https://bobostory.wordpress.com List

  • WAGYU KAISEKI DEN - WAGYU KAISEKI DEN沒有中文名字,寫漢字的話,是「和牛懷石店」。 該店附帶在一家精品酒店中,一共 […]
    10 hours ago
  • 多倫多舊居──人生長河的雪泥鴻爪之三 - 我加拿大多倫多的舊居,嚴格來說是在密西沙迦市(Mississauga)的。密西沙迦位於大多倫多西部,近機場,每 … 繼續閱覽 多倫多舊居──人生長河的雪泥鴻爪之三
    1 day ago
  • 多倫多舊居──人生長河的雪泥鴻爪之三 - 我加拿大多倫多的舊居,嚴格來說是在密西沙迦市(Mississauga)的。密西沙迦位於大多倫多西部,近機場,每次回到多倫多,乘的士不用二十塊。當時的密西沙迦是個小城,全市人口才幾萬人,華人甚少,主要的市中心集中在大型商場Square One附近,那兒有間頗有規模的中式超市和酒樓,老板姓潘,也是香港人,原來他也是...
    1 day ago
  • A Pit-Stop in Japan’s Time Capsule Post Towns - [image: A Pit-Stop in Japan’s Time Capsule Post Towns] We’ve got an achilles heel for places stuck in the past, and today on our armchair adventures, we’r...
    2 days ago
  • Reading Marx’s Capital Vol 1 – Class 10, Chapters 23 & 24 (2019) - The People’s ForumApril 16, 2019 The page numbers Professor Harvey refers to are valid for both the Penguin Classics and Vintage Books editions of Capital....
    2 days ago
  • 翻译:德勒兹《差异与重复》美国版序言 - 哥伦比亚大学版《差异与重复》,译者保罗·帕顿 德勒兹亲自为《差异与重复》哥伦比亚大学版写的序 1. 写作哲学史和写作哲学之间有比较大的差别。在哲学史中,你研究的是伟大思想家的箭矢或工具,他的猎物和酬劳,他所发现的新大陆。在另一种情况下,你得打造你自己的箭矢,或者收集看起来像是你最好箭矢的东西,只将它们...
    6 days ago
  • 同一畫嘗試兩種形式 - 青山綠水繞孤村 深山茅屋兩三間,但聞溪水響潺潺,仰觀浮雲輕散聚,功名富貴作等閒。
    2 weeks ago
  • The path to Journey Through Twin Peaks - You can bookmark this post to check back periodically. I will update each step to note when it is completed, bringing me that much closer to publishing n...
    2 weeks ago
  • 許定銘1970年1月新婚照 - 後排左起:黃廣鵬(野農)、龐繼民(路雅)、黃韶生(白勺)、楊懷曾、黃維波、康潔薇。 前排左起:吳萱人、許太、許定銘、禮拜六、羈魂(胡國賢) (詳見〈認人遊戲〉)
    3 weeks ago
  • 許定銘:《時日悠悠》歲月長 - 僅打印兩本的《時日悠悠》 《時日悠悠》紙質優良,製作認真 馬吉贈我他的文集《時日 … 繼續閱讀 →
    4 weeks ago
  • 財富之城──威尼斯 - 剛讀完Roger Crowley(羅傑.克勞利)有關威尼斯共和國歷史的著作: City of Fortune: How Venice Won & Lost a Naval Empire (財富之城──威尼斯怎樣嬴取及失去其海上帝國)(台版:《財富之城──威尼斯共和國的海洋霸權》),作為我近年來閱讀地中海和威尼...
    1 month ago
  • Tarot (塔羅與靈修) - 古老的符號系統一般都有兩種用途:占卜與靈修 。在功利的社會裏,占卜必然成為大部分人學習它們的主因。然而,若你能用靈修的系統去默觀它們,你可能會發現更偉大的真理。 舉例,在每天的星座運程底下,埋藏著一個人的成長過程:從天真的嬰孩白羊、勤勉的學生金牛、闖蕩的青年雙子、成家的母性巨蟹、領導的父性獅子、思考的智者處女、...
