In Celebration of Earth Day, I Went Vegan!

Roasted Portabella Mushroom Melt from Cafe Sunflower, Sandy Springs, GA.

Update: I am no longer vegan. I attempted the diet for two months and decided instead to eat less meat, and when I do, try my best to buy organic, local grass or grain fed meats.

I know, I know: it’s been several weeks since Earth Day, right? Well, in keeping with tradition (last year, I bought a hybrid), I’ve made another major change in my life, to better serve the environment. I’ve purposely waited until now to post this because this evening marks one month since I began a vegan diet. For those of you who are unaware, a vegan diet comprises of eating no animal or animal by-products. I’ve largely been promoting a vegan lifestyle in all other manner of things, so it really seemed just a matter of time.

Even so, a great many of my friends and family were shocked to hear that I’d suddenly decided, during a privately emotional battle between me and a rare hunk of sirloin, to completely cut out meat and dairy, etc., from my diet–cold turkey, as the saying goes. Several of my vegan friends (it’s really great to have some long-term, educated vegan friends to support me!) actually suggested I try out vegetarianism first. But after I’d filled my head with all the harsh, disgusting truth, I felt I needed to cease and desist altogether.

That being said, I am not doing this for dietary reasons–however, I already feel a lot healthier, incidentally. Instead, I’ve made the leap for ethical reasons. I can no longer support the unnecessary suffering and torture of animals that is so prevalent in the world today. No rational or misguided justification can change my view on this. Our brutal society has done absolutely nothing to safeguard the treatment of innocent creatures (sorry bub: your “organic” and “free-range” meat and eggs are still the product of tortured animals); therefore, the only solution is to cut it out completely.

And me, and my taste buds couldn’t be happier. I feel better about myself; I’m much more energetic; and, most importantly, I can sleep at night. I’ve been pleasantly surprised at most of my family and friends’ reactions and support in all this. My parents have expressed some serious interest in cutting down on meat (there have been talks of cutting red meat completely… Mom? Dad? Is that still something being contemplated?) and my dad really loved Spiral Diner, a vegan restaurant, co-owned by my friend and fellow filmmaker, James M. Johnston.

No matter what you’re eating, I challenge you to analyze it. Are you really tasting your food? Or do you find yourself loading it with condiments? Dipping your vegetables in your gravy? Or perhaps all of your food is covered in grease and lined with fat? None of this applies to me. I’m truly tasting my food now and I hope to continually rebuild my taste buds in time. In addition, I’m no longer supporting the mutilation, torture and killing of innocent, sentient and feeling animals.

Filed under: Environmentalism, Veganism

AFI Dallas Gets All Environmental (Well, Its Films Do Anyway)

A welcome growing trend at film festivals worldwide has been presenting films dealing with environmentally conscious themes. AFI Dallas has actually created an entire block, dealing solely with environmental subjects ranging from the world-wide water problem to the coal industry. The following two films were both hits at Sundance and although I missed them there, I was lucky enough to catch them here, at AFI Dallas. Both of these films deal with the subject of water. While Up the Yangtze focuses on a microcosm, Flow: For Love of Water focuses on the global issue (and even references the particular issue dealt with in Up the Yangtze). Watching either one of these films should drastically change your views on water conservation and modern industry as a whole. Rightly so, Up the Yangtze has received a limited theatrical release and hopefully more screenings will be available in the future. Flow: For Love of Water has also received some limited screenings and will most-likely be distributed as well.

A breathtaking cinematic experience, Up the Yangtze visually displays the problematic nature of industry and technology along the river Yangtze in China. Upon completion, the Three Gorges Dam will be the largest hydro-electric power station in the world. But the ramifications are catastrophic: over 1,500,000 people have been, or will be, relocated; cultural and archaeological sites will be flooded and destroyed; and the negative effects on the habitat of the region is impossible to avoid, due to the dramatic environmental change.

Filmmaker Yung Chang shows the devastating effects the dam has had on the surrounding community. Whole cities are being drowned and their inhabitants forced to relocate. Many families have been promised prosperity by government officials, and yet they tell tales of being beaten and dragged from their homes. The impoverished, though they can’t afford to move, are forced to. They can no longer farm because of the vast changes of the land and their homes are going under water. Some, ironically, choose to work on the dam; others, on luxury cruise liners carting rich foreign tourists along the river, as if the destruction of all this geography and civilization were merely an amusing spectacle.

Chang follows two teenagers in particular, who choose to work on the boats: sixteen year old Shui Yu (or “Cindy”) and nineteen year old Bo Yu Chen (or “Jerry”). They are given “American names” for the benefit of the tourists. As a footnote, they’re also not allowed to talk about current politics or anything that might make the Americans more uncomfortable (particularly, anything related to the independence of Canada, the struggle in Northern Ireland, and the monarchical system of the United Kingdom). Shui Yu comes from an impoverished family who’s had to build a hut from scraps because they cannot sustain themselves in the city where you have to buy vegetables and pay rent. Because her family is so poor, Shui Yu really has no choice but to work. She must forget about attending high school (she used to dream of being a scientist, but knows that fantasy is an impossibility). Bo Yu Chen, on the other hand, aspires only to have a lot of money and holds solely himself in esteem. His selfish behavior gets him into trouble, however, and because of it, his success is fleeting.

