6. Passing Through
←- →
Humans are often seen as destructive forces in the places we inhabit. This is, in part, because human beings consume the resources required for human life, and through our presence we can render fertile land barren, forests empty and fisheries devoid of life. The creation of human dwellings destroys the original contours of the land and renders once wild environments unrecognizable. Because cities take this type of transformation to the ultimate extreme some people view them as the emblem of environmental destruction. If the presence of human beings destroys the environment what could be more destructive than the intensive population density of cities? This argument is flawed in two ways: first it neglects the fact that the density of cities allows for more efficient land use-- not only in terms of people's homes, but also in terms of the efficiency of use of agricultural lands that support the city. It is also flawed because it fails to recognize the positive influence of people on the places they inhabit when those places are urban and made for human interaction. It also fails to recognise the city as a kind of natural environment.
Our presence anywhere changes the place. In a forest we will frighten animals and disturb whatever balance that environment has achieved. It is possible to live in sustainable harmony with this type of environment, but most human cultures have found it quite difficult-- there is a difference between finding harmony with the environment and being at the mercy of it and with a few notable exceptions people who live in direct contact with the raw environment have either eroded their environments or failed to thrive. In a city, by contrast, our actions are in harmony with the environment. In fact our presence in the city makes the city a better place. When we interact with people we give them all the more reason to love the city. The city in enlivened by the presence of humans. The web of trade and interdependency between the city and the country allows all participants to (potentially) concentrate on using the places they cultivate in more effective ways rather than trying to extract everything required for human existence from a single patch of land. The global awareness produced by the international populations of cities has lead not only to greater efficiency but also to an increasing awareness of the limits of the environment and in a few industries a shift to sustainable use of some resources.
Just as the positive effect of humans on places, like the city, is often overlooked so too are the potential negative effects of how people use urban places. The destructive nature of clear-cutting a forest is obvious, but less obvious is the destruction wrought by speeding through "bad urban neighborhoods" with car doors locked. Destructive acts in urban environments are often overlooked because we fail to see the urban fabric as a natural environment worthy of preservation. One of the most overlooked destructive acts, especially with regard to the spiritual energy of a place, is simply passing through that place without acknowledging its existence. Think back on your day and consider the places you crossed, did you make that place better through your presence or did you merely "pass through?" What did you take from the place? What did you leave behind?
Consider especially the places you only passed through. If you did it in a car you left behind nothing but exhaust and noise. Could you have instead found some purpose for that place rather than using it as a conduit?
The act of passing through places drains energy from these places. It is an insult to the inhabitants of the place. For the urban naturalist it is to be avoided at all costs. We should instead try to make a connection to the urban places we encounter since our presence in these kinds of places can be inherently positive.
Last: 5. Living Sacred Places
Next: 7. Graffiti
From: The Urban Naturalist.
Humans are often seen as destructive forces in the places we inhabit. This is, in part, because human beings consume the resources required for human life, and through our presence we can render fertile land barren, forests empty and fisheries devoid of life. The creation of human dwellings destroys the original contours of the land and renders once wild environments unrecognizable. Because cities take this type of transformation to the ultimate extreme some people view them as the emblem of environmental destruction. If the presence of human beings destroys the environment what could be more destructive than the intensive population density of cities? This argument is flawed in two ways: first it neglects the fact that the density of cities allows for more efficient land use-- not only in terms of people's homes, but also in terms of the efficiency of use of agricultural lands that support the city. It is also flawed because it fails to recognize the positive influence of people on the places they inhabit when those places are urban and made for human interaction. It also fails to recognise the city as a kind of natural environment.
Our presence anywhere changes the place. In a forest we will frighten animals and disturb whatever balance that environment has achieved. It is possible to live in sustainable harmony with this type of environment, but most human cultures have found it quite difficult-- there is a difference between finding harmony with the environment and being at the mercy of it and with a few notable exceptions people who live in direct contact with the raw environment have either eroded their environments or failed to thrive. In a city, by contrast, our actions are in harmony with the environment. In fact our presence in the city makes the city a better place. When we interact with people we give them all the more reason to love the city. The city in enlivened by the presence of humans. The web of trade and interdependency between the city and the country allows all participants to (potentially) concentrate on using the places they cultivate in more effective ways rather than trying to extract everything required for human existence from a single patch of land. The global awareness produced by the international populations of cities has lead not only to greater efficiency but also to an increasing awareness of the limits of the environment and in a few industries a shift to sustainable use of some resources.
Just as the positive effect of humans on places, like the city, is often overlooked so too are the potential negative effects of how people use urban places. The destructive nature of clear-cutting a forest is obvious, but less obvious is the destruction wrought by speeding through "bad urban neighborhoods" with car doors locked. Destructive acts in urban environments are often overlooked because we fail to see the urban fabric as a natural environment worthy of preservation. One of the most overlooked destructive acts, especially with regard to the spiritual energy of a place, is simply passing through that place without acknowledging its existence. Think back on your day and consider the places you crossed, did you make that place better through your presence or did you merely "pass through?" What did you take from the place? What did you leave behind?
Consider especially the places you only passed through. If you did it in a car you left behind nothing but exhaust and noise. Could you have instead found some purpose for that place rather than using it as a conduit?
The act of passing through places drains energy from these places. It is an insult to the inhabitants of the place. For the urban naturalist it is to be avoided at all costs. We should instead try to make a connection to the urban places we encounter since our presence in these kinds of places can be inherently positive.
Last: 5. Living Sacred Places
Next: 7. Graffiti
From: The Urban Naturalist.