Ishmael (1992), Daniel Quinn
This is a great novel. Let’s not get confused about that. The narrative is at times simple and childish, but it is important and should be read. The front cover bears the quotation:
It may not affect the opinions I have on the books I have read and will read, but it certainly has adjusted my view of the world.
Daniel Quinn reflects on how humans have come to be exponentially destroying the world. He explores the differences between societies built around agriculture and those built on the nomadic system of hunting and gathering and the semi-nomadic system of herding. The premise of the novel is that the agricultural-driven cultures are consuming the world at the expense of all else while the alternatives have been following an age-old natural law that allows man to live in equilibrium with the rest of the world.
He offers a very interesting interpretation of the first couple chapters of Genesis, which I found truly enlightening and entirely plausible. I think anyone who has ever struggled with the question “why?” when reading Genesis would be very interested in Quinn’s theory. Quinn points out that Genesis was written by the ancestors of the Hebrews, the Semites, who were herders and it’s written as an observation of human society’s change to agriculture. I grabbed our household bible and read Genesis chapter 4, and I was surprised by the clarity of Quinn’s theory.
Quinn describes how humans have taken themselves out of the laws of nature. He uses the term “the gods” to describe such laws and to make his theory open to the interpretation of all religions and non-religions. As he says, humans are consuming the world and leaving nothing for the rest of the animal kingdom.
On the topic of the other animals living on Earth he makes a very interesting point. If we look at the process of human evolution we can see how we have learned slowly over time how to use tools and make things. Each generation passes the information on to a new generation and we build on what we already know. He points out that certain species of animals are in the process of this same form of intellectual evolution. Dolphins and Apes are learning to use make and use tools and are passing that information to their children. Wow! To think that in a few thousand years we could be sharing the world with other intelligent species. Imagine what we could learn! However, as Quinn points out, we have to allow these species the chance to evolve by not destroying their habitats.
On the topic of consumption he raises the dichotomy of over-production and the millions of people starving and his theory is that the more we produce, the more we encourage population growth. If we produce enough to feed our current population plus some, people will continue to procreate and there will always be people starving.
Quinn’s theory is good, and it is a well known fact that humans are not obeying the natural laws of equilibrium when it comes to the topics of consumption and population, but not for the same reasons that Quinn suggests. The greatest proportion of beef production takes places on cleared Amazon land, farmed by people in South America to feed the obese McDonalds patrons of North America. Overproduction by, and for, the first world leads to waste. The food doesn’t feed the starving.
According to Quinn, the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, as described in Genesis, represents how we have come to think of ourselves as possessing the knowledge to construct our lives in the way that is best for humankind. Quinn describes our future as a plane crash. We’re currently airborne and we think we’re in flight, but in reality we’re plummeting towards our doom. We could abandon our plane now and survive or stay put and die (see Genesis chapter 3 for the biblical interpretation of our flight).
Of course, Quinn’s accuracy is pin-point on this issue. Everyone knows that we’re destroying the planet and our future with it, but we don’t know what to do. We continuously think we possess the knowledge, but it seems every time we try to advance we make things worse. The book was written in 1992, and I believe we’ve made some good moves since then, what with the invention of (but yet to be released) hydrogen car and advances in Solar energy made by Australian Scientists in recent years. However, the question remains “Is it enough?”
Australian Greenhouse Office
Solar Cities: A Vision of the Future
Solar hydrogen - energy of the future
I was afraid, while reading the novel, that Quinn was advocating that we relinquish our ties to the lifestyles that we have grown accustomed to and join the remaining tribes of hunters and gatherers scattered in small numbers around the globe. In high school we visited the property of Ted Trainer, an alternative lifestyles expert and a professor at the University of NSW. He believed that humans needed to return to an entirely self-sufficient and communal lifestyle in order to survive.
From consumer society to sustainable society ...
... and how do we get to there?
His theory (as I understood it with the limits of my high school experience) stated that if we live in small communities and produce only what our community needs and when it needs it, that we won’t need roads and transport and cars and trucks and highways and aeroplanes, which will get rid of pollution and geological damage etc etc etc.
He had a good point, but one thing frightened me. What did this mean to the Global way of life that we now have? How could I travel the world and explore other cultures and eat foods that I am yet to taste if I lived in a tiny community with the same 100 people to see every day. Even at that stage in high school, before I knew about the internet or had dreamed of living in a foreign country, my best friend lived on the other side of Sydney. Without a car and a road to drive it on, I couldn’t know her. I wasn’t ready to reduce my world and limit my options so I rejected his theory.
The same fear entered my mind while I was reading Ishmael. I’m an Australian living in Japan with Jeremy, an American. How would we have come to be here if we lived such alternative ways. It’s true, if we had been born and raised in a tribe where we could spend a few hours a day hunting or gathering what we needed to survive and the rest of the time we spent sharing our time with our communities, then we’d be happy and we may not wish for anything else. But I don’t want to give up the life I am currently living. Jeremy and I are thinking about moving to Mexico.
In the last few pages of the book Quinn redeemed himself and admitted that we won’t want to give up all our luxuries and comforts. We DO need to build a new aeroplane that flies in accordance with the laws the aerodynamics, not against them, but how? Quinn leaves us with not much of a suggestion of what we should actually do. He gives us a little hope because we’re an inventive race and we can find a way. I guess he’s right, and those inventions I mentioned earlier are part of it, but how can we know that we’re advancing correctly this time round and not just making more mistakes that will bring us even closer to our doom? Quinn, Quinn. Why did you leave me hanging like this? I still don’t know what to do!
