledge in important ways that cannot be done accurately without including said details. Basically, when it makes me think about things in ways I had not before, I will make my way through it. I believe this book does this. It does so in ways that are exceptional in comparison to others in the genre.
We are currently in a place, at least in much of western culture, where it is super cool to talk about climate change, but not to actually take responsibility for it. It is super cool to discuss amazing fun facts about other animals, as long as we always keep them a step below us and don't challenge the ways we exploit them. It is super cool to combat threats to endangered species, including blaming other species introduced by us, as long as the threats combatted aren't human (you know, the main threat.) Even in far left circles, these kinds of neoliberal and reactionary ways of thinking are common in regards to nonhuman animals. It's even fashionable to tokenize human struggles in reasoning as to why other species do not deserve respect and consideration. This book forces the reader to confront all of these anthropocentric biases and more. Keim acknowledges the great importance of the little bits of happiness we can gain from Dodo videos while also acknowledging that we "live in a world of wounds," as he said when he generously joined VINE book club last month. Keim also grapples with conflicts and questions that are often left out on the more liberatory side of things, such as when humans should intervene to help other animals and what kind of interventions are more wasteful or disruptive than they are helpful. He consistently asks the question- what would an individual from this species think or want? He ponders things such as the differences in opinion bears vs salmon might have in regards to habitat management and how humans choose which species to focus on helping or admiring. The most illuminating parts of the book for me personally, were those that discussed introduced/non-native, "overpopulated," and/or species labeled as "pests." I had not even realized just how much bias I had internalized about certain dilemmas even as a 18 year die hard (collective liberation) vegan with a ton of animal rescue experience who knows that these things are more complicated that the anthropocentric ways they are presented.
This book is what I was hoping the the book Pests: How Humans Create Animal Villains would have been. Even though MTN is not entirely about these species and conflicts, it tells multiple sides of the story in honest ways as much as a human can attempt to without being able to interview other species. I had no idea, for instance, that introduced (non-native) donkeys had rewilded in many places and helped other species survive through things like oasis digging in deserts. I had heard of "judas goats," but never knew about "judas donkeys," which were only mentioned in a footnote, but are truly one of the most heart wrenching examples of cruelty I have read about. I can't stop thinking about them, but do not regret learning this as part of the full story. I have read countless texts that explain how rats and feral cats threatened island nesting birds, which insisted that killing all of them was the only solution. Those texts neglected to mention that humans overfishing, habitat destruction, and killing of the ocean were countless times worse for said birds and everyone else. Keim also discussed how said purge of feral cats was also used to reduce competition with foxes, only to find that foxes at more threatened birds than the cats (who ate more rodents.) The culling of introduced pigs ended up taking away food from golden eagles, who then turned on the foxes, which then meant the eagles had to be "managed." I am a birder and often see people patting themselves on the back when telling people to keep their cats indoors (which I agree with for the record,) but will attack anyone who even questions how our actions affect birds (outside of the abstract or pointing the finger at other human groups- usually in oppressive ways.) We learn that feral cats are the "top killers" of birds when they aren't. We are. But, many writers (outside of animal rights and liberation niche texts) are encouraged not to talk about this as the reader needs the ability to channel the upset about what is happening onto someone else. Keim doesn't fall into that trap.
Keim also did a lot of research and got a lot of big names to interview. Bobby Corrigan on rodents for example. Again, the way he approached the book exceeds what you often find in nature and animal literature. He interviews scientists, environmentalists, lawyers, wildlife "management" services, philosophers, naturalists, animal sanctuary founders, zoo employees, and so on. He also presents one of the most honest sections on hunting and fishing- particularly westernized hunting that rebranded itself as "conservationist" (after hunting drove many species to, or near to, extinction.) I don't know if I have ever read a text that acknowledged the horrors hunters have committed, the trouble with ecosystem imbalance caused by overpopulation of certain species (and harm to other species,) the other human activities that often cause more harm but get less attention/ire than hunting (such as urbanization,) the conservation efforts of a subset of hunters, and how those conservation efforts ultimately serve hunters, ranchers, and loggers more than other animals or ecosystems (by prioritizing sport, profits, trophies, and species hunters want to kill even at cost of true balance and other species harmed by their "conservation" practices.) Keim even calls out the permission fallacy and idea of animals "giving their lives" as a way to redirect from the reality that their lives are taken. He is not claiming taking a life is always wrong, on the contrary, it is sometimes a necessity including for other species. But, he combats this view usually touted by people romanticizing hunting by claiming animals are super into being shot or stabbed for conservation, tradition, sport, trophy, food, or all of the above. It's very rare to find that level of honesty and diligent research on a topic so sensitive to many people on all sides. Keim truly seemed more interested in understanding the dilemma than taking a side.
