Welcome to Love of Place
Please read my essay "Born to Be Wild" in Onearth Magazine at http://www.onearth.org/article/born-to-be-wild (see links to the right below under More Places to Visit)
as well as "Letter to My Father" in The Provo Orem Word at http://www.provooremword.org/
and "The Body of Being" in High Country News at
http://www.hcn.org/issues/43.8/walking-in-the-body-of-being
and "All You Need is Love" in Onearth Magazine at
http://www.onearth.org/article/all-you-need-is-love

Below is a short essay I wrote called "The Lighter Side of Global Warming."What else could that be but sardonic humor?

For students in my summer 2011 and 2012 classes, scroll down to the April, 2010 entry. This speech is something of a “snap shot” of a writer in the middle of the current publishing crisis, as well as a personal statement about writing. Remember that this is a speech with a somewhat different rhythm than a written essay—more colloquialisms, fragments, etc. I also give short readings from my books.

Feel free to contact me at http://www.sharmanaptrussell.com/.


Thursday, April 14, 2011

Sharman Apt Russell

The Lighter Side of Global Warming

What is the world’s shortest book? The environmentalist’s book of jokes. –stolen by the author from some internet site she can’t find again

The pigs are funny. They are not really pigs, of course, but pig-sized (200 pounds) or “pig-like” heavily-built herbivores with short legs, big stomachs, small snouts, two tusks, and strong forelimbs for digging in the ground. After the Permian-Triassic extinction event over 250 million years ago—when 96 percent of marine and 70 percent of land species disappeared--these mammal-like reptiles or Lystrosaurus became the most common animal to walk the earth. For millions of years, 95% of land vertebrates were Lystrosaurus.

Yes. Pigs everywhere. Pigs as far as the eye could see. Pigs in the valleys and pigs in the glens and pigs on the mountains and pigs down by the riverside. Pigs mating, birthing, nursing, rearing families, and dying of old age. Pigs going about their business, greeting other pigs, “Hi ya there.” No other life but the pig life.

The Permian-Triassic extinction is abbreviated P-Tr and also called The Great Dying. No one really knows what caused the planet’s biggest loss of existing species but a plausible theory begins with volcanic eruptions that emitted carbon dioxide into the air. The resulting global warming allowed methane hydrate trapped under ice and permafrost to be released, and that methane burp spewed out even more carbon dioxide which increased the earth’s temperature about six degrees. The oceans became anoxic and highly acidic. This was a time when the world’s land masses were one big mass. Africa butted up to South America. Flowers hadn’t been invented yet. Normally I wouldn’t care much about a past in which I can’t recognize the continents. (Like most people, I’ve been conditioned by popular movies to stop short at the Jurassic. It’s a modern miracle how much I know about triceratops.) But climate change scientists are beginning to use the P-Tr as a model for what is happening now. In our case, man-made global warming is also melting permafrost and ice, which might also cause the release of methane, which might also result in a six degree rise in the global temperature.

At six degrees, the rainforests have flamed out, much of the world is a desert, weather is extreme, and humans are confined to a few habitable zones like present-day Michigan. It’s the Era of the Four Horsemen, whose names if you’ve forgotten can easily be Googled: Conquest, War, Famine, and Death.

For the pig-like Lystrosaurus, the glass looked half-full. They flourished in a world in which, from their point of view, biodiversity was over-rated. No other animal has dominated the earth in quite this way, and we have to ask why they were so successful. After P-Tr, the atmosphere was low in oxygen and high in carbon dioxide, and many animals died out because they had trouble breathing. The burrow-dwelling Lystrosaurus may have survived in part because of their respiratory efficiency--barrel chests that expanded and contracted easily, large lungs, and short internal nostrils. They were probably generalists who could survive on the surviving plants. Suddenly, too, they had no predators or competition. Moreover, as many scientists have rigorously concluded, they were simply lucky. Good mojo.

For those of you wondering, our ancestors were also mammal-like reptiles who either survived the Great Dying or evolved from the Lystrosaurus as they continued to radiate and diversify. The world of pigs slowly became the world of dinosaurs (small furry mammals underfoot, as annoying as mice in the kitchen today) until the dinosaurs’ own extinction sixty-five million years ago. The descendents of those mammals now rose to prominence, the world of humans, as far as the eye could see.

* * * *

Black humor is for insiders. You have to be one of the victims. It’s your trauma and that gives you the right to be witty about it. In my own life, I’ve been fortunate. Occasions for black humor are mostly confined to the sit-com of raising children--body fluids when they were young; alcohol, drugs, and sex in the teen years. I “own” global warming only in the sense that I worry about these children, whom I love very much and can see too easily in the last half of the twenty-first century, the impoverishment of their lives, the Four Horseman on the highway. Especially in the middle of the night, when resilience is low and worry gathers in the dark of the brain, I think: They are doomed. What will befall them? I think in some archaic language of fear.

For myself, I also feel an intangible loss. Humans are wired for continuity. We believe in culture, tradition, grandkids. We believe we are connected to the future. In the twentieth century, where I spent most of my time, we even believed in progress. We were destined to move forward into something better. Now I feel cut off. Disconnected. The future is no place I want to go.

As Woody Allen wrote, “Mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness, the other to extinction. Let us pray we choose correctly.”

My fears are abstract, and I’m grateful for that. Meanwhile, the “insiders” of global warming face literal threats right now, particularly those living on islands and coastal areas. In November of 2009 the president of the archipelago nation Maldives and his Cabinet put on scuba gear and sat around a table sixteen feet underwater. They used hand signals and a really good underwater pen to sign a declaration calling for cuts in global carbon emissions. Bubbles from the masks floated to the ocean surface. Zebra-striped fish, inherently comic, swam nearby. The dreamy scene was a nice example of black humor.

Other probable victims of climate change are south Africans struggling with drought, flooding, desertification, and deforestation. Erratic rainfall and the loss of maize crops in Lesotho, Namibia, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, and South Africa means increased hunger, while Somalia saw a 30% drop in cereal production in 2009. I am reminded of the Ik, an African tribe in the 1960s who served as the basis for a well-known study on hunger by anthropologist Colin Turnbull. In one story, the anthropologist shook hands with an elderly Ik, weighing about sixty pounds, who tightened his grip as Turnbull moved away. Pulled to the ground from his sitting position, the old man laughed and held out his hand again for Turnbull to help him back up. The Ik apologized for his behavior, saying that he hadn’t eaten for three days and so it was difficult for him to stand up, “Whereupon,” Turnbull noted, “he and his companion dissolved into laughter again."

