In “Parable of the Sower” by Octavia Butler, It can be seen throughout the first chapters that Lauren and her family live in a poorer area where there is a lot of poverty and violence. In chapter 3, Lauren states, “Is any of this real? Dangerous question. Sometimes I don’t know the answer. I doubt myself. I doubt what I think I know. I try to forget about it. After all, if it’s real, why doesn’t anyone else know about it. Every one knows that change is inevitable.” (Butler 48) It seems to be that Lauren is struggling with her faith even though she is surrounded by a religious community. Lauren also has a condition called hyper-empathy which enables her to feel other peoples “pleasure and pain.” Is this condition something that is affecting her beliefs? She obviously can empathize with others feelings, so how will this affect her through the rest of the book in regards to figuring out life?
“I can’t do a thing about my hyperempathy, no matter what Dad thinks or wishes. I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel. I get a lot of grief that does not belong to me and isn’t real. But it hurts” (Butler 12).
The main protagonist in Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower, is diagnosed with a condition referred to as hyperempathy. This concept is interesting from the perspective of modern capitalist societies and how we are taught to limit feelings of empathy as a form of self-preservation. Within a capitalist society, pain and injustices are everywhere and it is emotionally exhausting to empathize with the amount of suffering occuring. Thus over time we as a society have developed controlled empathy that functions to protect ourselves and ultimately the capitalist system. If we deny ourselves empathy how can we ever unite against those in control and performing the injustices?
Bill Neidije’s poems speak of a similar connection to deeper feeling with the people and land around him. Expressing empathy for the land is a force of power and not a weakness; a perspective that is prevalent in capitalist societies.
What role does empathy play in our relationship with the environment? How does our lack of empathy create societal rules that damage our own identity and how we respond to our own suffering (e.g mental health)?
The novel, “The Parable of the Sower,” by N.K. Jemisin takes the form of diary entries written by the 15-year-old teenager, Lauren Olamina. The events are set in the future, starting in 2024. The impacts of global warming and climate change have finally caught up to first-world countries like the United States, and Lauren writes her experiences and thoughts on the apocalyptic world that has made up most of her life. Furthermore, Lauren suffers from hyper empathy and faces the challenge of feeling the pain of others. Throughout chapters 1-6, Lauren voices her disagreements with her neighborhood’s decisions regarding wellbeing and survival throughout her writing and must learn how to integrate herself within the community without disruption. Or is disruption of the communities ideals what is needed to, ultimately, survive in the end? Personally, this is slightly terrifying to read. The time frame of the novel is so close to the present day, and the likelihood of this very scenario playing out in real life isn’t slim at all.
Throughout the novel “Parable of the Sower” by Octavia Butler the main character, Lauren, contemplates with the idea of God. Lauren writes a poem in which she depicts her theories about God, “God is Power– / Infinite, / Irresistible, / Indifferent. / And yet, God is Pliable– / Trickster, / Teacher, / Chaos, Clay. / God exists to be shaped. / God is Change” (25). From what we know of Lauren from the first six chapters of this book, this seems to fit her ideologies about needing to plan for the worst case scenario. She believes that God exists to be shaped, because civilization cannot simply wait around for someone to save themselves– they must take action in their own hands unless humanity want to be wiped out. How do you think this attitude would have changed the society Lauren resides in? In Ceremony, transition and change are fundamental to survival. Do you think Betonie would agree with Lauren’s idea of God and in what ways would he agree or disagree? Do you think the community Lauren resides in could use indigenous knowledge to aid in their survival?
In Parable of the Sower, it’s mentioned time and time again that change is coming. That it’s time for change and in Lauren’s mind God is change. One part of the book I want to talk about is the part where her father confronts her about what she said to Joanne. “I almost started crying. I had all I could do to hold it back. What I thought was, ‘No, I think your world is coming to an end, and maybe you with it.'” (Butler, 62). This stood out because it shows how Lauren is scared about the future of the world. How she cares and feels like the only way to have any type of future is to let go on the feelings of normal from the past. Constantly comparing how normal the past was with the hope that the future could return to it. It makes me wonder if that should how we should approach development for the future, if we should stop making it try to feel like past normal? also what about the pandemic, people keep saying that they’re excited for when things return to normal, or that things are starting to feel normal again. Should we just accept that things won’t be that type of normal again? Should we focus on creating the “new normal”? What about climate change, when do we accept that things are past the point of fixing or reversing? Is that something that we should be thinking about now?
The poems written by Bill Neidjie caught my attention because they show his appreciation for the earth and the connection he has to it when he states “I belong to this earth. Soon my bones become earth”. (Neidjie, 13) In the next poem, he writes “ I was thinking. No history was written for us when white Europeans started here, only a few words were written. Should be more than that” (Neidjie, 17). From my understanding, Neidjie explains that when the white Europeans traveled to his land, they disregarded all of this history that occurred before them and only wrote about their own. The history of the natives to the land was erased and not even acknowledged almost as if the land did not exist until they landed there. They never received recognition for the work that they did to maintain the land that was once theirs. With that being said, I find it unfortunate that we are never educated on the full history unless we decide to complete our own research. Since Bill Neidjie is the last surviving speaker of the Gaagudju language, he could be our last hope at learning. Why did people allow this to happen? Why were these people unconcerned about the previous history before them. Would they not want to add to it?
First and foremost I love Octavia Butler and everything this woman has to offer. She is the queen of sci-fi and I’m so excited to discuss the impact of her work.
That being said, this dystopic, but also not extremely far-fetched construction of society Butler has created in Parable of the Sower has truly tugged at my heart strings and left me feeling adequately queasy. In the development of Lauren’s story, she recounts target practice with her father. ‘”‘The police,’ my father told them, ‘may be able to avenge you, but they can’t protect you. Things are getting worse. And as for your children… Well, yes, there is risk. But you can put your guns out of their reach while they’re very young, and train them as they grow older,” (39). This touches on two sensitive topics in our own current society- the effectiveness of both law enforcement and gun control. Still being in the process of reading, this question may or may not be answered along the way but, what do you think Butler is suggesting about both gun control and law enforcement? Obviously the whole book is based in a society where the government has failed its civilians to the upmost degree, but what is Butler suggesting the parameters of law enforcement and gun control be as an alternative?
I have more thoughts and accidentally posted to early.
Is this quote suggesting that gun safety should be left to the hands of the individual(s)? Since Lauren is learning from her family, and earlier referenced that no one in the walls really attends school anymore due to safety concerns, is the only readily available option in this instance basically just “every man for himself, good luck!”? I feel as though this may take all accountability away from producers / suppliers of arms.
In western culture, we blame injuries and pain on things like twisting an ankle, being inactive, or constantly using the same joints over and over again. Many individuals in older communities see these consequences with age. Neidjie states “You cut yourself, they say. When you maybe forty years might be fifty years old you feel pain in your back, because you cut tree. I’m old man, he said, I’m telling you.” In aboriginal culture, the pain of the older years is due to a “karma-like” idea. As one interferes with ecology and you will feel the pain later. What can we, as westerners learn from this epistemology, and how can we use it to better western medicine and how we treat ecology around us?
Parable of The Sower was written in 1993, based in the year 2024. I find this really interesting because Butler wrote placing the reality in the relatively near future. Now, this feels even more relevant as many scientists warn that we have less than 30 years before further climate catastrophe. That being said, what has struck me most about the book so far is the sense of normalcy everyone tries to maintain- even in an apocalyptic world. Lauren is still baptized, people cling to God, and neighbors depend on each other… The reminded me of an episode of This American Life I listened to a few months ago. A guest was talking about how how even during the Sri Lankan civil war people went about like usual. They noted that they could see this same pattern in the United States, things are not fine here, but people are going about as if they are. I’m wondering if Butler would see issue with this. To some extent human needs remain the same, even in crisis, so some amount of normalcy seems vital for survival. I’m wondering, what Butler thinks of this. At what point does pretneding things in the world are ok hold us back from change, and when is it necessary to survive?
“We do not worship God.
We perceive and attend God.
We learn from God.
With forethought and work,
We shape God.
In the end, we yield to God.
We adapt and endure,
For we are Earthseed
And God if Change” (Butler 17).
In Parable of the Sower, the main character Lauren is figuring out what she believes in and developing her own beliefs away from her father’s. She is establishing that God is change and that he is shapeable to our personal situations. Change is coming in their world and in the book she says that God cannot be stopped. I think this perspective is very interesting. In the book they are facing constant struggles and living in danger most of the time. Change is something that they seem to be scared of because they have found a way to live semi-safely that works. Her surrounding community seems to believe in God in a more traditional way. Would her community do better believing in the ways that she does? How could her mindset change the way they live and the way they view the world outside of their walls? Does God need to be part of her beliefs or is it just a being to put her thoughts onto?