As a bird nerd, I learned so many new things about birds from this book. Some were depressing and far more were fascinating. Yet, he also has me thinking hard about what species I am fascinated by and how that affects my actions. I have lots of photos of birds eating insects and fishes. While I have definitely felt for these animals, especially when that damned ring-billed gull held that squirming fish for ages before finally killing them, what is it about birds that attracts me? And how does that affect my actions? I'm not saying I have never considered these things, but Keim gave me new ways to think about them. One might think based on what I have said here that there is a punishing way to these thought processes, but on the contrary, I actually found Keim's outlook freeing. It is often honesty, however painful, that is much less anxiety inducing in the long run. This book allows me to see myself as part of this world- an animal among many other animals- and to examine what that means to me.
As you may be able to tell, I could write a book on this book. I want to leave some surprises for the reader as well. I highly recommend Meet the Neighbors and I hope that if you find your expectations dashed a bit, that you can move forward and take what else the text has to offer because there is a lot here that I have rarely found elsewhere.
This was also posted to my goodreads and blog
The Zapatista Experience: Rebellion, Resistance, and Autonomy by Jérôme Baschet
5.0
I must admit that I've been a bad anarchist ™. While I've read many references to the Zapatista movement, I've never spent a ton of time really learning about them in detail. The Zapatista Experience was a much needed and enjoyable remedy to that situation. I can truly see now why do many leftists of many stripes look up to the Zapatistas as a functioning movement and liberatory society in practice. (I should note that they don't specifically identify as an anarchist movement, but share much overlap in philosophy.)
The translation of Jérôme Baschet's text by Traductores Rebeldes Autónomos Cronopios is skillful and readable. This and the text's introduction explaining foundations of the Zapatista movement make this book accessible to a wide audience. My book is completely littered with page flags. It's highly quotable. While there is an academic nature to the text, it is not the kind of excessively wordy type meant only to be understood by a tiny PhD minority.
I really enjoyed learning about just how far reaching and revolutionary the beliefs of the Zapatistas are and continue to be today. They offer a real example of successful autonomy and resistance rather than only theory, flawed/unsuccessful/hierarchical revolution, or state solutions to problems. Baschet did well discussing the many strengths of their practices and also the limitations and difficulties implementing such things. For instance, there is a lot of discussion around inescapable finances despite the fight against capitalism, which is something often neglected in revolutionary struggle (and as a result can cause a movement to fall into authoritarian structure.) Also, the discussions of autonomous vs "official" justice provides solutions to the common question thrown at as: What about the (murderers/abusers/etc)?
Another strength of Zapatista movements is the focus on dignity, joy, and humor. A cooperative society must include these things and organized effectively, leaves far more room for them than capitalist and authoritarian culture. The use of metaphor (the hydra, storm, and crack) in theoretical discussion was also very interesting.
There are in depth discussions of the Zapatista view on various forms of identity politics such as indigenous/mestizo participation and gendered oppression. There is regular emphasis on cooperation across lines of identity and experience rather than creating binaries. The Zapatisas acknowledge that we cannot return to a precolonial era and must find liberatory ways that allow cooperation across power differentials. The only thing I was left frustrated with here is how little I learned about women in the movement. Almost all quotes are from men. While I understand that they did have spokespeople and thus the most available quotes may come from them, there were also women speaking out that I did not get to hear from aside from abstract references to women's liberation.
I was fascinated by the discussion of how the other-than-human world played into their philosophies. There was discussion of the "anthropocene" being problematically human centered, but they used the term "capitalocene" to explain how capitalism is linked to and exacerbates this process. There is also discussion of both respect for and moving beyond indigenous tradition. There is emphasis on more modern benefits of certain societies, particularly environmental sciences. Rather than a war between "the West" and indigenous and other societies, there is a push for cooperation, taking the best parts of each. Indigenous Zapatistas discuss both the importance of preserving AND not being tied down by traditions.