* * * *

In 1926, H. W. Fowler, author of Modern English Usage, provided a table of the different forms of humor. The gentlest is for a sympathetic audience interested in the oddities of human nature. Wit uses surprise to entertain the intelligent. Sarcasm is about inflicting pain. Irony promotes exclusiveness.

Device

Humor

Wit

Sarcasm

Irony

Sardonic

motive/aim

Discovery

Throwing light

inflicting pain

exclusiveness

self-relief

Province

human nature

words & ideas

faults & foibles

statement of facts

adversity

Method/means

Observation

Surprise

Inversion

mystification

pessimism

Audience

The sympathetic

The intelligent

victim & bystander

an inner circle

the self

As I have learned in writing this essay, climate change brings out the sardonic—humor grounded in pessimism, whose audience is “the self” and whose aim is “self-relief.”

* * * *

I believe that humor is redemptive. Humor takes us outside our selves, outside our agenda and limited view. Remember a moment of laughing with friends? How the ego fell away, the purity of that moment? Remember the last time you saw a baby smile, the way she used her entire body, all two feet, and you had to smile back?

One of my neighbors in the rural West is a biologist saddened by the effects of global warming. Recently he showed me how to make fire with yucca twine and a piece of wood. Like a surprising number of rural people, my friend likes to flirt with the apocalypse-- Peak Oil, the destruction of industrial civilization, the need for certain life skills. We also share a nostalgia for our hunting and gathering past, a simpler Paleoterrific time when humans killed wolves and this was considered a good thing. We are both thinking, “How can I live more harmoniously with the earth?” even as we drive our cars and eat out-of-season fruit. We are concerned and confused to the point at which spending an hour making fire without a match seems not only a useful way to spend an hour but some kind of statement about being human.

My efforts are surprisingly slap-stick. The furrowed brow of the incompetent. The fumbling, the grunting. Then a little flare and flurry to get more grass and tiny sticks. I’m on my knees blowing miniature kindling when I begin to play up the physical comedy, aware of my audience--my friend’s six-year-old son. I exaggerate the urgency, make my gestures big. I’ve got him laughing because I’m such a doofus, a potato bug trying to make fire. I try a Charles Chaplin waddle. The kid hoots and holds his stomach. He is exaggerating, too. We build up the flames, move close against the evening chill, and toast some-mores (if you don’t know what those are, good. You can trust me when I say that ours were organic.)

In the end, I am not sure what this exercise symbolizes: that I can live without industrial civilization or that my pressing need for warmth is inherently destructive. Our nature is the consuming nature of fire. We are the species who makes tools, takes risks, and breeds year-round. A certain logic runs on an electric current from yucca twine to nuclear power plants.

It’s time for a funny aside. Humor is a good distraction—we can’t always bear the weight of our species. The pool of global warming jokes is small but growing. A climatologist walks into a bar…and it’s open season. On our greed. Our pomposity. Our ignorance. The fake talk show host Stephen Colbert interviews the producer of the CNN program Planet in Peril. Colbert asks, “Are you talking about Planet Earth?” and follows up astutely, “Could that eventually affect Planet America?” Mocking Al Gore is Climate Change Comedy 101; even Al Gore can do it. (“Airplane travel,” Gore says, “is nature’s way of making you look like your passport picture.”) George Carlin concludes that the earth invented human beings because it wanted plastic--now we’re expendable. In his blog, a climate change activist quotes an email that moans, “If we do not do something at once, the whole world will be turned into a dessert.” The activist responds, “Although this is an appealing prospect, unfortunately the science does not support it.”

How many of us does it take to screw in a CFL? What did the polar bear say to the climate change denier?

You have to love us. The Buddha said life is suffering. The comedian says life is absurd. Zen Buddhists don’t see much difference. The Big Bang let loose a lot of suffering and eventually humans would see the fun in that. New Age philosophy suggests that we are the universe reflecting on itself. The universe getting another kick out of things.

* * * *

Assume we’re redeemable.

Assume that we in the developed countries, who make most of the jokes and are causing most of the problems, have a responsibility to those people living in the Maldives and southern Africa and elsewhere, a responsibility to our children and grandchildren, as well as a larger responsibility to ecological health, beauty, and biodiversity. Assume we should change our personal patterns of consumption, our national policies, and our international efforts. Assume we must now focus on rewarding everyone and anyone who is trying to slow down climate change. We can do this smiling. We can whistle as we work.

My nature writing friend Jenny Price has an advice online advice column for greenies at the website http://www.laobserved.com/intell/2010/01/green_me_up_jj_2.php. When Jenny was asked for the environmentally-correct response to a child’s desire to play in a baseball league twenty-eight miles from home, she responded empathetically, “This is exactly the sort of argument that families are having more and more these days.”

Fortunately, Jenny had one of those great green formulas.

“First, figure out your family warming coefficient (FWC) by taking the weight in grams of your heart, add the weight of your wife's heart times 2, and multiply by the volume (in cc's) of your child's dreams. Multiply by the number of things that you value half or more as much as doing your part to reduce carbon--e.g. family, friendship, health, travel, chocolate. Then sit your child down and explain that the world as we know it is going to end if we don't stop doing things like driving 8-year-olds 56 miles round-trip to play baseball. Add the weight of the child's guilt to the previous total. Now add together the distance one-way to the game, the weight of the vehicle you plan to drive, and the weight of the people and equipment times 2 inside it. Multiply this sum by the gas mileage, and divide by 2 if it's a hybrid vehicle (or multiply by 2.3 if the hybrid gets ≤6mpg more than your other or last vehicles). Add half the air miles you've flown in the past 15 months (multiply by 1.5 for business class, 2 for first class), and add the number of offsets you purchased and immediately subtract the same number….”

The final scoring? 0-1000: start buying those snacks, Mom. 1000-2000: OK if you convert the car to vegetable oil. 2000+: personally responsible for a .004-inch rise in sea level.

LOL.

