This year Cedar Rapids, IA was expecting a 2008 repeat. I'll recap for you if you aren't sure what happened in 2008. So we had an extremely wet spring, after a very large amount of precipitation in the previous winter. The ground was completely saturated with water, so the Cedar River was already flowing a bit higher than it normally does (around 9ft). But what happened next was unprecedented. Upstream storms dropped a lot of rain, causing the river to further swell to a whopping 31.2ft on Friday June 13th, 2008. It impacted and displaced thousands of people, and cost millions in repairs for the city alone. The floodwaters this year crested around 21.9ft, thankfully. But the city was prepared for far worse, building massive sandbag walls to prevent the oncoming floodwaters, and evacuating at risk residents. One wetland just upstream of the Cedar Rapids area has been credited with the low crest of the river, holding back about 2.6 billion gallons of water. Prior to the flooding event, the wetland had already been containing a large volume of water from previous weather events, however, it still did it's job. And now thanks to the bond sales allocating money towards water quality and flood prevention, we'll be even less concerned in the future (barring other environmental phenomenon...ahem...climate change). Suffice it to say that I am very proud of my hometown for stepping up. While I might not appreciate the nation's choice for president, I am ecstatic for the future of wetland restoration in Eastern Iowa and look forward to more natural area exploration.
So while the entire world has been exploding over Donald Trump being elected president of the United States, I've been kind of blowing up over the fact that my hometown voted to approve the sale of bonds ($40 million) to go towards the waterways and surrounding lands in the region for the purpose of wetland restoration. Before European settlement, wetlands covered 11% of Iowa's surface. Since then 95% of those wetlands have been lost, leaving us only with about 250,000 acres of wetlands, dramatically dispersed throughout the state. This dispersal is really bad when considering ecological significance, specifically with population flow, genetics, etc. But that is very much not the point. The point is that our wetlands are few and far between now. The lack of wetlands has resulted in a number of scenarios that could have been avoided. These scenarios being the more devastating and more frequent flooding events that have occurred throughout Iowa in the past number of years. Granted, there is other environmental phenomenon influencing the frequency and destructiveness (ahem...climate change), but now isn't the time. Were we to have the appropriate natural areas, wetlands would solve a lot of our problems. Their function is to slow and retain water, to allow nutrients and sediments to settle. An increase in wetland habitat would not only reduce flood events, but also decrease the amount of erosion and the amount of nutrient runoff that reaches the Gulf of Mexico creating the Dead Zone.
This year Cedar Rapids, IA was expecting a 2008 repeat. I'll recap for you if you aren't sure what happened in 2008. So we had an extremely wet spring, after a very large amount of precipitation in the previous winter. The ground was completely saturated with water, so the Cedar River was already flowing a bit higher than it normally does (around 9ft). But what happened next was unprecedented. Upstream storms dropped a lot of rain, causing the river to further swell to a whopping 31.2ft on Friday June 13th, 2008. It impacted and displaced thousands of people, and cost millions in repairs for the city alone. The floodwaters this year crested around 21.9ft, thankfully. But the city was prepared for far worse, building massive sandbag walls to prevent the oncoming floodwaters, and evacuating at risk residents. One wetland just upstream of the Cedar Rapids area has been credited with the low crest of the river, holding back about 2.6 billion gallons of water. Prior to the flooding event, the wetland had already been containing a large volume of water from previous weather events, however, it still did it's job. And now thanks to the bond sales allocating money towards water quality and flood prevention, we'll be even less concerned in the future (barring other environmental phenomenon...ahem...climate change). Suffice it to say that I am very proud of my hometown for stepping up. While I might not appreciate the nation's choice for president, I am ecstatic for the future of wetland restoration in Eastern Iowa and look forward to more natural area exploration.
0 Comments
Today was a trying day. I'm sure it was hard for everyone, all around the world, in every nation, for a multitude of different reasons, but today was especially hard for me. So I'm going to do it, I'm going to air my dirty laundry and take a long, hot bath because today I break free from scourge that has threatened to take me down. Today my parents went to court. In a very long, very difficult divorce that has lasted well over two years, with plenty of issues stemming from long before, my parents finally got to court. I suppose I am very lucky, to not be a child and dealing with this, but I cannot pretend that this did not affect me, that it didn't tear my insides out and threaten my very essence...even though I am 21 years old, not living at home, and a mature, responsible adult. It did. It tore me apart each and every day. I will not deny, I probably shouldn't have gone to watch them duke it out - it was an experience of a type of trauma I do not wish on anyone, however, I needed some closure, and I needed to support my mother. Throughout this process I have wholeheartedly been behind my mother every step of the way. But you must understand why to get my message, and if this blog post ever reaches my father, I will likely not hear from him again. Honestly I don't really care. I'd have to do a whole lot less pretending if that were the case. To the outside world, my father is a generous, charismatic man who loves his community and cares for his family. To me, my father is an asshole who tells stories, lies, and uses people in order to get what he wants. He blames other people when he messes up and doesn't listen to anything that doesn't mesh with his version of events - which is often flawed. My parents' marriage counselor told my mother to get out of there because he is so irresponsible - and from my understanding of what a marriage counselor's job is, that's a last case scenario. My father twists words so well that by the end of the argument you're arguing about words and not things that actually matter - like financial problems. He ignores important things you tell him about, like being accepted into the college of your dreams or your senior project, and then gets mad when you "haven't told him anything" and "he didn't know about it", and it's your fault he forgot that thing that was so important to you. At best, he's a disagreeable man, in actuality, he's everything that you could possibly dislike in a person. He'd like to pretend he's there for me and my sister, both emotionally and financially. In truth, my friends who work at the supermarket see him more than I do. I like to ask them how he is. When I see him now, my sister drives because I take a shot of vodka before I go to see him - I'm not an alcoholic, it decreases my blood pressure and keeps me level headed. He cares more about his triathalon next summer than my job search and my sister's decision on a major. Financially? He feels he can't support himself in a house where he lives on another's dime, yet makes more in a month than I will in a year, so clearly he wouldn't be able to help pay for my education, which would've been nice to know before I got to my senior year at a private, liberal arts college. So in the end: Does he lie? Yes. Does he tell stories? Absolutely. Does he take advantage of others? For sure. Does he care about me and my sister? Highly questionable. And does his behavior disgust me? Without a doubt.