All of these things are wrapped up inside the oft quoted Zapatista foundation: a world in which many worlds fit. I thoroughly enjoyed getting to know more about the ins and outs of this movement. The Zapatista Experience is a well written and skillfully translated volume that makes this important information accessible, and inspiring, to a wider audience.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
The translation of Jérôme Baschet's text by Traductores Rebeldes Autónomos Cronopios is skillful and readable. This and the text's introduction explaining foundations of the Zapatista movement make this book accessible to a wide audience. My book is completely littered with page flags. It's highly quotable. While there is an academic nature to the text, it is not the kind of excessively wordy type meant only to be understood by a tiny PhD minority.
I really enjoyed learning about just how far reaching and revolutionary the beliefs of the Zapatistas are and continue to be today. They offer a real example of successful autonomy and resistance rather than only theory, flawed/unsuccessful/hierarchical revolution, or state solutions to problems. Baschet did well discussing the many strengths of their practices and also the limitations and difficulties implementing such things. For instance, there is a lot of discussion around inescapable finances despite the fight against capitalism, which is something often neglected in revolutionary struggle (and as a result can cause a movement to fall into authoritarian structure.) Also, the discussions of autonomous vs "official" justice provides solutions to the common question thrown at as: What about the (murderers/abusers/etc)?
Another strength of Zapatista movements is the focus on dignity, joy, and humor. A cooperative society must include these things and organized effectively, leaves far more room for them than capitalist and authoritarian culture. The use of metaphor (the hydra, storm, and crack) in theoretical discussion was also very interesting.
There are in depth discussions of the Zapatista view on various forms of identity politics such as indigenous/mestizo participation and gendered oppression. There is regular emphasis on cooperation across lines of identity and experience rather than creating binaries. The Zapatisas acknowledge that we cannot return to a precolonial era and must find liberatory ways that allow cooperation across power differentials. The only thing I was left frustrated with here is how little I learned about women in the movement. Almost all quotes are from men. While I understand that they did have spokespeople and thus the most available quotes may come from them, there were also women speaking out that I did not get to hear from aside from abstract references to women's liberation.
I was fascinated by the discussion of how the other-than-human world played into their philosophies. There was discussion of the "anthropocene" being problematically human centered, but they used the term "capitalocene" to explain how capitalism is linked to and exacerbates this process. There is also discussion of both respect for and moving beyond indigenous tradition. There is emphasis on more modern benefits of certain societies, particularly environmental sciences. Rather than a war between "the West" and indigenous and other societies, there is a push for cooperation, taking the best parts of each. Indigenous Zapatistas discuss both the importance of preserving AND not being tied down by traditions.
All of these things are wrapped up inside the oft quoted Zapatista foundation: a world in which many worlds fit. I thoroughly enjoyed getting to know more about the ins and outs of this movement. The Zapatista Experience is a well written and skillfully translated volume that makes this important information accessible, and inspiring, to a wider audience.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
On the Line: A Story of Class, Solidarity, and Two Women's Epic Fight to Build a Union by Daisy Pitkin
4.0
I got this from goodreads giveaways a while ago and finally got around to reading it.
This was an interesting and important case study about workers hidden from view in the medical world. I have often thought of them as well as other forms of dangerous medical labor such as facilities cleaners in all my time in hospitals. I did not know however just how dangerous these jobs were. Stories in this book included everything from serious burns to the reusing of already inefficient gloves that do not protect workers from needle sticks, constantly exposing them to disease. These people are handling the most dangerous of bodily fluids en masse with no real protection, abysmal pay, and regular mistreatment by bosses. Even worse, there is another much safer way than "soil sort" work , but it requires more machine maintenance and money, so companies instead choose to harm their workers to save a little. Of course, the company fought and intimidated the workers for trying to start a union. This is evil at its core, but the lengths they went to to fight were even moreso. It starts as verbal intimidation and escalated to stalking and violence.
Pitkin worked for a nonprofit helping people to organize. She discussed a lot of internal issues and the navigation of coming in as an outsider with many privileges. She also discussed the horrors of red tape and "leadership" of men in these organizations. I found these parts to be helpful.