Saturday, November 27, 2010

The Jaguar's Shadow

adapted from THE JAGUAR'S SHADOW: SEARCHING FOR A MYTHIC CAT
By Richard Mahler (Yale University Press, 2009)

Soon after I began research for my book, I discovered that the average person, including me, knows nearly nothing about jaguars. And much of what we think we know is wrong. I was surprised that friends and family members had only a vague idea of what I was talking about.
"Which model do you like?" a student, on the verge of receiving a doctorate degree from a prestigious university, inquired.

"They're vicious man-eaters," a cousin declared. "Don't ever turn your back on one because that's when they attack."

"I've seen them at the zoo," a woman at a party enthused. "What beautiful black coats they have!" At the same gathering a retired lawyer insisted that while on safari in East Africa he had watched a jaguar run down a wildebeest.

Several people were convinced the cats were a type of mountain lion: "Cougar? Panther? Jaguar? Aren't they the same thing?"

Patiently, I spelled out some facts. First, a person is much more likely to be killed by a spider, snake, or domestic dog than a jaguar. Second, fewer than 10 percent of jaguars are black. Third, jaguars are New World cats, found outside the Americas only in captivity. And finally, the jaguar is a distinct species, related only distantly to Puma concolor, the felines referred to as cougars and panthers.

When I explained that jaguars occurred historically in the American Southwest and seemed to be drifting back, I was met by skepticism. "Someone is pulling your leg," my next-door neighbor maintained. One of my work colleagues chimed in: "It’s a publicity stunt; a hoax! Tame animals are being turned loose in the mountains." Where I saw a marvel, they saw deception. The notion of a wild United States jaguar struck some folks as outlandish, even suspicious. Yet somewhere in Arizona roamed Macho B: a big, spotted felid that was as focused as a Zen master, as quiet as a fawn, and as eager to avoid cameras as a movie star in rehab.

From the start I was convinced that Panthera onca, one of several endangered among the 38 known species of wild cat, was worth saving, if only because it had as much right to exist as did humans. But how would jaguars find protection if 99 percent of the population did not know what they were? Where they lived? How they survived? What made them special? Beyond their charismatic image, these animals were essentially unseen and unknown.

Having reported for years on conservation issues, I knew people needed to care about a creature before they could be persuaded to help save it. An emotional bond or financial incentive must exist, otherwise the animal may be deemed insignificant, a competitor for resources, an obstacle to progress, a threat to survival, or a source of fresh meat.

Before I spread the word about jaguars, I had to educate myself further. I felt it was necessary to visit places where the animals were seen in order to speak with scientists who studied these cats and rural residents who lived among them. I had no intention of becoming an authority on jaguars, but I wanted to learn what bonafide experts had to say. And I still wanted to observe at least one such cat in the wild.

Accomplishing this would be tricky. Looking for wild jaguars and writing about them posed moral questions. If others followed my example, these animals might become even more endangered. I knew I could not control how my information would be distributed. At worst, my accounts might inspire unscrupulous trophy hunters to track and shoot jaguars. Poachers might use my text as a kind of road map to these strongholds. An increase in nature-based tourism might prompt the cats to withdraw deeper into the wilderness, putting themselves in various kinds of danger.

It was an audacious act to seek out such rare animals merely to satisfy my own curiosity. And wouldn't I be earning money by writing about them? Could that be considered yet another form of exploitation targeting a cat that seemed to want nothing more than to be left alone?
I reflected at length on my underlying motives. My bias was saving jaguars from extinction, an eventuality that already had befallen certain subspecies of tiger. The Cantonese tiger was as good as dead, the Sumatra tiger was critically endangered, and India's tigers were relegated to ever-shrinking islands of habitat. Overall, fewer than 3500 tigers still existed in the wild. By comparison, the jaguar as a species was in decent shape.

Simply wanting to see a big cat is insufficient to make it happen, of course. Felines are famous for their smarts and elusiveness. "Jaguars have the biggest brain-to-body mass of all the big cats," explained Belize researcher Sharon Matola. "They're extremely intelligent, which makes them independent, unpredictable, and dangerous. You'll never see a jaguar tamer in the circus. If you do, buy a ticket, because that'll be a one-time show."

Wild cats in general are challenging subjects. For some of the world's smallest, almost nothing is known. The caracal and serval, notoriously bashful African felids, are studied mostly through indirect evidence rather than direct observation. Field researchers learn about wild jaguars in much the same manner.

"Tracking the stealthy, solitary animals," concedes Eduardo Carrillo, a Costa Rican biologist who has encountered more than a dozen in jungle settings, "remains exceedingly difficult." And while there is plenty of general knowledge and considerable data about the jaguar as a species, significant details are missing. Only a few precious minutes exist on film, for example, of a wild female interacting with her cubs. This fundamental relationship—the foundation upon which the ABCs of "jaguarness" are built—remains something of a mystery. Watching a mother and cub in a zoo can provide clues but not answers, since captive animals act differently than their free-range cousins.

Other key questions hang in the air. It is unclear exactly how jaguars, often alone throughout adulthood, find and court their mates. Also, the cats' carefully regulated social structure and precise communication is not well known. Other lines of inquiry beg investigation: How do such alpha predators influence the biodiversity of a given area? Why are jaguars, as compared to most other large cats, such superb, water-loving swimmers? How do jaguars deal with competing carnivores that overlap with them in time, space, and prey? Why does each jaguar have a singular pattern of spots and rosettes, and why is this hodge-podge different on each flank? How many jaguars move between North and South America and how important is such migration in keeping gene pools healthy? If adult males head out from Mexico to far-flung places like the mountains of Arizona, how do they get across a carefully monitored border without being detected? What are they looking for—or fleeing from?

One reason to protect jaguars is simply to follow these and other intriguing lines of research. Knowledge about such highly evolved and specialized creatures may illuminate and improve our own lives. We might learn from the jaguar's finely tuned senses, for example, what is communicable through odors humans cannot smell and sounds we cannot hear. By studying the cat's remarkable night vision and optic system, perhaps we can better understand our own eyesight and the maladies that affect it. Knowing the role such a top predator plays in maintaining a balanced ecosystem may help us improve management of parks and adjacent agricultural lands. Such investigation is long and arduous, but through perseverance, training, and luck, researchers fit pieces—based on the gathering of a few facts at a time—into the jaguar puzzle, often without actually seeing the animals. Through such obsession, our picture of a wild place comes into focus.