    2 months ago
  • 采銅于山,照見日影 - 采銅于山,照見日影 讀《日影之舞》讓我想起明末清初學者顧炎武(1613—1682):「嘗謂今人纂輯之書,正如今人之鑄錢。古人采铜于山,今人則買舊錢,名之曰廢銅,以充鑄而已。所鑄之錢,既已粗惡,而又將古人傳世之寶,舂銼碎散,不存于後,豈不兩失之乎?承詢《日知錄》又成幾卷,蓋期之以廢銅,而某自别來一...
    9 months ago
  • 杭寧遊記 - 我的藏書裡有二部古籍和西湖相關,一是《御覽西湖志纂》,一是《西湖志》。
    11 months ago
  • 蘇賡哲:城寨和大學 - 12月5日多倫多明報 據説日本人最喜歡的香港特色地區是已消失了的九龍城寨,改建成公園已久,他們仍出版一本又一本追憶書籍。 以前家在九龍城賈炳達道,城寨自然也是熟悉的。所謂三不管黃、賭、毒集中地,髒亂無序不難想像。中共智囊強世功稱之為「一切人類道德所鄙視的東西,在這裏可以合法存在」。其實這話是有語病的,因...
    1 year ago
  • 釐清香港議員取消資格案的法律概念:又名「跳出跳入打我呀笨蛋」然後被打 - 好多人真的不懂法律又要講法律。又有好多人以為只有香港才會有「人大釋法」。任何一個 … 繼續閱讀 →
    1 year ago
  • 照顧與創作 - 月前為谷淑美的攝影詩文集《流光.時黑》做了中文部分的編輯工作,實在因為是一種唇亡齒寒感。谷淑美的書,是關於她照顧年老患病的母親,過程中進而對母親生命、自己生命的發掘,轉化為攝影與文字創作。自己進入中年,身體開始變差,也進一步想到將來要照顧家人的責任,暗暗畏懼其龐大。於是,也就想通過進入谷淑美的歷程,讓自己學...
    1 year ago
  • - 暗夜小巴像搖骰,我們每個橫切面都刻了字,不知我們在終站會變成甚麼。或者是上帝,或者是狗。或者倒轉的日歷。紙張一天一天倒著依附,雨中有人望過來問:為甚麼不可以?聽到問題的人,心裡又虛又慌,因為撇除了時日的制裁,也沒有多麼費力。耗費也是不足夠的。如果真的有努力過的話,根本不會站在這裡。喂,他其實一早...
    2 years ago
  • 《別字》試刊號第二期出版﹗ - 立即下載:《別字》試刊號第二期 《字花》的網上純創作誌《別字》登場了! 「別字」一名,既有別冊之意,更寄望透過網上平台,另闢傳播門徑,開拓閱讀體驗。 暫定三個欄目,「透光」的作品從自由投稿中特別挑選,「有時」配合《字花》徵稿或另設新題,「極限」則專載萬字長篇。 試刊號第二期,以PDF形式呈現,供各位下載...
    2 years ago
  • - 今晚和倩去百老匯看Antiporno. 如果這部片子要跟誰一起看,我只要她,不然就自己看。獨自欣賞是至高享受,看電影聽音樂於我不是社交活動,我最厭煩聽完即討論,太嘈雜。 倩是有negative capability的女孩。夜晚我們走在公園,一陣風吹過,樹葉沙沙作響,她會由衷感歎:風的聲音真好聽,然後我們沉默...
    2 years ago
  • “舔舐自己的生命,仿佛那是一颗麦芽糖” - ​ “舔舐自己的生命,仿佛那是一颗麦芽糖” 顾文豪 1、《加缪手记》 加缪 浙江大学出版社·启真馆 如果在接下来的两个月里,没有特别巨大的阅读惊喜的话,我想三册的《加缪手记》,将会成为我今年的阅读首选。 从1935年5月到1942年2月,《手记》记录了加缪的读书杂感、生活随想、情感波动,以及写作...
    2 years ago
  • 酒足飯飽。酣然入夢——江戶子的老派追求 - 東京適合散步。出了名的散步文士,堪稱達人者有二:二次大戰前,搞不定老婆,不想吵,遂攜著一把蝙蝠傘,四處趴趴走的永井荷風;戰後,老婆、老母擺得一平二穩,隨身帶著幾張江戶古地圖,這邊那邊亂亂踅的池波正太郎。 *正港的江戶子* 池波是正港的「江戶子」,淺草出身,愛玩愛熱鬧愛美食。父母親很早離異,跟著...