Read the rest >>
From now on I will divide the books I have read into two categories – the ones I read before Ishmael and those read after.
It may not affect the opinions I have on the books I have read and will read, but it certainly has adjusted my view of the world.
Daniel Quinn reflects on how humans have come to be exponentially destroying the world. He explores the differences between societies built around agriculture and those built on the nomadic system of hunting and gathering and the semi-nomadic system of herding. The premise of the novel is that the agricultural-driven cultures are consuming the world at the expense of all else while the alternatives have been following an age-old natural law that allows man to live in equilibrium with the rest of the world.
He offers a very interesting interpretation of the first couple chapters of Genesis, which I found truly enlightening and entirely plausible. I think anyone who has ever struggled with the question “why?” when reading Genesis would be very interested in Quinn’s theory. Quinn points out that Genesis was written by the ancestors of the Hebrews, the Semites, who were herders and it’s written as an observation of human society’s change to agriculture. I grabbed our household bible and read Genesis chapter 4, and I was surprised by the clarity of Quinn’s theory.
Quinn describes how humans have taken themselves out of the laws of nature. He uses the term “the gods” to describe such laws and to make his theory open to the interpretation of all religions and non-religions. As he says, humans are consuming the world and leaving nothing for the rest of the animal kingdom.
On the topic of the other animals living on Earth he makes a very interesting point. If we look at the process of human evolution we can see how we have learned slowly over time how to use tools and make things. Each generation passes the information on to a new generation and we build on what we already know. He points out that certain species of animals are in the process of this same form of intellectual evolution. Dolphins and Apes are learning to use make and use tools and are passing that information to their children. Wow! To think that in a few thousand years we could be sharing the world with other intelligent species. Imagine what we could learn! However, as Quinn points out, we have to allow these species the chance to evolve by not destroying their habitats.
On the topic of consumption he raises the dichotomy of over-production and the millions of people starving and his theory is that the more we produce, the more we encourage population growth. If we produce enough to feed our current population plus some, people will continue to procreate and there will always be people starving.
Quinn’s theory is good, and it is a well known fact that humans are not obeying the natural laws of equilibrium when it comes to the topics of consumption and population, but not for the same reasons that Quinn suggests. The greatest proportion of beef production takes places on cleared Amazon land, farmed by people in South America to feed the obese McDonalds patrons of North America. Overproduction by, and for, the first world leads to waste. The food doesn’t feed the starving.
According to Quinn, the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, as described in Genesis, represents how we have come to think of ourselves as possessing the knowledge to construct our lives in the way that is best for humankind. Quinn describes our future as a plane crash. We’re currently airborne and we think we’re in flight, but in reality we’re plummeting towards our doom. We could abandon our plane now and survive or stay put and die (see Genesis chapter 3 for the biblical interpretation of our flight).
Of course, Quinn’s accuracy is pin-point on this issue. Everyone knows that we’re destroying the planet and our future with it, but we don’t know what to do. We continuously think we possess the knowledge, but it seems every time we try to advance we make things worse. The book was written in 1992, and I believe we’ve made some good moves since then, what with the invention of (but yet to be released) hydrogen car and advances in Solar energy made by Australian Scientists in recent years. However, the question remains “Is it enough?”
Australian Greenhouse Office
Solar Cities: A Vision of the Future
Solar hydrogen - energy of the future
I was afraid, while reading the novel, that Quinn was advocating that we relinquish our ties to the lifestyles that we have grown accustomed to and join the remaining tribes of hunters and gatherers scattered in small numbers around the globe. In high school we visited the property of Ted Trainer, an alternative lifestyles expert and a professor at the University of NSW. He believed that humans needed to return to an entirely self-sufficient and communal lifestyle in order to survive.
From consumer society to sustainable society ...
... and how do we get to there?
His theory (as I understood it with the limits of my high school experience) stated that if we live in small communities and produce only what our community needs and when it needs it, that we won’t need roads and transport and cars and trucks and highways and aeroplanes, which will get rid of pollution and geological damage etc etc etc.
He had a good point, but one thing frightened me. What did this mean to the Global way of life that we now have? How could I travel the world and explore other cultures and eat foods that I am yet to taste if I lived in a tiny community with the same 100 people to see every day. Even at that stage in high school, before I knew about the internet or had dreamed of living in a foreign country, my best friend lived on the other side of Sydney. Without a car and a road to drive it on, I couldn’t know her. I wasn’t ready to reduce my world and limit my options so I rejected his theory.
The same fear entered my mind while I was reading Ishmael. I’m an Australian living in Japan with Jeremy, an American. How would we have come to be here if we lived such alternative ways. It’s true, if we had been born and raised in a tribe where we could spend a few hours a day hunting or gathering what we needed to survive and the rest of the time we spent sharing our time with our communities, then we’d be happy and we may not wish for anything else. But I don’t want to give up the life I am currently living. Jeremy and I are thinking about moving to Mexico.
In the last few pages of the book Quinn redeemed himself and admitted that we won’t want to give up all our luxuries and comforts. We DO need to build a new aeroplane that flies in accordance with the laws the aerodynamics, not against them, but how? Quinn leaves us with not much of a suggestion of what we should actually do. He gives us a little hope because we’re an inventive race and we can find a way. I guess he’s right, and those inventions I mentioned earlier are part of it, but how can we know that we’re advancing correctly this time round and not just making more mistakes that will bring us even closer to our doom? Quinn, Quinn. Why did you leave me hanging like this? I still don’t know what to do!
Read the rest >>