I like how you framed your question because it makes me think about not only Lauren’s perspective of God being change, but it reminds me of Ceremony when it’s articulated that anything that does not change is dead. In this sense, the quote from Ceremony could be taken quite literally, without change in Lauren’s community they very well may end up dead, especially considering the even poorer people outside of their already poor neighborhood walls view the inhabitants of the neighborhood as rich because they’re living significantly safer lives with communal safeguarding, looking after one another for survival, and ensuring everyone is fed. However, Lauren refers to those who reside outside the walls as “land sharks”, whereabouts she states, “our land sharks are on their way in. It’s just a matter of how long it takes for them to get hungry enough”(50), additionally she adds, “how long does a thief stay content and what’s it like to starve”(75), highlighting that desperation means danger, and given the situation outside the walls is only getting worse, eventually, the desperation will result in excessive danger from those who have nothing to lose and are blinded by their hunger. Your question also leads me to think of Lauren’s notion that God can be shaped (78), which I perceive as a parallel to the idea that you can create your own reality, or manifest your destiny, given you harness the ability to pay attention and see patterns to equip yourself with the tools to act accordingly. To answer your first set of questions, I believe if the community adopted Laurens’s mindset of shaping God and adapting to change, they’d be forced to be more aware and engage with the shaping of God by means of preparation for what’s to come, given the situational patterns. Preparation could be the sole thing that alters their reality and could save the community.
A focus of “Parable of the Sower” is Lauren’s formation of Earthseed and her relationship with religion and God. At the beginning of the novel, Lauren explains that ““At least three years ago, my father’s God stopped being my God. His church stopped being my church” (Butler 7). She explains that she is often preoccupied by thoughts of religion, stating that ““The idea of God is much on my mind these days. I’ve been paying attention to what other people believe — whether they believe, and if so what kind of God they believe in” (14). Instead of abiding by her father (and the majority of her community)’s Baptist faith, Lauren follows her own ideology centered around the idea that God is change and that “God can’t be resisted or stopped, but can be shaped and focused. This means God is not to be prayed to […] God is power, and in the end, God prevails” (25). Lauren’s beliefs seem to stem from her own experiences in a seemingly hopeless post-apocalyptic world and her unquestioning faith in her own religion as one that should be spread to others show that she believes the perception of God is more than an individual relationship. My question is: What gives religion authority and validity? Why should Lauren’s beliefs be a source of religious doctrine?
In reading the first 6 chapters of the Parable of The Sower the idea of God and how it fits into everyday life is brought up time and time again. Lauren on page 14 states “the idea of God is much on my mind these days. I’ve been paying attention to what other people believe-whether they believe, and if so what kind of God they believe in” (Butler 14). God is brought up many more times between that and the end of chapter 6. Mostly in regards to change and Lauren trying to understand the world and the people around her. At the end of chapter 6 she states “God is Change, and in the end, God prevails. But God exists to be shaped. It isn’t enough for us to just survive, limping along, playing business as usual while things get worse and worse. If that’s the shape we give to God, then someday we must become too weak-too poor, too hungry, too sick- to defend ourselves” (Bulter 76). I think it is interesting how “Change” is also capitalized. Is it because Lauren sees change as part of God and God will get them through change as long as they are strong enough? Is it because change is now as important to her as God? Why is changed capitalized?
In Bill Neidjie’s poem ‘I Give You This Story’ he begins by saying:
I give you this story,
this proper, true story.
People can listen.
I’m telling this while you’ve got time,
time for you to make something,
you know,
history
book.
And he ends the poem with saying:
Anyway, got to be made that book.
There’s still time.
No man can growl at me for telling this story,
because it will be too late.
I’ll be dead.
When it comes to indigenous issues in the United States and all over the world, these groups are marginalized and silenced. They are not given a loud enough voice because they are considered weaker in western philosophy and history and the western view of history is all we have come to know through our educational systems in middle school and high school.
When beginning to understand the immense neglect we have bestowed on the indigenous groups still here in this world today, it’s sickening. We all want to do something to help, right?
But yesterday I chatted with a Professor from Hawksbill Indian Nations University named Dr. Daniel Wildcat. I asked him how we can educate people on sustainability issues? The ignorant people with an engrained wrong preconception of history. He told me that we all need to listen. Educators, students, the general public, the human population. We all just really need to shut up and listen. In Bill Neidjie’s poem, that’s what he’s telling us to do, so we can understand what’s really going on and what has been going on. My question is: What would incentivize people to pay attention to problems affecting other members of the human race with a different background? How do you get people to stop acting like heroes going to save a dying species, and just get them to sit down and listen?
This book does not seem to be too far-fetched from what the future could look like if we continue down this path of profit over people and monetary safeguarding as opposed to environmental safeguarding and natural resource conservation. In fact, I see already some linear occurrences in the book that seem eerily similar to what’s transpiring now. Such as crazy climactic events happening across the globe, water scarcity, and an ever-growing gap between the wealthy and the poor. Another phenomenon that is parallel to some perceptions of the climate today too, even given more frequent natural disasters, is when Jo says to Lauren, “your father says he doesn’t believe people changed the climate in spite of what scientists say” (57). Unfortunately, I see far too often the notion of climate change being a polarized political topic, whereabouts certain groups (typically left-winged leaning) see the patterns and the anthropogenic interactions that are heavily contributing to an unstable climate–this envokes both fear and passion to advocate for change and environmental justice, backed by one of the many slogans, “there is no planet B”. On the other hand, we have the opposing group who quite literally do not believe in the existence of climate change at all and have a disdain for the idea that human existence has contributed to it, based upon various arguments, one being that the climate has always changed drastically and it is to be expected. What baffles me is, why a situation that concerns the collective livelihood of all living beings has to be politicized. Even with diverse and varying perceptions, I find it a simple, concrete, and obvious situation that everyone should be equally concerned about, “Embrace diversity. Unite–or be divided–embrace diversity or be destroyed” (196). I can resonate deeply with Laurens’s frustration in trying to convince a friend to pay attention to the patterns and prepare herself, and instead, Jo is too fearful to accept what could be inevitable. Is this fear why some people refuse to acknowledge the unsettling repercussions of our actions, or is it simply because ignorance is bliss and not knowing is easier to cope with than paying attention and feeling smothered by the amount of work it’d take to facilitate positive and productive change?
Additionally, in the face of climate catastrophe, economic catastrophe, and social catastrophe, Lauren seeks refuge in books about self-sufficiency, off-grid living, foraging native plants etc. She wants to prepare her community for what’s to come by ensuring people are able to defend themselves, sustain themselves, and have a cohesive plan for when disaster strikes. All her ideas are again shut down by Jo, who is terrified to entertain the idea of her small bubble of safety being anything but permanent. I can’t help but feel wildly attached to Laurens urgency in advocating for drastic change, encouraging education and preparation, and pushing the cruciality of community backup plans. Is Laurens’s desire to teach her community about the harsh realities of what’s to come and to find the solution in sharing the benefits of survival skills too naive, or does mobilizing her community, though it may be uncomfortable, seem to be the most uniting option…or perhaps the only option? If you agree with the latter, could this notion of strengthening, unifying, and mobilizing small communities be a more feasible way to teach the masses about climate change and the ways we can mitigate it? This is a varied version of the classic question of bottom-up vs top-down. Clearly, those at the top with all the money and power have the opportunity to facilitate change in a much quicker and more efficient manner, but we see even in a post-apocalyptic California, that the wealthy still prioritize profit over people and planet; this reaction by the wealthy could very well be a realistic future. With that being considered, is mobilizing small communities in order to gain a collective consciousness and demand change from the bottom, via power by number, the only way out of a future doomed by lack of timely action?
The opening chapters of Octavia Butlers’s “Parable of the Sower”, introduce us to a precarious main character who has been burdened with a crippling condition of hyper-empathy. This seems intentional and ironic in relation to the concept of sustainability as many of the issues in sustainability stem from a lack of empathy. It seems widely agreed that if everyone was more capable of caring and awareness for others, we would have avoided many of the sustainability problems we now face. So often do we trust the system already in place to uphold the wellbeing of everyone, but is it time we start questioning if there is a better way to approach things? Potentially a whole reworking of the systems in place with the perspective of someone like the main character Lauren, who suffers from this hyper-empathy, would lead to a network of systems that all support each other and the people they consist of as opposed to systems that support a majority but leave some in the dark. This is interestingly paralleled in the story as Lauren seems to begin to question her faith, since it doesn’t always account for or relate to her hyper-empathy. Where will Lauren’s condition lead her in her journey to figuring out life and how will it effect what she believes to be sustainable.
I am loving Parable of the Sower so far. This book has already touched on so many wise, important, and scary aspects of current and future society. To begin, the main character’s condition of hyperempathy I find fascinating, and so important to explore. Lauren’s father tells her, “You don’t have to give in to it,” (11) suggesting that it is a choice to share pain. This topic I think is often overlooked in the climate movement~ acknowledging collective pain and grief. I think many people often don’t understand how others feels emotional and physical pain for things that are not done directly towards them, or don’t believe it is possible to in the first place. Bill Neidjie speaks of this to in his poem on page 53. I think we often leave this out of discussion; that grief and pain for other beings and the state of the world is valid, and real. When this is ignored or suppressed, how does this hurt the movement towards a more just, sustainable society? How important is it to create a space for “hyperempathy” that so many do feel in the movement?
