You must respond to one of the following questions:
1. Look over pages 187 and 215-217. What are Garnett's and Nannie's ethics regarding the natural world and their place(s) in it?
2. What are the ethics of farming in the "Moth Love" Chapters?
3. On pages 177-180 Deanna and Eddie talk about their own connections to animals, specifically predators. What does it mean to Deanna to be an animal lover? And for Eddie? In other words, how do Deanna and Eddie understand the relationship between humans and animals?
Please use the comment link below to respond. Your response is due by 5 PM on Tuesday.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1) Garnett’s ethics on nature contrast those of Nannie, especially about evolution. Garnett believes that salamanders do not hold any more precedence in this world than any other creature, and therefore there is no reason to try and save it. He then references the Bible in particular Genesis, where God defines humans as guardians of earth, and our duty as God’s favored children is to use His gifts of natural resources. Even if this means putting one specie extinct in the process, because humans are the dominant animals. Garnett’s final point is that who care if one salamander specie goes extinct, how does that affect him?
ReplyDeleteNannie counteracts each statement, starting with how every creature is centralistic in their beliefs about themselves in relation to other organisms. Salamanders view us a nuisance, disrupting their habitat. Their world revolves around themselves, like humans, so they have no interest in anything else. Nannie compares losing one specie of salamander to losing the American Chestnuts; both cannot be replaced. Everything in life depends on each other, coexisting with predators, prey, and decomposers holding their individual niches. God also said gluttony is a sin- and “Thou shall not kill.” He didn’t mean for us to satisfy our every craving, destroying His creation in the process. God’s looking out for every creature on this earth, including the weeds and pond algae that are salamander food. Although we all have pet peeve’s about a certain creature, we must understand that everything has its place her for a reason.
On pages 177-180 Deanna and Eddie talk about their own connections to animals, specifically predators. What does it mean to Deanna to be an animal lover? And for Eddie? In other words, how do Deanna and Eddie understand the relationship between humans and animals?
ReplyDelete“Miracle of miracles, I do believe I’m bed with an animal lover (pg 177),” Eddie Bondo says to Deanna in Prodigal Summer as they lay next to each other and talk about their relationships with the natural world. Deanna goes on about the example of her example of a cat that was reaping havoc on and farm and in the woods. She would trap and kill it since it was not a part of the natural ecosystem she states. She believes that nature should be untouched and almost unfound. She went on to say how she would kill only if she had to for the propose of eating and never if it was a predator. So Eddie goes on and challenges her and says that she could come hunting with him next time he goes. Deanna say that, “herbivores tend to have shorter lives, and they reproduce faster; they’re just geared toward expendability. They can overpopulate at the drop of a hat.” Deanna is an animal lover though her love for preservation of the natural ecosystem, to take as little as needed from and to live an ethical life. Eddie in this section challenges Deanna, since he understands his relationship between humans and animals as you take what you need to live. I believe that Eddie follows the rules of Utilitarianism, which is the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. He understands the relationship between the two yet uses nature and animals for his own pleasure.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDeanna and Eddie have two very different perceptions of the relationship between animals and humans. Deanna considers killing predators, who are natural to their habitat, a crime. She has a profound love for animals that is deeper than a love for who they are by themselves; she loves them for who they are together and how they make up the natural world. Deanna states that she would readily hurt anything that might harm nature’s way of life.
ReplyDeleteEddie, however, has a more human-centered view of nature. His perspective reflects his protection over what he believes is rightly his; Humans should have control over nature. He views coyotes as “enemies” because of their perceived potential to harm something that is important to his family and hometown (their livestock). Eddie, therefore finds pleasure in getting revenge on them for his own misfortunes. Finding a scapegoat is Eddie’s purpose in traveling around the states to kill coyotes. Eddie doesn’t dislike all animals, however, he does despise those who may threaten his property.