# # #
learn more, and read an excerpt from the first chapter, at www.thejaguarsshadow.com

Monday, August 23, 2010

The Apocalypse: Not in My Backyard


Sharman Apt Russell


Where I live in the rural Southwest, I am literally surrounded by apocalyptic vision. To my left, a neighbor prepares for the collapse of civilization once the supply of cheap oil disappears and the trucks stop running and the government crashes. To my right, another neighbor waits for the biblical end of days prophesied in Revelations. Both the Peak Oil doomer and fundamentalist Christian seem almost happy about the approaching catastrophe. The human race has sinned, and we deserve to be punished.


I’m not so happy with the human race, either. My apocalypse is spelled six degrees and goes something like this: in the next ten or twenty years, if we fail to reduce the percentage of greenhouse gases in the air, we’ll cause a two to three degree rise in the earth’s temperature, triggering the further release of methane gases in the north, the continued acidification of the oceans, and the flaming out of the Amazon rainforest. Feedback loops will lead to a runaway four or five degree increase in global warming, resulting in even further desertification, famine, war, and poverty on a scale virtually unimaginable. At six degrees, everyone dies from a broken heart.


In my own backward—which now includes a beautiful view of the Gila River winding south from the Gila Wilderness and Gila National Forest--the cottonwoods and willows will be long gone. The river has become a curve of dust. Water is a memory.


If I squint one eye, I can almost see them--those fires burning in the distance. If I try really hard, I can smell the smoke. If I stand on one leg and hop backwards rapidly five times, I am sure to fall down. Just a little effort and I can make myself truly miserable.


I love a good apocalypse as much as the next person. Only lately…I’ve decided to just say no. I still believe in climate change. I still believe that we might actually, foolishly, heat up the earth with catastrophic consequences. But it hasn’t happened yet. I don’t live in that future—yet.


Instead, I am on the board of a local group called the Upper Gila Watershed Alliance, and we’re working hard to reintroduce the otter to the Gila River (way overdue), prevent a foolish diversion on the river, and regulate the use of off-road vehicles in the national forest. I am on my town’s Mayor’s Advisory Committee on Climate Protection, and we have just gotten stimulus money to set up an Office of Sustainability—to weatherize buildings, promote solar energy, and reduce the town’s emission of greenhouse gases. I teach Nature Writing at the nearby university, and my students are producing some awfully nice essays. I am on another board to reduce hunger in Grant County through neighborhood gardens and a Food Security Center with energy-efficient greenhouses, a permaculture system of farming, and a commercial kitchen open to the community. We got federal money for that, too. I’d give up a nonessential body part to keep President Obama in power for another six years. I would even canvas again in Buckhorn, New Mexico (and that was a pretty terrible experience). I am happy doing everything I do because it’s mostly fun and it makes me feel better about over-consuming resources and not living as simply as I could.


I would be the first to admit I’m a flawed human being. I fly in airplanes. I drive a car. I’m part of the problem as much as the solution. At this point, I may be irrelevant. Maybe nothing I do now, good or bad, matters any more.


But I’m not giving up. I’m not ready to consign the human race to ashes. We’re a young species. Maybe we’re too smart for our own good. Maybe we suffer from an addictive personality. I think of my own children and feel a motherly compassion. I think of how much I love my children. I think of how much I love my life, the beauty all around me, the curve of cottonwood trees following the river, shafts of light and flat-bottomed clouds in a sky so gorgeous I almost fall to my knees and sing my own version of Hallelujah. I’m not giving up.


The apocalypse? Not in my backyard.

Friday, July 2, 2010

Radical Renaissance

Radical Renaissance: Writing in the Twenty-first Century

First I am going to talk about my life as a creative writer and then I am going to talk about yours.

I am one of those people who wanted to be a writer when she was eight years old. Well, a number of people of all ages have this compulsion, and at some point in our lives most of us wonder why that is.

It begins with the sheer joy and fun of making up a story. I am going to quote a bit now from the writer C.S. Lewis who, in turn, is talking about J.R. Tolkien and the psychologist Carl Jung. Lewis is speaking specifically of fairy stories or fantasy which is exactly what I wanted to write when I was in the fourth grade. But I think the idea that there are primal and substantive reasons behind the act of writing applies to every kind of creative work—essays, nonfiction, all of it. This quote was written, by the way, in 1963 and you will have to forgive some old-fashioned pronouns:

“According to Tolkien, the appeal of the fairy story lies in the fact that man there most fully exercises his function as a ‘subcreator;’ not, as they love to say now, making a ‘comment upon life,’ but making so far as possible a subordinate world of his own. Since, in Tolkien’s view, this is one of man’s proper functions, delight naturally arises whenever it is successfully performed. For Jung, fairy tale liberates the archetypes which dwell in the collective unconscious and when we read a good fairy tale we are obeying the old precept, “Know thyself.’”

I am reading this quote mainly for that wonderful phrase: delight naturally arises. That’s how I feel about writing. About writing a short story or a novel, or about writing a nonfiction essay or book. Delight naturally arises. The joy of creating a new world. A subcreator. The ability to be everything in that story--a king, a fox, a leaf in the wind. And the almost mystical pleasure of having all those parts integrated into a shaped whole. Everything is one thing. The joy of breaking free of your personal limitations. The joy of getting outside your ego. The joy of creativity. The joy of flight. The joy of play. Delight naturally arises.

This alone is reason enough to write. But there are other compelling benefits. I could also say that for me, as a child, and later as a young woman without much economic or social status, writing was a way to be seen in the world. Writing is about having someone else read your work. Writing depends on that exchange between reader and writer. Writing is about having a voice that is heard. Writing is about the desire to connect to people. Writing is about the desire to be part of a cultural conversation. And so, yes, writing is also about the desire to influence people. Writing can certainly be about ambition or the need for approval.

