Since mid-summer, our twice-daily walks with Muttley the Dog have taken place in the Big Woods behind our house, rather than on the rural, gravel road where we had previously walked. This morning, as Muttley and I were meandering slowly down a deer-made path to one of the cedar groves, I reflected on the differences between the two sorts of walks. Rural gravel roads are nice enough -- trees line the road, the horses in the nearby corral are generally good for a laugh, and sometimes passing neighbors stop for a friendly chat. But a walk in the Big Woods is an entirely different level of experience. Winding paths with an uneven tread require a slow, deliberate pace (unless you enjoy ending up face down in the leaves) and that slow pace allows time for the environment to make itself known. There's time to notice edible Chanterelles a hundred yards from the back door and red-topped toadstools straight out of a fairy tale. There's time to stand still and hear the raindrops hitting the maple leaves and to notice that the ground is almost always bone dry under the cedar trees. There's time to see where the raccoon trails go and the locations of the Douglas Fir cone middens where squirrels sit to strip the seeds from the cones.
The distinction between the two sorts of walks got me thinking about a recent comment from a dear friend that Wal-Mart and the other big box stores might be good because they're efficient and everything costs less. I wonder. Are price and efficiency really the only pertinent considerations? Or is it worth asking what sorts of goods Wal-Mart and the other big box stores sell? Are their products beautiful, functional, and long-lasting? Where do those products come from? What does it cost the planet to make those goods and ship them around the globe? Are company employees paid a living wage? Do they receive decent health benefits? Do company profits enrich the local community? Are communities healthier and more vibrant before or after the big box store moves in?
Could it be that patronizing the big box stores is akin to striding efficiently down the straight, flat, sterile gravel road, missing all the sounds, the smells, the twists and turns of the un-roaded Big Woods? Is true value being sacrificed in the name of price -- is there greater pleasure elsewhere?
Today's front yard critter count:
Raccoons: 5 (Crabby Mama and her 3 teenagers; the New Guy)
Deer: 0
Thank you for sharing your blog with me. I admire the content, the design, and of course the photographs!
ReplyDeleteMisquoted! I said sometimes big is bad, but big isn't always bad.
ReplyDeleteI think it's good to question convention of all kinds, to ponder the spectrum between nostalgia and innovatiove thought, and to always seek out balance.
I've enjoyed mulling over the concept of balance in response to this comment. It seems to me that balance isn't so much a stand-alone goal as it is one possible element of an evidence-weighing process. When evidence is weighed on a scale, sometimes the evidence on both arms of the scale turns out to be equally balanced. In that situation the term balance describes the outcome of the weighing process. Other times, the evidence on one arm of the scale clearly outweighs the evidence on the other arm of the scale. In that situation, seeking some sort of balance would seem to lead away from an accurate picture of the situation. When one is heading into a brick wall at 100 mph, slowing down to only 50 mph in the name of balance would appear to be somewhat unwise.
ReplyDeleteI quite agree, particularly in a digital world or where we seek a decision within a singular dimension that we might initially view as involving polar opposites. Consider this as an expanded approach: If balance in life is viewed as being animated by some objective - let's pick harmony or peacefulness - balance can be viewed as an effort to appreciate all the nuance that surrounds us, to avoid characterizing the world as bound by opposites, and to appreciate, dare I day empathize with, other perspectives. Balance may be multidimensional with regard to an issue involving multiple perspectives to weigh, and dynamic when we factor in connectedness to others and the world around us. It doesn't preclude making deliberate choices, but it facilitates less reactionary choices by widening perspectives and incorporating empathy.
ReplyDeleteYour comment brings to mind an image I like -- the image of a scale with numerous arms, rather than just two. There are arms for factual evidence, and arms for moral values, and arms for emotion, and arms for other viewpoints. A complete analysis most assuredly requires consideration of fine distinctions, nuance if you will. When all is said and done, sometimes there are still hills worth dying on. This isn't a matter of rigidity or incomplete vision. It's a matter of caring deeply about some things and acting on that care.
ReplyDelete