Cradle to Cradle, Chapter 5 & 6
There were many concepts I found to be interesting in the book, Cradle to Cradle, chapter 5. One was the idea that the world was created a certain way and that it has a certain framework, nature's design has a certain type of framework, a flowering diverity and of abundance. And that for most humans, the response to this is to have the thought or theory that as the book calls it, "attack of the one size-fits-all." The book to me, is basically stating that humans use anything land to try to conquer. If they want to build something, nothing will get in the way of that, no jungle, no desert, or coastal marsh. Concrete can and will go wherever it is needed so that industrialists can keep building up the society they live in. I think this is true in part. I think that most people do not truly care where or what they destroy as long as what they want to accomplish is done. To me, this is such a sad, cavalier outlook on the world. What happens when there is no more place or space to build? And not to mention, the side effects that come with distroying all this land. The less trees, the less it can combat the massive amounts of C02 in the atmosphere.
To me this part really speaks to me. I want to try to make a difference and know that that can really only come from me. It starts with one person. The thing here about attacking the one size thing, is that, it is true what the book states. In today's society and the way the economy is, it is important to build more and more, and to push out things that were once there. The trees, the pretty landscape, I mean, who cares, really? You always have your house to go back home to at the end of the day, knowing no one is destroying the place you live. I just don't think it is fair to have this happen. Animals, the ecosystems are being destroyed, because we as a society want to keep expanding. These animals don't have a place to go home to, because they don't have a home after all the destruction that comes with expanding. What if there were another way to go about this? I like that this book tries to go into different ways to go about things in life. Too bad not many people share in on this idea. Because I think one day, the more destruction that is done, will one day, impact where we live, too.
Catie
2 comments:
I agree with you, Catie, that many humans have the mentality of "I want it now, and I will go to whatever lengths or costs to have it now." Especially with the evolution of technology, like cell phones, instant messaging and online shopping--everything is so much more instantaneous that I think many people are beginning to lose their sense of patience. It's the sort of consumeristic belief that gradually allows people to think it is their RIGHT to take over/run down/destroy nature, with little thought or care to the consequences that may come after.
The dangers of this sense of entitlement humanity seems to have over nature is only just beginning to truly reveal itself over the past few decades. We're breaking down the natural systems that sustain life on our planet...and only we have the ability to fix it. I've really enjoyed reading Cradle to Cradle because it shows how we can be more effecient if we just take the time to do so. I don't think preserving the earth is as simple as recycling our soda cans, and it will take a lot more thought and patience on everyone's part. Obviously the results won't be instantaneous either, which is WHY patience is so important, and an attribute that many in our society need to relearn if we hope humanity to survive for generations to come.
Late--Chapter 5/6
I enjoyed how Chapter 5 emphasized that diversity means strength and monoculture means weakness. It’s interesting how backwards the idea of monoculture is—we strive for the biggest and the best but in turn we gain disease and depletion. The imagery of “spaces once lush with foliage and wildlife shrink to marginal places where only the hardiest species--crows, roaches, mice, pigeons and squirrels—survive.” Also the “Gaia principle” stuck out in my mind as well; thinking of the world as one living organism and how interrelated we all are. The idea of bioremediation was an interesting idea but would nature be able to tackle our wastes of today? It’s an interesting solution, but the issue of waste equals food would have to be the first priority. I liked the idea of sewage being localized so residents would think twice about what they throw away. I think with the idea of the Industrial Revolution and “power over nature” a lot of people may have been thinking that safety could be modernized like never before. C2C talks about wind and sun and how sustainable structures can be made to endure those elements; and it talks of Chinese, Pakistani and Australian structures that withstand those elements…but could sustainable architecture and shelter withstand extreme weather? Again the idea of locality seems to be a very approachable solution instead of the one-size-fits all (mentioned in the other blogs). I think people would be more accepting of environmental issues if they were brought closer to home. In chapter 6 the Ford project just blew my mind. It was so interesting to see people opposed to the idea of environmentalism—going back to the first chapter of how most people don’t and won’t see a connection between industry and environment. Ultimately more sunlight in a working environment is proven to be healthier; I can’t imagine that one guy opposed to the idea of skylights! The listed steps throughout the end of the chapter seemed to be geared more to business owners, etc. I hope that sustainability isn’t just limited to architects, manufacturers, scientists, etc. in his eyes.
Post a Comment