    3 years ago
  • 乌托邦遗迹 - [image: uploads/201510/18_114414_s1.1973peterderret.jpg] [水瓶节,宁宾,1973年。摄影:Peter Derret] 乌托邦遗迹 欧宁 宁宾(Nimbin)是澳大利亚新南威尔士东北部山区的一个小镇,因1973年举办水瓶节(Aquarius Fes...
    3 years ago
  • 「馬拉松 看世界」專頁 向世界馬拉松出發 - 如無意外,本周日我應該身在三藩巿,跑今年第五個外國比賽,也是人生第三十個馬拉松比賽(廿九個在香港以外)。雖然Blog有好一段日子沒有update,但跑步仍是繼續下去,這兩年尤其多,也去了俄羅斯、澳洲這些新國家、新大陸跑,是另一個飛躍期。 這些年的跑馬路上,有幸認識一些志同道合、見識廣博、洞察力強、對比賽有要...
    3 years ago
  • 自由路艱:再思肖友懷事件 - 文:野莩遣返或特赦肖友懷,無絕對之可不可行,但決定時當先考慮法理依據,而非道德情懷。我曾就此事詢問一位在入境處工作的朋友,她的答覆非常簡單:「1. 依法當遣返事主;2. 父母非港人,事主不能申請單程證;3. 除了酌情,事主無其他留港途徑。」那麼酌情先例會為制度開漏洞嗎?「Personally speaking...
    3 years ago
  • 烏蘭巴托的夜 - 《烏蘭巴托的夜》是首蒙古歌曲。蒙古的作曲家寫的,賈樟柯重新填了詞,左小祖咒改編,電影《世界》插曲(湖南台的字幕打錯了)。左小原版的就好聽,他少有的比較「正經」地演唱。譚版也不錯,大氣,聲情並茂。 左小改編演唱的《烏蘭巴托的夜》 賈樟柯電影片斷(趙濤演唱) 蒙古族樂隊杭蓋的版本 烏蘭巴托的夜 作詞:賈樟...
    4 years ago
  • 莉娜骑士在盘子上 - 1874年12月25日,一个女孩诞生在罗马北部小城维泰博的贫民窟,迷信说,这一天诞生的人有特别的命运,父母为她取名“娜塔莉娜”(Natalina ),因为“natale”是意大利语里的“圣诞节”。12 岁开始,她当过卖花姑娘、包装女工,生活虽然贫寒,好在她天赋歌喉,每天从早唱到晚。邻居一个音乐教师给她上...
    4 years ago
  • 欲望的事故 - 欲望的事故 顾文豪 特里林在《知性乃道德职责》一书中引述亚里士多德关于悲剧的定义,认为悲剧的主人公具有某种程度的、可进行自由选择的可能性,他“必须通过自己的道德状况来为自己的命运进行辩解”,而其道德状况并非十全十... *博客大巴,你的个人传媒早班车*
    5 years ago
  • 給《明報》 - 一口答應寫一篇給《明報》,箇中心情,猶如「償還」。 明明我沒有欠這報甚麼,稿債沒有,瓜葛沒有。 都是人情吧。多老套。 這些年來,跟《明報》的這些年來,救命,怎麼細數。 第一次認真寫稿刊登,已是2003年的事了。正是馬家輝博士邀請,給世紀版寫一篇關於「網上飄流的香港家書」。(私人回憶:先生有份跟我寫的。)一年過...
    5 years ago
  • 那一身華美的曲線 - [image: 那一身華美的曲線] 她就站在落地窗邊,回眸對我笑了笑。我沒說話,什麼話都不想說。能說什麼呢?在她的笑容裏早就透露了對我些微的輕視:你總歸只能沈默吧!她似乎視我的沈默為一種必然的結果,像是看透我的一切。其實,我想了想,和她也不過就一面之緣。甚至在之後的好長一段時間再見到她,她根本就不記得我。自然,要...