Finally, and most significantly in the larger arc of my life, writing has become a way of thinking and feeling and being in the world. Writing is a way of becoming my best self. Writing my thoughts helps clarify them. Moreover, writing is a way to actually generate thought. Writing is not transcription. I don’t have some answer which I am then copying onto the page. I write out of a question and the process of writing leads me to an answer, sometimes through the research, sometimes through the very act of writing. Because writing is a dynamic process that takes place on the page. Neurons are firing. Synapses are snapping. There is energy, action, movement. Writing dislodges things in my mind. It sets things adrift. It brings new ideas together. It makes new connections. And as much as writing is about ideas and abstraction and thought, writing is also about feeling. Writing deepens my engagement with the world. Writing might well liberate archetypes and become a path to individuation. Writing, at the very least, is a way to organize and translate. Writing is certainly a process of exploration and discovery.

In my public life as a writer, in my twenties, I published short stories and essays in small literary journals. I began to write articles for commercial magazines and discovered the thrill of getting paid for writing. Meanwhile I had started teaching writing skills here at Western New Mexico University. I was a hired hand on a few books, including Built to Last, an architectural history of Silver City which some of you know and a high school biography of Frederick Douglas. The first book that I would call my own, however, was a collection of personal essays called Songs of the Fluteplayer, published by Addison-Wesley in 1991. I was 37 years old. Not a prodigy. But a steady plodder. That determined little girl. Once I “broke into publishing,” I became something of a hardened criminal. In the next sixteen years, I published nine books: seven creative nonfiction books with New York publishers, one adult novel with the University of New Mexico Press, and one children’s fantasy—that old dream of the eight-year-old—with Knopf Books for Young Readers. As I had been told to do so by the scholar and mythologist Joseph Campbell, I “followed my bliss” and I was somehow given the freedom to write about whatever interested me, in my case, mostly having to do with science, nature, and our relationship to the land.

I have also been told by the people who asked me here today to read a bit from my work during this talk and I’m going to stop and do that briefly—to show you some specific examples of my bliss as a writer. What I will read from is the very first page of my last four books. This will take ten minutes only.

* * * *
I wrote Anatomy of a Rose based on a question, which is the generative source of all my books, questions and not answers. I wanted to know why flowers were so compelling and I also wanted to know what exactly they were doing, their secret life. This was prompted by one of those monsoon seasons here in New Mexico when walking through a meadow or grassland is like walking through a bouquet, all that color, all that scent, all those shapes, and none of it meant for us. Although this book is about pollination ecology, I begin in a chapter called “The Physics of Beauty” with what draws us emotionally to flowers:

READING
“My grandmother in Kansas had a large garden which she used to provide flowers for my father’s grave. We would cut bouquets of snapdragons, zinnias, and cosmos and put them in a coffee can set in the ground near the headstone. My father died when he was thirty-two-years old. Where I live in Silver City, New Mexico, parents decorate the graves of children with holiday ornaments: Easter eggs, Christmas trees, a plastic wreath, a Valentine heart. Some parents do this years and years after a child has died.

My grandmother put flowers on graves until she died at the age of ninety-one: great flowing marigolds for her youngest boy Milburn Grant Apt, weighty white chrysanthemums for her husband Oley Samuel Apt.

Why do we give flowers to the dead? Why do we give flowers to the grieving, the sick, the people we love? Fifty thousand years ago, the Neanderthals, too, buried their relatives with hyacinth and knapweed.

What are we offering? Flowers are not symbols of power. Flowers are too brief, too frail, to elicit much hope of eternity. In truth, flowers are far removed from the human condition and from all human hope. For a moment, in that moment, flowers are simply beautiful.”
END OF READING

I started out knowing that flowers are beautiful. They gladden our hearts. I learned, of course, that flowers run the world. Almost everything we and other mammals eat requires a plant that uses a flower for reproduction. In fact, flowers are powerful. Flowers can be brutal. And without flowers, we would all die.

The next book An Obsession with Butterflies begins:

READING
“In physics, string theory suggests that there are more than four dimensions, perhaps ten in all. These extra dimensions are curled up into a very small space, big enough only for subatomic particles, or tiny loops of vibrating “string.” The theory does not rule out more dimensions, perhaps in the area of time. These dimensions, here but not here, exist outside our range of perception.

Adding butterflies to your life is like adding another dimension. The air trembles with the movement of wings. The approach of a White Admiral. The aerial dance of sulphurs. A painted Lady. A Mourning Cloak. All this existed before, has always existed, but you were unaware. You didn’t see. At various times and places, in winter, or on a busy street, the air is still and butterflies are impossible. Yet their presence remains, like one of those other ten dimensions. You’ve added this to your life.

Butterflies became present in my life one summer afternoon by a river in New Mexico. A Western A Western Tiger Swallowtail dipped by my face. About three inches across, it seemed much larger. Its lemon yellow wings were striped improbably and fluted in black. They filliped into a long forked tail with spots of red and blue. Smelling nothing of interest, the butterfly floated away, leaving me pleased and agitated, as though I had been handed a gift I didn’t deserve. Could this, all along, be a simple truth, beauty without cause or consequence?
The Western Tiger Swallowtail was patrolling for a mate, avoiding birds, and on the lookout for nectar or carrion juices. Like most butterflies, it tasted with its feet and smelled with its antenna. Its genitalia had eyes, light-sensitive cells. It had been alive for a day. It would live another month.

Later I became enamored with the tiniest of butterflies—thumbnail-sized Gray Hairstreaks in my peripheral vision, on a weed or fence, common as a mailbox. But wait until they settle and show their underside. Scallops of mango orange. Patterns of blue and russet. A crescent, a dash, a language in code.

In the second movie of the Jurassic Park series, actor Jeff Goldblum is once again trapped on an island filled with dinosaurs. As the other characters admire a herd of triceratops, Goldblum says drily, “Oooooh. Aaaah. That’s how it always starts. But later there is screaming and running.”
Ooooh. Aaaah. That’s how it starts. Later there are guidebooks and more guidebooks and picnics in meadows and screaming and running. Some of us become obsessed with butterflies, although I would never include myself in that category.

Not like those other people.”
END OF READING

What I learned from writing this book was also a surprise to me. Because butterflies are not especially important pollinators, not like that engine of pollination the bee or even their cousins, the moths. If all the butterflies went extinct, so would a few flowers. But not many. Butterflies are less about ecology and more about grace. Butterflies are a gift.