Further, I am fascinated by the discussion of God so far, especially the idea of God as change. “God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without our intent,” (25). With interconnecting topics of gun laws, of violence, and more, I hope the book continues exploring the role of various Religions, how they differ, and how they contribute to beliefs similar and different to Lauren’s, especially regarding the survival and self-sufficiency. Later on, she speaks of changes in medieval Europe as slow, “compared to anything that might happen here, but it took a plague to make some of the people realize that things could change,” (56-57). This is so relevant today, especially with covid exposing new ways of living regarding labor and free time, and regarding climate change effecting the people and places often farthest away from the sources and people who create the harm in the first place. The idea of change and God being shaped by us, and shaping us, to me immediately drew connections to Silko’s ideas of the role of change in tradition. How important is it to explore the historical context of various Religions and understand how they have changed, in order to better adapt and understand social and political contexts within the climate movement, and between elites and non-elites?
In the book “Parable of the Sower”, we follow along with the story of 15-year old Lauren Olamina and her experience in this almost post-apocalyptic world. It is set in California and starts in the year 2024. After the world has gone mad and humans have destroyed the planet, we see how people have learned to interact with one another. On page 22 the narrator states, “Different people frightened her in some deep, hard, ugly way. She didn’t like the Hsu family because they were Chinese and Hispanic, and the older Chinese generation is still Buddhist. She’s lived a couple of doors up from them for longer than I’ve been alive, but they were still from Saturn as far as she was concerned.” (22) This is a story about an old lady, Mrs. Sims, and how she killed herself when it got too tough to live on. But in this story, we see how not much has changed in human narrative and how racism and hatred still fill people’s minds. This is no different than what we are facing today. Literally, our world is burning and yet people are still racist, homophobic, sexist, and outcast people of certain identities because they are not ‘human’ in the eyes of the oppressor. This leads me to believe that even if we are left with nothing but a burning planet, we would still be where we have always been. In previous posts, I have mentioned many times the nature of human nature and whether or not it was truly ours or one that we have created. Does this show that our nature as a species is violent? Will we ever break away from this created mindset for the betterment of our species and our planet?
“But this thing (This idea? Philosophy? New religion?) won’t let me alone, won’t let me forget it, won’t let me go. Maybe…. Maybe it’s like my sharing: One more weirdness; one more crazy, deep-rooted delusion that I’m stuck with. I am stuck with it. And in time, I’ll have to do something about it. In spite of what my father will say or do to me, in spite of the poisonous rottenness outside the way where I might be exiled, I’ll have to do something about it. That reality scares me to death.”
The analysis of this quote is based of the critique of a specific personification of god. Having the guts to know that she can challenge this book while still spreading the information. The philosophy of this book is haunting to her in some way. The virtues of the reading has done are hard to avoid. The “in time i’ll do something about it” part of that quote is interesting to me. The idea of doing something about it eventually feels like a procrastination that will linger on for a while. Unless she clearly sees that even if she gets exiled she will be ok, I don’t see how she will ever do something about it.
At first, I was a little skeptical about reading this book because the science fiction genre has always been very hit or miss for me. However, I have really enjoyed the first half of the book and I am starting to understand why this book was chosen for the last book of the course. As a Sustainable Development student who has spent the last four years studying the impacts of human choices on the environment, I cannot help but view this book as a lens into the apocalyptic future we could potentially face.
One thing I have found very interesting about this book so far is Lauren’s battle with organized religion, specifically Christianity. In, Parable of the Sower, the main character Lauren Olamina struggles with her spirituality. Her interpretation of God varies from her fathers, who is a Baptist preacher and pushes Lauren to get baptized into the church. Lauren views God as such: “God is Power—Infinite, Irresistible, Inexorable, Indifferent. And yet, God is Pliable—Trickster, Teacher, Chaos, Clay. God exists to be shaped. God is Change.” Lauren’s God is not the all-powerful being that Christians worship and pray to. Lauren’s God is meant to be changed and shaped by humanities influence.
In Western society today, things are constantly changing. People are becoming more open to understanding things that have always been seen as taboo, like gender and sexuality, and many people are finding spirituality outside of organized religions. How do you think Lauren’s Earthseed religion and views on God would be accepted today?
Parable of the Sower gives us an inside look on a dystopian society, from the view point of a 15 year old girl. This is written like it is a journal making it very easy and enjoyable to read, writing about her many experiences and thoughts about God, life, and the world around her. She seems to have a very strong opinions on religion and God that differ from her family beliefs, so she keeps them hidden. She writes “God exists to be shaped. God is Change. This is the literal truth… God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without intent…My God doesn’t love me or hate me or watch over me or know me at all, and I feel no love for or loyalty to my God. My God just is” (25). With saying this it feels like she doesn’t need anything from her God, unlike others who turn to their God for everything. Lauren believes that God is the change, which everyone around her is scared of. They want things to go back to how they were but no one wants to change. Will sharing this mindset help others to embrace change just as Lauren has? Will the change ever come?
Parable of the Sower is the story of a 15 year old girl who is living in a dystopian society during the year 2024. The book is more like a journal from the point of view of the main character, Lauren Olamina. Lauren struggles with her own spirituality and often writes about God. Lauren writes a poem on page 25:
God is Power–
Infinite,
Irresistible,
Inexorable,
Indifferent,
And yet, God is Pliable–
Trickster,
Teacher,
Chaos,
Clay,
God exists to be shaped.
God is Change.
After this poem, Lauren writes “This the literal truth. God can’t be resisted or stopped, but can be shaped and focused.” (25) I think the idea that God, like clay, can be shaped and molded can be frightening. If anyone can bend God to their desired shape, God could be used to justify gross realities. However, the fact that God “exists to be shaped” can also be a lesson to us to utilize religion in order to benefit society rather than harm it. If we avoid molding God as climate activists, God will be used against us.
How can we utilize God and religion in our reality to encourage a society that prioritizes climate justice?
As I was reading chapter five of Parable of the Sower the following quote caught my attention: “‘We can get ready. That’s what we’ve got to do now. Get ready for what’s going to happen, get ready to survive it, get ready to make a life afterward. Get focused on arranging to survive so that we can do more than just get batted around by crazy people, desperate people, thugs, and leaders who don’t know what they’re doing!’ (P 55)”
Seeing as this book was written quite a while ago I think this quote is extremely relevant to the attitudes that are shared largely across the world, possibly less dramatically, when people are confronted by the effects of anthropogenic climate change. I think we as a society ignored the red flags early on which only allowed the issue to grown in intensity. Seemingly now it is a matter of adapting to live with the effects of climate change; although, there are undoubtedly some groups of people who aim to create positive change. My question is: Is it too late for people to band together on a global scale to make such a substantial impact on climate change that we could avoid simply adapting and attempting to survive whatever effects might be coming our way? Has too much damage already been done to the Earth, the atmosphere, and biomass as we know (or have previously known) it?
Throughout the first four chapters of the Parable of the Sower, the main character discusses how she has the problem of hyper-empathy that she apparently got from her mother abusing drugs during her pregnancy. “I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel.” (pg.12) I find this condition very interesting in an individual that is living in a time where society is falling apart, or has basically already fallen apart. I also wonder if this condition would be beneficial during a time where the Earth is collectively hurting. With all of the pain that individuals are experiencing during today’s time, it seems like there would be a decrease if people were all able to share the same pain that they are feeling. I honestly see this as an advantage, although it would be quite difficult to deal with, it would help stop the immense amount of violence that we see occurring globally. Like when she sees the dog that her father shot still alive, and how painful it was for her to look at it suffering. If the whole world could not bear to see suffering then it is obvious that the amount of suffering would decrease because nobody wants to experience that pain. Although this response has seemed kind of scattered, my main question would be: Would the world be changed if everyone experienced hyper-empathy, and would this help with all of the inequality we see occurring around the world? If we shared the pain of the suffering, would it be able to continue happening?
Throughout reading the beginning of Parable of the Sower, I’ve really enjoyed reading the criticism and perspective Lauren voices on the politics of her current world, that of course closely relate and parallel with current politics in the our current world. I specifically loved the subject of space travel that was brought up multiple times. On page 15, Lauren expresses her neighbor’s disapproval for government investments in space travel writing, “All that money wasted on another crazy space trip when so many people here on earth can’t afford water, food, or shelter”. This quote immediately reminded me of the recent headlines this summer of our modern day billionaires and their exploration’s into space while simultaneously wildfires in California were raging and spreading smoke you could see over much of the United States. I remember those hazy days in Boone, and thinking to myself the same thing as Lauren’s neighbors; people are dying on Earth here, and these wealthy elites have the luxury to go to another planet. It felt so twisted and made me angry. It’s interesting, however, to hear Lauren defend the concept of space travel during a period where humanity and justice are collapsing. On page 20 she expresses, “Space could be our future…As far as I’m concerned, space exploration and colonization are among the few things left over from the last century that can help us more than they hurt us.” I found this perspective really interesting, considering my own thoughts on space travel, or just the allocation of resources/time in a time of mass suffering. Her father’s perspective that, “Politicians and big corporations get the bread, and we get the circuses,” (p. 20) resonates with me much more.
Do you feel as though this perspective Lauren holds is wise? Where do you think it’s rooted in, what do you think draws her to put faith into a seemingly non-priority area of research? I don’t believe she is naive or overly optimistic, as she makes other excellent (in my opinion) critiques of political practices, so why do you think this one is defendable for her?