    5 years ago
  • 偶然的發現 - 很久沒在facebook上看到湯正川的post,早上偶然看到他與另一DJ的對談,發現這首歌,先放上來,待電腦回復正常,再仔細欣賞。
    5 years ago
  • - *Chapeau...!*Cock your hat - angles are attitudes (Sinatra) By Heinz Decker Hats seem to stimulate the imagination; maybe because they are a prolongatio...
    6 years ago
  • 閱讀讓我質疑制度 - [本訪問稿乃〈不可能所有的真實都出現在你的攝影機前──賈樟柯、杜海濱訪談〉的第一部份。訪問稿全文網上版見以下網頁: http://leftfilm.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/jiaduinterview1/ http://leftfilm.wordpress.com/2012/07/17...
    6 years ago
  • 蜚聲卓越在書林──蘇州文育山房 - 蘇州的氣候溫潤,步調舒緩,水道與巷弄縱橫交錯,教人一來到此便安下心來。城裡的平江街區,從宋代便已經存在,以今日留存的巷弄來看,八百年來的格局規劃變化並不大,只是範圍縮小許多。而就在這僅存的街區裡,留下的不只是悠悠時光,亦有不少哲人賢士駐守的痕跡。書癡黃丕烈的百宋一廛、史學家顧頡剛的顧氏花園、清代狀元洪...
    7 years ago
  • 當世界留下二行詩 宣傳BV - 當世界留下二行詩瓦歷斯.諾幹Walis.Nokan本書以極簡的形式,現代詩行的排列,挑戰詩藝和語境的實驗風格觀察視角從台灣的土地與家園,擴及到族群、社會乃至世界的關懷。動情至深,引發共鳴,為作者近年來最新創意力作!短短的二行詩,宛如「芥子納須彌」激起無限想像空間,是一本趣意盎然、值得珍藏的現代詩集。向陽、李...
    7 years ago
  • 韩戍:无序的社会流动,模糊的文化认同——《中国社会的阶层与流动》重读(【读品】110辑) - republichan@gmail.com 所谓社会流动,指的是个人在社会大众公认为高低不等的位置里,由一个位置向另一个位置的移动过程。一般来讲,社会分为“封闭社会”和“开放社会”两种形态。在完全封闭的社会里,个人的出身决定了他在社会阶层体系中的地位,如欧洲的封建社会;在完全开放的社会中,个...
    7 years ago
  • V城系列明信片 - 圖:by 智海 and 楊智恆
    7 years ago
  • 诗歌是飞行术,散文是步兵 - *诗歌是飞行术,散文是步兵顾文豪* *刊于《南方都市报——阅读周刊》2009年10月11日* 在众多优秀诗人看来,散文不是适合他们展露才思表陈感情的文体,偶然为之,亦不过如布罗茨基所说的是一种“以其他方式延续的诗歌”。他还有另一个比喻———诗歌是飞行术,散文则是步兵。 是的,诗人兴许能在...
    9 years ago
  • 《般若波罗蜜多心经》印存 - 《般若波罗蜜多心经》印存 般若波罗蜜多心经 35*35*138mm 薄意山水巴林红丝冻石 观自在菩萨 26*35*80mm 貔貅钮巴林黄冻石 行深般若波罗蜜多时 30*38*90mm 貔貅钮巴林冻石 照见五蕴皆空 33*33*114mm 螭钮巴林黄彩石 度一切苦厄 25*2...
    10 years ago

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

THE INHUMAN ANTHROPOCENE


Recently, a study appeared in the journal Nature proposing a previously unsuggested start date for the Anthropocene: 1610 CE. It may seem, at first, a strange year to choose. It doesn’t have any obvious connection to the events we usually think of as tied to climate change, nor to the “great acceleration” that began in the mid-20th century. Still, 1610 has a lot to recommend it. As Simon L. Lewis and Mark A Maslin, the climate scientists who authored the proposal, comprehend it, it holds the potential to reorient the way we think about the Anthropocene, to help reconcile the quest for dramatic change in environmental policy with ongoing movements for social justice.
Most people reading this will, I think, have heard of the Anthropocene by now; indeed, given the extensive reporting on the concept, the Anthropocene may have greater name recognition than the Holocene, the geological epoch in which we officially still live. But in case you’ve missed it, “Anthropocene” is the proposed stratigraphic name for a new slice of geological time, an epoch made distinct by significant, measurable human impact on the earth and its climate.
