Do we really own our property? Do we truly have ownership of the amount of land that we pay for, build homes on, and live in? Does the sum of money that we take out of our own bank accounts really account for the plot of dirt and grass that we're granted the deed to? Everyone does it eventually (buying homes/property) but do people realize that the land wasn't for anyone to sell in the first place? Nobody truly owns an area of land. It's not like buying a pen and owning it, if someone bought a pen they would probably use up all of the ink of the pen and then throw it away when they're done. They're done using the pen and have no need for it so they get rid of it because they can because they paid for it. What about land? Can you just throw away land once you don't want to live there anymore? No, because that land will most likely be there once you're ten feet underground, unless some sort of explosion happens, but let's not think that negatively. So if you don't own your land then who does? Nature owns it. As a society, we basically pay thousands of dollars to borrow land for a relatively short amount of time (compared to how long the has already been there and will continue to be there).
So if nature is the true owner of "our" property, then what's stopping it from taking it back? The answer is, nothing. Nature is always actively trying to take back its land. This book has made me realize that all the "bad" things that happen to people's homes, such as termites or mold, is just nature taking back what belongs to it. And our expensive efforts of trying to stop these happenings, are only slowing down nature's course, NOT stopping it. Speaking of our EXPENSIVE endeavors, Alan Weisman reflects this costly notion well when he says, "Back when they told you what your house would cost, nobody mentioned what you'd also be paying so that nature wouldn't repossess it long before the bank."
What's even worse about nature reclaiming its territory, is that it's happening whether any of us know it or not. As the book graphically explains, "...awful when you see it, worse when you don't, because it's hidden behind a painted wall, munching paper sandwiches of gypsum board, rotting studs and floor joists." Imagine, as you're reading this post, spores are penetrating through the exterior of your house and exploding, resulting in the molding of your walls and the attraction of more bugs. What if there were mushrooms growing in between your walls? One point for nature and zero for humans! But in reality, there's not a lot we can do about it. As humans, we'll always be innovative and build bigger and better homes, continuing to steal land away from nature. But nature will always try to reclaim its territory, even after we're all dead. So in the battle of good and bad, good is nature and we are the bad ones. And guess who always wins?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
To answer your question, nature always wins! I really like this perspective on things. I think that if we "borrow" this land from nature, we should be either improving it or taking better care of it. If you're gonna use this ownership analogy, then can't we also say that we're committing a crime when we damage the earth? We should be treating it with respect, considering we can't live without it. But no, instead, people sometimes spend their entire lives trying to get money and own as much property as possible. I don't see a point in movie stars owning five different mansions, isn't that kind of a waste? It's only going to get worse as time goes on. I agree with your point that even though we advance in technology, nature will always triumph. With our increase in technology, I see a correlation with an increase in pollution and environmental damage. It'll ultimately lead to our downfall, and nature will just take back whats rightfully theirs. It's inevitable; we can only slow down and temporarily prevent nature's influence, but only for so long. And of course, that'll always be the thought pushed to the back of our heads until the day finally comes.
Have you seen the show on the History Channel called "Life After People"? This reminds me a lot of that. http://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people
It really shows that in the end, we are so inferior to nature itself, because we seem to forget that we have not exactly been around forever or even as long as the earth. Couple of billion year old vs thousands of years old, obviously nature has been around so much longer and I think we should learn to respect it because it can always retake what belongs to it. Besides the termites and spores, there's always the tornadoes, wild fires, and floods that just sweep away at our creations that might belong to us, but the land that it sits on does not. It really makes me laugh at how much we protect and fight over something that does not even belong to us.
Sandy I think you ask a really great question, and you offer a very interesting perspective on a common "American Dream" type of life event. We really aren't buying a piece of land. Our name goes on the deed, but it isn't our permanently. It gets sold from person to person, and clearly due to the extreme age of the planet, exists long after the death of the original "owner." And maybe, like the mold covering walls, and termites corrupting wood and foundations, natural disasters and devastations are Earth's way of correcting issues like overcrowding and things like that. Maybe floods and hurricanes and tornadoes exist to create more natural like conditions again when Earth was supreme and didn't have humans trying to challenge that. I'm not saying the world is out to get us, but there is some connection to that idea and the one your author states. Humans like to believe and think we are in control and can prevent nature from doing what nature does - taking over and controlling - by creating pesticides and bigger homes and advancements in building techniques, but ultimately nature will always win. Frankly, its been here alot longer and knows how to play the survival game alot better.
Post a Comment