Deanna separates herself from the human world because of her love for what is natural and living. She believes that most humans don’t appreciate the beautiful environment that surrounds them. Deanna wishes humans didn’t have to be so controlling, selfish, and destructive to nature. She doesn’t like nature to be invaded by human footprints; she likes it wild and untouched. Eddie doesn’t accept the same natural connection between humans and nature as Deanna does. Nature should be somewhat contained and not cross over into human territory according to Eddie’s background. In Deana’s mind, humans and nature can and should live together harmoniously.
3.
ReplyDeleteDeanna sees the world as belonging to nature and it’s original and natural creatures. She sees it as an animal’s world that humans just live in. She lives as quietly as she can among nature, barely disrupting it; encouraging it, actually. And she is completely content to do this. She wishes more humans would live this way. Even the radio is too disrupting for her; she prefers utter separation from civilization. Deanna respects and admires nature the way it is; she in no way wants interfere with it. As an observer, she is an animal lover, but she, at least at this point in her life, would never consider even having a pet. If she had a dog, I think she would feel like she was enslaving it. She loves animals because of who they are and their ability to go through life with structure and organization, living off the land, not taking from it. When she reminds Eddie to be extra quiet when he steps out to get firewood, so as not to disturb the phoebe nest on the porch, she is putting the animal’s needs before her own, like always. Looking out for nature is how she is an animal lover. As Eddie observes when she comments that she is not very maternal, “you spend more time making sure you don’t hurt a spider or a baby bird than most people do taking care of their kids. You’re maternal” (page 265). She may not have any children to love, so her tenderness and affection goes towards nature and everything it involves instead.
Eddie is an example of someone who takes from nature. He uses it to his own advantage. He would kill a coyote because of the relationship they have with humans. The coyotes kill the farm animals, and then the farm is at a disadvantage. Deanna would side with the coyote, saying it is a natural instinct of the animal, he is just trying to live and he should not be punished for that. But Eddie would hate the animal because of what it recklessly did to the humans, and go out to destroy it. Eddie has more of a conqueror’s view towards nature and predators, whereas Deanna has a personal, mutual relationship. She understands more and wishes that Eddie and the Eddies of the world would understand as she does.
In reading the Moth Love chapters it is clear that people in Zebulon County value those who have farming in their blood. Individuals who do not come from a lineage of farmers simply do not belong. They are not taken seriously and cannot possibly understand or possess the skills necessary to survive. This is apparent when Little Rickie learns that Lusa came from farming people and appraises her "as thought she'd suddenly grown taller or older" (Kingsolver 162).
ReplyDeleteAs the rest of the family has not made an effort to get to know Lusa, they are unaware of this information as well and truly feel that as long as Lusa stays in Zebulon and tries her hand at farming she is destined to fail. This is evident in Herb and Rickie's conversation with Lusa as they try to tell her that she will not be able to live off of any crop other than tobacco. To them, farming is all about economics. They sit on some of the richest dirt on the planet, and yet because crops such as corn cannot earn them enough to live on, they stick with tobacco. As Lusa concludes, "they [farmers] are trapped" (122). As no one wants to risk failure, these farmers do whatever it takes to get by. Lusa wants to break through this old mindset and devise a revolutionary idea that will involve successfully living off of the land without growing tobacco. Little Rickie's enthusiasm towards Lusa's plan to raise and sell goats proves that the ideologies of farming are changing with the younger generation.
3. I think that although Deanna feels that her views and Eddie’s views on animals are different, there is still a similarity. Deanna believes that if you hunt you should hunt to eat, not for sport and that you should only hunt herbavoirs because they reproduce more quickly and can over populate at the drop of a hat, while carnivores do not reproduce as quickly and can become extinct if hunting goes unchecked. Her love of animals is paying attention. She does not love single animals, as in having her own dog or cat, but loving a species, loving the group of animals as a whole.