Finally, Hunger: An Unnatural History was a book I had wanted to write since I was pregnant with my first child, awash in that flood of maternal hormones, wringing my hands over the fact that children were going hungry in the world, that children were dying of hunger. It took me twenty years to convince a publisher to support me in this book and that was mainly because I stopped wringing my hands and approached the subject from a broader perspective. This book begins with the science of hunger in your body, what happens when you skip breakfast, when you fast for three days, when you fast for thirty days. I explore the voluntary-- cultural, spiritual, and social--uses of hunger before I start talking about involuntary hunger, before I get to those starving children.

READING
“Hunger is a country we enter every day, like a commuter across a friendly border. We wake up hungry. We endure that for a matter of minutes before we break our fast. Later we may skip lunch and miss dinner. We may not eat for religious reasons. We may not eat before surgery. We may go on a three-day fast to cleanse ourselves of toxins and boredom. We may go on a longer fast to imitate Christ in the desert—or to lose weight. We may go on a hunger strike. If we are lost at sea, if we have lost our job, if we are at war, we may not be hungry by choice.

Our body is a circle of messages: communication, feedback, updates. Hunger and satiety are the most basic of these. Every day, we learn more about how this system works. We know what hormones run through the blood screaming, “Eat!” We know which ones follow murmuring, “Enough.” We know that it is relatively easy to repress the signal for enough. A gene malfunctions, and a three-year-old girl weighs one hundred pounds: her body does not tell her when to stop eating. That signal is complexly influenced by genetics, chemistry, and culture. For many of us, it has become blurry. Our body doesn’t give us the news or doesn’t give it with enough emphasis.

The signal for hunger is much, much harder to turn off. We are omnivores with an over-sized brain that requires a lot of energy. We are not specialized in how we get our food. Instead, we are always willing, always alert, always ready with a rock or digging stick. We are happy to snack all day long. We are particularly drawn to the high-caloric bit of fat around the deer's kidney and the sweet taste of berries. Our love of fat and sugar has been associated with the same chemical responses that underlie our addictions to alcohol and drugs, and this cycle of addiction may have developed as a way to encourage eating behavior. We hunger easily, we find food, we get a chemical reward. Then we’re hungry again. That’s good because the next time we look for food, we may not find it. Better keep eating while you can.

Human beings evolved for a bad day of hunting, a bad week of hunting, a bad crop, a bad year of crops. We were hungry even in that first Garden of Eden, what some anthropologists call the "Paleoterrific," a world full of large animals and relatively few people. Paleolithic bones and teeth occasionally show an unnatural pause in growth, a sign of food shortage. Our diet didn’t get better as our population grew and the big-game species died out. In the Mesolithic, we foraged more intensively for plants and hunted smaller game with new tools like nets and snares. In the Neolithic, we invented agriculture, which sparked the rise of cities. There is no evidence that any of these changes reduced the odds of starvation or malnutrition. A more common trend seems to be that small-game hunters were shorter and less nourished than their Paleolithic ancestors, farmers less healthy than hunters-and-gatherers, and city-dwellers less robust than farmers. We just kept getting hungrier.

It's no wonder we are programmed to pound the table and demand dinner. The exceptions to this are usually extreme: infection, disease, a terminal illness. For most of us, at regular times, the body shouts, “Feed me, damn it!” Deprived, the body sulks. The body exacts its petty revenge. Finally, with extraordinary cunning, with something that approaches grace, the body turns to the business of the day, beginning what scientists call “the metabolic gymnastics” by which it can survive without food.

If you are a healthy, well-nourished twenty-five-year-old man, you can live this way for sixty days. You can live much longer if you have more fat to break down. The rhythms of your life will change: your heartbeat, your hormones, your thoughts. Your brain will switch to a new energy source, something rare and wonderful, something only humans do and a few lactating ungulates. You will start consuming yourself, but precisely, carefully, with such orchestration.

You are built to be hungry and you are built to withstand hunger. You know exactly what to do.”
END OF READING

Standing in the Light: My Life as a Pantheist was my next book. It’s about everything. And I think I will save that now for my conclusion.

None of these books sold particularly well. You are not looking at a household name or at someone who has made much money from writing. You are looking at someone who has had a lot of cheap thrills. The thrill of doing research, talking to scientists, getting outside your own world, getting all those books from Interlibrary Loan. The thrill of seeing your words translated into Chinese, becoming entirely alien and separate from you, and then imagining those people in China or Korea or Russia reading your work. You are looking at a writer who has felt very lucky. Very happy.

I tell you this not merely to establish my authority today but as the background to my current fall from grace. My world, the world of traditional publishing, is in crisis. My last book came out in 2008 and by now I should be deep in a new contract, a new and exciting book project. I am not. Instead, a year ago, my New York publishers dropped me. My agent, who is now sending out two children’s manuscripts and shopping around a new nonfiction proposal, is not optimistic. I am not optimistic. I don’t see an immediate future for me as a book writer. I don’t know, yet, how to feed my addiction to writing books. I don’t always wake up in the morning with the same excitement of the day. On some days, I don’t know what to do with myself.

I am not alone. Other mid-list writers like myself are also being dropped by their publishers. Other literary agents are not selling work. The staff at most publishing houses is being drastically cut. The remaining editors say no to almost everything that isn’t a slam-dunk commercial success. Small independent bookstores are going out of business, and even the bigger chains like Borders are not something you should invest in. Newspapers are going bankrupt and downsizing, and the traditional venue for book reviews has suddenly disappeared. Print, as we like to say now, is in decline.

I’ll just state quickly some of the obvious reasons. The internet has made it much harder to sell new books. There are over 20,000 book sellers on the net and almost all of these are selling used books. There are websites where hundreds of thousands of readers can swap books through the mail. Then there is Kindle selling an electronic book for ten dollars. Last year, the sale of electronic books was greater than the sale of print books. Essentially a product that can require considerable time and expense can now be acquired at very little expense. In various ways, better technology has undermined the traditional form of writing as commerce.