Octavia E. Butler writes, as Lauren, and states to her friend that yes she does have the ability to see into the future, to predict the future. On page 55 she says “You can, if you want too. It’s scary but once you get past the fear, it’s easy.” Through her struggle with religion, who or what God really is, while living as the daughter of a preacher, Lauren tries to subtly but firmly explain her once fears to her only friend. While she still thinks about these fears she does so in a different perspective, one that emphasizes finding solutions in order to make the fears disappear rather than one that ignores them in hopes that they will disappear on their own. Ignoring fear is something prevalent within a capitalist society that makes decisions based on profitability rather than human safety. By telling her friend that she indeed can see into the future Lauren is demonstrating a key concept of ecofeminism in which the past is used to predict the future. The saying “history repeats itself” is something that ecofeminism tries to cease from happening and by Lauren continuing on to say “In L.A. some walled communities bigger and stronger than this one just aren’t there anymore… What happened to them can happen to us,” she is trying to draw attention to the inevitability of change in an intellectually dominate yet still positive way.
Not which do you think is the right actions, but between the phrase “ignorance is bliss” and “knowledge is power” which do you feel is an easier perspective to have on life?
Parable of the Sower is an interesting book that intertwines the topics of religion and climate change. This immediately caught my attention because a lot of times I feel like the two do not go together in our society today, I often put religion and conservative views in the same category, which in my mind creates the idea that certain religious people are skeptical of climate change. The poem on page 25 spoke to me in regards to my previous thoughts. It says: “God is power- infinite, irresistible, inexorable, indifferent. And yet, God is pliable- trickster, teacher, chaos, clay, god exists to be shaped. God is change.” After the poem, it reads “But we can rig the game in our own favor is we understand that God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without our intent.” I took this in terms of the climate, it will be shaped with or without forethought or intent. Can we look at God in a different way, maybe in terms of climate change or Mother Earth? Does God always have to be tied to religion if we are thinking about her in that way?
In “Parable of the Sower,” Octavia Butler uses the main character, Lauren, as an outlet for symbolizing the detrimental effects of climate change through her power, or rather weakness of hyper-empathy. This condition that Lauren suffers from parallels many of the issues that arise in the book. For example, Lauren feels the pain of multiple killings, which makes her more likely to understand others and their conditions. After Lauren and the others went to practice their shooting, Lauren kills a dog and states, “I had felt it die, and yet I had not died. I had felt its pain as though it were a human being. I had felt its life life flare and go out, and I was still alive” (46). Does Octavia Butler emphasize Lauren’s hyperempathy condition to describe the feelings that are lacking in our society? If so, how will Lauren’s role change throughout the book, and do you think Lauren’s condition will put her in bad situations or create a positive change to her society and current situation?
Parable of the Sower can be viewed as a hopeful, yet cautionary tale of sorts. Being set in the now near future, Lauren Oya Olamina is in search of a better way of life. One that does not consist of towering walls separating communities and fires pillaging the towns and churches she once was familiar to. The book displays a time where privatization is at the forefront of society, rendering the majority poor and helpless. At the center of all this confusion, Lauren realizes the faith she once had in “her Father’s God” is no longer the same as she does not believe we are meant to blindly follow these rules and ideas given by some higher entity. Lauren believes a God’s purpose should be fluid, changing with the situation and needs of each individual, “God is Change”. Did this notion begin as a response to the apparent lack of God’s guidance when climate change and mass destruction ensued? Maybe Lauren felt like the God everyone had been praying to in the past was not pushing the people to where they need to be or what they need to prioritize, Mother Earth. Is it possible Lauren is unknowingly wanting to recreate a more ecocentric religion, with nature at the forefront?
In Octavia Butler’s book Parable of the Sower, the main character, Lauren, experiences a condition called hyper-empathy. Lauren describes this condition as “I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel. I get a lot of grief that does not belong to me and isn’t real. But it hurts” (12). Lauren’s hyper-empathy is somewhat of a power because it enables her to decide to make a difference in her community while everyone else stands around and waits. This can also be seen in our world today. Many of us sustainability students may be hyperempathetic towards our planet’s future in fear of a climate disaster whereas others who do not feel our world crumbling apart tend to sit around and just wait for someone else to do something about it.
In considering Lauren’s hyper-empathy as a power and as a condition of suffering, I began to think about how hyper-empathy can create positive and negative effects in other social movements. If our society had as much empathy a Lauren did, would that make our social movements stronger or weaker?
In Butler’s Parable of the Sower, Lauren talks a lot about God, or rather, her “father’s God”, and it is interesting to see how little faith she has in this God and why. One passage that really caught my attention was when she began talking about one of the old churches- “But after it had been slept in by the homeless, robbed, and vandalized several times, someone poured gasoline in and around it and burned it down. Seven of the homeless people sleeping inside on that night burned with it,” I thought this connected well with one of the later passages when she asks “So what is God? Just another name for what makes you feel special and protected?”(p.15). She then goes on to talk about a hurricane on the Gulf of Mexico. “How many people has it hurt? How many are going to starve later because of destroyed crops? That’s nature. Is it God?” (p.15). There is somewhat of a nature v mankind in her conflict with her father’s God- When natural disasters hurt the unprepared or poor, its nature, is that God? Does she see people’s suffering as a result of God’s actions/nature, or human nature in that those who are less affected and able to help refuse to do so? Or is it her belief that human nature is part of God? Does she blame her father’s God for this part of human nature? Is human nature the reason that she is so unsure of the existence of her father’s God- “Is there a God? If there is, does he (she? it?) care about us?” (p.15). Referring back to the first quote, churches are usually seen as a sort of safe haven or place of sanctuary. Do you think Lauren would blame God for the suffering of the homeless people who burned with the church, a place that should be a sort of sanctuary? Or human nature, or both? (One as the result of another).
I wanted to discuss the significance behind Lauren’s hyperempathy syndrome. On page 11 Lauren describes, “the sharing isn’t real, after all. It isn’t some magic or ESP that allows me to share the pain or pleasure of other people. It’s delusional.” Lauren also explains how her father thought the sensitivity was something Lauren should just ignore and forget about. I feel like Christianity almost encourages empathy within the religion in order to accept all people and forgive all sin. Why would Lauren’s father try to sweep her hyperempathy under the rug? Do you think her father’s response to her hyperempathy pushed her further away from Christianity? Does this excerpt serve to represent the negative connotation behind struggles with mental illness in society today?
Throughout the beginning chapters of Parable of the Sower, we learn that the main character, Lauren, is living in a semi-apocalyptic post-modern America with many of the threats being due to climate change. Violence is high, and the “town” she lives in named Robledo, is enclosed in a wall. This book was written almost 30 years ago, and reflects some experiences we are facing today, especially in the state of California with water, and fire threats. This is a science fiction book, but do you think there might become a day when it is even more realistic? What lessons can we take from the first few chapters to improve our futures?
Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower covers a wide range of themes and topics. One in particular that remained a strong part of the novel was religion and God. I enjoyed seeing Lauren’s journey to discover her own religion, and create her own idea of who or what god is. The idea that “God is change” becomes almost a mantra for Lauren as she navigates through incredibly difficult and tumultuous years. I also liked that Lauren was raised by a religious father, and rather than fully embracing Christianity or outright rejecting it, she kept the ideas that she liked and brought in new ideas in place of what she didn’t agree with. I don’t think religions (more specifically western religions) need to be so rigid and right-or-wrong only, and I appreciated religion being a major aspect of the novel without becoming a religious novel in and of itself. If more people created their own religions based on their moral beliefs and world views rather than confining themselves to the tenets of one specific religion, what would be some of the biggest changes to the world as a result?
I wish to draw attention between the connections one might find between Ceremony and parable of the Sower. In Ceremony the use of poetry is a method for expanding the narrative of the story to encompass non-typical representations of culture and social-life, and through this craft a more holistic representation of the complex associations and realities comprising our social and cultural life. Similarly to this divergence in approach, Octavia Butler sets out to, and I would argue achieves, in the desire to present a different kind of science fiction protagonist. However this divergence applies not only to Butler’s decision to make the protagonist someone representing typically un-represented demographics and identities’, but also to her re-interpretation of typical notions of religious revelation and social movements. Lauren’s religious awakening is not only unique for who is participating in the revelation, but also in what is being ‘revealed’, namely the following: that our typical spiritual interpretations of the world need not be regressive, nore do they need to make reference to any extensive system of beliefs which form a complex historical ideology. No, in Butler’s presentation of Lauren’s religious awakening, and in the description of her god as being indifferent, non-anthropomorphic, and loosely defined, we see an attempt to deconstruct the literary motifs we are common to see: the messiah character, beset on all sides by degradation and corruption, finding divine revelation, and in seeing the truth, forges a path of redemption out of the deteriorating conditions they and their community are experiencing. A question I would ask is this: Does this method of deconstructing typical literary traditions and motifs achieve its goal of providing outlets for different interpretations and solutions to social-ills and present social phenomena?
