Taking a gamble that I can make this work color wise. I want the Ent to be visible, backlit, before a darkened forest. Making the scene sunset increases the outside drama but there needs to be enough light to see the other focus. I'm colorblind and kind of gripping my seat through all of this.
There's "I'm writing a book about The Lord of the Rings" nerdy, and then there's "I've written a geneology of the White Tree of Gondor" level of nerdy.
I finished the cover for "Where the Roots are Long: The Lord of the Rings and the Modern Environmentalist Movement".
I often think of this image: an Ent looking out over Isengard. What does he think when he sees the industrial site that has destroyed so much of his beloved forest? Does he despair? Does he resolve to act?
This image is a stand-in, since when the eventual publisher will want to design the cover. But until then this, is as good a representation of the book as I can make.
In it's attempts to erase science around climate change, the Trump Administration pulled a climate report that I had cited for my Tolkien / Environmentalist book offline.
Speaking of citations, we're looking at more than 240, at the moment. Today's work was to fix all my quotes that should have been block quotes and turn all my various parentheticals, MLA citations, asides, etc, into foot notes.
I need to start promoting the book more. I hesitate, because although I have more than 45,000 words written, I still need to do tons of editing, and I keep finding sections I need to restructure or write altogether.
It's time, however. I'll share some of the more polished sections, under the assumption that things will change over time.
I've experimented with third-party websites to promote my book, but I figure, 99% of my engagement and feedback has been on the #fediverse.
So I've made a website for "Where the Roots are Long: The Lord of the Rings and the Modern Environmentalist Movement": https://derek.caelin.cloud/roots/
Just discovered at 47,000 words that somehow LibreOffice has messed up my citations. Quotes from Aldo Leopold have been attributed to Tolkien's "Letters". I've got 260+ citations to fix. 😬
This won't end up in the book, but I've been thinking about Legolas' and Gimli's relationship.
By the end of the story they are inseparable friends, but they remain very dissimilar.
Gimli drags Legolas to the Glittering Caves of Aglerond, and Legolas hauls Gimli through Fangorn Forest. Neither loves the experience that the other has chosen, but they like each other so much that they will go along with the other's experience.
I've been married long enough to know: this is true love. 😂
Can confirm the "deeper" meaning is alive and well at the town level.
“Contemporary use of the word #sustainability is ambiguous, with conceptual confusion leading to definitions of sustainability that have been “hijacked and robbed of its substance” This definitional confusion is essentially due to two levels of usage; the first (or shallow) meaning is “long lasting”, the second (deeper) is a “political concept incorporating ecological, economic and social dimensions” https://1library.net/us/download/888078987592761349
@derek I’d agree, but also caution that very often folks who *think* they’re invoking the latter seem to mean “BAU but with wind turbines and balcony solar” when pressed. I’m not unsympathetic — imagining-otherwise isn’t easy, and gets much harder the more embedded in consensual normalcy one is — but it’s a real stumbling block to articulating genuinely different arrangements of power.
@adamgreenfield I think you're right. I still haven't read enough, but the big divide in the environmentalist movement seems to be whether it's possible to achieve "sustainability" (in the shallow sense) without radically restructuring our society.
@adamgreenfield Well, I guess that's too simple. I'm reading a dissertation on deep ecology and the lit review shows a bunch of people throwing out critiques on where the dividing line is. Interesting and exhausting.
@derek Couldn’t agree more, in both respects! Especially when some of the propositions that constitute “deep sustainability” offend my sensibilities for other reasons, often quite elementally.
Welp. Definitely have to add more on the modern environmentalist movement to the book. I need to tie Tolkien's thoughts and actions to the modern discussion.
I don't want to write a comprehensive dissertation (there are already so many) of environmental philosophy - whatever comes out needs to be distilled.
I think the touch points have to be "relationship with nature", and "whither society", and "action".
I've been reading Barbara Tuchman recently (she of "The Guns of August" and "The Zimmerman Telegram). Reminded that her compelling brand of history emphasizes people as characters. The events of history are draped across the characters like cloth on tentpoles.
One thing I can do to distinguish history from academic texts is to place more emphasis on the people, their personalities, and their ideas.
There is an obvious tension in tying modern environmental activism to a text written nearly 90 years ago.
Any sketch of modern environmentalism must include a discussion of the actors who try to work within capitalism.
But The Lord of the Rings was a work of its own era, exploring themes of stewardship and the personhood of nature. It didn't have much to say about the financialization of sustainable development, or, say, the concept of "ecosystem services".
Part of the environmentalist divide is over the relationship between humans and nature. Do we operate from an ecocentric or anthropocentric one? Tolkien's heroes are "stewards" in the Chrisitian model: belonging to a hierarchy of care for Middle-earth, exercising dominion on behalf of nature. Ecocentric worldviews emphasize that humans exist within a system and must play a positive role.
On the surface, both ideologies favor care for nature. But they can result in divergent outcomes.
@derek@Roots I am coming to believe that how we construct the interface of nature and culture is among the most significant questions we can pose. In that respect, a few folks here recently suggested I pick up a framework I hadn’t worked with for awhile, Murray Bookchin’s opposition of “first” and “second” nature — it may be helpful here?
@adamgreenfield I haven't read that particular Bookchin, onto the list it goes! Thanks for the recommendation.
I've read some other Bookchin, though. He's the rep of "social ecology", and this vision of small, low-impact, decentralized, sustainable and egalitarian societies. You mentioned 'BAU' earlier; Bookchin and Ted Trainer are about as far from status quo as you can get.
@derek Honestly, my experience was hugely atypical: they came to me after they’d seen my self-published book “Against the Smart City” in 2013, and proposed doing something together. That book became “Radical Technologies,” then we did “Lifehouse,” and now we’re working on a third.
It’s been wonderful, the whole way. I’ll never not be grateful.
@derek I develop Bookchin’s ideas on the assembly at some length, and explore their influence in places as different as Rojava and big-city Spain, in the third section of “Lifehouse,” Collective Power.
@DMakarios Yes, I agree! A steward who prioritizes self over the thing stewarded is no longer a good steward.
And in the Tolkien universe, the good/bad steward dichotomy continues. Denethor is a bad steward because he became enamored of the power that came with it, and placed himself and his own dignity above the wellbeing of his people.
@derek The key point in the stewardship model is who you are the steward of, because it is incumbent on the steward to act in accordance with the values and intents of the Lord. A steward who maximizes profits at the cost of environmental destruction is only going to be accounted a good steward if they serve a Lord who values money but not the environment.
@derek Denethor is a classic example, but a steward doesn't even have to prioritize self to be unfaithful to their charge. They just need to prioritize their own idea of what is good over their lord's.
I seem to recall C S Lewis having something to say about the dangers of being oppressed by a person who's convinced they're doing what's best for you, because they will never give up. Something similar could be said of stewards who are convinced they're looking after their lord's best interests.
Hooray for Better World Books! I have a copy of "Deep Ecology" by Bill Devall and George Sessions (1985). This was an early work that outlines the Deep Ecology platform.
@Roots isn't too focused on philosophy and theory, but any discussion of the modern environmental movement has to address the "how" and "for what" of the struggle. I've wanted to read Deep Ecology because it's supposed to be focused on the first part: the ontology of environmentalism.