Earth-centric beauty and fascination

[EyeSeeCold]

The atmosphere of a rainy day; the worth of precious metals and other minerals; green trees turning a mix of yellow, orange and red during autumn; sailing on a ship on a stormy sea, trekking up a snow-covered mountain. There are many things that humans are fascinated by and find beauty in, some can be found all over while others are specific to certain regions. Yet, overall, many of these are specific to Earth; it seems to me humans are so immersed in Earth culture that rarely does someone stop and realize how arbitrary the things we are accustomed to are.

I sometimes like to imagine aliens visiting Earth and their bewilderment upon observing bizarre human customs and fascinations, or humans traveling to other planets with different physical geographies that render our familiar Earth experiences insignificant.

Interstellar and intergalactic space travel are only pipe dreams in this age, but it is still interesting to think of the planetary contrast, and how something so overlooked as Earth's physical geography has a huge influence on human experiences, and life in general.

 

[Polaris]

Geology is the perfect subject for immersing oneself deeper into this sort of fascination trance.

I had one of those moments again just a couple of weeks ago, standing alone in the rain somewhere on an isolated beach with my nose hovering about an inch from the cliff wall in front of me, spectacles fogging up. There were numerous organic inclusions in the dirty limestone rock in front of me, and I picked one out to examine closer. It was a piece of wood, preserved and blackened over ca. 80 million years. But still a piece of wood, soft and brittle, grains still visible.

I almost felt dizzy with the impact of understanding what rested in the palm of my hand.



It's kind of nice to feel that insignificant.

 

[Puffy]

To be honest, I think it's not so common that people even stop to observe Earth in a detached manner, let alone the nature of such reflections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle

"Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: "All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."[1] Debord argues that the history of social life can be understood as "the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing."[2] This condition, according to Debord, is the "historical moment at which the commodity completes its colonization of social life."

It's like there's something standing in the way.

 

[DreamMancer]

To be honest, I think it's not so common that people even stop to observe Earth in a detached manner, let alone the nature of such reflections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle

"Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: "All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."[1] Debord argues that the history of social life can be understood as "the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing."[2] This condition, according to Debord, is the "historical moment at which the commodity completes its colonization of social life."

It's like there's something standing in the way.

Yes, or else the beauty of the earth has itself become another commodity: eco-tourism, for instance, or the use of "green" imagery and rhetoric in advertising products with a toxic lifecycle or components.

There are actually few people, I think, who are able to really connect with nature in an authentic way.

My guess is that while aliens might find a lot of our behavior and customs and even biology to be quite strange, any aliens I'd care to meet would also be awestruck by the beauty of our planet, no matter how different it might be from theirs. Likewise, I am sure we could appreciate their planet's beauty as well, no matter how different it might be.

After all, even though our species developed in an extremely specific biome, we have come to be able to appreciate the unique features and beauty of other biomes as well - even ones that we can't inhabit, like the deep ocean, where many of the inhabitants may as well be aliens to us. I suspect the same would be true of other planets.

 

[DeadonDreaming]

Plants themselves can be quite strange looking, though it might be because whenever we imagine an alien planet their flora looks similar to ours. We don't have the ability to imagine anything really weird, so we just end up making their plants look like "crazier" versions of our own.

Spoiler

Palm Tree

Spoiler

Alien planet
So, that is pretty much a dwarf palm tree cluster? I could see that in my backyard. The leaves are similar enough, maybe it doesn't have the bushy "head" of the palm tree, but if I was to look through a book of different types of tropical trees I could probably find one that looks even more similar.

Also, this picture was chosen after looking through a couple dozen Google images for "alien planet", all of which had a tree that looked like a palm tree with a couple of minor changes. This one had the least "palm tree" looking plants in it. There were a couple of planets that just had rocks on them, so I skipped those.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Humans evolved on Earth. This behavior isn't unexpected at all.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I'm not really criticizing society or humans so much as I'm trying to bring to attention to how influential physical geography and the environment are. If you've never ventured anywhere else, there's some sort of cultural fusion with the environment. This happens on Earth also, as DreamMancer mentioned with the different biomes(or even cities if you want to be really specific), but a wider perspective is to look at the whole Earth contrasted with other planets.

I suppose one question you could ask is, what effect would this have on people who are born and raised aboard ships in outer space? Would they feel a sense of identification with the spacecraft or with space or what?

 

[Puffy]

More specifically to cities, you might find this interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychogeography

"the study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behavior of individuals."

Maybe not, you seem to be talking about Earth as a whole, where this is more specific environments. Though many people are born and die in cities, so it is Earth for them I suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychogeography#cite_note-0

 

[EyeSeeCold]

More specifically to cities, you might find this interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychogeography

"the study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behavior of individuals."