Lauren’s understanding of her ever-changing relationship with God, as she says “God is Change” (p4), relates to an apocalyptic idea of what God means in this post-disaster(s) society. Similarly, Bill Neidje explores a world where there has been great disasters to the way of life his people had known for hundreds of centuries. Neidje writes, “Now Aborogine losing it/ losing everything./ Nearly all dead my people,/ my old people gone.” Both Lauren and Bill Nedije provide explanations for this happening as they understand it, within their own frameworks. Lauren’s understanding of her religion and conception of creating a religion which is based upon the principle of change is indicative of the presence of uncertainty in her world, similarly to Neidje’s work, which has a clear mournful, yet hopeful, tone.
Both of these framings help us to understand the worldview of Lauren and Neidje, especially as they consider themselves as pieces of a whole which is larger than themselves. For Lauren, she is very aware of her place within her family, community, and finally, begins to gain an understanding of her conception of the world around her, and thus herself, through her religion. Neidje’s wisdom and reflections serve as a meaningful guide to understanding one’s relationship with the land, as well as their relationship to other people, within the Gagudju community or outside of it. Further, these framings allow readers to think in terms of self-determination. In Lauren’s case, she is able to exercise autonomy from her father and his religion, and provide understandings for the processes she sees happening around her through her religion. Neidje, discussing the changes which have occurred alongside colonization exemplify the amount of destruction which has impacted the Gagudju community.
When looking through the lens of religion, how can having a theology based in a simultaneously influential and influenced God provide hope for people living through uncharted and uncertain times? How can understandings of evolving epistemologies that survive alongside people help guide the unprecedented impacts of climate change?
SD 3800 Voices in Sustainable Development 
In “Parable of the Sower” by Octavia Butler, It can be seen throughout the first chapters that Lauren and her family live in a poorer area where there is a lot of poverty and violence. In chapter 3, Lauren states, “Is any of this real? Dangerous question. Sometimes I don’t know the answer. I doubt myself. I doubt what I think I know. I try to forget about it. After all, if it’s real, why doesn’t anyone else know about it. Every one knows that change is inevitable.” (Butler 48) It seems to be that Lauren is struggling with her faith even though she is surrounded by a religious community. Lauren also has a condition called hyper-empathy which enables her to feel other peoples “pleasure and pain.” Is this condition something that is affecting her beliefs? She obviously can empathize with others feelings, so how will this affect her through the rest of the book in regards to figuring out life?
“I can’t do a thing about my hyperempathy, no matter what Dad thinks or wishes. I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel. I get a lot of grief that does not belong to me and isn’t real. But it hurts” (Butler 12).
The main protagonist in Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower, is diagnosed with a condition referred to as hyperempathy. This concept is interesting from the perspective of modern capitalist societies and how we are taught to limit feelings of empathy as a form of self-preservation. Within a capitalist society, pain and injustices are everywhere and it is emotionally exhausting to empathize with the amount of suffering occuring. Thus over time we as a society have developed controlled empathy that functions to protect ourselves and ultimately the capitalist system. If we deny ourselves empathy how can we ever unite against those in control and performing the injustices?
Bill Neidije’s poems speak of a similar connection to deeper feeling with the people and land around him. Expressing empathy for the land is a force of power and not a weakness; a perspective that is prevalent in capitalist societies.
What role does empathy play in our relationship with the environment? How does our lack of empathy create societal rules that damage our own identity and how we respond to our own suffering (e.g mental health)?
*A perspective that is NOT prevalent in capitalist societies
The novel, “The Parable of the Sower,” by N.K. Jemisin takes the form of diary entries written by the 15-year-old teenager, Lauren Olamina. The events are set in the future, starting in 2024. The impacts of global warming and climate change have finally caught up to first-world countries like the United States, and Lauren writes her experiences and thoughts on the apocalyptic world that has made up most of her life. Furthermore, Lauren suffers from hyper empathy and faces the challenge of feeling the pain of others. Throughout chapters 1-6, Lauren voices her disagreements with her neighborhood’s decisions regarding wellbeing and survival throughout her writing and must learn how to integrate herself within the community without disruption. Or is disruption of the communities ideals what is needed to, ultimately, survive in the end? Personally, this is slightly terrifying to read. The time frame of the novel is so close to the present day, and the likelihood of this very scenario playing out in real life isn’t slim at all.
**Octavia Butler
Throughout the novel “Parable of the Sower” by Octavia Butler the main character, Lauren, contemplates with the idea of God. Lauren writes a poem in which she depicts her theories about God, “God is Power– / Infinite, / Irresistible, / Indifferent. / And yet, God is Pliable– / Trickster, / Teacher, / Chaos, Clay. / God exists to be shaped. / God is Change” (25). From what we know of Lauren from the first six chapters of this book, this seems to fit her ideologies about needing to plan for the worst case scenario. She believes that God exists to be shaped, because civilization cannot simply wait around for someone to save themselves– they must take action in their own hands unless humanity want to be wiped out. How do you think this attitude would have changed the society Lauren resides in? In Ceremony, transition and change are fundamental to survival. Do you think Betonie would agree with Lauren’s idea of God and in what ways would he agree or disagree? Do you think the community Lauren resides in could use indigenous knowledge to aid in their survival?
In Parable of the Sower, it’s mentioned time and time again that change is coming. That it’s time for change and in Lauren’s mind God is change. One part of the book I want to talk about is the part where her father confronts her about what she said to Joanne. “I almost started crying. I had all I could do to hold it back. What I thought was, ‘No, I think your world is coming to an end, and maybe you with it.'” (Butler, 62). This stood out because it shows how Lauren is scared about the future of the world. How she cares and feels like the only way to have any type of future is to let go on the feelings of normal from the past. Constantly comparing how normal the past was with the hope that the future could return to it. It makes me wonder if that should how we should approach development for the future, if we should stop making it try to feel like past normal? also what about the pandemic, people keep saying that they’re excited for when things return to normal, or that things are starting to feel normal again. Should we just accept that things won’t be that type of normal again? Should we focus on creating the “new normal”? What about climate change, when do we accept that things are past the point of fixing or reversing? Is that something that we should be thinking about now?
The poems written by Bill Neidjie caught my attention because they show his appreciation for the earth and the connection he has to it when he states “I belong to this earth. Soon my bones become earth”. (Neidjie, 13) In the next poem, he writes “ I was thinking. No history was written for us when white Europeans started here, only a few words were written. Should be more than that” (Neidjie, 17). From my understanding, Neidjie explains that when the white Europeans traveled to his land, they disregarded all of this history that occurred before them and only wrote about their own. The history of the natives to the land was erased and not even acknowledged almost as if the land did not exist until they landed there. They never received recognition for the work that they did to maintain the land that was once theirs. With that being said, I find it unfortunate that we are never educated on the full history unless we decide to complete our own research. Since Bill Neidjie is the last surviving speaker of the Gaagudju language, he could be our last hope at learning. Why did people allow this to happen? Why were these people unconcerned about the previous history before them. Would they not want to add to it?
First and foremost I love Octavia Butler and everything this woman has to offer. She is the queen of sci-fi and I’m so excited to discuss the impact of her work.
That being said, this dystopic, but also not extremely far-fetched construction of society Butler has created in Parable of the Sower has truly tugged at my heart strings and left me feeling adequately queasy. In the development of Lauren’s story, she recounts target practice with her father. ‘”‘The police,’ my father told them, ‘may be able to avenge you, but they can’t protect you. Things are getting worse. And as for your children… Well, yes, there is risk. But you can put your guns out of their reach while they’re very young, and train them as they grow older,” (39). This touches on two sensitive topics in our own current society- the effectiveness of both law enforcement and gun control. Still being in the process of reading, this question may or may not be answered along the way but, what do you think Butler is suggesting about both gun control and law enforcement? Obviously the whole book is based in a society where the government has failed its civilians to the upmost degree, but what is Butler suggesting the parameters of law enforcement and gun control be as an alternative?
I have more thoughts and accidentally posted to early.
Is this quote suggesting that gun safety should be left to the hands of the individual(s)? Since Lauren is learning from her family, and earlier referenced that no one in the walls really attends school anymore due to safety concerns, is the only readily available option in this instance basically just “every man for himself, good luck!”? I feel as though this may take all accountability away from producers / suppliers of arms.
In western culture, we blame injuries and pain on things like twisting an ankle, being inactive, or constantly using the same joints over and over again. Many individuals in older communities see these consequences with age. Neidjie states “You cut yourself, they say. When you maybe forty years might be fifty years old you feel pain in your back, because you cut tree. I’m old man, he said, I’m telling you.” In aboriginal culture, the pain of the older years is due to a “karma-like” idea. As one interferes with ecology and you will feel the pain later. What can we, as westerners learn from this epistemology, and how can we use it to better western medicine and how we treat ecology around us?
Parable of The Sower was written in 1993, based in the year 2024. I find this really interesting because Butler wrote placing the reality in the relatively near future. Now, this feels even more relevant as many scientists warn that we have less than 30 years before further climate catastrophe. That being said, what has struck me most about the book so far is the sense of normalcy everyone tries to maintain- even in an apocalyptic world. Lauren is still baptized, people cling to God, and neighbors depend on each other… The reminded me of an episode of This American Life I listened to a few months ago. A guest was talking about how how even during the Sri Lankan civil war people went about like usual. They noted that they could see this same pattern in the United States, things are not fine here, but people are going about as if they are. I’m wondering if Butler would see issue with this. To some extent human needs remain the same, even in crisis, so some amount of normalcy seems vital for survival. I’m wondering, what Butler thinks of this. At what point does pretneding things in the world are ok hold us back from change, and when is it necessary to survive?
