Getting Past the Preservation of Our Own Self-Image. Krakauers Into the Wild and Sieberts An Elephant Crackup - Essay Example

?Getting Past the Preservation of Our Own Self-Image For a long period of time, mankind has been so engrossed at resolving the issues that have led into strife and misunderstanding among themselves, especially those cases which have actually prompted serious crises in society. Conflicts between men have been the primary concern of many political and religious leaders who have taken responsibility to regain peace and harmony. There are successful attempts at reducing racial tensions, political violence, economic disparities, and other causes and effects of intra-human conflicts. In effect, mankind has been triumphant to a certain degree in becoming more civilized and to be grounded on humanness. However, as mankind enjoys the benefits of such success, it is also clear that his relationship with other species in the planet has not yet improved. There is still the tendency of stressing the preservation of self-image as distinct specie at the expense of other animals and living things in his environment. Because of this, the abuse and destruction of other animals have continued, which ironically would also lead to new tensions and between people. This is the reason why there is an urgent necessity to overcome the tendency of over-emphasizing self-preservation even if it meant the serious disadvantage of the other species that share the planet’s resources with people. The essays written by Job Krakauer and Charles Siebert provide valuable insights on how man should treat the other animal species. Krakauer’s Into the Wild, may actually be the real story of Chris McCandless as he tries to survive the Alaskan wild but it also highlights his realizations about man’s relationship with animals. Siebert’s “An Elephant Crackup?”, on the other hand, accurately points out very attitude of man that has served as a stumbling block in establishing a mutually beneficial relationship between men and the other members of the animal kingdom. The key points of both written works all lead to a conclusion that in order for man to stop altogether the maltreatment of other animal species, he should first get past his tendency of laying too much emphasis on the preservation of self-image. Man must set aside his idea of being human, a superior life form in the animal kingdom. It is only when he regards himself as merely a part of the animal kingdom, a co-equal of the other species who are also trying to survive and thrive, that he would be compelled to stop animal abuse and maltreatment. It is when people only think of their own interests and strive to achieve these at all cost that they would be unable to appreciate the need to be sensitive to others also. Once this happens among them, it is expected that conflicts between them would also arise. This is basically the same thing that happens between man and the other species. When man focuses on the preservation of his self-image, he tends to become insensitive to the plight of other animals. This is exactly what happened to the indiscriminate slaughter of the elephants in Africa and in other parts of the world where the mammals exist. Siebert argues that “decades of poaching and culling and habitat loss…have so disrupted the intricate web of familial and societal relations by which young elephants have traditionally been raised in the wild, and by which established elephant herds are governed, that what we are now witnessing is nothing less than a precipitous collapse of elephant culture” (323). New generations of elephants have been found to be more dangerous to humans, especially when these go on a rampage. However, this negative change of attitude among the elephants is not motivated by inherently natural reasons. Studies have proven that the reason why this happens is that human activity, which is basically insensitive to the plight of their specie, has pushed to desperation. However, if human activity in relation to animals is only meant to satisfy immediate needs and not to comply with excessively selfish demands, man would become more sensitive to the conditions of other species. McCandless wrote in his journal: “when I had caught and cleaned and cooked and eaten my fish, they seemed not to have fed me essentially…it was insignificant and unnecessary, and cost more than it came to” (Krakauer 210). McCandless realization may seem a bit exaggerated, considering that fishes are far less intelligent than other wildlife. The point here though is that McCandless reached a conclusion that needs to be appreciated by mankind as well. People have been so accustomed to consuming more than what is necessary and to develop cravings for things that are not even fundamental to their survival. This has resulted into the rampant slaughter of animals not to satisfy the basic requirements of survival but to meet artificial demands. Man’s abuse and maltreatment of other animals is not even natural. This is contrary to the concept being propagated that humans are superior, which is why they not only have the right but also the natural tendency to slaughter animals in huge quantities for satisfaction. In a journal entry, McCandless explains that “the repugnance to animal food is not the effect of experience but is an instinct” (Krakauer 210). McCandless realizes at this point that he can actually live in utmost simplicity, relying only on the objects around him to satisfy his most immediate needs, and this does not make him unhappy in any way. This would seem impossible for humans who have been so accustomed to supermarket shelves that are filled with animal-based