Uncontrolled Consequences
Rutger Rosenborg- Although I am of Swedish descent, I was born in Guatemala where I lived until I moved to San Diego, California at the age of 3. I am interested in Biology, Psychology, and Literature and this is my first year here at Stanford University.
Lily Dinh- I have lived the major part of my life in Georgia on the east coast of the US and am very excited to experience the west coast. I’m interested in pursuing business and/or law and also have a penchant for Latin and the classics.
For centuries, humans have strived to establish their dominance over each other through wars and conflicts. As long as they have been doing this, they have also been trying to conquer nature, to make it less threatening to them. With these attempted conquests, there has always been collateral damage, and there has always been a victim. Mankind often overlooks this fact, and is often ignorant of the dire consequences that our actions have on our fellow humans and our beloved earth. By understanding the loneliness and sadness of those we victimize, it offers us a new perspective that is important to acquire in order to acknowledge and change the way we, as the human race, carry ourselves in the world. Only then can we reduce the detrimental effects of our actions.
Rutger:
The dark colors and shades give the whole picture a dark and ominous air, a sense of impending darkness and a feeling that the shark is utterly and terrifyingly alone. Were it not for the rays of sunlight, the whole picture would be completely black. Yet the color created by the sunlight is still not inviting. It is grayish/greenish and not the typical brilliant blue that we so often associate with a thriving ocean. It is interesting that the cage is right on the brink of the darkness, indicating that if it were lowered anymore it would be forever lost in the blackness of the sea. Inside the cage there is a great white shark, a notoriously ferocious and threatening beast that is arguably the greatest predator of the sea. Surrounding the cage are three divers, who are very ominously dressed in black and wielding long spears, which are aimed directly at the shark. Yet the shark’s nose is still pointed up towards the surface, towards the source of sunlight, showing the promise of some kind of hope.
On a general environmental level, the shark represents nature as not only wild and untamed, but something that we are afraid of. By putting it in the cage, we are trying to tame it, to control it so that it is not threatening to us, so that it doesn’t impede on our perceived dominance of the world. There is also the specific relationship with sharks and humans. It is a critique on human hunting practices on sharks. There is an ironic inversion because humans are typically the ones in the cage looking at the sharks. Here, the humans are made to take the place of the sharks. It is a reversal of perspective and the viewer is made to feel scared by the humans and compassionate for the shark. This is effective because of the emotion it evokes in the viewer. It makes us re-evaluate our practices with and against nature, shedding light on the fact that mankind’s obsession with dominance has grave consequences on nature.
Humans are generally afraid of what they can’t understand. Our society is so ordered, and we are so sure that we are the center of Earth, of existence itself, that anything that contradicts that is deemed illogical. If something threatens this order, we can’t handle it, so we become scared. We can’t cope with the fact that we may not be the ultimate “chosen” being, that everything may not be under our control. So what do we do? We try our hardest to control the uncontrollable, to rein in our fears of the unknown, and prove our superiority and dominance no matter the consequences. Our bloated egos cannot handle defeat. It is the ferocious strength of the uncontrollable, the natural world in particular, that could shake the very foundations of our understanding about what it is to be human. Though we have managed to subdue and control nature with our technological and societal advancements in order to preserve our traditional views of humanity, it has produced disastrous results. We keep poking and prodding at nature, reaffirming our control, but it can only take so much before it crumbles. Then where will we be? It is time to release nature from its cage. It is time that we assess our actions and the consequences they have on our world by altering our perspectives and understanding the repercussions of our actions by looking through the eyes of our victims.
Lily:
The child in the image is distinguished from the other humans in the room in several ways. Each distinction between the child and the other people in the room marks an important message to the global audience. Firstly, the difference in age represents the devastating potential of knowledge. The victim in any given situation tends to be the one with less knowledge. The child knows little about what has afflicted him and how to handle the situation. On the other hand, the medical staff appears to be in control of the situation. However, their lowered heads and blurred faces foreshadow knowledge of a bleak end for the boy. While knowledge is not always negative, the misuse and abuse of knowledge can also be a dangerous weapon.