Unfortunately, the memoiresque snippets of her relationship stuff felt out of place. It's not that I think she shouldn't discuss how her personal life affected organizing. It is important to show just how horrific fighting for unions can be. The stress of such a thing is a life destroyer. The author could not care properly for herself and also seemed to already be in an unstable place before it all started. My issue with the writing was more that it felt clunky and much of it sounded like she was talking directly to an ex. I didn't like the way she discussed her new trans partner, though I'm willing to forgive that due to language barriers and the reality that not everyone is mired in Queer community and lingo. In my 40s as Queer transmasc person myself even I tend to be behind the times on language.
I also wasn't a big fan of the moth stuff. I know what she was trying to do, but it was very shallow including even googling dream meanings and reporting from all of those sites often written by white woowoo people who also tell you what your "spirit animal" is. I think this book would have been better as a more journalistic effort, still including the authors experience, but focused more on the general union story.
My favorite parts of the book aside from the general story about the union fight were the really cool women/girl's labor histories that I did not know about. The first strike in the USA was actually
teen and child girl mill workers! Women have been dominating unions for some time and were refused leadership by men- a problem still present today unfortunately.
Overall an important story that I'm glad I read and learned about. I'm grateful to everyone involved in this fight and will definitely have them on my mind even more when getting medical care.
This was an interesting and important case study about workers hidden from view in the medical world. I have often thought of them as well as other forms of dangerous medical labor such as facilities cleaners in all my time in hospitals. I did not know however just how dangerous these jobs were. Stories in this book included everything from serious burns to the reusing of already inefficient gloves that do not protect workers from needle sticks, constantly exposing them to disease. These people are handling the most dangerous of bodily fluids en masse with no real protection, abysmal pay, and regular mistreatment by bosses. Even worse, there is another much safer way than "soil sort" work , but it requires more machine maintenance and money, so companies instead choose to harm their workers to save a little. Of course, the company fought and intimidated the workers for trying to start a union. This is evil at its core, but the lengths they went to to fight were even moreso. It starts as verbal intimidation and escalated to stalking and violence.
Pitkin worked for a nonprofit helping people to organize. She discussed a lot of internal issues and the navigation of coming in as an outsider with many privileges. She also discussed the horrors of red tape and "leadership" of men in these organizations. I found these parts to be helpful.
Unfortunately, the memoiresque snippets of her relationship stuff felt out of place. It's not that I think she shouldn't discuss how her personal life affected organizing. It is important to show just how horrific fighting for unions can be. The stress of such a thing is a life destroyer. The author could not care properly for herself and also seemed to already be in an unstable place before it all started. My issue with the writing was more that it felt clunky and much of it sounded like she was talking directly to an ex. I didn't like the way she discussed her new trans partner, though I'm willing to forgive that due to language barriers and the reality that not everyone is mired in Queer community and lingo. In my 40s as Queer transmasc person myself even I tend to be behind the times on language.
I also wasn't a big fan of the moth stuff. I know what she was trying to do, but it was very shallow including even googling dream meanings and reporting from all of those sites often written by white woowoo people who also tell you what your "spirit animal" is. I think this book would have been better as a more journalistic effort, still including the authors experience, but focused more on the general union story.
My favorite parts of the book aside from the general story about the union fight were the really cool women/girl's labor histories that I did not know about. The first strike in the USA was actually
teen and child girl mill workers! Women have been dominating unions for some time and were refused leadership by men- a problem still present today unfortunately.
Overall an important story that I'm glad I read and learned about. I'm grateful to everyone involved in this fight and will definitely have them on my mind even more when getting medical care.
The Deluge by Stephen Markley
2.0
The hype did not match the quality. Probably 3 stars rounded down since it has such undeserved high ratings.
Thoughts:
Cons-
This book has more antifat hatred than a 70s fad diet book. I've seriously never encountered a book with this much obsession over body fat and how gross the author thinks fat people are. Legit wonder if he's dealing with food/disordered issues in his personal life.
The way women, especially women of color, are treated in this book is not great and at times fetishy. Not the worst. But very run of the mill #menwritingwomen.
If it weren't for the full cast, I would not know the difference between any of the characters because they are all written the same way. This is a tough thing to do so no hate, needs more practice.
The overarching message despite the author writing from multiple viewpoints has the worst parts of liberal (center right wing) ideology without most of the parts worth saving.
For how pessimistic and bleak it is, it's ridiculously optimistic about how long we've got until ecological collapse (continues)
The bait and switch with a far left environmental org that's slightly believable and sympathetic turned "both sides"y at the end was straight up insulting. Eco activists have been labeled terrorists higher than white supremacists despite no violence against humans or other animals bodies. For how much this book talks shit on Trump it sure does like to use his talking points against leftists (like many liberals when you really get down to it.) Good job adding to the feds scare mongering in order to better protect the industries leading to the collapse you're trying to portray in this book.
