I, Jason, was sorry to realize the morning after having written the last post that I had failed to include what is arguably the most important turtle sighting, and its attendant ruminations.
There was a movie shown during one SPI lunch break called, as I understand it, Turtle Island. "Turtle Island" is the name many native american groups used for the north american continent. I've never heard an explanation of what the significance of this naming is...I suppose the time has come to find out. The presence of the first human inhabitants of this land is never far from my mind, and their universal name for this continent was one of the first things I associated with the turtle theme that I saw emerging as the class developed.
It's been only in recent years that I learned that my family may have a fairly direct connection with the abuse of native american cultures and groups: my great-grandparents were among the first settlers of the shores of Lake Superior, and helped to found the town of Bayfield, Wisconsin. Their habitation of that land came not long after the removal of the native inhabitants, probably at least partly by force if it followed the typical pattern of american settlement by Europeans. I don't really know anything about their relationship with the local native folk except for the following clue: Part of the way they made their living at one time was to host on their farm, campground style, euro-american tourists who had come to observe the ceremonies at the nearby reservation. I'm withholding judgment on principle, but so far this does not sound too good. It's time I learned more about that, too.
Anyway, Turtle Island (the movie) is about particularly one aspect of the genocide of native groups perpetrated by the eurocentric government, religion, and culture of the United States: the history and legacy of boarding schools for native children. I won't go into much detail about the film, but will simply recommend to everyone that they see if they can't get an opportunity to watch it (being aware that some graphic subject matter may make it less appropriate for young children). We really shouldn't go on any longer as a culture without facing up to the unbelievable cruelty these communities have undergone. I was grateful to the creators of the film and to those whose stories are detailed there that they are willing to put forth the effort and endure the vulnerability required to bring this history to light.
Though we can't find any reference to the film on the website, it was put out by this organization: www.whitebison.org. This is an excellent source of information about efforts native folk are putting forth to bring healing to their lives and communities. One thing they are especially trying for currently is to extract an official apology for this legacy from the Obama administration. I believe instructions might be somewhere on the site for how to help with this campaign.
For the purposes of the design project and the class, then, I found myself thinking a lot (before and after viewing the film) about how the presence of native folk could be felt in the design of a new peace center at EMU. Or perhaps even more to the point, how we could, with a new building, take the opportunity to make a break with certain aspects of the history of our culture and forge a new path that reflects our most deeply cherished values with integrity. I see implications for sourcing of energy and materials, building function, flow planning, spacial aesthetics, artistic statement, and stylistic cultural associations.
I realize, as I indicated in the last post, that this is a bit of a stretch for many folks. You may find yourself thinking, 'It's just a building...get over it! What matters is what goes on inside the building.' I have two responses to that. One is that I have always known intuitively that what goes on inside the building is affected strongly by the shape and design of the building (I'm not alone in this), and I've been exposed to snippets of scholarship along these lines in the past. This class, of course, constituted a huge advance in that understanding. The other is a series of questions: If it's just a building, then why did Saddam Hussein build one of his palaces on the ruins of King Nebuchadnezzar's? Why do courthouses in western cultures nearly all give off the same ethos of power and intimidation? Why are dungeons dark, and thrones high? What of the McMansion? I say there is no such thing as "just a building." Every construction is in some way a communication from the assembly of people who made the decisions associated with it. Don't you think we ought to pay attention to what we're saying?
Think about the words associated with architectural styles: Colonial, Victorian, Modern, Jeffersonian...all of these have deep and specific history and assumptions associated with them. It's not as cut and dried as, "If you build a Colonial style building then you are saying you affirm the practice of colonialism." However. It's worth asking the question of whether the typical ignorance about the sources and meanings of architectural styles is associated in any way with an apathetic or even aversive reluctance to examining the ways in which cultural/moral assumptions connected to those styles might persist in the present (even in our very selves...yikes!). Furthermore, we may be dismayed to realize the ways in which the families and communities and categories of people to which we may belong have benefited or continue to benefit from the unethical and abusive systems of power literally housed in those brick-and-mortar structures. Can we face this? Do we have the insight? Can we summon the courage?
As I was mulling over these things the other day, a metaphor from Christian scripture popped into my head that may help illuminate this thinking for some: New wineskins for new wine. According to Jesus, when you put new wine into an old wineskin, the old wineskin will burst and both will be ruined. So if we've made the leap to realizing that there were and are serious problems with the status quo of power and human social systems, and we've dreamed new dreams and visions of how we might work and play together in peace, then is it not only reasonable that we realize also the need for inventiveness with regard to physical structures we create to house this new way of being in the world? I hope you might agree with me that it is so.
No comments:
Post a Comment