Issues with Place and Justice

In our society as a whole we conceive of the land in terms of ownership and use. It is a lifeless medium of exchange; it has for most of us, I suspect, no more spirituality than has an automobile, say, or a refrigerator. And our laws confirm us in this view, for we can buy and sell the land, we can exclude each other from it, and in the context of ownership we can use it as we will. Ownership implies use, and use implies consumption. (Momaday 580, my emphasis)

I am not certain how to think of place. One may refer to a place as a place for one's stuff...



Our understanding of place is static. I mean we know a place changes over time, but our memory of it remains somewhat stable and constructed based on how we want to remember it.
The woods I grew up near, similar to Dr. Rouzie's, were always changing, but that change was unnoticeable unless one were very meticulous each time one went to the woods by taking some type of record of it. The overall effect was one of consistency, but, I know, the trees, grass, creek, rocks, etc. were all slightly different each time I went there.
I recall one time I went to the woods down the hill from where I lived after several months of not being there--I noticed the difference immediately. This difference went unnoticed the next day I went because my memory of the woods was consistent with what I saw (or remembered I saw) the day before.
In our hubris (just for you Russ), I think we believe things change solely for and because of us. And when things change outside those confines, we sense some level of displeasure. Let me put it this way, if you owned a home, and someone came to mow your grass without your knowledge and you noticed this once you got home, how might you feel? Let's assume that the job was done expertly, did not do any damage, and actually "looked" better than you had ever done. Yet, you would probably still feel violated because someone changed the landscape. They changed something you were not expecting--your expectation created your displeasure when confronted with reality.
Nevertheless, as Ursula K. Heise and others suggest, we are nomadic--always on the move, "forever on the road" (48). The inclusion of place in this context--the context of our movement--suggests, again, that place is static.

We move within it.

Heise points to numerous examples of American, perhaps Westward, expansion and movement across the land. Some people recognize the romance of moving from place to place and we even envy those that do move from place to place. For Instance: Someone that has lived in Wyoming, Utah, California, New York, Florida, London, and Tokyo garners a certain level of interest, mystery, and intrigue--do they not?

Change.
In reading bell hooks, I simply do not make some of the same connections she does between African Americans and nature. Moreover, I'm at a loss at her comparing (and quite closely) the Native American connection to land to an African American connection to land. Perhaps I'm defensive, but her suggesting that African Americans go back to the South for "spiritual nourishment" has me bewildered (107). Even in her next paragraph (after the quote on 107), she suggests how African American "can restore our relationship to the natural world"--why would one need to restore a relationship (or connection) she's describing them as already having?
Sorry to be critical, but I'm missing something here.

Change.
As I read through Momaday, I realized that I have often heard the phrase, "living off the land," and I realized that living off something also means taking something from it--like a parasite. In fact, humans are a parasite on Earth's body. Momaday writes of his grandfather: "He could not have conceived of living apart from the land" (576). To be sure, it seems he could not leave apart from the land. Deep in Momaday's essay, there is a sense of confusion. Confusion between the "land" and the element of our galaxy: the sun. As we know, the sun is not a part of our planet--yet, it is often portrayed as a part of the landscape, which creates some problems regardless of the fact that we need the sun to survive.
I'm curious what the class thinks of this confusion I perceive. So, post a comment below and let me know!



I don't believe there will ever be, nor can there ever be, environmental justice.
Each one of us has killed millions of lifeforms throughout our lifetime. We continue to do so now. What justice is there in the cessation of another life?