Why is this SO POINTLESSLY LONG and why did I sit through it? If it had not been an audiobook that I could have on in the background I never would have made it through. There were so many times I thought, "ah it's finally over," only to look at the time stamp and see there were 14 hours left.
Why did everyone love this so much? Is it because Stephen King did? I asked myself why he recommended it then remembered the last book I tried of his where he told me in detail about the breasts of every female in it including children so I see why Markley is his style as he treats women similarly, women of color even worse.
Could have done without the multiple earth r*pe analogies.
Pros-
This actually could have been a tolerable book with an editor cutting out the insulting stuff and making it about 1/3 as long.
Though the road to hell is paved with them, I do think the author has good intentions.
The sense of climate urgency and an honest attempt to convey that is admirable.
Now that I've finished this and ministry for the future I can read Dean Spade's piece which did not require this effort but I wanted to form my own opinions first. I should have just read without bothering with this book.
Thoughts:
Cons-
This book has more antifat hatred than a 70s fad diet book. I've seriously never encountered a book with this much obsession over body fat and how gross the author thinks fat people are. Legit wonder if he's dealing with food/disordered issues in his personal life.
The way women, especially women of color, are treated in this book is not great and at times fetishy. Not the worst. But very run of the mill #menwritingwomen.
If it weren't for the full cast, I would not know the difference between any of the characters because they are all written the same way. This is a tough thing to do so no hate, needs more practice.
The overarching message despite the author writing from multiple viewpoints has the worst parts of liberal (center right wing) ideology without most of the parts worth saving.
For how pessimistic and bleak it is, it's ridiculously optimistic about how long we've got until ecological collapse (continues)
The bait and switch with a far left environmental org that's slightly believable and sympathetic turned "both sides"y at the end was straight up insulting. Eco activists have been labeled terrorists higher than white supremacists despite no violence against humans or other animals bodies. For how much this book talks shit on Trump it sure does like to use his talking points against leftists (like many liberals when you really get down to it.) Good job adding to the feds scare mongering in order to better protect the industries leading to the collapse you're trying to portray in this book.
Why is this SO POINTLESSLY LONG and why did I sit through it? If it had not been an audiobook that I could have on in the background I never would have made it through. There were so many times I thought, "ah it's finally over," only to look at the time stamp and see there were 14 hours left.
Why did everyone love this so much? Is it because Stephen King did? I asked myself why he recommended it then remembered the last book I tried of his where he told me in detail about the breasts of every female in it including children so I see why Markley is his style as he treats women similarly, women of color even worse.
Could have done without the multiple earth r*pe analogies.
Pros-
This actually could have been a tolerable book with an editor cutting out the insulting stuff and making it about 1/3 as long.
Though the road to hell is paved with them, I do think the author has good intentions.
The sense of climate urgency and an honest attempt to convey that is admirable.
Now that I've finished this and ministry for the future I can read Dean Spade's piece which did not require this effort but I wanted to form my own opinions first. I should have just read without bothering with this book.
The Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson
5.0
While this doesn't quite match my more dismal and urgent views of the present and future and the writing can be a little heavy handed at times, I appreciate when someone REALLY researches and thinks HARD through what a better world could look like if we were to survive the apocalypse were currently living through. That's not easy. So, this is probably 4ish stars for my taste and more... aggressively left(?) politics, but 5 for effort. I'm making my way through this and next The Deluge before reading Dean Spade's critical piece on both so I'm curious how my thoughts may change.
Disabled Ecologies: Lessons from a Wounded Desert by Sunaura Taylor
5.0
Updating to add a link to Taylor's coauthored important article that was just published:
If the left is serious about saving democracy, there’s one more cause to add to the list
Original review:
The bar was already set very high for Disabled Ecologies: Lessons from a Wounded Desert before I even had my hands on the book. I have been a massive fan of Sunaura Taylor's work- both artistically and academically for some time. Her paintings are uniquely stunning and her book, Beasts of Burden: Animal and Disability Liberation was a groundbreaking text regarding discussions of the ableism central to nonhuman animal and human exploitation. I'm happy to say that this book met my expectations and then some.