“We do not worship God.
We perceive and attend God.
We learn from God.
With forethought and work,
We shape God.
In the end, we yield to God.
We adapt and endure,
For we are Earthseed
And God if Change” (Butler 17).
In Parable of the Sower, the main character Lauren is figuring out what she believes in and developing her own beliefs away from her father’s. She is establishing that God is change and that he is shapeable to our personal situations. Change is coming in their world and in the book she says that God cannot be stopped. I think this perspective is very interesting. In the book they are facing constant struggles and living in danger most of the time. Change is something that they seem to be scared of because they have found a way to live semi-safely that works. Her surrounding community seems to believe in God in a more traditional way. Would her community do better believing in the ways that she does? How could her mindset change the way they live and the way they view the world outside of their walls? Does God need to be part of her beliefs or is it just a being to put her thoughts onto?
I like how you framed your question because it makes me think about not only Lauren’s perspective of God being change, but it reminds me of Ceremony when it’s articulated that anything that does not change is dead. In this sense, the quote from Ceremony could be taken quite literally, without change in Lauren’s community they very well may end up dead, especially considering the even poorer people outside of their already poor neighborhood walls view the inhabitants of the neighborhood as rich because they’re living significantly safer lives with communal safeguarding, looking after one another for survival, and ensuring everyone is fed. However, Lauren refers to those who reside outside the walls as “land sharks”, whereabouts she states, “our land sharks are on their way in. It’s just a matter of how long it takes for them to get hungry enough”(50), additionally she adds, “how long does a thief stay content and what’s it like to starve”(75), highlighting that desperation means danger, and given the situation outside the walls is only getting worse, eventually, the desperation will result in excessive danger from those who have nothing to lose and are blinded by their hunger. Your question also leads me to think of Lauren’s notion that God can be shaped (78), which I perceive as a parallel to the idea that you can create your own reality, or manifest your destiny, given you harness the ability to pay attention and see patterns to equip yourself with the tools to act accordingly. To answer your first set of questions, I believe if the community adopted Laurens’s mindset of shaping God and adapting to change, they’d be forced to be more aware and engage with the shaping of God by means of preparation for what’s to come, given the situational patterns. Preparation could be the sole thing that alters their reality and could save the community.
A focus of “Parable of the Sower” is Lauren’s formation of Earthseed and her relationship with religion and God. At the beginning of the novel, Lauren explains that ““At least three years ago, my father’s God stopped being my God. His church stopped being my church” (Butler 7). She explains that she is often preoccupied by thoughts of religion, stating that ““The idea of God is much on my mind these days. I’ve been paying attention to what other people believe — whether they believe, and if so what kind of God they believe in” (14). Instead of abiding by her father (and the majority of her community)’s Baptist faith, Lauren follows her own ideology centered around the idea that God is change and that “God can’t be resisted or stopped, but can be shaped and focused. This means God is not to be prayed to […] God is power, and in the end, God prevails” (25). Lauren’s beliefs seem to stem from her own experiences in a seemingly hopeless post-apocalyptic world and her unquestioning faith in her own religion as one that should be spread to others show that she believes the perception of God is more than an individual relationship. My question is: What gives religion authority and validity? Why should Lauren’s beliefs be a source of religious doctrine?
In reading the first 6 chapters of the Parable of The Sower the idea of God and how it fits into everyday life is brought up time and time again. Lauren on page 14 states “the idea of God is much on my mind these days. I’ve been paying attention to what other people believe-whether they believe, and if so what kind of God they believe in” (Butler 14). God is brought up many more times between that and the end of chapter 6. Mostly in regards to change and Lauren trying to understand the world and the people around her. At the end of chapter 6 she states “God is Change, and in the end, God prevails. But God exists to be shaped. It isn’t enough for us to just survive, limping along, playing business as usual while things get worse and worse. If that’s the shape we give to God, then someday we must become too weak-too poor, too hungry, too sick- to defend ourselves” (Bulter 76). I think it is interesting how “Change” is also capitalized. Is it because Lauren sees change as part of God and God will get them through change as long as they are strong enough? Is it because change is now as important to her as God? Why is changed capitalized?
In Bill Neidjie’s poem ‘I Give You This Story’ he begins by saying:
I give you this story,
this proper, true story.
People can listen.
I’m telling this while you’ve got time,
time for you to make something,
you know,
history
book.
And he ends the poem with saying:
Anyway, got to be made that book.
There’s still time.
No man can growl at me for telling this story,
because it will be too late.
I’ll be dead.
When it comes to indigenous issues in the United States and all over the world, these groups are marginalized and silenced. They are not given a loud enough voice because they are considered weaker in western philosophy and history and the western view of history is all we have come to know through our educational systems in middle school and high school.
When beginning to understand the immense neglect we have bestowed on the indigenous groups still here in this world today, it’s sickening. We all want to do something to help, right?
But yesterday I chatted with a Professor from Hawksbill Indian Nations University named Dr. Daniel Wildcat. I asked him how we can educate people on sustainability issues? The ignorant people with an engrained wrong preconception of history. He told me that we all need to listen. Educators, students, the general public, the human population. We all just really need to shut up and listen. In Bill Neidjie’s poem, that’s what he’s telling us to do, so we can understand what’s really going on and what has been going on. My question is: What would incentivize people to pay attention to problems affecting other members of the human race with a different background? How do you get people to stop acting like heroes going to save a dying species, and just get them to sit down and listen?
**Haskell Indian Nations University
This book does not seem to be too far-fetched from what the future could look like if we continue down this path of profit over people and monetary safeguarding as opposed to environmental safeguarding and natural resource conservation. In fact, I see already some linear occurrences in the book that seem eerily similar to what’s transpiring now. Such as crazy climactic events happening across the globe, water scarcity, and an ever-growing gap between the wealthy and the poor. Another phenomenon that is parallel to some perceptions of the climate today too, even given more frequent natural disasters, is when Jo says to Lauren, “your father says he doesn’t believe people changed the climate in spite of what scientists say” (57). Unfortunately, I see far too often the notion of climate change being a polarized political topic, whereabouts certain groups (typically left-winged leaning) see the patterns and the anthropogenic interactions that are heavily contributing to an unstable climate–this envokes both fear and passion to advocate for change and environmental justice, backed by one of the many slogans, “there is no planet B”. On the other hand, we have the opposing group who quite literally do not believe in the existence of climate change at all and have a disdain for the idea that human existence has contributed to it, based upon various arguments, one being that the climate has always changed drastically and it is to be expected. What baffles me is, why a situation that concerns the collective livelihood of all living beings has to be politicized. Even with diverse and varying perceptions, I find it a simple, concrete, and obvious situation that everyone should be equally concerned about, “Embrace diversity. Unite–or be divided–embrace diversity or be destroyed” (196). I can resonate deeply with Laurens’s frustration in trying to convince a friend to pay attention to the patterns and prepare herself, and instead, Jo is too fearful to accept what could be inevitable. Is this fear why some people refuse to acknowledge the unsettling repercussions of our actions, or is it simply because ignorance is bliss and not knowing is easier to cope with than paying attention and feeling smothered by the amount of work it’d take to facilitate positive and productive change?
Additionally, in the face of climate catastrophe, economic catastrophe, and social catastrophe, Lauren seeks refuge in books about self-sufficiency, off-grid living, foraging native plants etc. She wants to prepare her community for what’s to come by ensuring people are able to defend themselves, sustain themselves, and have a cohesive plan for when disaster strikes. All her ideas are again shut down by Jo, who is terrified to entertain the idea of her small bubble of safety being anything but permanent. I can’t help but feel wildly attached to Laurens urgency in advocating for drastic change, encouraging education and preparation, and pushing the cruciality of community backup plans. Is Laurens’s desire to teach her community about the harsh realities of what’s to come and to find the solution in sharing the benefits of survival skills too naive, or does mobilizing her community, though it may be uncomfortable, seem to be the most uniting option…or perhaps the only option? If you agree with the latter, could this notion of strengthening, unifying, and mobilizing small communities be a more feasible way to teach the masses about climate change and the ways we can mitigate it? This is a varied version of the classic question of bottom-up vs top-down. Clearly, those at the top with all the money and power have the opportunity to facilitate change in a much quicker and more efficient manner, but we see even in a post-apocalyptic California, that the wealthy still prioritize profit over people and planet; this reaction by the wealthy could very well be a realistic future. With that being considered, is mobilizing small communities in order to gain a collective consciousness and demand change from the bottom, via power by number, the only way out of a future doomed by lack of timely action?
The opening chapters of Octavia Butlers’s “Parable of the Sower”, introduce us to a precarious main character who has been burdened with a crippling condition of hyper-empathy. This seems intentional and ironic in relation to the concept of sustainability as many of the issues in sustainability stem from a lack of empathy. It seems widely agreed that if everyone was more capable of caring and awareness for others, we would have avoided many of the sustainability problems we now face. So often do we trust the system already in place to uphold the wellbeing of everyone, but is it time we start questioning if there is a better way to approach things? Potentially a whole reworking of the systems in place with the perspective of someone like the main character Lauren, who suffers from this hyper-empathy, would lead to a network of systems that all support each other and the people they consist of as opposed to systems that support a majority but leave some in the dark. This is interestingly paralleled in the story as Lauren seems to begin to question her faith, since it doesn’t always account for or relate to her hyper-empathy. Where will Lauren’s condition lead her in her journey to figuring out life and how will it effect what she believes to be sustainable.