You have to understand, my mother isn't perfect, and sometimes she downright sucks. But the thing is, she never abandoned me when I needed her most. She never kept me in the dark about the fact that he had filed for divorce. She never lied to me. She didn't move out without telling me. She didn't use her uncle as a meal ticket and expect him to scrape up money from nowhere to feed me and my sister. To him I am simply a child that doesn't have a place in the middle of their relationship, even though I am a child of it. To her I am a thoughtful, intelligent adult who is interested in the lives of my parents and capable of making decisions about my level of knowledge for myself. While I probably have every right to hate him, to want to punish him, to despise him, I recognize now that I cannot stoop to his level. I won't use dirty tactics and completely fictional stories to get you to understand me and feel sorry for me. I don't want that. I am using this blog to air out my laundry. I am using this blog to scrub my skin of this filth. I am using this to reorient my field of view. I cannot continue to let this affect how I interact with people on a daily basis - because I know who I am and what I believe and I won't let myself become twisted in the words of others again. I cannot let this affect how I respond to men - because they aren't all like him. I cannot let him color how I see the world - not everyone is trying to screw me over and take advantage of my sympathies. No longer. Today I take back my humanity and push away my fear. I am enough. Today I declare my freedom. I mean this blog as a promise to my mother, my sister, and my future family. I (will) love you deeper than you can possibly imagine. And I mean this blog as a spot of hope to all kids, teenagers, and new and old adults out there who are dealing with the same traumas, perhaps the same situation. It is possible to get through it. I am not there yet, but I promise it is there. You are worth something to me. Lots of love. In the wake of the San Bernadino shooting, The New York Times asked the public to respond and reflect on their fear of mass shootings, which are becoming increasingly more commonplace in our society today. As I read this article, which was beautifully written by N.R. Kleinfield, I couldn't help but find myself connecting to the people who responded on an instinctual level. I have the good fortune to live in a place where I feel secure and believe that a mass shooting would never happen - that comes from the fact that I'm at a small, liberal arts college in an extremely small town in the middle of nowhere. Over the course of my four years here I've made it a point to get to know my peers, my community, to try to understand the minds of the people who live in this isolated place. Fortunately, I've found extremely kind, generous people here who truly care about the wellbeing of their community and individuals within it. So of course I don't feel threatened here in this beautiful place. However, every time I return home to the larger city, worry sets in and I feel what these people feel. Fear. Anxiety. Dread. Because being in a situation where I am surrounded by people I don't quite know is frightening now.
The Washington Post, reporting numbers compiled by the Reddit community, states that we have had more mass shootings this year than we have had days in it, the number is 351 shootings in the 334 days (article published on November 30th). A mass shooting is defined as having four or more victims, this includes the shooter. When we mourn so often and fear so frequently, there is no reason not to fear the world outside the your own home. I identify with the people cited in this article. We’re always taught that you never know what’s going to happen when we leave our homes, but this is that statement taken to the extreme. We fear for ourselves, our children, our parents, and our friends each and every second. We fear the people we don't know, and sometimes, those that we do. I fear the backpack abandoned in the cafeteria on some days like today. And I sit here and look at my peers and fear for them and pray they don't become a victim. Just another number in a long, unending list, just a statistic on the wall of some Reddit page. Because while I recognize the value of that page and the value of numbers, these are my peers; they're my family, and I fear for my family. In the end, we need to recognize that fear cannot rule our lives. We need to get out there and continue our lives. Not as normal, no, but as people who recognize the dangers of the world and deal with it accordingly. To the person who searches for a hiding place for his kids, and the person concerned about the guy checking his watch slightly too often, and the person who doesn't want to drop her son off at his job, and every other person out there confronting the same fears, be strong and continue your lives. Our society is only as great as we make it, and while I know that this fear is sometimes debilitating, we need to continue to strengthen our bonds. We need to understand each other. We need to bring out the best in all of our peers and neighbors in the hopes that someday we can walk out our doors and never have this fear again. Lots of love. As I sit here writing my senior paper, I'm pondering the world around me. Recently someone posed a question to my school community, "If you could be anything, what would you be??" And of course the question being posed in an open area with a high flow of traffic, people responded. You have your realistic answers of "researcher", "singer", "orthopedic surgeon", and you have your crazy answers of "cat" and "Niall's bae" - which I consider crazy because both are pretty long shots...though with today's medicine...kidding. But some of the answers struck me in a way that I have to put down in words here. Happy. One response to the question posed was "happy". This response was inspiring to me for several reasons.
