After reading and discussing the poem I really started to wonder what all he and we had left out. Granted, the poem was about the effects of testing a bomb and not Nevada, but the poem left me with a false sense of my home state. He made it seem as if the testing destroyed the lives of the poor people who just wanted to survive. Yes, this was a horrific event and time in our history that destroyed much of what we call humanity. I am, in my personal life, seeking to further understand this. I am not focusing on that aspect, but instead the art of exclusion. The author never mentioned how bare the state of Nevada is. People don't fully comprehend what I mean when I say that there is literally nothing out there. I appreciate and love my state, but I also acknowledge that it isn't the greatest of living conditions. So, while reading through this poem I couldn't help asking myself what are we missing.
The bombs and bomb testing destroyed the planet. I would like to again emphasis that I do not disagree with this. However, this particular poem really made me question whether or not we as artists, scientist, and even poets are obligated to include all aspect of what we are depicting. Should we prove a point or present a situation?
So, I ask you: what are we missing?
One thing I would encourage you to consider is nature and its many unique forms. Although to you the desert landscape and lack of trees and shrub may not seem as beautiful and valuable as the Colorado wilderness, to some people (myself included) the Nevada landscape is still beautiful and wonderful! The bomb did affect nature that some consider pleasurable, so maybe try and keep that in mind when reading the poem again!
ReplyDeleteI think your argument fails to take in to account the cyclical nature of the testing in Nevada. Do nuclear tests take place in Nevada because it is such a bare state? Or does the majority of Nevada continue to remain empty because of nuclear testing? A classic and mentally exhausting though pattern, but something interesting in considering the long term impact of nuclear tests and how it continues to have a hand in our lives. Perhaps if there had been no nuclear testing in that area nature could have developed beautifully and in such a way as to support more inhabitants, or perhaps Nevada could have sprouted more oasis like cities in the same manner of Las Vegas to meet other social needs requiring a large amount of land.
ReplyDeleteThat is something that I think we are missing.
However, I don't think every artist or scientist or poet is obligated to present the whole situation and include arduous analysis such as this at the expense of their point. So long as some present the entire situation as opposed to a single point, then they intellectual community as a whole will meet its obligation to educate society.
Sean,
ReplyDeleteI have to admit I kind of agree with you about Nevada. What made me have a different perspective was talking to someone about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. The engineers had to plan on storing the waste for 10,000 years before it would become reasonably inactive. How can we store nuclear waste for that long? Human records are not that long. We can't put up a sign and expect people that far into the future to recognize that it is a dangerous area. We also don't know how the area will change in the future. Geologic time includes now. In the future what we don't see valuable in Nevada may be highly sought after-- will future people run into issues with the radiation we are creating now?