I am loving Parable of the Sower so far. This book has already touched on so many wise, important, and scary aspects of current and future society. To begin, the main character’s condition of hyperempathy I find fascinating, and so important to explore. Lauren’s father tells her, “You don’t have to give in to it,” (11) suggesting that it is a choice to share pain. This topic I think is often overlooked in the climate movement~ acknowledging collective pain and grief. I think many people often don’t understand how others feels emotional and physical pain for things that are not done directly towards them, or don’t believe it is possible to in the first place. Bill Neidjie speaks of this to in his poem on page 53. I think we often leave this out of discussion; that grief and pain for other beings and the state of the world is valid, and real. When this is ignored or suppressed, how does this hurt the movement towards a more just, sustainable society? How important is it to create a space for “hyperempathy” that so many do feel in the movement?
Further, I am fascinated by the discussion of God so far, especially the idea of God as change. “God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without our intent,” (25). With interconnecting topics of gun laws, of violence, and more, I hope the book continues exploring the role of various Religions, how they differ, and how they contribute to beliefs similar and different to Lauren’s, especially regarding the survival and self-sufficiency. Later on, she speaks of changes in medieval Europe as slow, “compared to anything that might happen here, but it took a plague to make some of the people realize that things could change,” (56-57). This is so relevant today, especially with covid exposing new ways of living regarding labor and free time, and regarding climate change effecting the people and places often farthest away from the sources and people who create the harm in the first place. The idea of change and God being shaped by us, and shaping us, to me immediately drew connections to Silko’s ideas of the role of change in tradition. How important is it to explore the historical context of various Religions and understand how they have changed, in order to better adapt and understand social and political contexts within the climate movement, and between elites and non-elites?
In the book “Parable of the Sower”, we follow along with the story of 15-year old Lauren Olamina and her experience in this almost post-apocalyptic world. It is set in California and starts in the year 2024. After the world has gone mad and humans have destroyed the planet, we see how people have learned to interact with one another. On page 22 the narrator states, “Different people frightened her in some deep, hard, ugly way. She didn’t like the Hsu family because they were Chinese and Hispanic, and the older Chinese generation is still Buddhist. She’s lived a couple of doors up from them for longer than I’ve been alive, but they were still from Saturn as far as she was concerned.” (22) This is a story about an old lady, Mrs. Sims, and how she killed herself when it got too tough to live on. But in this story, we see how not much has changed in human narrative and how racism and hatred still fill people’s minds. This is no different than what we are facing today. Literally, our world is burning and yet people are still racist, homophobic, sexist, and outcast people of certain identities because they are not ‘human’ in the eyes of the oppressor. This leads me to believe that even if we are left with nothing but a burning planet, we would still be where we have always been. In previous posts, I have mentioned many times the nature of human nature and whether or not it was truly ours or one that we have created. Does this show that our nature as a species is violent? Will we ever break away from this created mindset for the betterment of our species and our planet?
“But this thing (This idea? Philosophy? New religion?) won’t let me alone, won’t let me forget it, won’t let me go. Maybe…. Maybe it’s like my sharing: One more weirdness; one more crazy, deep-rooted delusion that I’m stuck with. I am stuck with it. And in time, I’ll have to do something about it. In spite of what my father will say or do to me, in spite of the poisonous rottenness outside the way where I might be exiled, I’ll have to do something about it. That reality scares me to death.”
The analysis of this quote is based of the critique of a specific personification of god. Having the guts to know that she can challenge this book while still spreading the information. The philosophy of this book is haunting to her in some way. The virtues of the reading has done are hard to avoid. The “in time i’ll do something about it” part of that quote is interesting to me. The idea of doing something about it eventually feels like a procrastination that will linger on for a while. Unless she clearly sees that even if she gets exiled she will be ok, I don’t see how she will ever do something about it.
At first, I was a little skeptical about reading this book because the science fiction genre has always been very hit or miss for me. However, I have really enjoyed the first half of the book and I am starting to understand why this book was chosen for the last book of the course. As a Sustainable Development student who has spent the last four years studying the impacts of human choices on the environment, I cannot help but view this book as a lens into the apocalyptic future we could potentially face.
One thing I have found very interesting about this book so far is Lauren’s battle with organized religion, specifically Christianity. In, Parable of the Sower, the main character Lauren Olamina struggles with her spirituality. Her interpretation of God varies from her fathers, who is a Baptist preacher and pushes Lauren to get baptized into the church. Lauren views God as such: “God is Power—Infinite, Irresistible, Inexorable, Indifferent. And yet, God is Pliable—Trickster, Teacher, Chaos, Clay. God exists to be shaped. God is Change.” Lauren’s God is not the all-powerful being that Christians worship and pray to. Lauren’s God is meant to be changed and shaped by humanities influence.
In Western society today, things are constantly changing. People are becoming more open to understanding things that have always been seen as taboo, like gender and sexuality, and many people are finding spirituality outside of organized religions. How do you think Lauren’s Earthseed religion and views on God would be accepted today?
Parable of the Sower gives us an inside look on a dystopian society, from the view point of a 15 year old girl. This is written like it is a journal making it very easy and enjoyable to read, writing about her many experiences and thoughts about God, life, and the world around her. She seems to have a very strong opinions on religion and God that differ from her family beliefs, so she keeps them hidden. She writes “God exists to be shaped. God is Change. This is the literal truth… God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without intent…My God doesn’t love me or hate me or watch over me or know me at all, and I feel no love for or loyalty to my God. My God just is” (25). With saying this it feels like she doesn’t need anything from her God, unlike others who turn to their God for everything. Lauren believes that God is the change, which everyone around her is scared of. They want things to go back to how they were but no one wants to change. Will sharing this mindset help others to embrace change just as Lauren has? Will the change ever come?
Parable of the Sower is the story of a 15 year old girl who is living in a dystopian society during the year 2024. The book is more like a journal from the point of view of the main character, Lauren Olamina. Lauren struggles with her own spirituality and often writes about God. Lauren writes a poem on page 25:
God is Power–
Infinite,
Irresistible,
Inexorable,
Indifferent,
And yet, God is Pliable–
Trickster,
Teacher,
Chaos,
Clay,
God exists to be shaped.
God is Change.
After this poem, Lauren writes “This the literal truth. God can’t be resisted or stopped, but can be shaped and focused.” (25) I think the idea that God, like clay, can be shaped and molded can be frightening. If anyone can bend God to their desired shape, God could be used to justify gross realities. However, the fact that God “exists to be shaped” can also be a lesson to us to utilize religion in order to benefit society rather than harm it. If we avoid molding God as climate activists, God will be used against us.
How can we utilize God and religion in our reality to encourage a society that prioritizes climate justice?
As I was reading chapter five of Parable of the Sower the following quote caught my attention: “‘We can get ready. That’s what we’ve got to do now. Get ready for what’s going to happen, get ready to survive it, get ready to make a life afterward. Get focused on arranging to survive so that we can do more than just get batted around by crazy people, desperate people, thugs, and leaders who don’t know what they’re doing!’ (P 55)”
Seeing as this book was written quite a while ago I think this quote is extremely relevant to the attitudes that are shared largely across the world, possibly less dramatically, when people are confronted by the effects of anthropogenic climate change. I think we as a society ignored the red flags early on which only allowed the issue to grown in intensity. Seemingly now it is a matter of adapting to live with the effects of climate change; although, there are undoubtedly some groups of people who aim to create positive change. My question is: Is it too late for people to band together on a global scale to make such a substantial impact on climate change that we could avoid simply adapting and attempting to survive whatever effects might be coming our way? Has too much damage already been done to the Earth, the atmosphere, and biomass as we know (or have previously known) it?
Throughout the first four chapters of the Parable of the Sower, the main character discusses how she has the problem of hyper-empathy that she apparently got from her mother abusing drugs during her pregnancy. “I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel.” (pg.12) I find this condition very interesting in an individual that is living in a time where society is falling apart, or has basically already fallen apart. I also wonder if this condition would be beneficial during a time where the Earth is collectively hurting. With all of the pain that individuals are experiencing during today’s time, it seems like there would be a decrease if people were all able to share the same pain that they are feeling. I honestly see this as an advantage, although it would be quite difficult to deal with, it would help stop the immense amount of violence that we see occurring globally. Like when she sees the dog that her father shot still alive, and how painful it was for her to look at it suffering. If the whole world could not bear to see suffering then it is obvious that the amount of suffering would decrease because nobody wants to experience that pain. Although this response has seemed kind of scattered, my main question would be: Would the world be changed if everyone experienced hyper-empathy, and would this help with all of the inequality we see occurring around the world? If we shared the pain of the suffering, would it be able to continue happening?
