Although Tsing’s text is about the
local/global frictions through which fictions(?) of universals are made,
circulated, and unmade, I was perhaps more interested in the localized
ethnographies she provided of life in rural Kalimantan and the Meratus
Mountains. I am aware that these provide the background for her greater
arguments about globalization, but often, they were intriguing in and of
themselves. In specific, I was really taken in by her discussion of the social
field in which the forests of the region exist – how the trees, weeds, and insects
each tell their own stories about the interrelationship between the Meratus
Dayaks and the environment in which they live.
Tsing discusses governmental
attempts to designate the type of forest in many areas of the Meratus
Mountains. She notes that often these designations brush up against local
understandings of the forest, creating vast homogeneity where, in reality, the
trees and other plants are widely heterogeneous. The trees tell their own
stories about who has seen them, how they have been used, and which people and
animals have interacted with them. People mark their names on trees to claim
them, then passing down these parcels of the natural world to relatives so long
as the claim continues to be acted upon. That is, one must “care” for their
natural claims, perhaps cutting off parts of the tree so as to allow the bees
to build their hives. The forest has visceral markers of its place in the
social sphere of the Meratus Mountains, the names that have been inscribed upon
the trees or the patches of fruits that have grown where once a community
stood.
To consider the forest as an active
player in the social domain of the Kalimantan region does, to tie this account
back to Tsing’s main arguments, expose some of the frictions at play in our
understanding of how humans interact with nature. At all levels, we see
differing understandings of the way that trees and other natural actors may
relate to the human actors in the region. To understand global friction, then,
we must attend to the myriad of actors in any given situation and examine the
competing levels of agency, power, and discursive authority that are at play.
No comments:
Post a Comment