ReplyDeleteEddie is a lot harder to figure out in regards to his relationship with animals. He is a hunter and a tracker but he is also surprised, and seems somewhat offended, when Deana starts talking about feral cats and drowning them. From this passage I feel as if he has a “live and let live” sort of mentality. However, he is a hunter. Eddie Bondo is much more difficult to understand, partially because we are not hearing his inner monologue, but also because he has somewhat bipolar views on the subject of “animal loving.”
Deanna, as others have stated, takes a wider view of animals and nature. Her love of animals is present and very strongly felt, but it does not narrow to encompass any single creature to the detriment of natural balance. She takes on the role of supporting the entire ecosystem, hence her preference for predators. She is still capable of looking after individual animals and caring about them. The moth and the phoebe are examples of this. She is also capable of taking the other approach if her statement about feral cats is to be believed.
ReplyDeleteEddie also cares for animals. His reaction to Deanna’s statement about feral cats was telling, and he talks of killing predators as a means to protect their prey, specifically sheep. Yet he also has a strong anthropocentric bias. He protects the sheep because they are property and does not consider the ecosystem at all in his decisions. In this regard he typifies the average person’s view of nature.
Deanna and Eddie clearly have different perceptions on the relationship between animals and humans. Deanna is more sympathetic in the way she views animals. Deanna feels that killing predators in their natural environment is a harmful thing. To take this to a different approach since Deanna is a woman she a more nurturing way to her and loves animals for themselves. She states on page 188, "I'll never kill just for fun." She feels animals should live together.
ReplyDeleteEddie on on the other hand is a a bit harsher on his views towards animals. He believes that humans should have control over nature and breeding. Eddie likes to hunt and takes a more masculine stance than Deanna when is comes to animals. Eddie would kill animals to protect his property. On page 189 when he is talking to Deanna he says, "But if I'm a bug rancher its my right to shoot the bats off my ranch." I think like Leeland says that this is more of the average views on nature.
2. Lusa is caught in a tangled web when it comes to the ethics of farming in the Moth Love chapters. She doesn't want to grow tobacco because she feels that she's promoting society to smoke, and give themselves cancer, yet the soil she has to work with cannot produce any other crop with a feasible profit. Apparently, Cole, her husband tried other things like tomatoes, bell peppers, and potatoes; but he ran into issues with each (mainly not being able to sell them). Without a choice she feels trapped, and at first places the blame of this trap on Big Rickie and Herb. She feels judged for even attempting to make a change. She states on page 147: "Oh, I see. I'm supposed to go down there and apologize for my rash attempt at self-rule and beg them on bended knee to come set my tobacco." Lusa feels constantly at war with everyone within Zebulon. After obviously fighting against Cole’s sisters, because she is an outsider, she now has to fight against the men of the family. They send Little Rickie to tell her that they won’t set her tobacco, but make it sound like it’s because of her stubbornness, not because of the lack of availability of the product. Little Rickie says: “…And Dad said you wasn’t all that interested in us setting your tobacco anyways, is what they said.” (Kingsolver 147). All of this pressure forces Lusa to an idea that she concocts with Little Rickie involving goats. Hopefully, it’ll work out!
ReplyDelete3.How do Deanna and Eddie understand the relationship between humans and animals? The two different oppinions between the contrasting relationship differ pretty drasticaly. I have percieved Deanna's oppinion of the relationship between humans and animals as to be very intouch, very deep, and caring. "I don't love animals as individuals... I love them as whole species. I feel like they should have the right to persist in their own ways," (Kingsolver, 177). I think this is a good sign of how she views animals, and how she see's them for their own, and is aware of their place here on earth. She also is aware of the effect humans have on animals, because she can see the damage that "lazy humans" have in regards to cats. She believes that humans should leave the animals in their natural habbitat, never to kill or mess with intentionaly. However, Eddie argues against her beliefs. He states that its just inocent fun to kill and mess around with animals. He see's her oppinion, and he acknowleges it, however he wont budge on his own oppinion. "You've got your rules, Ive got mine," (Kingsolver, 179). I believe that Eddie doesnt really see the effects that humans can have on animals, and if he does, he down plays the effects to an undisguisable level. He values the control that humans posses over animals and does not show empathy towards the animals. However, Deanna trys to magnify the relationship between humans and animals in a caring way so that Eddie will understand. However, I predict that Eddie could come around and soon he will see a new caring perspective of the relationship between humans and animals.