ChronostratChart2012
2012 Chronostratigraphic Chart
Stratigraphy organizes the vast geological timescale according to significant and demonstrable changes to the planetary system, so the Anthropocene proposal—formally tendered in 2008—is no casual matter: if it happens, it will be a new recognition that humans have changed not only the earth’s climate, but the earth itself. The International Committee on Stratigraphy, the group that oversees the divisions recognized in the International Geologic Time Scale, has formed a committee to consider the question, and hopes to decide the issue by next year.
“Holocene,” the name for the epoch in which we officially still live, was adopted in 1885, a half-century after Charles Lyell’s demarcation of the “Recent” epoch by the end of the last Ice Age, some 11,500 years ago. Holocene means “wholly recent,” so the decision to bring this epoch to an end would mark the present as a peculiar time, after the recent, a time out of time in more than one sense. The move to recognize the Anthropocene is, in effect, a move to double the present, to see it from the perspective of another moment as well as our own. But what we can see from that doubled place depends on where we locate that other moment.
There are numerous contestants for the Anthropocene’s “Golden Spike,” or Global Boundary Stratosphere Section and Point (GSSP), the site that marks a recognized division in the geological timescale by pinpointing the planetary material that justifies the divide. The earliest would place the start date between six and eleven thousand years ago, based on the adoption and spread of agriculture, since the land-clearing it required necessarily altered the earth’s atmosphere.
But this would be tantamount to saying that the Anthropocene is equivalent to human life as we know it; by linking climate change to something we cannot imagine undoing—very few people are advocating a return to hunter-gatherer status—it would effectively remove any political energy the term might have. And the Anthropocene is, at base, a political strategy, notwithstanding its scientific verifiability; its intent is not simply to carve humanity’s name upon the stratigraphic map (humans, after all, invented the map in the first place), but to raise awareness of the negative planetary impact of certain human activities, with the intent of altering or mitigating them.
Plastic Rocks
Plastic Rocks
Other proposed GSSP sites include Holocene ice cores that reveal rises in methane and carbon dioxide around the late eighteenth century, the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when fossil fuels began to be widely used, with increasingly devastating effects on atmospheric carbon; highly-leaded soils affected by mining and the use of leaded gasoline; the apparent creation of a new form of rock out of plastic, which marks the mid-to-late 20th century as a moment when human garbage took on a geological life of its own; and radio-isotopes detectable in the planetary rock record which record the detonation of nuclear bombs.
1610, the date proposed by Lewis and Maslin, who hold positions in Climatology and Global Change Science in the Geography Department at University College of London, works a little differently. It was chosen because it was the lowest point in a decades-long decrease in atmospheric carbon dioxide, measurable by traces found in Artic ice cores. The change in the atmosphere, Lewis and Maslin deduced, was caused by the death of over 50 million indigenous residents of the Americas in the first century after European contact, the result of “exposure to diseases carried by Europeans, plus war, enslavement and famine” (Nature175).
The destruction of the indigenous population (leaving only an estimated 6 million survivors on both northern and southern American continents by the mid-17th century) meant a significant decline in farming, fire-burning and other human activities affecting atmospheric carbon levels. Lewis and Maslin point to other geologically significant aspects of Euro-American contact as well, including the transfer of plant and animal species between Europe and the Americas, leading to a significant loss of biodiversity and acceleration of species extinction rates. From this view, the Anthropocene develops alongside the global pathways of modernity. Lewis and Maslin term this proposal the “Orbis hypothesis,” from the Latin for “globe.”
Lewis and Maslin’s proposal is compelling because it is, as far as I know, the first proposal for an Anthropocene “golden spike” to recognize genocide as part of the cause of epochal division. Geologists have long known that European settlement was accompanied by a dramatic upsurge in extinction rates. Charles Lyell, in the second volume of his foundationalPrinciples of Geology (1832), justified this as simply in the natural order of things:
“[T]he annihilation of a multitude of species has already been effected, and will continue to go on hereafter….as the colonies of highly-civilized nations spread themselves over unoccupied [] lands…Yet, if we wield the sword of extermination as we advance, we have no reason to repine at the havoc committed, nor to fancy with the Scotch poet that we ‘violate the social union of nature’….We have only to reflect, that in thus obtaining possession of the earth by conquest, and defending our acquisitions by force, we exercise no exclusive prerogative. Every species which has spread itself from a small point over a wide area must, in like manner, have marked its progress by the dimunition or the entire extirpation of some other…”
Lyell’s depiction of the devastating consequences of European conquest as just another natural cycle is belied by contemporary climate scientists’ recognition of its lasting effects as an ongoing unnatural disaster.