First, that that's all someone wants, is to be happy. Happiness is something that we always seem to be searching for. It's something we desire. We are constantly catching the briefest glimpse of it, maybe even have the chance to touch it, but we never truly catch it and hold on to it. Which leaves me pondering the question, do the other answers suggest that that's all that's standing between them and true happiness? If they don't achieve their dreams, are they not going to be happy? Are they going to replace those dreams with others if they don't achieve them? How do we hold onto happiness? The other way that it inspired me, that I really want to hit home, is that the statement "happy" implicitly recognizes the fact that people are not always happy. There are so many ways I can take this blog post, but I think I'm not going to get into the debate of mental health care right now, and am going to skirt the issue of mental health altogether, I'll take that topic up at some other point. However, I think it's important to recognize that people are not always happy. And that it's COMPLETELY normal not to be. People have bad days. People deal with shit in their lives that no one else deals with. And when we see someone who isn't happy, we think "weird". We live in a society in which we greet people by saying, "Hey. How's it going?" and expect to receive "Good." as a response. We want to receive that response for two reasons, because one, we want people to be doing well - we live in a society with them and ultimately, we're a very altruistic society, and two, we don't care enough to listen to them talk about problems they're facing in their day-to-day lives. The altruism comes into play because anytime we hear, "Not great." we say, "What can I do to help?" And obviously, depending on the need, we help - we give up our resources to ease their hardship. We want people to feel better, we want others to be happy, and it makes us happy. The problem here is that we also don't care enough. Sometimes we don't have the resources - time, money, etc. - to be able to help. And we want to hear the statement, "Good." because we don't want to give up our resources. I live in the Midwest and we are always asking how others are doing and then we always expect to hear "Good." as an answer. And I would like to critique my society on this point. When you ask someone how they're doing, mean it. Because happiness is a sliding scale - what does "Good." mean to this person? And if we don't care enough to truly try to understand how the other person's day is and what they're threshold for "Good." is, we're going to have problems. "Good." is an acceptable answer only if it is true for them. But in order to continue to be functional as a society, we need to understand what our neighbor's "Good." is. We need to know how large their gap between, "Good." and "Not great." is. We need to understand our peers and friends. Because the moment we fail to try is the moment this society we've built dissolves and becomes meaningless. So. Cheers to my peers. Here's to trying to become a closer knit society, one with a better understanding of other people and ourselves. It's been a really long time, however, I felt this is something that I should share. This is an essay that I wrote for a class following a research experience in San Pedro de Atacama, Chile, several months prior to now. These conversations were mostly conducted in Spanish, and as my second language, it was a bit rusty. Please take my findings with a grain of salt, however, this was one of my more moving experiences in my life, discovering the effects on the handicraft industry of commercialized areas with more evidence than what I perceived with my own eyes. I've visited other areas in the world before and noticed similar effects, however, this was my first real evidence that I wasn't just imagining something that wasn't there. So perhaps this essay doesn't change your life like it did mine, but maybe, just maybe, when you think about flying around the world and purchasing souvenirs that you consider where they came from and the effects on the local artisan industry. Lots of love. INTRODUCTION In the hustle and bustle of the touristy pueblo of San Pedro de Atacama you can find a little oasis of quiet, peace, and solitude on it’s edge. Here, in this place you will discover men and women trying their craft; here, in this place you can see the beauty of the goods you watch them make by hand. In the Pueblo de Artesanos and other small artesan shops located along the streets of Caracoles and Domingo Atienza, art is being produced and sold by men and women who make handicrafts made with both cultural heritage in mind and from being taught in big cities. Based on the study “Heritage for sale” (Salazar and Brushell 2013), the heritage of the area of San Pedro de Atacama has been largely overlooked by the tourist industry and has been commoditized in a way that has negatively impacted the Atacameño culture. In doing so the tourist industry has produced a variety of souvenirs that it has claimed to be authentic through giving it the status of ‘Atacameño’. Through these actions they have not only harmed the indigenous culture of this region, but have also negatively impacted the handmade craft industry from the pueblo of San Pedro de Atacama. Initially without any real research I questioned whether or not the local artesan crafts may or may not help to preserve cultural heritage of this region, but upon true investigation the goal of the study became the discovery of the disconnection between tourists and the handicraft industry. From this I developed the question of: What are the barriers from access between tourists and the handicraft industry? The argument that I propose is that there are many barriers. Not only does the tourist industry negatively impact the handicraft industry, but the Chilean and municipal governments do so as well, however these barriers are further supplemented by the artesans’ negative perceptions of the tourist industry and a lack of interest by the tourist’s themselves. Taken together, the barriers between the artesan community and the tourist industry are large and have led to economic, spatial, and social isolation of the artesan community. METHODS In order to address this question I employed four approaches, all of which required discussion between an interviewee and myself as the interviewer. I approached the interviewee as either a student researcher or a ditsy, American tourist in search for handmade products. The four approaches that I took were talking to artesans, fake artesans, tourist agencies, and tourists. Artesans were separated from the self-coined term of fake artesans by inspection of the products that were sold in the shop and through discussion with shop owners and workers that either told me directly what was and was not handmade, or so vehemently denied the presence of machine-made products that it was impossible to believe that handmade products were present in the establishment in enough concentration to make the shop considered to be truly artesan. With artesans and fake artesans I approached as a student researcher and asked about several key aspects of their establishment with scripted questions regarding the business of the store, how often visitors purchased items, and the owner/worker’s opinion of the tourist industry in San Pedro de Atacama. Tourists were also approached as a student researcher with the questions of how long they had been in San Pedro de Atacama, where they were dropped off in San Pedro de Atacama, and if they knew about the Pueblo de Artesanos. If they did know about it, they were then asked about how they found out about it and if they had/had made plans to visit it. Finally, tourist industries were approached as a tourist, asking where I could go to find handmade products. The location of the tourist agencies and the tourist interviews was limited to the area shown in red in Figure 1. This was done in order to limit outliers of agencies and tourists that had closer spatial relation to the Pueblo de Artesanos (easier to give directions to) and tourists that had just visited or were on their way to visiting the Pueblo de Artesanos. Figure 1. Map of the study area in SanPedro de Atacama. Target areas are circled, purple representing the study area of discussion with artesans and fake artesans, red representing areas of polling with tourists and tourist agencies, and black representing specific points of interest. Map courtesy of Google Maps, with editing by the author. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS Once I completed all four approaches, I was able make sense of three very distinct and equally important areas from which I could draw conclusions as to the location of the disconnection between the artesans and tourist industry. The three areas that I discovered were the handicraft industry, the tourist industry, and the government. I. THE HANDICRAFT INDUSTRY Upon study it was determined that the main location of the artesans within the central area of San Pedro de Atacama are located in an area off of the central tourist area in an area called the Pueblo de Artesanos (Figure 1 – smaller purple circle). This large density of artesans is coupled with sparse shops along the main roads (Figure 1 – area of the larger purple circle), Caracoles and Domingo Atienza. The shops along these roads, however, are mostly made up of a cooperative of artesans renting out the shop together and collectively selling their products. Along Caracoles and Domingo Atienza the fake artesans make up a majority of the shop owners in that region. This is an important distinguishing characteristic of the negative impacts on the artesan community as it showed a distinct spatial separation between the artesan community and the area of the most foot traffic in San Pedro de Atacama. It should be brought to light that there is a lot of emotion that flows out of the artesan community. They are very angry about many things, especially about the fact that they are not able to share the beauty of what they create, with the world in a way that is expedient. While my discussion with one artesana told a different story, that she enjoyed the quiet, slow pace of the Pueblo de Artesanos, the majority of the artesans there would prefer to have a larger amount of traffic through the area, as this would increase the likelihood of selling more of their products, which would allow them to reduce the cost of the goods they sell, and likely enable them to create a larger profit. However, the lack of foot traffic has enforced the already high prices that are a result of the fine work that each artesan creates individually and by hand over the course of hours and days. One woman explained to me that it takes her about five days to complete a full bufanda, or winter scarf, for sale. These high prices help to build a greater distance between the tourist community and the artesan industry. Tourists will buy where they can find a perceived better deal, specifically where the fake artesans can provide machine made products for half of the price. This is such an emotional theme in the artesan community due to the fact that their handmade craft is the point of income. Every artesan that I talked to uses the sale of their handmade products as their main or sole point of income. Artesans specifically come from other parts of Chile in order to find work here. This is where the tourist industry is. They provide products that are made directly in Chile, with Chilean raw products, and hope to make an income off of it; however, they have found that they end up lacking that income that they had hoped to find here. This is how the artesan community survives, off of their craft. Not only do they just have to pay for food, clothing, and the roof above their heads, but some also pay for their children’s education. One family that I met established a family effort to create a variety of products so that one of the children could attend secondary school and advance further in the world. The lives of families and the futures of their children rely on the sale of these handicrafts. Unfortunately, this has been accompanied by negative emotions for the tourist industry itself. The artesan community, with reason, perceives the tourist industry as a limiting factor to their livelihoods. The artesans recognize the fact that they don’t see many tourists from countries other than Chile. They associate that with the fact that many of these extranjeros are delivered directly to the door of their hotel/hostel through a shuttle service. Hostels and hotels then proceed to neglect to give any information about the Pueblo de Artesanos, where it is, and even that it exists. Those that use the bus station into San Pedro de Atacama are typically Chileans, or other travelers, that are on a budget, and thus unable to afford the products sold at the Pueblo de Artesanos. This dislike and distrust of the tourist industry has either helped to spawn or at least spur on the dislike of the tourists themselves. Their perception of tourists is that of a gardener to an untrained dog. The tourist, like the dog, causes many problems, it degrades the natural beauty of the area, it is very noisy, and decreases the strength, the moral, of the culture in San Pedro de Atacama. The tourist is distracted by flashy things and bright lights, thus missing out on the aspects of a culture that truly matter, and not truly gaining connections to the culture of San Pedro de Atacama and that of Chile in general. The tourist, like the untrained dog, doesn’t give anything back to the community and leaves it’s shit when it goes. II. THE TOURIST INDUSTRY The negativity and ambiguity of the artesan community towards the tourist industry provides for a smooth transition into a major source from which the barrier between the two parties originates, the tourist industry. The three major outlets that were used in order to address this area are the local tourist agencies, the tourists, and the tourism websites. The places to which a tourist agency directs a tourist is very telling about the information that the tourist community receives. Utilizing my role as an American tourist, I believe that I was able to receive a relatively accurate picture of what tourists learn about of the handicraft industry in San Pedro de Atacama. Out of seven interviews with tourist agencies, only two agencies directed me to places that actually sold handmade goods. Most agencies sent me to the Paseo Artesanal, a feria just to the east of the Museo Archeológico RP Gustavo Le Paige, as well as a shop at the intersection of Caracoles and Gabriela Mistral, which clearly fit the category as a fake artesan, despite the owner’s vehement denials. One agency even sent me across the street to interview an Atacameño family, they directly stated that they did not make any of the products they sold and was import of either Perú or Bolivia, and upon direct questioning, the granddaughter that ran the store just laughed and shook her head. The reference to this shop was curious considering the family that owns the shop is Atacameñan, however were not shy in saying that nothing in the shop was handmade. This seemed to be a blatant disregard not only for local artesans, but also the local indigenous culture as well. This is important because this feeds directly into the inaccurate Atacameño brand, which is what tourists are bombarded with the moment they step foot in San Pedro de Atacama. Not only this, but the largely incorrect references to shops that do not sell true handicrafts negatively reflects the handicraft industry and presents an incorrect image of what is artesan. This is a major barrier because incorrect assumptions of what is and is not something are often difficult to correct, especially pertaining to the identification of true handmade goods. What the tourists are perceiving on their own, and away from the tourist agencies, is equally as important in order to establish the location of the disconnect between the two parties. Through this study, two very distinct groups of people were demonstrated, an older group and a younger group. The older group has more time and money to spend in San Pedro de Atacama. They do arrive directly to their hotel, but they are directed to the Pueblo de Artesanos by private guides, their hotel, or people they talked with prior to arriving here. However, this is not the average tourist of San Pedro de Atacama. Often they are young, looking for adventure, staying for a very short period of time, and have little money to spend. Most tourists that were interviewed had absolutely no idea what the Pueblo de Artesanos was; several didn’t even know what the words in Spanish meant (interviews were conducted in English first, and then Spanish as a secondary). Those that did have some semblance of an idea had passed by the Pueblo de Artesanos on their way from the bus station recently (Figure 1 – black circle next to the Pueblo de Artesanos) and they hadn’t yet stopped there yet, this had typically happened within the previous 24 to 48 hours. Only one person in the younger group was actively searching for the Pueblo de Artesanos. This is a valuable demonstration of tourist curiosity and values. The Pueblo de Artesanos clearly did not peak the curiosity of the tourist community – it did not stick well in the minds of the tourists, and even if it did, the tourists that would be attracted would not be able to afford both the time and money spent on the area, they value the adventure of the area more than a handmade scarf. Handmade products are not a commonly searched out item in younger generations; the several others I have talked with and myself are the exceptions in this, not the rule. Time, money, and differing value systems represent a large barrier between tourists and the artesan industry. The final aspect of the tourist industries effect on the handicraft industry is what is available online. Websites like Wikipedia, Lets Go Chile and The Lonely Planet are popular websites for people searching for more information about this area and stuff to do while there. Shopping is often a common pastime of young females, thus should be a very accurately reported on aspect of this region also considering it’s importance to the economic stability of the region. From Wikipedia a tourist can glean this little tidbit about the handicrafts common in the area: “Its first inhabitants were the Atacameños, who developed basketworks and ceramic pottery crafts that can be now be appreciated by tourists in the several souvenir