Traditional publishers themselves are part of the problem. Many of the big corporate-owned publishers came to rely on a model where they paid huge advances for potential best-sellers that didn’t pay off. Publishers also pay enormous costs in operation—particularly for that choice office building and prime real estate in New York. At the same time, publishers weren’t paying attention to new forms of marketing on the internet. When I suggested a blog tour for my last book, my New York publicist said she had no experience with that—now, when someone from Silver City knows more about an industry than the industry does, that’s a sign of something going wrong. In truth, the digital revolution—a world where you can read a book online or order a book printed at an Expresso Book Machine, where the word viral is a good thing—all this has happened so fast and is continuing to happen so fast that tradition-bound publishing just couldn’t and didn’t keep up.

Most of this, by the way, was happening before the economic downturn. The demise of print publishing can not simply be blamed on villainous bankers and stock traders.

And none of this means that people are reading less. A 2008 survey by the National Endowment for the Arts actually says that people are reading 7% more literature since 2002, with the biggest increases in young adults 18-24, and in Hispanic-Americans and African Americans.
People are reading more, and people are writing more. People are writing blogs about their midlife crisis and their parenting and their spirituality and their discovery of native plants or dinosaur tracks. People are writing romance novels and science fiction novels and mystery novels and literary novels and self-publishing them as print-on-demand books. Last year more of these books were produced than by traditional methods of publishing. Maybe the self-published writer does all the work of getting her manuscript ready and then pays nothing for a commercial service to give her book an ISBN number and put it up for sale on the internet. The service then takes a percentage of the sales. Or maybe, and more likely, the author buys from this publishing service editorial help or has them design the cover and page lay-out or contracts for marketing and publicity in the hope of getting more readers than family and friends.

Bottom line: you can write a book now and you can see it in print, spending as much or as little as you like. You can also join a writing community online, a community of beginning writers who will give you support, encouragement, advice, and more readers. You can enter online writing contests. You can do the increasingly well-known NaNoWriMo, which stands for National Novel Writing Month, which happens every November and which in 2008 had 120,000 participants. More than 20,000 of those finished their goal of writing a 50,000 word novel in 30 days.
Amazing. The democratization of writing. This is not the traditional and elitist model of East and West Coast publishers deciding who gets to write and who gets to be read. This is you getting to write and you getting read.

Let me give you an example of my daughter’s experience last Christmas.

First I’ll quickly define fan fiction, a genre in which writers take existing literary worlds—from TV shows to ancient Greek myths—and build on those characters and plots. Often these writers are young adults who are most happy subverting these worlds, playing with gender roles and sexual orientation, crashing together realities by having Harry Potter meet up with Captain Kirk, throwing in some Japanese anime for spice, mixing and matching, churning and spinning, playing out new fantasies, new directions, new possibilities. It’s wildly creative and purely fun. It can be erotic, outrageous, and combative. It is outside commerce, not for profit, and it is enormously successful. The best know fanfiction site hosts millions of stories in dozens of languages, stories that are archived and read and reread.

In this brave new world, a group of people run a website called Yuletide where fanfiction authors post a wishlist of stories they would like to read and then agree to write one such story themselves, a minimum of 1000 words, with all the stories posted on December 25. This is a secret Santa exchange. Over Thanksgiving break, my daughter Maria described the story she wanted and got her assignment of what to write—in this case, a continuation of the anime movie Spirited Away. Maria had some intense days of writing, she consulted some editors—me and her best friend. She rewrote the piece, revised a little more. Then she sent the story off. On December 25, it was posted, along with 3500 other stories, got 603 hits, with 13 comments or reviews, and 10 people who thought it was the best story of the week, the best story ever. She got the entire psychological experience of being a writer in a month. The joy of creation. The more subtle pleasure of revision. The fun of being read. A few book reviews. Praise and reward. Then it was time for her to go back to graduate school. I have to say that I watched on with envy.

I have segued now from my life as a writer into your life as a writer—not necessarily fan fiction, but all these other possibilities. Some of you already know about these possibilities. Some of you are already blogging, already writing haiku as twitter, already thinking about the memoirs you want to write for your children and grandchildren, already designing your cover art. Some of you have already discovered that it’s ten times more fun to wake up in the morning and write your own murder mystery than it is to read one.

Some of you are suspicious. Self-publishing, vanity press—well, look at those words. Self. Vanity. You distrust new forms of creativity that are not vetted by outside sources, that do not have a collective and social stamp of approval. You value the way publishers have served as a filter, protecting you from bad writing. You know that there is a difference between the published writer who has served years of apprenticeship, who has burnt her financial bridges by getting an MFA instead of going to law school, who has suffered through scores of rejection letters, written drawers of drafts, fought her way through angst and self-doubt—that dogged little girl, moi!--to be finally selected for publishing through a competitive process. You know there is a difference between that published writer and the writer who pays Create Space to put it on the net for sale. You also value work in terms of commerce. You see money as a validation. Real writers get paid.

And you are right, on many levels. In most complex situations there is room for being right and wrong at the same time. The democratization of writing, the access to being read as a writer, means there will be more amateur and undisciplined writing in the world. The Google search engine doesn’t distinguish quality. For a long time, perhaps, everything will seem a muddle and a mish mash. The question of how serious writers can make money on their work is still up in the air. The question of who will now decide to commit their lives to writing is still up in the air. The form in which we choose to read is still up in the air.

Eventually, things will sort out. We’ll find ways to value and vet good writing on the internet. We’ll have new filters. We will still have blockbusters, books that we all read together, that touch us collectively. We will still have a range of writers, from serious to celebrity to amateur. We will actually have a broader range. We will have more specialized niches, more curious books on even curiouser subjects. We will have a greater diversity of writing.

If we don’t know exactly what we will lose in this future, we already know what we will gain. You know that already because either you are secretly writing a book or you are going to go home and write a book, inspired by my talk today. We have opened up writing. The floodgates of creativity. There’s no turning back.

As a writer, I may have temporarily lost my job. I don’t expect you to feel sorry for me. I still have a good job, teaching here at Western New Mexico University. The joy of writing is not contingent on publishing. The sky is still a deep New Mexican blue. The birds are still singing. Pollen is in the air.