ReplyDelete1. Both Garnett and Nannie respect the natural world but have different views on them. Garnett believes that salamanders have no precedence than any other creature, in fact, to him, salamanders are harming us and Japanese beetles are destroying his trees. In his letter he asked Nannie “Why is it our duty to set free the salamander, any more than it is the salamander’s place to swim up to the state prison in Marion and liberate the criminals incarcerated there?” Then he refers to the bible in Genesis, where God says: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon you the face of the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. In his understanding creatures are gifts from God to mankind for there own purpose so there is no reason to care about them.
ReplyDeleteNannie believes that Garnett might not have understood Genesis, even though she believes he is a religious man. If creatures are God’s gift to mankind than why not protect them? Salamanders are like humans, there world revolves around them and if harmed they are irreplaceable. She also counters by taking a quote from the bible saying “Though shall not kill”. She explains that God gave us the gift of nature’s creature not to kill or eat them, but rather it is our duty to take care of them. Everything God created has a reason for being on earth.
2. Ms. Kingsolver has some nice irony floating around in the “Moth Love” chapters. Lusa’s instincts told her not to plant tobacco, at least not without Cole around. Though she is relatively new to farming, she knows enough to listen to her conscience, to do something different with the land that will celebrate her heritage and her farming background, and in a way, Cole’s memory. While she devises her plan for the farm, she actually smokes her first cigarette. Clever, Ms. Kingsolver! As Lusa is hacking and coughing on the plant she has just rejected, her decision to ditch the tobacco is completely validated. Soon enough, while still smoking the cigarette, she recognizes a Cole-like spirit within Rickie’s character, and decides that he will be able to help her. By attempting the goat plan, in a way, she will also be allowing Cole to once again dream big with his little plot of land, as he had in the days when he wished to “make a killing off of something besides tobacco” (123). This plan to change things up a bit will probably end up proving that Lusa is strong enough to maintain a portion of the Widener farm, and that she and Cole shared not only a deep love for each other, but for farming as well.
ReplyDeleteTo Deanna, being an animal lover means loving animals as a species but not every single animal. She says "I dont love animals as individuals, I guess that's the way to put it...I love them as a whole species." (Kingsolver, 177)Here Deanna is talking about how tabby cats do not have a place in nature because they were basically brought upon by men and do not know how and what to properly chase. She loves animals but feels as if each of them has their own rightful place, and if they are not in their own rightful place, then if they happen to be killed it is ok because nature chose it to be that way. She says that "if there's a house cat put here by human carelessness, I can remedy that by taking one life, or ignore it and let the mistake go on and on." (Kingsolver, 177)Deanna sees the cat as a good house pet and an animal that is meant to be domesticated - once it veers into the wild section of nature and into the woods that Deanna has come to grow to love so much, she feels that it would be best to kill one animal in order to save so many others. In other words, it seems as if Deanna is the type of animal lover that thinks nature should be as is, without any human help. "I support their right to go on murdering their babies in the wild if that's how they do it, unpestered by humans. That's the kind of animal lover I am." (Kingsolver, 178)
ReplyDeleteEddie seems not to think that human influence really matters in nature. He hunts and asks Deanna if she would too, which she replies to by saying that she wouldn't kill for fun but only if necessary, like for food. (Kingsolver, 180) He gives the example of the lynx up north who over-populate but then every ten years disappear. Deanna says they shouldn't be messed with but Eddie doesn't see where she's coming from. Eddie thinks that humans have the right to mess with nature and Deanna thinks that nature should just take its course and not be messed with.