Clearly an ironic metaphor for what’s happening to the region, these two teens, along with their fellow co-workers, sleep under the main decks in rooms filled with bunks and lacking air-conditioning, while the tourists marveling at the changing environment enjoy fine dining and all the amenities of a luxury cruise line. The metaphor becomes clear towards the end of the film when an elderly man stands on the dam and stares out over the drowned cities and flooded landscapes and notes only his amazement with the Chinese government, for its ability to split the gigantic river in two. He smiles faintly, as we linger on his brittle face. A similar sentiment earlier in the film gives us a downtrodden man attempting to defend the actions of the government, but in the end, finds himself weeping uncontrollably.

Martin Heidegger was deeply concerned with man’s relationship with nature, specifically when dealing with the question of Being. He wrote that man’s increasing technological quest was directly changing his relationship to Being. That man is concerned only with conquering nature, severely alters his ability to be harmonious with nature. In this passage from his essay entitled, “The Question Concerning Technology,” Heidegger describes the hydroelectric power station on the Rhine river:

The hydroelectric plant is set into the current of the Rhine. It sets the Rhine to supplying its hydraulic pressure, which then sets the turbines turning. This turning sets those machines in motion whose thrust sets going the electric current for which the long-distance power station and its network of cables are set up to dispatch electricity. In the context of the interlocking processes pertaining to the orderly disposition of electrical energy, even the Rhine itself appears to be something at our command.^[1]

 

The problem has been festering for some time now. Where so many philosophers have argued in favor of conquering nature to suit our own practical needs, others have found that view point problematic from the start. Aristotle, for example, was largely concerned with merely understanding nature, while Descartes, the “Father of Modern Philosophy,” wished to “render ourselves masters and owners of nature” (cf. Descartes’ Discourse on Method). As Descartes’ view of the world became the prevailing and popularized view of the world, at least when dealing with Western philosophy, Heidegger warned us of it’s consequences, from a purely philosophical perspective. Now, we’re seeing the practical complications of technology and industry, as such.

Up the Yangtze ends with a joke told by one of the inhabitants of the river Yangtze, a worker on one of the luxury cruise ships:

Two leaders, one an American and the other Chinese, are riding along in a car. They come to a fork in the road. To the right is the way of capitalism. To the left is socialism. The American leader suggests they go right. The Chinese leader agrees; though he suggests they do so, but turn on the left blinker.

^[1] Martin Heidegger, “The Question Concerning Technology,” Basic Writings Ed. David Krell (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1993), 321.

***
Director Irena Salina deals with the global issue surrounding the need for water conservation, due to the shortage of water world-wide, the social and political ramifications of privatization of water control, the startling realization that water all over the world is basically unsanitary, and the negative impact of water bottling.

Not only are governments building enormous dams, largely funded by the World Bank, that displace millions of people, but most of the world’s water goes largely unchecked–both out of the tap and into the bottle. Millions of Americans, for example, get sick every year due to the stuff found in the water supply. And bottling companies are doing immense damage by sucking out all of the water in local areas and destroying the habitant and natural environment of nearby inhabitants. Far worse, they’re taking all of the water and, in cahoots with government officials, forcing the poorer people to pay for the water that’s already theirs.

The film focuses a great deal on local, community water sanitation systems in India that are affordable and practical. One of the neatest systems referenced in the film, is basically a merry-go-round for children. When the children spin each other around, the machine goes to work. Many governments shut these systems down, however, and substitute largely inefficient and costly systems, at the expense of the local community. The locals then have to walk several miles and pay a ridiculous amount for the water. Most of them cannot afford to pay, so they take their chances on the polluted river water.

What really made me cringe, however–and what really hit close to home–was the facts presented about major bottling companies and their practices. It’s fairly common knowledge now that most bottled water is not from the springs or mountain valleys or whatever; but mostly just tap water. Many people that I’ve talked to about bottled water, say they drink it because, even though it’s tap water, it’s filtrated and more reliable than city water. Yet there’s really no evidence to substantiate this. Unfortunately, there really is no regulation in the industry; and what little regulation there is, largely goes unchecked due primarily to a lack or resources. So, the bottled water you’re drinking could actually be worse than the city tap water freely available at home.

Both of these films deal with the harsh realities of privatization of industries and the drastic negative effects they’ve had worldwide. The fact is that this is, and will remain, a global problem. No government or company should ever claim ownership or control the water supply, as it is necessary and essential for human survival. When President Skroob sucks the air out of a can (see Spaceballs), we all had a laugh because it was a parody: no one would ever really own air, would they? But corporations and governments currently own water and manipulate the water supply to suit their needs. Let’s stop this before the slippery slope continues. Sign the petition to add a 31st article to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, establishing access to clean water as a fundamental human right (thank you Flow: For Love of Water‘s website for making this accessible).

Filed under: Environmentalism, Film Festivals, Dallas Int'l Film Festival, Flow: For Love of Water, Up the Yangtze