shops as typical products of San Pedro de Atacama.” The website that provided this information to Wikipedia is Lets Go Chile, who goal as a tourism travel blog and website is to create an easy service for those “looking for a quality and efficient travel service” in Chile (Lets Go Chile). As a tourist that spent a great amount of time perusing the crafts created by artesans of San Pedro de Atacama and the crafts purchased from abroad, I can say with some degree of certainty that basketworks and ceramic pottery crafts were not the major crafts sold in San Pedro de Atacama, not to mention made in San Pedro de Atacama. Not only does this continue to give an unrealistic view of the Atacameñan people, but it also continues to give an incorrect view of the handicrafts that are truly sold in this region. This is continued on with the shopping page located on The Lonely Planet: “The shaded Paseo Artesanal, a poker-straight alley squeezing north from the plaza, is the place to hunt down novel cardón carvings, llama and alpaca woolens and other curious trinkets. More artisanal outlets are strewn throughout town.” The website that provided this information is a highly trafficked website by the tourists that visit San Pedro de Atacama. To begin, many items sold wthin the Paseo Artesanal are not regionally made by hand, many are actually still machine made in other countries. This is the only shop or area that has been reviewed by The Lonely Planet in San Pedro de Atacama and this webpage has been updated within the past month. There are many other areas within San Pedro de Atacama where one can purchase trinkets or handicrafts, however, none have been mentioned on this site. Further, an entire area devoted to the sale of handmade goods would likely be considered to be an important area within the city boundaries of San Pedro de Atacama, and one such area would be considered to be the Pueblo de Artesanos, which has existed in that exact spot for at least four years. Inaccurate and lacking information of the handicraft industry by the tourist internet represents a large barrier due to misrepresentation and the incoming perceived belief of the tourists that the handicraft industry is all of what is presented in San Pedro de Atacama. From this we can make the conclusion that the tourist industry has directly avoided the topic of true and correct discussion of handmade goods in San Pedro de Atacama. This neglect has left the tourist industry even further spatially and economically marginalized, further causing tension within the artesan community and between the tourist industry. III. THE GOVERNMENT As a means of further marginalizing the artesans of San Pedro de Atacama, the government has also played a significant factor. This is a factor that is hidden if it isn’t directly brought up in conversation, and even then those older artesans that lived in the area during the military dictatorship or are from Chile in general are more reluctant to say anything bad about the government. Even more so, the people who are of indigenous descent or from another country were even more careful with their words. Therefore it should be mentioned that the government could only be brought up after prodding of several individuals and through the anger and disappointment-filled statements made by several others. However, from their statements three specific areas of focus were found to demonstrate a direct disconnection created by the government to separate the tourists and the artesan community; these included the signs, the bus station, and the taxes imposed upon artisans. The bus station has been where it is for a relatively short period of time, only one to two years. The location of it was only decided after consistent urging by the local artesan population to the municipal government in the hopes of bringing in a stronger client base. One girl stated that for three years the entire area of the Pueblo de Artesanos was empty, visitors were as common as rain in the driest desert. However, with the implementation of the bus stop there were more visitors. A further increase in visitors occurred with the installation of two signs that helped to guide people to the bus station, after the bus station was placed where it is today. These signs were also installed by the municipal government at the urging of the local artesans and the directions to the Pueblo de Artesanos appears to be included as a side note to the directions to the bus stop. While told these signs have actually dramatically helped to increase the number of visitors to the area, according to one source, it is interesting to consider the possibilities of better-placed signs. Currently the signs are placed at the end of Caracoles and at the intersection of Ignacio Carrera Pinto and a small side street. These are well out of the way from any real foot traffic unless it is leaving from or going to the bus station (Figure 1 – two black circles of interest) and would in large part be hidden from the sight of tourists. A third sign, located near the Paseo Artesanal, and unrelated to the two signs put up by the municipal government, is also located in the plaza, but denoting a direction that creates an even longer distance between the Pueblo de Artesanos and the high density foot traffic of downtown San Pedro de Atacama. These signs were not only absent when they were needed the most, early into the years of the Pueblo de Artesanos, but they were also placed in locations that still make it difficult for the Pueblo de Artesanos to be able to be found. This is a clear indication of the municipal government spatially isolating this group of people. However, the government has also decided to economically isolate the artesan community as well though the use of taxes and other blatant fiscal methods. I am unclear of which level of the government hold the control over the tax policy of this area, however, the overall consensus is that it is very, very expensive to keep a store in any location in San Pedro de Atacama due to taxes. Due to the fact that several moved from Caracoles to the Pueblo de Artesanos, one can assume lightly that there may be slightly lower prices in that region. As well, some artesans joined together to form a cooperative to sell their products together. One artesan told me that they have asked the state for help financially or at least commercially at least five times, however, each time they have been turned down for others that the state prefers. Another artesan was adamant to the fact that the state only cares about money, that the cultural significance behind art was ignored and that that service provided to the community counted for nothing. It is, perhaps, that the government has begun to take steps to try to close the gap between the artesans and the tourists. This has been demonstrated by the implementation of the bus station and signs, and the resulting increase in foot traffic to the Pueblo de Artesanos. However, this is “progreso a poco tiempo” as one artesana pointed out. As well, the economic gap continues to be a grow and the government’s tactic of ignoring it is not, and will not, work because the livelihoods of the artesans are dependent on the income that is being dramatically reduced by the taxes imposed on them by the government. CONCLUSIONS
There are three realms of importance when considering the handicraft industry of San Pedro de Atacama; the first of which is the handicraft industry itself. The handicraft industry feels great anger and ambiguity for the tourist industry; they greatly mistrust it and constantly live with the fear of not making enough profit off of the art that they create. Being spatially and economically isolated leads to the social isolation of the artesans from the rest of their community. They hold a different set of values and trust that their work will provide for them high enough so that they will not stoop to selling machine made items. The artesan community has a different set of complaints, difficulties, and goals from the normal resident of San Pedro de Atacama. San Pedro de Atacama has also demonstrated a distinct lack of true and full information provided by tourist industry. As well as the tourist community lacking the information, it seems that tourists themselves lack the time and incentive to go, even having walked directly past it on their way from the bus stop. This contributes to the economic separation between the artesan community and the tourism-oriented community as a whole. The tourist industry, by neglecting to bring to light the true handicraft industry, have created a distinct social separation, feeding into the social barriers the artesans themselves have constructed. Finally the government has contributed to the spatial and economic marginality of the artesan community. Heavy taxes make the lives of artesans difficult by decreasing their income source, this is paired with the spatial barriers that the government has made steps to limit, however, this physical separation still remains and is still strong between the tourists and the handicraft industry. All of these factors play greatly into types and durability of the barriers that go unperceived by the average tourist, however, cause them to limit themselves and thus remain distant from the handicraft industry. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to all of the anonymous shop owners and worker, tourists, and tourist agencies that answered my questions. Thank you to Lila for assisting in the interviewing process and stimulating the true course of this research assignment, without her this research would’ve been significantly less important and life changing as to the way that I view the world. Thank you also to Dr. Anita and Dr. Beth for helping me to reflect on my topic and guide it in a true direction. Thanks also go to Sarah and Cadence for allowing me to perform my research alongside them in the field. LITERATURE CITED Google. (2015). [Map of the area of downtown San Pedro de Atacama]. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+Pedro+de+Atacama,+Antofagasta+Region,+Chile Let’s Go Chile. (2015). San Pedro de Atacama. Retrieved from http://www.letsgochile.com/locations/big-north/antofagasta-ii/san-pedro-de-atacama Salazar, J., and R. Brushell. 2013. Heritage for sale: indigenous tourism and misrepresentations of voice in northern Chile. In Russell Staiff et al. (Eds.) Heritage, Place, Encounter, Engagement. Pp. The Lonely Planet. (2015, January). Shopping in San Pedro de Atacama. Retrieved from http://www.lonelyplanet.com/chile/northern-chile/san-pedro-de-atacama/shopping Wikipedia. (2015, January 7). San Pedro de Atacama. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Pedro_de_Atacama Summer's finally here, and surprise! I'm back at school. Lovely Luther College. I love it so much that I never want to leave. Okay. I'm probably pushing it. I'm really just doing research in forest ecology with a professor on campus. I'm only four days in and I love it. Not gonna lie. I'm getting up at 6:45am every day this summer to go crash around in the forest so that I can identify plants in a meter by half-meter plot. I'm hanging out with ticks and spiders and all kinds of icky insects, sorry bug people, for eight hours a day, and I hate that part, no offense, but I absolutely love the experience I'm having. I'm doing all of these crazy things that I never thought I would ever consider doing, and I love it. This is a side of science that I never considered, I never considered restoration ecology.
I also never considered the type of life that scientists actually lead. Coming from this prestigious institution, I'm pretty sure I'm destined to become a scientist, especially if I'm majoring in biology. What type of field, I don't really know yet, but it's under the umbrella of biology. Now I'm coming into this research summer having a total blast, learning tons of new things, but I'm doing this for eight hours a day, a full work day. My research advisor, and her colleagues, are at the labs before I get there and after I leave. I don't really know how much before or how much after, but they are putting in much more than eight hours a day. I'm finding that as a student that having nothing to do at night is really weird. I don't have homework. But let's be really honest. Instead of going out and exploring the town, or 'partying' with my friends, or reading a relaxing book, I research. I look up papers and studies and data collected by the US governmental agencies on my research topics. And according to my research prof, this is what a lot of the the biology department professors do. They take their work home with them. They don't have enough time to read a paper during the workday? They take it home. They have the time to read a paper? They read a related paper at home. It just keeps going on. They spend eight plus hours teaching and researching the topics that they're paid to research, and then they take it home with them. I guess my point is, where does work stop being work? Or is it even work? They clearly love what they're researching. They're incredibly involved and quite honestly I've never seen someone so excited about a yellow wild violet before, but my question is, is it still work? And I don't know what they think. I haven't actually asked any of them for their opinion, but in all honestly, I think it isn't work. They love what they're doing so much that they fill all aspects of their live with it. My research advisor spends eight hours outside in the woods with us, and then she takes her dog out to chase deer in the woods for another couple hours. My academic advisor walks to work (although he does live just across the street) and he spends an incredible amount of time in the prairie with his dog. They both love their jobs, sure. But they don't really have jobs, they have things they love so much that they're lucky enough to get paid to do. Sure. Some may call the hours outside of work reading papers an obsession, others might call it crazy, but they call it a passion. And while I explore my life 'plan' this summer, I'm going to keep that in mind, that I need to find my passion. What's something that I can take home with me every night and not get sick of it for years on end? What's something I love to do? And lord. If I have role models like this, I may misidentify Campanulastrum americanum, but I will for sure know if this my passion. I'm going to love what I do. There are many things that I have to fear in the world as a woman, lots of questions are asked and never answered, like am I getting this job because of my talents or because I'm a woman? And am I crying because my hormones are raging or because this is an upsetting experience? These questions are fine and dandy, while there's not often a simple answer, one can typically be discerned. The worst questions I have to ask myself always have to do with how I present myself. When I say present myself I can literally mean everything under the sun. The problem arises when I have to consider how the male gender will respond to my appearance. Living on a college campus was something that I never considered to be dangerous, as a Midwesterner, I always believed in the goodness of people and trusted in their respect for others; however, college life, and hearing about college life from friends at larger universities has forced me to call into question my safety, even at a small liberal arts college. The nationwide statistic is that about 1 in 5 girls will be sexually assaulted at one point in their college experience. What that means is that in my close knit friend group of 6, at least one of us will be sexually assaulted by the time we graduate. 1 in 5 is far too large of a statistic. This is a statistic that I will not stand for and it is high time that the upper government officials weighed in on the subject. Now Luther has policies very similar to the standard policies describing sexual assault, defining it as: "any sexual act directed against another person, forcibly and/or against the person's will where the victim is incapable of giving consent.," and includes forcible rape, forcible sodomy, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling" The number of forcible sexual assaults last year on my campus was four, which was three more than the years before. I would like to point out that these were reported assaults. A study done by a student, or faculty, a couple of years ago, which for the life of me I cannot find anywhere, so I apologize for not providing the actual data, showed that something like 18% of students had felt that they had been pressured into sex that they didn't want, another 13% or so felt that they had to have sex with their partner in order to maintain or create a a deeper relationship. Now ladies and gents. Don't ever let your partner push you into something you're not ready for. It's wrong, but unfortunately it's still not sexual assault. But my point of those statistics is that there are probably other students on campus that have not reported sexual assaults, which unfortunately is very common, especially for a campus this size where everyone knows everyone. It enables victim blaming. Victim blaming is terrible problem. Not only does a woman, or man, have to go through the actual experience, but they then need to go through every detail again, often with a male police officer, and have every aspect of that encounter scrutinized, down to the make-up, clothes, behavior, they then have to repeat this process a dozen other times with people around them, the man or woman in their lives, their parents, siblings, friends. All of this can plant self-doubt in the victim's mind, and they are even criticized and harassed, they are blamed. This is unacceptable. Sexual assault is not about not being able to help yourself, or it was too enticing, it's about power and leaves the victim in a vulnerable state. Blaming the victim only elevates the power of the attacker. The PSA declares respect and responsibility to men, and I agree. Men are not animals, they know what the word "no" means, they know when something is questionable or unacceptable. What a woman wears is what she wants to wear, and she should never have to feel like something is going to put her in a problematic situation because it shouldn't. If I run across my campus buck naked, it does NOT mean that I'm asking for it or that anything is my fault, the only thing that it suggests is that I'm doing something that isn't allowed legally. I'm not allowed to run across campus naked, it's the law. But in no way, shape, or form am I asking to be sexually assaulted.
