Plant or Patent?
Pollan M. The botany
of desire. New York, NY: Random House, Inc.; 2001. 183-238p.
Chapter 4
Desire: Control
Plant: The Potato (Solanum
tuberosum)
Terms of interest
Allée:
a walk or passage between evenly planted trees
Hubris: excessive pride or self-confidence
Modus
operandi: mode of operation
Debonair: confident, stylish, and charming
Laconic: (of a person, speech, or style of writing) Using very few words
Chapter four, of The Botany of Desire, plants the seeds for change in agriculture.
Michael Pollan beautifully compares a city to green vegetable seedlings,
organized in his garden. He describes
the sublime of nature having her way with us, making us feel small as we awe at
her power. As the chapter progresses, Pollan often refers to the fact that mankind
has a need for power. Something often
associated with oversimplification and the formation of new problems, problems
that often outweigh the original. The evolution of the potato is explained with
the integration of historical facts. Uncertainty is focused upon along the
way. Pollan provides a gate way for insight into the science behind commercial potatoes
of today, bringing humor to the often humorless field of study. Pollan provides
the means for a new perspective on genetically modified organisms (GMO’s).
As Pollan described the sublime of feeling small and in awe by nature, I felt moved on a personal level. This sublime is something I have always been fond of, something I have always craved, appreciated, and embraced since I was a child. Being somewhat of a free spirit, my father was my greatest influence in this.
It is here, in having the capacity to not only work toward but to obtain power, I think our appreciation for nature stems. This is something that has caused problems in all facets of life across history, especially agriculture. In agriculture, as power increases “…every new step in the direction of simplification-toward monoculture, say, or genetically identical plants-leads to unimagined new complexities” (pg. 185). In self-interest, possible repercussions are often not weighed. Immediate benefits are all that are taken into consideration. On the scale of an individual, Pollan describes personal sacrifices for power when he admits to using his tomatillos, planted near his potatoes, as scapegoats for beetles. He reminds us of the commonality our species has for power, even if seemingly, at first glance, non-existent.
Through small details like this, I am reminded of why I see the authors (Pollan and Diamond) contrast so greatly. Pollan brings in dates and explanations of historical events instead of just spewing “facts”. He explains that Solanum tuberosum was first domesticated by the Incas 7000 years ago. He is careful to prevent doubt in the minds of his readers - I respect the consideration. Despite the contrast in, what I consider, relevant details, my poor first impression of Diamond is lifted by Pollan touching on many of the same points. For example, they both consistently touch on our role in co-evolving with plants.
Back to what matters…
In a nutshell, on pg.186, Pollan describes the course of our relationship with plants saying “…together, the people and the plants embarked on a series of experiments in co-evolution that would change them both forever”. Throughout the chapter, we get the impression that people are not the only things with a strong relationship to plants. Things, such as beetles, seem to be dependent on plants for many of the same reasons we are, using plants for protection, food, etc. On this note, I find it particularly interesting that companies like Monsanto are so willing to produce insecticidal vegetables when they affect more than just the target species, such as the case with monarch butterflies. With such uncertainty in the effects of a plant, not knowing what species it will affect in a given ecosystem and how those affects will play out in the long run, I am more than surprised to hear of how widespread GMO’s are, especially when more conventional farms still exist.
I love that Pollan is willing to acknowledge the uncertainty science is composed of, something often overlooked by many new, or not actively involved, in the field of study. Unfortunately, however, it is sometimes overlooked by those that should know better (Monsanto). With respect to power, Pollan says that ideally he wishes to control for every variable but one, and that unfortunately the reality is that everything affects everything, no matter what scale. The uncertainty within the roots of science is made clear when the gene gun, and the genetic methods associated with it, are described as nothing more than a gun shooting rounds coated in DNA (pg. 207). It was disheartening to hear Pollan say, on pg. 210, that he believes “uncertainty is the theme that unifies most of the questions now being raised about agricultural biotechnology by environmentalists and scientists”. Maybe it is for this very reason that Pollan often refers to our actions as to those of either the God Apollo or Dionysus, to diffuse accountability. Aside from obvious pitfalls of a unifying theme like uncertainty in agriculture, I found the whole topic very interesting.
I was particularly interested to hear, on pg. 209, Pollans reaction to such a reality when he says “I was struck by the uncertainty surrounding the process, how this technology is at the same time both astoundingly sophisticated yet still a shot in the dark”. There seemed to be a transition of Pollans opinion, across the chapter, as he continually investigates GMO’s. Beginning to feel increasingly active in science myself, I am beginning to understand that the reality of front-line science seems to be dependent on whether you are proximal or distal to the field of study - I saw this too in hearing Pollans perspective. The further away (distal), the more precise and definite science seems to be. Whether from media or other second hand sources, science always seems to bring reassurance to people as a dependable, factual entity. I think this is something we should be ashamed of, as the essence of life itself is dependent on uncertainty. A false sense of security prevents us from the beauty life has to offer.
Philosophy aside, Pollan continues to avoid conventional thoughts on “factual” science by describing one of the head scientists at Monsanto as a “senior potato person”. With many farmers only netting $50 per acre of crops, laughter might be exactly what we need. No one needs brain damage from a buildup of cortisol in addition to being broke. Good for you Monsanto, you got two birds with one stone. I would say two potatoes with one seed but that would be violating the terms of your “intellectual property”.
Although I feel as if I want to rant and let the world (who all read my blog) know of my newfound distaste in GMO’s, I can’t bring myself to say too much. Simply put, I have an opinion but much as Pollan took the time to understand both sides of the story, I feel I must do the same. I want to hear what Percy Schmeiser has to say; I want to hear first hand the voice of the farmers. I don’t want to be left in the dark in the face of revolutionary change. I want to grow. How did we go from a time where Charles Darwin once said, “man does not actually produce variability” to a time where man thinks he can patent it?
I think this question is the take home message from Pollan, and is the essence of the chapter.
I wish I had an answer to it but I just don’t understand.
Links of interest
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment