Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Take Out II (any different?)

8 comments:

Aaron said...

wow... this is disturbing... where did you find it/what is its context? any idea?

elnellis said...

yeah, it's messed up. i'm wondering why that is so strongly my reaction too and the picture below is not disturbing at all.


(i think i found it on a vegan activist website or something, don't remember)

Anonymous said...

phil i think i can jive with your distinction here because when the human kills the seal he is effectively raping it, i.e. taking it's hide to sell to an upscale boutique and leaving all the life giving material to rot. the shark uses everything and must for survival. this is the shark's home and this consuming relationship makes sense. the man had to unnatuarally travel thousands of miles in a machine to invade the home of another species and take away from that eco system in order to transport it to another in which it will not be digested and contribute back to the place in which it came in order to create more of the same.

theres a certain beauty in the shark's need to live and a certain ugliness in the man's luxury of gluttonty. i really appreciate the choice to juxapose these two shots, it's really insightful.

Aaron said...

i agree chuck...
when phil posed the question, my initial thought was that the first picture (although grotesque) is operating within the harmony of nature... the second is certainly operating against it and creating disharmony...

Anonymous said...

my heart breaks at the face of that little seal...in a world where man has everything. why do we also need the life of any living thing?

Anonymous said...

it poses a really good question: where is man's place in the 'natural' world? what role does he play to reap and sow, if any? this was adam's charge after the fall

"To Adam he said,
Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. 18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return"

it feels inevitable that there will be no easy relationship to the earth anymore. we are the dirt, tied to the earth and because of this there will be this struggle, these thorns to make doubt, to see our ways with 'nature' in great disharmony, in conflict of interests.

Aaron said...

chuck... good points...
i was sitting in a lecture today on christianity's contributions to the modern problems in economics/politics/science and our prof was explaining that in a lot of ways Christianity is responsible (or has contributed greatly to) the ecological crises of our time, stemming from an improper view of what our role is with the natural world. we have taken the fruits of the natural world that have been given to us as a gift and as sustenance and used it as an opportunity for us to exercise our "power" over creation (a thoroughly modern aspiration)... i think this picture communicates this very concept loud and clear.

i think we need to return to a proper view of creation... as God's creation... as God's gift to us... and our relationship with it will never be clean, easy, and neat... but that there needs to be an overall respect within that relationship.

my two cents.

elnellis said...

yeah, aaron. the christian campfire song comes to mind that goes... "this world is not my home, i'm just apassin' through... on my way to glory...ect..bla blah blahhh"
it's an escapist attitude that doesn't believe the kingdom is about the hear and now... and that redemption isn't just for human souls but for all of creation...