Another striking difference in the child and the medical staff is the exposure of the child. The contrast in the medical staff’s white attire to the boy’s tan nude body highlights the thoughts and emotions that define the essence of being human. The image captures the child’s vulnerability and thus everyone’s vulnerability that exists underneath our layers of clothing. All of the other robed humans in the room symbolize the mechanization of mankind and how humans can easily be desensitized. Once humans have joined a community, such as the medical community in this example, they adopt certain characteristics of that community and abandon others. The uniform white jackets remind the people wearing them that they are not merely humans, but that they have a specific role to fill that requires emotionally removing themselves from their patients. If something as simple as putting on a jacket can separate the thoughts, emotions, and goals of humans from one another, how do we unite as humans to prevent victimization of humans by both other humans and by nature?
Finally, the juxtaposition of the clarity of the boy’s features to the medical staff suggests that we should focus on what is real and raw. Even in his vulnerable state, where his ribs are showing and his pure emotion is evident, the image of the boy is still beautiful and more thought provoking than those in the background. The goal of preserving and advancing mankind is not about the race for knowledge or about becoming more systematic as humans. Instead, it is about nurturing and focusing on the human identity that unites us all. We must consider the consequences of our actions and in our progression, who we are ultimately victimizing by our decisions.
This image invokes emotions of fear and sadness in me. My fears originate from considering the pain and agony that mankind can bring upon themselves. The child in the image is suffering because of a product created by man- Agent Orange. While this is just one general case, there are multitudes of other inventions that man has created and actions that man has taken that solely serve a negative purpose. I find it neither ethical nor judicious for mankind to utilize these types of inventions if they ultimately aim for the preservation and advancement of mankind.
The image is also very sad in an ironic way because we are able to see that only the source of the destruction (humans) are able to handle the repercussions of humankind’s actions. The child in the image is suffering due to an invention of man, but now must turn to man for help. Even so, science and technology can only do so much once nature has taken its course. I feel that the face of the child reminds us of this continuity in time and nature. While man may try as hard as possible to interfere with nature’s course, in this example using technology to end a person’s life, nature will continue to fulfill its function despite this interference.
Closing Remarks and Questions to Consider:
In the struggle to survive, humans have victimized nature and other human beings. However, to disregard the potential consequences of our actions is to do a disservice to mankind as a whole. An exploration and understanding of the unknown and those who are victimized can reveal a new perspective to our evaluation of where we fit into nature and how to effectively conduct ourselves within nature and with other humans. While we have shown that we are a force to be dealt with, it is important to remember that our span has only been a short one compared to nature’s long history on this earth.
- Which victim arouses more sympathy- the child or the shark? Why?
- Both images have the same general layout (victim as the focal point outnumbered by surrounding people), but with different victims (nature vs. man). Despite this difference, do these layouts portray similar messages?
- Who has been more victimized by the actions of man: man or nature? Do these victims have a voice? If so, how do they express their message?
- What differentiates the victimizer from the victim? Is it their intent, motives, actions, or something else? Who or what decides if these attributes are right or wrong?
- How are technology and knowledge linked to the relationship between mankind and between man and nature?
Comments
Nature and human have always clashed but during recent times the clash is damaging to both nature and human beings. The reason in my point of view is the evident evolution of humans and human life through technology. We, as humans, think ultimately about ourselves and about proving our superiority on other beings and nature that we ignore the consequences and the effects of out actions. We think of ourselves this way because it gives us a sense of accomplishment that we can only get by trying to conquer nature. The two pictures reflect on that by showing us simple examples of what happens in our everyday life and then the interpretation that humans can derive from them. The first picture as explained by Rutger is the basic clash and it shows how humans are trying to opposite the effects of nature by hunting something like sharks down. Rutger's words, explanations and analysis of the picture represent an explanation to what's happening and a plea to look back and view the consequences. While the second picture is more touching as who's lying there hurting from our actions is an innocent helpless child who is still waiting for us humans to provide him with a cure. The pain in that picture is more real and doesn’t represent only children; it represents everything that humans hurt where their pain can't be sensed. The pain and anger that is derived from the second picture does not underestimate the cruelty of the first. All this and no matter how much we hurt the world and its people, its beauty though bruised remains intact. What needs to be derived from these two pictures is that if we keep ignoring the collaterals and keep affecting the world negatively, we will end up destroying it. Using these examples humans will keep hunting down the sharks until they become extinct and humans as an effect will keep causing the death of one of their own until we end up destroying ourselves
Posted by: farah shurrab | April 14, 2009 05:15 AM