How To Change The World #3: Personal Narrative (and Action) in Addressing Climate Change

Q: Many have reported on the difficulty of getting people to focus on climate change because it’s such a long-term problem. Describe two techniques you have found useful in getting people to either change the pattern of their own energy consumption or to advocate for public policies that address environmental threats.

A: Recently, I saw four sets of data that really struck me in this report on my country from the World Bank: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/06/20/survey-8-of-10-Filipinos-Personally-Experience-Impacts-of-Climate-Change

1. That 8 out of 10 Filipinos personally experience impacts of climate change
2. 52% have little to almost NO understanding of climate change. 
3. Also, 63% have NOT personally participated in efforts to reduce the risks of reducing the effects of climate change. 
4. And 68% have NOT participated in an effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

And as a test of response, I posted the data on my social media page and got what I expected: zero response (no likes, no comments). That’s just the effect of talking about climate change. Prof. Daniel Kammen of UC Berkeley put it very succinctly in the conversation on energy, sustainability and solution science video (video lecture 3.8 of How To Change The World): a) quoting Prof. George Lakoff, cognitive linguist, there’s no verb form (pretty much, no language) for humans being affected by outside forces like climate change and b) there’s no currency for dealing with climate change.

Climate change is the elephant in the room. We all know, especially us Filipinos, that it is happening. But there’s no structure around which to talk about it without getting extremely polarized. I took a consensus among my office mates during a lunch break and they all believe climate change is real. What is hard to put into words and action is what to do about it that will actually make a difference.

The two techniques that I have found that are effective for getting people to care about climate change have to do with something that Prof. Kammen said and what Prof. Alice Haddad, political scientist (video 3.4 Grassroots Politics and Climate Change) said.

1) Prof. Alice Haddad talked about how art is one potent way to engage people. It’s because art creates narrative, something people care about. It is something that moves them and helps them emotionally engage with an issue or a concept.

2) Prof. Kammen talked about connecting a highly abstract thing like climate change to a deeply personal level of experience.

Overall, I’m also inspired by the work of E.F. Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered. Schumacher advocates a return to small, appropriate technologies that empower people without destroying the environment.

For me, the personal story/ narrative, together with action, are far more effective than rhetoric and fear-mongering. My simple story about signing up with a local initiative called Good Food Community http://www.goodfoodcommunity.com/, which helps local smallholder farmers invest in, and continue to practice, organic farming is a small step in the direction towards addressing climate change (ex. organic farming practices and lower carbon footprint by buying local produce). It’s also something that people responded to positively. It’s an action that could easily be taken by a family and it’s connected to my daily life. It’s a very personal choice but it’s not exclusive. Anyone can make this choice. It’s about doing something that anybody could do without being overwhelmed.

Note: I am currently taking up a course boldly called How To Change The World offered by Wesleyan University (offered for free through Coursera.org) and taught by Wesleyan University President, Michael S. Roth. It tackles major issues facing humanity and it is based on discussions brought up during the 2013 Social Good Summit in NY. I am putting up all my assignments on my blog as well.

ModPo 2013 #53 Katipunan Avenue, The Personal Is The Political: On Silliman's "Albany"

Link to text for Albany by Ron Silliman here.
--------------------------------------------------------

"The line is the distance between." I think this pretty much sums up the Albany chapter of Silliman's The Alphabet. With the aid of the video discussion, I pretty much get that the sentences are intentionally jumbled up (inviting reader participation) and that the "between-ness" is the goal of the prose poem. There is no logical point to it except to witness how the self gets created "in between."

These lines were so evocative to me: "Our home, we were told, had been broken, but who were these people we lived with? Clubbed in the stomach, she miscarried. There were bayonets on campus, cows in India, people shoplifting books. I just want to make it to lunch time."

It's a jumble, it's a mix. But there's something so powerful about "Our home, we were told, had been broken" juxtaposed with "but who were these people we lived with?" It's non-sequitur but I can imagine that these two lines make sense to someone growing up in such a home. And then a moment of violence in American history: a woman clubbed in the stomach, miscarrying. It's a piece of trivia. But it is also very personal. Very "in-the-gut" wrenching. What a line to follow a broken home! It's an exclamation point. And then right after, we are whirled from bayonets on campus ("militarized" universities), cows in India (that are sacred and left to roam the streets) and people shoplifting books. These three are so far from each other that the reader needs to find that line, that thin line in between that connects random worlds (and words). It's a mix of rights, ancient and recent, and the breaking of laws. And then that last line: "I just want to make it to lunch time." Who hasn't thought these very same thoughts? The poet invites the reader to draw the lines.

This prose poem will give you a headache...if you expect a narrative. But who wants this much work? I think I asked this question all the way in the chapter on Emily Dickinson. I guess those who want to look into the nuances of words and language. Puzzles with no end.

Here's one for you:

I'll tell you a love story. There are books on the bed. And the Pope is here. And there is some writing on the blue journal. The one with flowers. A chair is thrown. A sleeve is ripped. What is Biogesic for? Give me the keys. I can get out of here now. But where would I go? Look at my cheek. What color is it? Not really here. There's a knife in the kitchen. The note on the bathroom mirror is in black. The grass is all around. There are dragonflies hovering. The letter is stapled. I take a match. My head is exploding. I have a prescription. We smile at the back of the car. Grow up, grow up, grow up.

That was a short response to Albany. Maybe I'll call it Katipunan Avenue. A short excerpt.

I can feel what's being said: the personal is the political. I agree.