My relationship to nature is at a distance, particuarly with things that grow, such as plants.
I have never felt at one with nature. What's more, I do not think this is ever possible. I think, in fact, that I fear nature, or, rather, the possibility of contact with nature (even though I believe this is never possible). Perhaps it is also because I live in the city. In the city there are some trees, parks, flower-beds (usually cordoned off to prevent contact with the public), but generally there is a lack of nature, and an overabundance of concrete. this may be a contributing factor to my inability to relate to nature. I cannot touch an insect, I cannot sit on the grass, I cannot have trees towering over me. I can't even pick up a leaf. This is a sickness of modern times that I am unwilling to try to cure (an altogether other sickness). At the same time, I would say that those who believe that they have crossed the boundary line of the natural world are deluded, and slightly arrogant.
One of the most uncomfortable things I have ever seen is an advert for a moisturizing cream, which took as its subject a dry autumn leaf, and 'cured' this by putting the said moisturizer on it. The image on screen was then one of a very soft leaf that still had youth on its side
When it comes to rocks I am also fearful. They are so strong and sturdy, that even the strongest waves smack against them without causing the slightest damage. Who could stand up to that? Not that I long for a confrontation with the rock - I just don't want to get involved.
The expression of someone being a "rock" is meant to be one that is applied to a person who is strong during difficulties, doesn't weep during another's sad time but lets waves of tears of the other crash against them. What about the cold, unmoving, unaffected side of the "rock"? This is the problem when humans try to apply nature to themselves - all kinds of difficulties arise.
The fear of the sea is so obvious there is no point in discussing it.
No comments:
Post a Comment