Lewis and Maslin identify the two factors most often cited in Anthropocene discussions—the anthropogenic change in atmospheric carbon levels and the homogenization of planetary biota—as an apres-coup to the event we know as “1492.” Numerous cosmologies hold that the Earth will remember acts of intra-human violence, that the planet itself will testify to the brutality humans have inflicted upon members of their own species. With the Orbis hypothesis, climate science may be counted among them.
For some, the Anthropocene debates seem irrelevant: does it matter where in the past geologists decide to place a golden spike, when such urgent questions remain about our future? But the liveliness of the discussion reflects the explanatory promise of the Anthropocene concept: it is a debate over what kind of story can and should be told about human impact on the planet. The claim is often made that climate change is simply too big to see—that it is what eco-critic Timothy Morton terms a hyperobject, something that cannot be realized in any specific instance. The Anthropocene offers climate change not just periodicity but narrativity. And like any well-told story, it relies upon conscious plotting and the manipulation of feeling.
Some insist that we are naming this story incorrectly—that “Anthropocene” obscures vital social and historical facts that must be addressed in any proposed solution. “Humans” as a whole are not responsible for causing the mess we are currently in, nor are they perpetuating it at equal rates. Naming the crisis after the species, they argue, hides the social, not geological, histories of exploitation (of humans and “nature” alike) at the root of the problem. It’s unlikely that we will find a single word that can accurately convey these histories (Jason Moore’s “Capitalocene” falls short on aesthetic grounds, though Jussi Parikka’s “Anthrobscene,” indexing the profound wastefulness of contemporary capitalism, may come closer.) Still, the Anthropocene story needs to find ways of communicating them, of refusing to generalize or naturalize the consequences of the past few centuries.
Photo Credit: Sea Change Radio
Photo Credit: Sea Change Radio
The Orbis hypothesis, in this respect, succeeds better than others, though it remains limited by standards of scientific verifiability. (What kind of geological trace, for instance, might inscribe the concurrent history of the Atlantic slave trade, also central to the dynamics and the devastation of “contact”?) And indeed, the desire to make the Anthropocene’s start date conform to established stratigraphic convention seems to be pushing the ICS’s Anthropocene Working Group toward the mid-20th century, based on the dawn of the nuclear age, which, according to the group’s chair, Jan Zalasiewicz, left the first truly global and indelible marks in the planetary rock record. Lewis and Maslin’s report names the mid-20th century as a second option, though as they point out, the two origins have different implications: 1610 is broader, pointing to “colonialism, global trade and coal,” while the nuclear-age Anthropocene highlights an “elite-driven technological development” capable of laying waste to the planet almost instantaneously (Nature 177).
In both cases, the Anthropocene story takes as its origin not simply human indifference to nature, but human disregard for other human lives. But the latter frame is too narrow, pointing toward abstractions like “elites” and “technology” instead of the histories of global striation that follow 1492. Sylvia Wynter, in a brilliant account of the 1492 event, identifies it as the start date for a cognitive process that parallels, in some ways, the homogenizing effect on planetary life that Lewis and Maslin note. It is, she contends, the beginning of the global dissemination of a specifically Western idea of humanism that posits itself as universal but endlessly defers the truly universal distribution of the benefits it confers, one that legitimates and covers over the violence, racial, colonial and otherwise, done in its name.
The aftermath of 1492, Wynter shows, is the spread of a humanism that has failed much of humanity, a failure to which even the Artic ice cores can bear witness, and that in doing so has deeply damaged the planet as well: an inhuman humanism. The contradiction that some have seen in the name of the proposed epoch—that the “Anthropocene” was not brought about by all members of the species it names—is precisely the problem it is now up to us to solve.

Dana Luciano: Rocks and Ghosts

No comments:

Post a Comment