food items. People may not be able to consume whatever food from animals is being processed by manufacturers but they still could not bear seeing the shelves having quantities that are adequate for them. This is basically greed and this is unnatural. Animals eat enough to survive and to do their most natural activities. Humans produce food at the expense of other animals not feed themselves but to earn money, which again is unnatural. Man’s behavior in this regard is self-centered. Studies have proven that animals also feel almost the same way that humans do. The reaction of new generations of elephants to human encroachment and abuse is a proof of this. Siebert admits though that there some scientists, such as Bradshaw and her colleagues, have come up with what “would seem to be an extreme form of anthropocentric conjecture if the evidence that they’ve compiled from various elephant researchers, even on the strictly observational level, wasn’t so compelling” (325). However, such analysis is clearly an attempt at achieving an understanding of animal behavior far different from the self-centered “man is superior to other species” line of thinking that is still the dominant concept among human beings. With this radical counter-concept, it is hoped that man would begin entertaining the idea of making himself a co-equal of other species. Getting past the preservation of self-image cannot be realized instantaneously. It is necessary to acknowledge the fact that man’s current attitude towards other animal species is not one that has been developed overnight and, therefore, is very easy to unlearn. The process of unlearning habits and attitudes that may have been entrenched in the human mindset for centuries can be long and tedious. However, it is possible and what is necessary at the moment is for this generation to begin the solid initial steps toward that direction when people no longer think only of the preservation of their self-image, when man and animals live in harmony and mutual respect. There are two basic stages in the effort of achieving such direction; one is when man transcends his humanness and the second is when he finally integrates with the rest of the animal kingdom. Apparently, the first stage is of extreme importance because it is at this point when man must first overcome his selfish tendencies. Siebert articulates that “while our concern may ultimately be rooted in that most human of impulses - the preservation of our own self-image - the great paradox about this particular moment in our history with elephants is that saving them will require finally getting past ourselves; it will demand the ultimate act of deep, interspecies empathy” (331). With these words, Siebert points out that saving the animals may prompt man to commit actions that would supposedly benefit the other species. However, as long as the perspective of doing so still retains the hallmarks of self-image, such response may either be futile or inadequate. For man to truly work for the wellbeing of animals, he has to completely set aside his interest as humans. He has to think of survival not as a human being but as an animal who wishes to live longer despite the odds. It is by doing this that man is able to forget his self-proclaimed superiority over other species and therefore lose his self-image in the process. Once this is done, the next stage of integrating with the rest of the member of the animal kingdom should be easy. McCandless came to realize that “an extended stay in the wilderness inevitably directs one’s attention outward as much as inward, and it is impossible to live off the land without developing both a subtle understanding of, and a strong emotional bond with, that land and all it holds” (Krakauer 220). In order for man to develop empathy for the other species, he should be in the wilderness too. At first, this may lead into introspection but soon, he would be compelled to think only about survival and gradually his mindset would become similar to animals. Integration with animals in the wild, therefore, is a very effective way of getting past the concept of self-image preservation. For as long as man continues to uphold the concept of preserving self-image, it would be impossible for him to seek the solutions to the problems that he himself had brought about to the rest of the animal kingdom. It is not that mankind has been inhuman, which is why the destruction of other animal species has been going on for centuries already. It is actually because mankind has been so engrossed at his being human and his perceived superiority over other species that made the destruction possible. The process of overcoming tendency of emphasizing self-image may not be short and easy but there are actual steps that could be taken so that a change of attitude toward other species is achieved. McClandless’ realizations as described by Krakauer in his Into the Wild should enlighten people on the matter. Siebert’s discussions in ‘An Elephant Crackup’ give a historical and scientific explanation of the root causes of man’s destructive attitude toward the rest of the animal kingdom. There is urgency in the need to stop the destructive behavior of man against the other species and to repair the damage that has been done. To do this, however, people should first transcend their humanness and to embrace again their animalistic origin. It is at this point too that they would find it easy to integrate with the animals and commune with them. Work Cited Krakauer, Jon. “Selections from Into the Wild: The Alaska Interior.” The New Humanities Reader. Siebert, Charles. “An Elephant Crackup?” The New Humanities Reader. Read More