"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
81<br />
… we are the architects of our own salvation <strong>or</strong> destruction – which (terrible<br />
thought!) means we are, finally, just another life-f<strong>or</strong>m despite these lofty choices<br />
available to us. If we do not make it m<strong>or</strong>ally, <strong>or</strong> should I say spiritually, the earth,<br />
the Creative Principle will replace us… If the globe is a living cell – and all the<br />
evidence so far points to this – it will survive no matter what, no matter who <strong>or</strong><br />
what has to go. (Fazzini 1990:139).<br />
Livingstone’s themes within the broader ecological framew<strong>or</strong>k<br />
To expl<strong>or</strong>e his position which shifts between ecological hope and ecological despair,<br />
Douglas Livingstone p<strong>or</strong>trays humankind as both divided from and united with the<br />
physical w<strong>or</strong>ld <strong>or</strong> nature. Humanity united with nature is an idealistic position, imagined<br />
as a possibility; while humanity divided from nature is a m<strong>or</strong>e realistic p<strong>or</strong>trayal. The two<br />
extremes may be termed deep ecology and ecological destruction. Livingstone implicitly<br />
acknowledges that his search f<strong>or</strong> a middle ground, where humankind would attain a state<br />
of ecological equilibrium, is quixotic. His w<strong>or</strong>k reflects the following aspects <strong>or</strong><br />
dimensions, which are not clear-cut categ<strong>or</strong>ies in his poetry but rather are p<strong>or</strong>trayed as<br />
tensioned links. I offer the following categ<strong>or</strong>isation of themes as a means of analysis<br />
rather than as distinct categ<strong>or</strong>ies as few of the poems fit cleanly into any one categ<strong>or</strong>y.<br />
1. Evolutionary the<strong>or</strong>y presupposes a common ancest<strong>or</strong> f<strong>or</strong> all life-f<strong>or</strong>ms on Earth and<br />
leads to a deep ecological awareness of humanity’s tenuous position on Earth.<br />
Livingstone uses the evolutionary process as an ontological metaph<strong>or</strong> and in supp<strong>or</strong>t<br />
of his belief in a Creative Principle. I am aware of the contradiction between ontology<br />
(as a branch of metaphysics) and evolution which is based in the mechanisms of the<br />
physical <strong>or</strong> biological. Evolution and the idea of a creat<strong>or</strong> <strong>or</strong> a teleological purpose<br />
are mutually exclusive (see Mayr 49; 66-7). Livingstone, too, was aware of this<br />
contradiction, which he referred to as “my running war with the Almighty” (Robbins<br />
1992: 52). The religious is a recurrent theme in his w<strong>or</strong>k: in A Litt<strong>or</strong>al Zone, f<strong>or</strong><br />
example, he gives “An Evolutionary Nod to God”. The sea is often used a trope f<strong>or</strong><br />
the Creative Principle in Livingstone’s poetry. Following Livingstone’s capitalisation<br />
of the Creative Principle, this position requires that we view Nature with a capital N. I<br />
have instead favoured the use of a capitalisation of Earth and have not written nature<br />
with a capital N because of the term’s complexity.