3. Both Deanna and Eddie are animal lovers and protectors, only each sees their affinities towards animals through the filter of their own experience. Deanna loves the natural hierarchy of animals, more than she is attached to individual animals themselves. She explains that while she had tabby cats and enjoys them and loves them in their own rights, that affection would not stop her from killing a cat that was interfering with the natural ecosystem. She sees domesticated animals as animals still, but also tainted by human adoption, almost another human product. For her it is also a logical love, not a blind love or emotional attachment. One cat can wreck an entire ecosystem of creatures, she asks how the life of one creature can take prevalence over so many more. This logic is part of her obsession with predators and disillusionment with people. She understands predators can be keystone species, keeping the ecosystem in check and healthy. Predators, because they are fewer and far in between naturally, can be more fragile than prey, especially if they are being subjected to human control. She finds even more fault, because human control is responsible for destruction of things that cannot be fixed, such as the extinction of the red fox or American chestnuts, without fully understanding the impact of their decisions and actions. Deanna is a protector of the underdog—those that cannot protect themselves because they are not understood, or seen as naturally “loveable”.
ReplyDeleteEddie and Deanna both love nature and are very in tune with nature. Nature for Eddie however, is more human centered, predators are great—unless they interfere with the human hierarchy of created ecosystems, such as the sheep farm he grew up on. Because coyotes potentially threaten “his” land, they are negative, even in “wilderness” nowhere near his territory, such as the natural park Deanna rangers. It seems that Eddie believes humans are the ultimate tier, and animals are important and should be left as they please, unless they interfere with animals being protected or harvested by humans. Eddie is a hunter, he know the values of animals, as they pertain to humans, it seems he does not have the same complete ecosystem view that Deanna has.
While it initially may seem like Deanna and Eddie have very opposing views of animals and nature itself, the truth is that both of them just focus on specific parts of nature. Deanna seems like someone who loves animals and wants to be with them in her cabin in the woods, while Eddie appears to be an outdoorsman who appreciates killing animals. In reality Deanna just loves how nature works. Ecology, and how certain things affect others on a huge scale is what she loves. Eddie is only focused on one thing at a time. For him to love nature, he follows a part of it, like a coyote, and kills it to be a part of it.
ReplyDeleteThis is why both of them appreciate predators so much. Deanna realizes that predators have a great range of influence over multiple ecologies. Depending on their actions and lives, or lack of, an entire environment can change. Eddie likes predators because they are what he hunts. He is almost like a predator himself, and may see a connection that way. A good example is when he is describing lynx, which are a very mysterious predator. He talks about how it seems like they have pride and confidence. To Eddie, this is much more impressive than huge ecologies.
Eventually, these philosophies relate back to how humans, animals, and nature itself interacts. For Deanna, even though she likes to think about how groups of animals work together, she doesn’t think of them all in the same way. She thinks that it’s acceptable for animals to be “racist” and eat their offspring. She realizes that humans are different, and everyone must accept these differences while interacting with nature. Eddie, however, is willing to kill every coyote he can find because some of them may or may not affect him. He doesn’t care that a coyote is just hungry and wants a sheep; to him that coyote is stealing part of his farm. It is interesting to see the similarities and differences between two characters that both seem to be so in-tuned with nature.
Both Eddie and Deanna share a similar lifestyle. They have a clear unspoken understanding of one another and as a reader I appreciate it so much: how they get along so well yet their views often contradict one another. They both know how important predators are to them but for different reasons. Deanna is extremely interested in the cycle of nature and the purity of these animals (especially coyotes). She needs them to keep her sane and I see it as companions. I also think that she relates to them in that she herself is a predator and looking to survive the same way the coyotes are. On the other side there is Eddie who has no intentions of destroying nature or exterminating species, but he hunts in order to protect himself in a "survival of the fittest" sort of mindset. He uses his smell to find Deanna, similar to many animals when searching for a mate.
ReplyDeleteEddie and Deanna both learn from each other about interactions with nature and what is seen appropriate, yet it is clear that they each prefer their own style.