One of the best things about this text is that it has all of the meticulous research and information of an academic dissertation without all of the absurdly unnecessary jargon. It reads like an academic text for sure because that's what it is, but it can actually be read by people outside the field which is something that should be true for any disability scholarship but often isn't. Taylor also had a clear intention with how she used footnotes that gives the reader a variety of ways to choose how to engage with them without requiring them to skip to the back of the book where they are often found. The research materials of the book are also used in a very engaging way. We have the usual statistics here and there as well as lots of newspaper clippings and photographs from a time before everything was easily found online. Taylor also offers reportbacks from activist community meetings and other events that she attended in person. Taylor clearly put a ton of work into this book. It not only adds to the credibility of her claims. It allows her to highlight marginalized voices often silenced in these discussions. It also makes the book more readable in general and breaks up the text well.
Disabled Ecologies is an interesting academic exercise because it has a very personal note at the center. Taylor uses her experiences from Tuscon, AZ of aquifer and other pollution caused by the military (which likely led to her being born with her disability,) as an anchor for the rest of the book. Such an intimate exercise navigated the personal connection to disability with the global field well. This is an important skill as none of us is able to divorce ourselves from our own experience and position in the working. This framing also allows her to discuss the thorny issue of disability liberation in the context of when environmental destruction is the cause of disablement.
Taylor grapples with the disabling nature of ecodestruction and the idea of illness, cure, eugenics, and public health in general. She does not glamorize disability nor does she take away from the positive idea of a disabled future with the care and support that could entail in an ideal situation. She gathers the words of others like Eli Clare who have also discussed the politics around the idea of cure. In all of these elements, Taylor makes clear the need for disability to always be part of discussions around environment including how environmental injury occurs.
Much of these sections made me think about the idea of body neutrality as opposed to body positivity. We do not need every narrative of success to be a happy story where each person is/feels uniquely beautiful within a fairy tale as our only response to the negative, pitying, blaming narratives around disability and other body-related issues The body can just be a body that has an amalgamation of characteristics coming from many sources and experiences.
A good chunk of the book is spent discussing the methods that polluters use to redirect their responsibility for the destruction of the planet and the lives of everyone on it. This fits into disability and eugenecist capitalism in how they turn health into an individual issue. When disability is depoliticized and characterized only as an individual medical problem, it allows those in power to shift blame onto (often also racist, classist, colonialist, etc) notions of culture, behavior, etc. Polluters manage this even when entire communities are suffering and dying from high rates of illness unique to their location for generations matching up perfectly with the polluters' activities. Polluters knew then just as they do now the effects of their industry. They are even skilled at turning science/medicine against us claiming to always need more research to "prove" their pollution causes illness- a level of burden always just out of reach. One little historical tidbit that surprised me was that Raegan's "war on cancer," was instrumental in changing the focus to genetics and individual and rather than environmental research. I've had cancer 3 times (which I do believe may have environmental causes) and even personally I can see how this culture affected every aspect of my treatment. Even if Raegan was well intentioned for once, flooding one form of the research market and neglecting the other undoubtedly backfired. I had genetic testing and infusions but no one asked about my polluted water or examined why my roommate and I both had cancers with recurrences in our 30s.
The conclusion of the text is very well written and connects the local to the global in skilled and frankly horrifying ways. We learn that the same polluters in Tuscon manufactured bombs used in Yemen among other atrocities. She also connects the human to the more than human in discussions of how the rest of the animals on this planet are affected. She reframes narratives on Darwinism (while acknowledging his many faults) to include the reality that the message should not be about the "fittest," but about how consistent change, mutation, and variation are what have and continue to propagate life. It is a call to action to support this variation in order for us to continuously adapt to ecocide. When Taylor joined us at VINE book club to discuss the text, she elaborated more on her intention to avoid "one and done" apocalypse narratives, discussing the importance of seeing ourselves in an ongoing struggle. She also mentioned how the discussion of systemic pollution and authoritarianism do not remove the value and effectiveness of our individual participation in organizing and liberatory movements (such as veganism.)