The PSA that the White House put out states exactly what should be thought, that one is too many. That men need to respect women and take responsibility. It calls for action among men, to stop and to prevent sexual assault from happening. I'm going to put it bluntly. I love this public service announcement that the White House put out. It condemns victim blaming. Condemns it. Finally!! The sad part is that I was really surprised when the video even brought it up. That's one of the things I fear most in my life, that if I'm ever sexually assaulted, that I'll be blamed for the incident occurring. But this PSA went above my wildest dreams in it's condemnation of victim blaming. I will not deny it, I was peeved that the PSA did not include men, and there has been comment on that in the social media. While men do not make up a majority of sexual assaults, they do exist, and it is time that it be brought to light that it is also a problem. However, I will make my peace with the arguments that the PSA did make, that men are not animals, that they need to respect women and take responsibility for their actions, and finally, that the victim is not responsible for the actions of an attacker. Finally. It's about time that the government weighed in on this topic, and I am glad that they didn't fail me. Okay, so while I'm finishing my finals up in the small-town bubble of Decorah the whole world, by which I mean the entire American T.V. viewing audience, is blowing up up over the comments one lone American has made about the morality of gay sex. Phil Robertson, star of A&E's Duck Dynasty, made these comments and in doing so was suspended indefinitely from the show. A&E in their decision to suspend him has come under fire by proponents of the First Amendment and viewers of the show. Right and left, people are saying that under the First Amendment Robertson has the right to voice his views as it pleases him, that the steps taken by A&E to suspend him were unjust a an overreaction to his comments. I think that he should voice his opinion, if it pleases him. A country in which you have no right to say what you believe is not a country at all in my opinion, just a lonely slab of land with people living on it under the control of a government that does not wish to change or care about the opinions of their people. But was what he was saying still fall under the First Amendment? This is what he had to say. "It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man's anus, that's just me," the reality star said. "I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical. Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there, bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men." Cool. So in this interview he expressed his ideological views. That's awesome, I give him props, not many are willing to do so. But is what he saying covered by the First Amendment? I don't think so. Especially due to the nature of the comments and the owning of them by another source. The First Amendment does not mean that you can say whatever you want to without consequences, your boss can fire you for what you say, your significant other can leave you for what you say, you can miss out on a job opportunity for what you have to say (that's why it's important to not put everything online, boys and girls). And the actions that they take, based on what you have to say, are legal ones. And unbeknownst to common knowledge, but there are exceptions to the First Amendment, legal exceptions. Exceptions that have been made, and upheld, over time by a court system by the people for the people. Speech that involves incitement, false statements of fact, obscenity, child pornography, threats, and speech owned by others are all completely exempt from First Amendment protections. We can assume that his statements did not involve incitement, false statements of fact (even if the Bible does not actually condemn homosexuality, we'll assume for our purposes that it does and this has a factual basis for Robertson), child pornography, or threats. However, I think that his statements may classify under obscenity and speech owned by others. Let's start with obscenity. Obscenity was defined in the Miller v. California case when Miller published a set of advertisements in a pamphlet form that had pornographic characteristics. This case went through the appeals process and eventually made it's way to the Supreme Court. Sweet. Okay. Now this case came out with a definition of obscenity as defined by Chief Justice Warren Burger. "The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." Okay, we're going to go straight to the second on the assumption that I am not of average intelligence, that I am above average, I am in no way saying that I am, but I can't write an unbiased reaction to this without that assumption. Straight onto the second guideline, now, patently offensive is defined as referring to any obscene acts or materials that are considered to be openly, plainly, or clearly visible as offensive to the viewing public. Not only were his use of anus and vagina crass and slightly offensive just in their use, but the sexual connotations of the comments made by Robertson are offensive to me as a person. There are some men out there who do not want vaginal sex, and they are straight. There are some women out there that enjoy anal sex. Now, if I weren't straight, I would be horribly offended. Unfortunately, I'd probably be used to being told that I was sinful and going to hell, but it would be offensive to me if I was told that they way that I like sex is wrong. As for the third guideline, take a look at the the quote. It completely lacks all values. And if you're going to argue about it not lacking political value, you are wrong, sorry, but there is no political significance in that statement. The political argument lies in the fact of whether gay marriage should be legalized, religious views are not political views, nor can they be as a stipulation made by the same Constitution that allows Robertson his freedom of speech. There is a separation between Church and State, and bringing religion into politics leads us down another trail of the same tyranny that led to the formation of these United States. And if you're going to argue for scientific basis that homosexual behavior leads to bestiality and promiscuous behavior, please show me the evidence. I know plenty of homosexual people, and they are wonderful people, who only wish to find that one person and spend the rest of their life with them.
Here we go. Let's assume for arguments sake that obscenity is a completely incorrect basis to go about arguing that his comments are covered by the First Amendment. Let's take a look at speech owned by others. The original basis of this exception goes back to the 80s and specifically dealt with copyright infringement. The case that upheld copyright over free speech was Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises in 1985. In this case The Nation magazine lifted excerpts from Gerald Ford's memoir, A Time to Heal, and the publishing obviously didn't like that, and took the magazine to court. Since then the definition of speech owned by others has expanded to include trademarks. During his interview Robertson was speaking as the "founder of the Duck Commander company" and the " patriarch at the heart of A&E's smash reality hit Duck Dynasty". Okay. He undoubtedly has a contract with A&E and the name "Duck Dynasty" is undoubtedly trademarked, why wouldn't it be? It's a smash hit. So during his interview, he was representing the brand of the show and under a contract owned by A&E. We he to have been speaking as only the Duck Commander company, not a big deal, then again we wouldn't have this dilemma. Both of these scenarios allowed A&E to take actions as they saw fit - a contract likely with a representation clause and the trademark of the Duck Dynasty brand. Now, I'm not denying Robertson his right to speak his religious views or to have his views. I may not agree with what he said, but to say something that goes against popular opinion in so many different ways in an interview takes courage. I admire that. But we can't confuse that admiration with the validity of the actions that A&E has taken. And those actions are legal. He can say whatever he likes, but there still are consequences for what he says that aren't the responsibility of the government. All that I'm saying was that A&E was justified in their actions. So I recently submitted a Haiku to a scholarship site about metamorphosis. And while I was thinking about the topic I realized that there's a lot more to this topic than what the people who run the contest intended. We can look at this topic many different ways, of course there's the caterpillar/butterfly cliché, there's the rock (metamorphic rocks - 7th grade science anyone?), and then there's a human metamorphosis of an internal conflict sort. But honestly, what can you determine to be metamorphosis? A metamorphosis is a complete change of form, substance, structure - as defined by Dictionary.com. But how do we determine that? We have absolutely no way of knowing what truly is change. This goes back to Plato's study on forms. When we approach a subject to know what's right, what's wrong, we approach it from our own, personal, and highly objective point of view. We have no subjectivity. When we consider metamorphosis, we have to take this into account. What is a complete change if we have no knowledge of what is the beginning and the end? Is there a beginning and an end? Or is this all a circle, that has no beginning? Well. We have absolutely no idea. So perhaps we can understand the word metamorphosis, but we'll never truly see it, in progress or otherwise. This was the Haiku that I submitted, I wrote of an internal conflict sort of metamorphosis. I tried to express a lack in demonstration of change, as we truly have no idea what change actually is. :) Devour the beast The definition of bigotry is the intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
Recently I've been trying to understand why people don't accept or even try to see a situation from someone else's viewpoint. I don't know why I've been thinking about it more lately, it may be because I've been paying a lot more attention to the news, or that I'm join back to school, or that I'm listening to the radio daily, but I know that Glenn Beck's book, Agenda 21, was a major part in my shift to questioning bigotry. My first comments remark on the ideas brought to light in Agenda 21 by Glenn Beck. As you can probably tell or will be able to shortly, I lean left. Beck's ideas reflect the actual Agenda 21 which was produced by the United Nations Sustainable Development committee, and is based on the idea that our world is changing due to our impact upon it, called climate change. I don't know where you live, what you do for a living, what your race, religion, nationality, gender, etc. is. This is something that cannot be denied. The scientists that are opposed to the idea of climate change are grasping at straws that ran out thirty years ago. They have nothing anymore. We, the people of the world, feel the changes that we are causing. Weather patterns no longer hold steady. In my hometown, we've had extreme flooding, extreme droughts, extremely cool summers, warm winters, all in the past 10 years. We've broken records almost every single year for the past 10 years - records that haven't been broken since the 1970s. We are at a point where we cannot deny this anymore. Anyways. Beck's book is a extreme of Agenda 21, portraying a "possibility" of a future that could happen if we go along with Agenda 21, when I say extreme, I literally mean extreme. Even the least selfish humans have some semblance of self preservation. Limiting water is such a situation, there would be riots. Beck's book declares the problem of Agenda 21 to be the "fundamental belief in the idea of socialism". Although I lean left, that doesn't mean that I don't understand and empathize with some of the points from the right. I understand that people should be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor, I know that I certainly do. But isn't there a point where there is such a thing as too much money? Studies have shown that money doesn't buy happiness, though, you probably can buy seratonin with it. Sorry, I had to crack a biology joke somewhere in here, but seriously, if you see the world around yourself and decide that there's something wrong, that someone's hurting, isn't it your duty as a human being to try to help that person? Maybe it's not. But doesn't that make humans inherently evil if you don't have that obligation? Now I believe in a world where everybody would do their part, where sharing what is cultivated as a community would be acceptable, but I also understand that that isn't acceptable to some people. Clearly Beck is one of those people who doesn't share this outlook on life. But not accepting that he has his own idea is bigotry. What I think is going on in Agenda 21 is a classic miscommunication. Now I'm not positive, as I haven't read Agenda 21, though I plan to, but I think that what Beck is deeming to be socialism, isn't. Yes, the entire environmental movement is slightly leftist due to fundamental principles, but the movement is not so far left as to declare war on capitalism as he'd like to think. Now I'd like to declare a war on classical economic strategy, but I can't just say that the right doesn't have a point. There is no market without consumers AND suppliers. This is my point, and I know it took a long time to get here, so bear with me, but what is happening in our world, what causes bigotry, is miscommunication. Miscommunication is what causes people not to understand each other. Ideas coming across as something different than what they are meant is what causes people to not accept what other people are saying. I think that perhaps we're all saying the same thing. On the grand scale, there appears to be huge differences between the leftist and the right points of view, but isn't the goal, all on the same scale, to have a functioning society that understands and works together? But as long as we continue to miscommunicate, we'll never have that. We'll always be stuck someplace in between, in some state of passive anarchy, refusing to accept what the "other side" has deemed as the authority. Bigotry is this refusal and it all stems from a miscommunication. Bigotry obviously has multiple roots. But the one that I believe goes the deepest and has the greatest effect on the quality of life for all, is the idea of miscommunication because with it we not only risk the ability to understand but we also risk the quality of the society we create. |
Zoe BachmanI'm just a curious girl living in a big world. :) Archives
December 2015
Categories |