Maybe not, you seem to be talking about Earth as a whole, where this is more specific environments. Though many people are born and die in cities, so it is Earth for them I suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychogeography#cite_note-0

Yes that's exactly what I was getting at. I see some related concepts are cultural geography, sense of place(also accurate), spirit of place, spatialization and topophilia.

Sense of place is described as "... often used in relation to those characteristics that make a place special or unique, as well as to those that foster a sense of authentic human attachment and belonging."

EDIT:
Here are some other definitions that I like as well:

A sense of place results gradually and unconsciously from inhabiting a landscape over time, becoming familiar with its physical properties, accruing history within its confines.​

It is place, permanent position in both the social and topographical sense, that gives us our identity.​

http://envstudies.brown.edu/oldsite/Thesis/2001/james/senseofplace.html


To a human on another planet, what is the value of Earth gold or silver compared to hundreds of other rare types of minerals on that new planet? A human would still feel attachment to the gold or silver that it was used to, and likely would have no special appreciation for the new minerals, they are meaningless. Aesthetic appreciation might still be there I suppose, but it would not nearly be comparable to the overall appreciation on Earth.

 

[DreamMancer]

I'm not really criticizing society or humans so much as I'm trying to bring to attention to how influential physical geography and the environment are. If you've never ventured anywhere else, there's some sort of cultural fusion with the environment. This happens on Earth also, as DreamMancer mentioned with the different biomes(or even cities if you want to be really specific), but a wider perspective is to look at the whole Earth contrasted with other planets.

I suppose one question you could ask is, what effect would this have on people who are born and raised aboard ships in outer space? Would they feel a sense of identification with the spacecraft or with space or what?

From an objective perspective, the human being, like any organism, can bd seen as an extension of the environment; it is thoroughly shaped by its surroundings. And from a subjective perspective, the environment itself can be seen as an extension of the human subject. The two mutually condition each other.

Putting a human being in a radically different environment, like your hypothetical space situation, would therefore radically alter the human subject, perhaps beyond recognition. Can you imagine a human being growing up in a zero-g environment? Setting aside the physiological issues that this would create, their raw phenomenal experience of the world - in particular, the very concepts of "space", "direction", etc - would be entirely different from our own.

Over long periods of time humans living in such an environment would ultimately begin to undergo speciation and appear thoroughly "alien" to terrestial humans.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

From an objective perspective, the human being, like any organism, can bd seen as an extension of the environment; it is thoroughly shaped by its surroundings. And from a subjective perspective, the environment itself can be seen as an extension of the human subject. The two mutually condition each other.

Putting a human being in a radically different environment, like your hypothetical space situation, would therefore radically alter the human subject, perhaps beyond recognition. Can you imagine a human being growing up in a zero-g environment? Setting aside the physiological issues that this would create, their raw phenomenal experience of the world - in particular, the very concepts of "space", "direction", etc - would be entirely different from our own.

Over long periods of time humans living in such an environment would ultimately begin to undergo speciation and appear thoroughly "alien" to terrestial humans.

Hmm, I'm not sure those humans would be unrecognizably different(not counting physiology), but Earth's gravitational effects has definitely shaped humans and the human experience and I'd agree that they would have a whole different approach to spatial orientation.

For us, basic things such as driving, walking, sports, even injuries from falling, they wouldn't be the same.

 

[Cavallier]

I'm not really criticizing society or humans so much as I'm trying to bring to attention to how influential physical geography and the environment are. If you've never ventured anywhere else, there's some sort of cultural fusion with the environment. This happens on Earth also, as DreamMancer mentioned with the different biomes(or even cities if you want to be really specific), but a wider perspective is to look at the whole Earth contrasted with other planets.

I suppose one question you could ask is, what effect would this have on people who are born and raised aboard ships in outer space? Would they feel a sense of identification with the spacecraft or with space or what?

I spent my childhood in Alaska. The landscape took a formative role in my development. I spent almost all my time outside, away from people entirely. I would follow my dog through the woods for miles. I climbed up rock walls, through wild rose thickets, and distinctly remember drinking from water puddles when I got thirsty.

The place I lived was filled with big rugged geography. There were giant mountains, a thick rushing river, and lots of wildlife. When I see photos that remind me of the place I grew up I want to tuck myself into the corner of them.

When I'm outside and the light is just right or late at night if the air is crisp and it has snowed recently I am caught in a deep feeling of nostalgia. I don't mean nostalgia for doing the things I did as a child or for childhood itself. Rather, I get caught up in a moment where I feel melded with my environment. I'm just a small piece of the whole place. I don't feel that way living where I live now. I miss my small moments of immersion.