A good chunk of the book is spent discussing the methods that polluters use to redirect their responsibility for the destruction of the planet and the lives of everyone on it. This fits into disability and eugenecist capitalism in how they turn health into an individual issue. When disability is depoliticized and characterized only as an individual medical problem, it allows those in power to shift blame onto (often also racist, classist, colonialist, etc) notions of culture, behavior, etc. Polluters manage this even when entire communities are suffering and dying from high rates of illness unique to their location for generations matching up perfectly with the polluters' activities. Polluters knew then just as they do now the effects of their industry. They are even skilled at turning science/medicine against us claiming to always need more research to "prove" their pollution causes illness- a level of burden always just out of reach. One little historical tidbit that surprised me was that Raegan's "war on cancer," was instrumental in changing the focus to genetics and individual and rather than environmental research. I've had cancer 3 times (which I do believe may have environmental causes) and even personally I can see how this culture affected every aspect of my treatment. Even if Raegan was well intentioned for once, flooding one form of the research market and neglecting the other undoubtedly backfired. I had genetic testing and infusions but no one asked about my polluted water or examined why my roommate and I both had cancers with recurrences in our 30s.
The conclusion of the text is very well written and connects the local to the global in skilled and frankly horrifying ways. We learn that the same polluters in Tuscon manufactured bombs used in Yemen among other atrocities. She also connects the human to the more than human in discussions of how the rest of the animals on this planet are affected. She reframes narratives on Darwinism (while acknowledging his many faults) to include the reality that the message should not be about the "fittest," but about how consistent change, mutation, and variation are what have and continue to propagate life. It is a call to action to support this variation in order for us to continuously adapt to ecocide. When Taylor joined us at VINE book club to discuss the text, she elaborated more on her intention to avoid "one and done" apocalypse narratives, discussing the importance of seeing ourselves in an ongoing struggle. She also mentioned how the discussion of systemic pollution and authoritarianism do not remove the value and effectiveness of our individual participation in organizing and liberatory movements (such as veganism.)
This review could have been even longer had I mentioned everything I learned and loved about this book. Sunaura Taylor has shown us yet again her ability to add something new and revelatory to ongoing discussions about disability and the environment at a time when it's more important than ever.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.
If the left is serious about saving democracy, there’s one more cause to add to the list
Original review:
The bar was already set very high for Disabled Ecologies: Lessons from a Wounded Desert before I even had my hands on the book. I have been a massive fan of Sunaura Taylor's work- both artistically and academically for some time. Her paintings are uniquely stunning and her book, Beasts of Burden: Animal and Disability Liberation was a groundbreaking text regarding discussions of the ableism central to nonhuman animal and human exploitation. I'm happy to say that this book met my expectations and then some.
One of the best things about this text is that it has all of the meticulous research and information of an academic dissertation without all of the absurdly unnecessary jargon. It reads like an academic text for sure because that's what it is, but it can actually be read by people outside the field which is something that should be true for any disability scholarship but often isn't. Taylor also had a clear intention with how she used footnotes that gives the reader a variety of ways to choose how to engage with them without requiring them to skip to the back of the book where they are often found. The research materials of the book are also used in a very engaging way. We have the usual statistics here and there as well as lots of newspaper clippings and photographs from a time before everything was easily found online. Taylor also offers reportbacks from activist community meetings and other events that she attended in person. Taylor clearly put a ton of work into this book. It not only adds to the credibility of her claims. It allows her to highlight marginalized voices often silenced in these discussions. It also makes the book more readable in general and breaks up the text well.
Disabled Ecologies is an interesting academic exercise because it has a very personal note at the center. Taylor uses her experiences from Tuscon, AZ of aquifer and other pollution caused by the military (which likely led to her being born with her disability,) as an anchor for the rest of the book. Such an intimate exercise navigated the personal connection to disability with the global field well. This is an important skill as none of us is able to divorce ourselves from our own experience and position in the working. This framing also allows her to discuss the thorny issue of disability liberation in the context of when environmental destruction is the cause of disablement.
Taylor grapples with the disabling nature of ecodestruction and the idea of illness, cure, eugenics, and public health in general. She does not glamorize disability nor does she take away from the positive idea of a disabled future with the care and support that could entail in an ideal situation. She gathers the words of others like Eli Clare who have also discussed the politics around the idea of cure. In all of these elements, Taylor makes clear the need for disability to always be part of discussions around environment including how environmental injury occurs.
Much of these sections made me think about the idea of body neutrality as opposed to body positivity. We do not need every narrative of success to be a happy story where each person is/feels uniquely beautiful within a fairy tale as our only response to the negative, pitying, blaming narratives around disability and other body-related issues The body can just be a body that has an amalgamation of characteristics coming from many sources and experiences.