The relationship between people and animals has change drastically in the past half century due to industrialization and the transformation of religion. The relationship has shaped our views on how to raise them, feed them, and slaughter them. The ethics of farming are touched on through cultural values in the “Moth Love” chapter. Lusa is struggling to maintain her farm after the recent loss of her husband, Cole. While she is chatting with her nephew-in-law little Frankie the topic of her religion and ethnicity come up. She explains to the less culturally aware teen that she is of both Muslim and Jewish decent. This sparks a lighter conversation about festivals and yearly celebrations. Through this conversation we learn about the traditions of both ethnic groups and how they view goats. In the farm where they live goat is not regularly consumed or desired. It is an interesting culture clash and point of interest.
ReplyDeleteBoth Lusa and Rick seem to enjoy being on the land with the animals. Lusa expresses this trough her desire to give the milk from the mother cow directly to the calf, rather than consume it herself. She seems soft hearted and wary of the animals feelings. Her introspective view of the moths is another indication of her identification with animals. She uses them as a metaphor. This type of self identification with animals provides an insight to her view on animals.
1. The most important difference between Garnett and Nannie's views on the other species of the planet that aren't human is that Garnett thinks he is above them, while Nannie sees herself as part of them, i.e. Garnett thinks in a completely Anthropocentric way (humans in the center). Garnett thinks he can do whatever he wishes to the Earth because he is man and God made man the rulers of the Earth (God fashioned himself after man, after all). Nannie, however, sees everything connected to each other; the algae is connected to the salamander, which is connected to the fish, which are connected to the humans. And she knows that what we humans do affects the other species, so we must always be careful.
ReplyDeleteI very much agree with Nannie's point of view, and I believe that many in the class do as well. However, there are also a lot of people in this world that agree with Garnett, and very much do not think about their actions on the environment. While it is not always easy to tell how our actions can affect other things, unlike spraying pesticides and knowingly killing a species on its way to extinction, it is always the better route to think things through thoroughly before proceeding. And while it is hard because we are ingrained to think about ourselves first, not doing certain things because they are harmful to others really benefits all.
Denna sees it more as natural selection and that humans need to let things live in the world but when it comes to individuals species like a stray cat she has no problem killing it. Becuase it is not natural and it is an invasive species causing thousands of native species to become extinct. Eddie sees the world more from a human perspective- that humans are the chief species and we can control what we want and do what we want. He can go kill a species for fun no matter if it is a predator species. He does not take into account what one species has on another or a whole ecosystem, he disergards the rules pof ecology and jsut goes to the thoery that humans are in control and cannot really screw anything up and because we are the only ones that matter. Denna take s the role of just a plain nature/ animal lover, loving the rawness and the darkness of it. She embraces the fact that humans are only part of the equatino and that every species has a role and that some are slight more important, like the predator species.
ReplyDelete3. Deanna sees the world of nature as something that should largely be left alone to work in its ways, and it is in this way that she is an animal lover. Well, sort of. She sees our duty as humans not as beings that are meant to just go in and destroy things for the fun of it. She is not against hunting per se, but against irresponsible killing. She is more interested in animals on a species level rather than that of the individual. If a wild cat was "supposed" to be in a certain area based on her view of what the natural state of a certain ecosystem is, then she would be extremely against killing it. If, however, she saw the cat as an invasive species accidentally let out into the wrong habitat, she would support getting rid of it. Although it would be easy to say that she considers humans at the same level of other animals, she clearly has few qualms about doing what's necessary to retain status quo.
ReplyDeleteEddie Bondo is a hunter, and thinks more on an individual level. He will shoot a deer or a coyote probably without giving the overall ecological consequences much thought. He doesn't see what he and others similar to him do as anything to make a big fuss about. I think he is just blissfully ignorant of his impact, or else just isn't overly concerned with it. Though he has a deep appreciation for nature, he has no problem disrupting it.