I think where I was raised is a part of who I am.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I spent my childhood in Alaska. The landscape took a formative role in my development. I spent almost all my time outside, away from people entirely. I would follow my dog through the woods for miles. I climbed up rock walls, through wild rose thickets, and distinctly remember drinking from water puddles when I got thirsty.

The place I lived was filled with big rugged geography. There were giant mountains, a thick rushing river, and lots of wildlife. When I see photos that remind me of the place I grew up I want to tuck myself into the corner of them.

When I'm outside and the light is just right or late at night if the air is crisp and it has snowed recently I am caught in a deep feeling of nostalgia. I don't mean nostalgia for doing the things I did as a child or for childhood itself. Rather, I get caught up in a moment where I feel melded with my environment. I'm just a small piece of the whole place. I don't feel that way living where I live now. I miss my small moments of immersion.

I think where I was raised is a part of who I am.

How would you feel about homesteading back in Alaska? Are you attached to the affairs of modern society?




There is a game currently in development called No Man's Sky, it will involve traveling to and discovering new planets which will have unique landscapes and inhabitants. I think it serves as a good representation of the concept of the thread (we won't be able to actually live there of course).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0APP5WcX8v8


I also highly recommend checking out this science fiction art collection.

 

[Cavallier]

How would you feel about homesteading back in Alaska? Are you attached to the affairs of modern society?

If I could be sure of a regular supply of groceries and an internet connection I would in a heartbeat. My long term goal is to get back to a place where I have a cabin in the middle of the wilderness. For now I'm working IT in suburbia. I'm still not sure how I got here.

 

[Polaris]

^ Sounds rather familiar...

How did I get from an isolated island in the Arctic ocean to the sleepy suburbs of the city? I went from -40° C to +40° C in two days...I feel like I'm still in shock, even after so many years in this hot and dry land.

I have asked myself, what is the difference from one city to another? If I live in a city, I may as well be in a city anywhere in the world. A city often fails to impress you with a sense of the country you are in. There are different cultures and languages, yes. There are elements to recognise, but the character of nature is lost, and supplemented in designed substitutes of nature. I find myself standing in a group of trees, and I hear the noises of traffic, dogs barking, and strangers pushing past me on pushbikes. I feel like I am in the way of something, like I should not be here.

I grew up in a forest, then near a fjord with a view that came in through the windows in such an imposing manner it almost engulfed you and made you forget about the walls around you.

I did not watch TV, I watched the weather through the massive windows. Balmy endless summer days of sunshine and rain, interrupted by violent storms that went on for days at the time; crisp autumn days that stung you in the eyes and nose and the violent eruption of colours before the dark...the neighbour's greenhouse flying past in fragmented shards -- then the blue twilight Lapis of winter draped like a magic blanket over the mountains in the distance; nights of quiet, frozen starlight with moonlight casting a million sparkling diamonds across the landscape of snow.

On a whim, kicking your feet into the bindings of your skis and setting off between the snow-laden pine trees -- nothing but your own breathing and the sliding of glass fibre across the icy surface to be heard. You stop, and the silence is audible. You spot some hare prints. Then, suddenly bear paws traversing the side of the mountain.

You hear the distant cry of an owl.

You become aware of the presence of animals because you see their tracks, everywhere.

I have never felt alone in this isolation.

But I have felt utterly alone in a city of 4 million people.

I long to go back to the snow-covered, isolated and unrestricted expanses of my home country. Which is probably very likely to happen soon.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I have asked myself, what is the difference from one city to another? If I live in a city, I may as well be in a city anywhere in the world. A city often fails to impress you with a sense of the country you are in. There are different cultures and languages, yes. There are elements to recognise, but the character of nature is lost, and supplemented in designed substitutes of nature.

Yes I think that's the negative effect of modern technology, culture is either marginalized or turned into a commodity. On the other hand, a city can be beautiful too in itself. That's the whole point here, how different people appreciate anything from the fauna and flora of a planet in a another galaxy, to tundra climates and landscapes, to the exotic mazes of a metropolitan area.


Having spent virtually my whole life in the modernized desert of Southern California though I definitely think both you and Cavallier are fortunate to have been able to experience something different. I can understand wanting to go back, exploring various foreign places would be cool too, something I eventually hope to do.