A good chunk of the book is spent discussing the methods that polluters use to redirect their responsibility for the destruction of the planet and the lives of everyone on it. This fits into disability and eugenecist capitalism in how they turn health into an individual issue. When disability is depoliticized and characterized only as an individual medical problem, it allows those in power to shift blame onto (often also racist, classist, colonialist, etc) notions of culture, behavior, etc. Polluters manage this even when entire communities are suffering and dying from high rates of illness unique to their location for generations matching up perfectly with the polluters' activities. Polluters knew then just as they do now the effects of their industry. They are even skilled at turning science/medicine against us claiming to always need more research to "prove" their pollution causes illness- a level of burden always just out of reach. One little historical tidbit that surprised me was that Raegan's "war on cancer," was instrumental in changing the focus to genetics and individual and rather than environmental research. I've had cancer 3 times (which I do believe may have environmental causes) and even personally I can see how this culture affected every aspect of my treatment. Even if Raegan was well intentioned for once, flooding one form of the research market and neglecting the other undoubtedly backfired. I had genetic testing and infusions but no one asked about my polluted water or examined why my roommate and I both had cancers with recurrences in our 30s.
The conclusion of the text is very well written and connects the local to the global in skilled and frankly horrifying ways. We learn that the same polluters in Tuscon manufactured bombs used in Yemen among other atrocities. She also connects the human to the more than human in discussions of how the rest of the animals on this planet are affected. She reframes narratives on Darwinism (while acknowledging his many faults) to include the reality that the message should not be about the "fittest," but about how consistent change, mutation, and variation are what have and continue to propagate life. It is a call to action to support this variation in order for us to continuously adapt to ecocide. When Taylor joined us at VINE book club to discuss the text, she elaborated more on her intention to avoid "one and done" apocalypse narratives, discussing the importance of seeing ourselves in an ongoing struggle. She also mentioned how the discussion of systemic pollution and authoritarianism do not remove the value and effectiveness of our individual participation in organizing and liberatory movements (such as veganism.)
A good chunk of the book is spent discussing the methods that polluters use to redirect their responsibility for the destruction of the planet and the lives of everyone on it. This fits into disability and eugenecist capitalism in how they turn health into an individual issue. When disability is depoliticized and characterized only as an individual medical problem, it allows those in power to shift blame onto (often also racist, classist, colonialist, etc) notions of culture, behavior, etc. Polluters manage this even when entire communities are suffering and dying from high rates of illness unique to their location for generations matching up perfectly with the polluters' activities. Polluters knew then just as they do now the effects of their industry. They are even skilled at turning science/medicine against us claiming to always need more research to "prove" their pollution causes illness- a level of burden always just out of reach. One little historical tidbit that surprised me was that Raegan's "war on cancer," was instrumental in changing the focus to genetics and individual and rather than environmental research. I've had cancer 3 times (which I do believe may have environmental causes) and even personally I can see how this culture affected every aspect of my treatment. Even if Raegan was well intentioned for once, flooding one form of the research market and neglecting the other undoubtedly backfired. I had genetic testing and infusions but no one asked about my polluted water or examined why my roommate and I both had cancers with recurrences in our 30s.
The conclusion of the text is very well written and connects the local to the global in skilled and frankly horrifying ways. We learn that the same polluters in Tuscon manufactured bombs used in Yemen among other atrocities. She also connects the human to the more than human in discussions of how the rest of the animals on this planet are affected. She reframes narratives on Darwinism (while acknowledging his many faults) to include the reality that the message should not be about the "fittest," but about how consistent change, mutation, and variation are what have and continue to propagate life. It is a call to action to support this variation in order for us to continuously adapt to ecocide. When Taylor joined us at VINE book club to discuss the text, she elaborated more on her intention to avoid "one and done" apocalypse narratives, discussing the importance of seeing ourselves in an ongoing struggle. She also mentioned how the discussion of systemic pollution and authoritarianism do not remove the value and effectiveness of our individual participation in organizing and liberatory movements (such as veganism.)
This review could have been even longer had I mentioned everything I learned and loved about this book. Sunaura Taylor has shown us yet again her ability to add something new and revelatory to ongoing discussions about disability and the environment at a time when it's more important than ever.
This was also posted to my blog and goodreads.