This book is yet another view into our epoch; the Anthropocene. It's clear that this term is a growing in popularity when it comes to the detrimental environmental issues today. Human impacts are increasing which is causing this to be such a serious issue.
If we analyze earth's situation at this point, we are currently destroying it, day by day; however, even though Haraway mentions this, she still has her opinions on the situation. From my understanding, she basically agrees with the fact that humans are causing climate change and other environmental factors that are dangerous, but our demise is basically meant to happen and there is no way that we can escape it. We can if we change most things we do. But, the main problem is our parasitic relationship with the environment.
She uses a spider to basically give a clear understanding of what she is trying to say. The term Chthulucene is a play on the species Pimoa chtulhu. She uses this as a figure of speech in order to bring forth the fact that humans are not separate from other organisms, we are all literally interwoven. i can totally agree with this. It;s not like humans have such a bigger niche in the environment. Each organism. living or non-living serve or served a purpose. There is no segregation when it comes to this.
I have stressed before the negative impacts that capitalist has pushed on our environment. It's clear that the "Chthulucene" is not clear to them. I think a slight change can be made if it was. We need to learn to establish a mutulistic symbiotic relationship with earth instead of being selfish.
With Haraway being proficient in feminine studies, this brings light to most feminists and those interested in hearing different opinions on our current epoch. This also brings along a hint of criticism because of her reasoning but she defends herself. Humans would always stay with trouble because we continuously destroy the environment and be intertwined with everything bad that happens. We need to know our role and stick with it; this role is not to damage the planet.
Do you think there's any reason why we can't acknowledge the human impact on our planetary ecosystem by designating our time the Anthropocene, the time of Humans, AND also acknowledge the intricate interrelationships between humans and non-human nature? Seems like a false dichotomy to me. If we're really going to "stay with the trouble" in the sense of persevering through adversity to a solution, won't we need to accept both perspectives?
ReplyDelete"She eschews referring to our current epoch as the Anthropocene, preferring to conceptualize it as what she calls the Chthulucene, as it more aptly and fully describes our epoch as one in which the human and nonhuman are inextricably linked in tentacular practices. The Chthulucene, Haraway explains, requires sym-poiesis, or making-with, rather than auto-poiesis, or self-making. Learning to stay with the trouble of living and dying together on a damaged earth will prove more conducive to the kind of thinking that would provide the means to building more livable futures."
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28369185-staying-with-the-trouble