As a teacher of writing skills, I am in more demand than ever. For twelve years now I have been teaching MFA students at Antioch University in Los Angeles at a low-residency program. I don’t know what is going to happen to those students. They are entering the new world with old world expectations of publishing. More pertinently, in the past four years, I have started teaching online graduate students here at WNMU who are getting their Masters of Arts in Interdisciplinary Studies. One of these disciplines is writing and the enrollment is steadily increasing. Right now my Writing Fiction class includes students from San Diego, Tallahassee, Deming, and rural areas throughout the country. These people want to join the radical renaissance of the twenty-first century. They want to write their books, their dreams—they want to write themselves into their best selves--and they want to learn as much as they can learn about the art and craft of writing and rewriting. Some of these students dream the old dream of “making it big,” commercial success, the next John Grisham. They equate writing with a career or a bank statement. But more are writing from the heart for the heart. They are writing to clarify their thoughts and to feel more deeply and to live more intensely in the present. They are writing so that that they can feel that joy of waking up and thinking, “Oooh, I get to work on Chapter Fourteen today.” I get to write that scene where Sophie reveals her love for Judy or the cybernetic Polish-speaking goldfish flies to the moon or the evil politician undercuts health care and then dies of blood poisoning. I get to be anything I want, a king or a fox or a leaf in the wind.

I titled this “Writing in the 21rst Century” and of course that was a lie, designed to lure you here and make you think you were going to learn something about the future. In truth, somewhat more knowledgeable than I am might be able to predict writing five years out--but probably not. The CEOs of major publishing houses, the editors, the agents, the writers, the social critics—we are all watching the future happen. New business arrangements, new marketing strategies, new technologies. Imagine yourself standing by the microwave and waiting for that mini-bag of popcorn to finish. Pop, pop, pop, pop. That’s one image of the publishing world. Another might be the sound of a balloon deflating.

In truth—and this is less a parenthetical aside than you think, this is an appropriate if sudden turn of thought--I believe in climate change. I believe we are facing some environmental consequences to our actions such that business as usual is not going to be possible thirty or forty or forty years from now, and so my vision of the mid to late 21rst century is really more about the apocalypse than a new renaissance.

But not even that, not even my greatest fears for us, for our world, for our children and grandchildren, changes my belief in the inherent power and joy and instinct of writing. Because although I may not know much, I do know that we are the story-telling animal. We are the animal for whom imaginative play became an adaptive trait that fostered flexibility and opportunism. In our long developmental time as children, we learn through trial-and-error, through games, through the exercise of creativity. We are the animal who does art and who needs art—from the nearly constant art-making of the Paleolithic hunters and gatherers with their cave paintings and beaded clothes and engraved tools and, quite probably, stories around the campfire—to the nearly constant art of today with our books and our movies and our music, our doodles, our crafts. Through our art, we engage in the world, we order the world, we fall in love with the world. Through our art, through our stories, we reach out to each other. That’s the radical renaissance and, of course, it is not radical at all, and it is not a renaissance in the sense of something new: it is simply who we are being who we are.

Delight naturally arising.

I am going to conclude with the first two pages of Standing in the Light. This is a history of pantheism which is perhaps best defined by the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius when he said “Everything is connected and the web is holy” or by Frank Lloyd Wright who said, “I believe in God only I spell it Nature.” This is a history of pantheism in Western thought from the early Greeks, the pre-Socratics to the American transcendentalists, but I began as I usually do with an intimate experience, with where I enter the subject. Ironically, I suppose this passage is also about silence whereas I have been talking for the last forty minutes mostly about speech and words.

READING
“In the summer of 1996, I sat on my porch steps in the small town of Silver City, New Mexico, trying to decide if I should become a Quaker. I had attended my local Meeting off and on for twelve years but had not yet written my official letter asking for membership. Should I write that letter now? I was forty-two years old, a wife and mother. I felt anchored in my life. I felt the sun on my face. I felt the rough concrete against my legs. I watched an ant move across the sidewalk. Was I ready, for the first time, to join an organized religion? Did I have in fact any religious belief, or was I mainly attracted to Quaker culture and history?

The Quakers in my Meeting are also known as unprogrammed Quakers and Universalists. Following the earliest tradition of Friends, we have no scripture, no preacher, no creed. Instead, we practice silence, the act of sitting in a circle, saying nothing, and waiting--waiting for the Light. The Light is a deliberately broad concept. Among Universalist Friends, the Light can take the shape of Christ, the son of a heavenly Father, or the shape of Buddha, a human prince who enlightened himself and preached the Middle Way. Or the Light can take no shape at all and serve only as metaphor, a substitute for the ineffable. In my Meeting, how each Friend defines the Light is a personal choice. We conform to Quakerly ways of opening and closing silence. We share similar ideas about social justice and nonviolence. We wait for the Light. We do not ask much of our members. We do ask this.

In front of me, on my porch step, was a sidewalk, a patch of grass, a broad strip of asphalt, more sidewalk, a stone wall, a pine tree and, higher above, electrical wires. Cars drove by. A raven gurgled, liquid and insistent. In the blue sky, white clouds floated above brown hills. “Well,” I said to myself, “the Light is all this, I suppose, these steps, this concrete, this ant, that raven. The weft and warp. It is,” I gestured, “the street.”

I did not have the perspicuity to shout, “Pantheism.” I would do that a few hours later, looking at a dictionary. Pantheism is the belief that the universe, with all its existing laws and properties, is an interconnected whole which we can rightly consider sacred. At that moment, I had decided to call the wholeness of the universe the Light. I had decided to believe in a holiness that was not confined to any one thing but immanent in everything. God was in the raven and concrete not as a supernatural being but as the miracle of raven-ness and hydrogen molecules and light waves bouncing off a hard surface to enter my soft receptive eye--an image reflected upside down which my brain instantly turned right, my brain humming with insight, adrenaline in the blood, water vapor in the sky, all of it an amazement, all of it numinous. Suddenly, on those porch steps, I was so pleased, so grateful to be part of this existence.

Soon after, I joined my Quaker Meeting, or the Religious Society of Friends, or more simply the Gila Friends since our membership extends across the watershed of the Gila River in southwestern New Mexico, surrounded by the Gila National Forest and Gila Wilderness in a specific landscape of ponderosa pine, juniper, oak, prickly pear, grama grass, and yucca. It is a landscape of transition, between conifer forest, grassland, and high desert, a southern range for elk, a northern for coatimundi. It is a place where not enough rain falls and then too much, flooding the arroyos. Very few people in our Meeting are originally from this area. Most of us have come here just to be here, our home of choice.”
END OF READING

Thank you so much for having me here today.