 

[Puffy]

^ Aye, I think it's a problem to differentiate cities, or built environments, as unnatural or artificial with the kind of environments Cav & Polaris grew up in (as envious as I am ) as the natural alternative. Maybe not a subject for this thread, but it's a question of how life-supporting that environment is and how well adapted it is to the life that inhabits it in my opinion. People will of course have preferences for different kinds of landscapes, but both could have their own life and intensity, and it's the role of inhabitants to nurture that.

The problem of modern cities (tl;dr) is a separate one to its 'built-ness', and I agree I find there to be a noxious, life-destroying element in most I've encountered. (If I'm being honest I feel these elements are in our present culture, that feed into this and are more amplified in cities.)

Simultaneously, I grew up in a suburb, and my upbringing was largely spent on TV, video-games, various games & media. My internal landscape, as a consequence, is highly frenetic & rapidly shifting. As much as I long for that 'melting' feeling of emplacement (and sometimes for inner silence), I do enjoy urban exploration/ psychogeography on account of the compression of the environment: landscape of accidents, synchronisation, the feeling of inner and outer speed in rhythm.

 

[Polaris]

Yes I think that's the negative effect of modern technology, culture is either marginalized or turned into a commodity. On the other hand, a city can be beautiful too in itself. That's the whole point here, how different people appreciate anything from the fauna and flora of a planet in a another galaxy, to tundra climates and landscapes, to the exotic mazes of a metropolitan area.

I agree there are many fascinating and beautiful aspects of cities. I have spent many hours photographing urban landscapes, for example. They provide me with a different sense of melancholy that natural landscapes don't.

But what I have grown up with is now what I find myself seeking yet again, as the novelty of cities has somewhat worn off and a need for an expansive horizon and the sense of freedom that comes from being able to walk for hours without seeing a single human being is yet again playing on my mind.

The city reminds me of all the things that are associated with human psychology, whether it is positive or negative. Thus, it demands judgement on a sub-conscious level constantly as one encounters situations involving other humans. Nature is just what it is. It is harsh, but it also holds no judgement. One does not have to justify one's presence to nature, but one will pay heavily if not respecting it's forces.

With humans, the laws are made in expressive and non-expressive ways. Sometimes these laws are difficult to reconcile with one's private convictions. Conflict can thus be draining, and a source of confusion as all human law is essentially questionable. With nature, one cannot argue; just obey. It is thus liberating in a paradoxical sense.

^ Aye, I think it's a problem to differentiate cities, or built environments, as unnatural or artificial with the kind of environments Cav & Polaris grew up in (as envious as I am ) as the natural alternative.

Sorry, I probably haven't expressed myself accurately enough here. When I talk about the natural, I mean directly related to natural landscapes. I don't disagree that cities can be classified as natural in an evolutionary context -- termites and ants build complex structures and all animals and plants manipulate the natural environment to a great degree -- this constant change is indeed absolutely natural within this context.

It is when the negative effects of change is becoming a dominant hindrance to the positive growth and advancement of species that we as sentient beings capable of conscious intelligent reasoning begin to question. Animals and other organisms just accept, although perhaps grudgingly as one can observe in the peculiar cases of the retaliation of elephants on humans.

As such, we should never stop questioning our motivations for change and progress, and re-examine our values against those of others. Freedom is ultimately defined by the boundaries of another's freedom (including all biological life), thus, the concept of freedom is somewhat paradoxical.

Perhaps off topic, so I'll leave it at that.

Simultaneously, I grew up in a suburb, and my upbringing was largely spent on TV, video-games, various games & media. My internal landscape, as a consequence, is highly frenetic & rapidly shifting. As much as I long for that 'melting' feeling of emplacement (and sometimes for inner silence), I do enjoy urban exploration/ psychogeography on account of the compression of the environment: landscape of accidents, synchronisation, the feeling of inner and outer speed in rhythm.

Here are some examples of my urban fascinations (excuse poor phone resolution). Spoilerama:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[Auburn]

How did I get from an isolated island in the Arctic ocean to the sleepy suburbs of the city? (......) You hear the distant cry of an owl. You become aware of the presence of animals because you see their tracks, everywhere. I have never felt alone in this isolation. But I have felt utterly alone in a city of 4 million people. I long to go back to the snow-covered, isolated and unrestricted expanses of my home country.

(You have such an elegant/poetic way of wording things..)

@topic - I grew up indoors, escaping reality via headphones. I painted my walls dark blue, had black silk curtains and made my own sanctum, a place where i could think undisturbed. I disliked going outside as it always involved activity, interaction, chaos and noise.

But am living in the woods now; beginning to appreciate the outdoors more and realizing what people have been saying about finding solace outside in nature. It's still a bit foreign to me (i like to be inside 4 walls) as I feel exposed and unsafe.