Throughout reading the beginning of Parable of the Sower, I’ve really enjoyed reading the criticism and perspective Lauren voices on the politics of her current world, that of course closely relate and parallel with current politics in the our current world. I specifically loved the subject of space travel that was brought up multiple times. On page 15, Lauren expresses her neighbor’s disapproval for government investments in space travel writing, “All that money wasted on another crazy space trip when so many people here on earth can’t afford water, food, or shelter”. This quote immediately reminded me of the recent headlines this summer of our modern day billionaires and their exploration’s into space while simultaneously wildfires in California were raging and spreading smoke you could see over much of the United States. I remember those hazy days in Boone, and thinking to myself the same thing as Lauren’s neighbors; people are dying on Earth here, and these wealthy elites have the luxury to go to another planet. It felt so twisted and made me angry. It’s interesting, however, to hear Lauren defend the concept of space travel during a period where humanity and justice are collapsing. On page 20 she expresses, “Space could be our future…As far as I’m concerned, space exploration and colonization are among the few things left over from the last century that can help us more than they hurt us.” I found this perspective really interesting, considering my own thoughts on space travel, or just the allocation of resources/time in a time of mass suffering. Her father’s perspective that, “Politicians and big corporations get the bread, and we get the circuses,” (p. 20) resonates with me much more.
Do you feel as though this perspective Lauren holds is wise? Where do you think it’s rooted in, what do you think draws her to put faith into a seemingly non-priority area of research? I don’t believe she is naive or overly optimistic, as she makes other excellent (in my opinion) critiques of political practices, so why do you think this one is defendable for her?
Octavia E. Butler writes, as Lauren, and states to her friend that yes she does have the ability to see into the future, to predict the future. On page 55 she says “You can, if you want too. It’s scary but once you get past the fear, it’s easy.” Through her struggle with religion, who or what God really is, while living as the daughter of a preacher, Lauren tries to subtly but firmly explain her once fears to her only friend. While she still thinks about these fears she does so in a different perspective, one that emphasizes finding solutions in order to make the fears disappear rather than one that ignores them in hopes that they will disappear on their own. Ignoring fear is something prevalent within a capitalist society that makes decisions based on profitability rather than human safety. By telling her friend that she indeed can see into the future Lauren is demonstrating a key concept of ecofeminism in which the past is used to predict the future. The saying “history repeats itself” is something that ecofeminism tries to cease from happening and by Lauren continuing on to say “In L.A. some walled communities bigger and stronger than this one just aren’t there anymore… What happened to them can happen to us,” she is trying to draw attention to the inevitability of change in an intellectually dominate yet still positive way.
Not which do you think is the right actions, but between the phrase “ignorance is bliss” and “knowledge is power” which do you feel is an easier perspective to have on life?
Parable of the Sower is an interesting book that intertwines the topics of religion and climate change. This immediately caught my attention because a lot of times I feel like the two do not go together in our society today, I often put religion and conservative views in the same category, which in my mind creates the idea that certain religious people are skeptical of climate change. The poem on page 25 spoke to me in regards to my previous thoughts. It says: “God is power- infinite, irresistible, inexorable, indifferent. And yet, God is pliable- trickster, teacher, chaos, clay, god exists to be shaped. God is change.” After the poem, it reads “But we can rig the game in our own favor is we understand that God exists to be shaped, and will be shaped, with or without our forethought, with or without our intent.” I took this in terms of the climate, it will be shaped with or without forethought or intent. Can we look at God in a different way, maybe in terms of climate change or Mother Earth? Does God always have to be tied to religion if we are thinking about her in that way?
In “Parable of the Sower,” Octavia Butler uses the main character, Lauren, as an outlet for symbolizing the detrimental effects of climate change through her power, or rather weakness of hyper-empathy. This condition that Lauren suffers from parallels many of the issues that arise in the book. For example, Lauren feels the pain of multiple killings, which makes her more likely to understand others and their conditions. After Lauren and the others went to practice their shooting, Lauren kills a dog and states, “I had felt it die, and yet I had not died. I had felt its pain as though it were a human being. I had felt its life life flare and go out, and I was still alive” (46). Does Octavia Butler emphasize Lauren’s hyperempathy condition to describe the feelings that are lacking in our society? If so, how will Lauren’s role change throughout the book, and do you think Lauren’s condition will put her in bad situations or create a positive change to her society and current situation?
Parable of the Sower can be viewed as a hopeful, yet cautionary tale of sorts. Being set in the now near future, Lauren Oya Olamina is in search of a better way of life. One that does not consist of towering walls separating communities and fires pillaging the towns and churches she once was familiar to. The book displays a time where privatization is at the forefront of society, rendering the majority poor and helpless. At the center of all this confusion, Lauren realizes the faith she once had in “her Father’s God” is no longer the same as she does not believe we are meant to blindly follow these rules and ideas given by some higher entity. Lauren believes a God’s purpose should be fluid, changing with the situation and needs of each individual, “God is Change”. Did this notion begin as a response to the apparent lack of God’s guidance when climate change and mass destruction ensued? Maybe Lauren felt like the God everyone had been praying to in the past was not pushing the people to where they need to be or what they need to prioritize, Mother Earth. Is it possible Lauren is unknowingly wanting to recreate a more ecocentric religion, with nature at the forefront?
In Octavia Butler’s book Parable of the Sower, the main character, Lauren, experiences a condition called hyper-empathy. Lauren describes this condition as “I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel. I get a lot of grief that does not belong to me and isn’t real. But it hurts” (12). Lauren’s hyper-empathy is somewhat of a power because it enables her to decide to make a difference in her community while everyone else stands around and waits. This can also be seen in our world today. Many of us sustainability students may be hyperempathetic towards our planet’s future in fear of a climate disaster whereas others who do not feel our world crumbling apart tend to sit around and just wait for someone else to do something about it.
In considering Lauren’s hyper-empathy as a power and as a condition of suffering, I began to think about how hyper-empathy can create positive and negative effects in other social movements. If our society had as much empathy a Lauren did, would that make our social movements stronger or weaker?
In Butler’s Parable of the Sower, Lauren talks a lot about God, or rather, her “father’s God”, and it is interesting to see how little faith she has in this God and why. One passage that really caught my attention was when she began talking about one of the old churches- “But after it had been slept in by the homeless, robbed, and vandalized several times, someone poured gasoline in and around it and burned it down. Seven of the homeless people sleeping inside on that night burned with it,” I thought this connected well with one of the later passages when she asks “So what is God? Just another name for what makes you feel special and protected?”(p.15). She then goes on to talk about a hurricane on the Gulf of Mexico. “How many people has it hurt? How many are going to starve later because of destroyed crops? That’s nature. Is it God?” (p.15). There is somewhat of a nature v mankind in her conflict with her father’s God- When natural disasters hurt the unprepared or poor, its nature, is that God? Does she see people’s suffering as a result of God’s actions/nature, or human nature in that those who are less affected and able to help refuse to do so? Or is it her belief that human nature is part of God? Does she blame her father’s God for this part of human nature? Is human nature the reason that she is so unsure of the existence of her father’s God- “Is there a God? If there is, does he (she? it?) care about us?” (p.15). Referring back to the first quote, churches are usually seen as a sort of safe haven or place of sanctuary. Do you think Lauren would blame God for the suffering of the homeless people who burned with the church, a place that should be a sort of sanctuary? Or human nature, or both? (One as the result of another).
Also, she asks if this God cares about people, what does she think of people’s lack of care for each other?
I wanted to discuss the significance behind Lauren’s hyperempathy syndrome. On page 11 Lauren describes, “the sharing isn’t real, after all. It isn’t some magic or ESP that allows me to share the pain or pleasure of other people. It’s delusional.” Lauren also explains how her father thought the sensitivity was something Lauren should just ignore and forget about. I feel like Christianity almost encourages empathy within the religion in order to accept all people and forgive all sin. Why would Lauren’s father try to sweep her hyperempathy under the rug? Do you think her father’s response to her hyperempathy pushed her further away from Christianity? Does this excerpt serve to represent the negative connotation behind struggles with mental illness in society today?
Throughout the beginning chapters of Parable of the Sower, we learn that the main character, Lauren, is living in a semi-apocalyptic post-modern America with many of the threats being due to climate change. Violence is high, and the “town” she lives in named Robledo, is enclosed in a wall. This book was written almost 30 years ago, and reflects some experiences we are facing today, especially in the state of California with water, and fire threats. This is a science fiction book, but do you think there might become a day when it is even more realistic? What lessons can we take from the first few chapters to improve our futures?
Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower covers a wide range of themes and topics. One in particular that remained a strong part of the novel was religion and God. I enjoyed seeing Lauren’s journey to discover her own religion, and create her own idea of who or what god is. The idea that “God is change” becomes almost a mantra for Lauren as she navigates through incredibly difficult and tumultuous years. I also liked that Lauren was raised by a religious father, and rather than fully embracing Christianity or outright rejecting it, she kept the ideas that she liked and brought in new ideas in place of what she didn’t agree with. I don’t think religions (more specifically western religions) need to be so rigid and right-or-wrong only, and I appreciated religion being a major aspect of the novel without becoming a religious novel in and of itself. If more people created their own religions based on their moral beliefs and world views rather than confining themselves to the tenets of one specific religion, what would be some of the biggest changes to the world as a result?
I wish to draw attention between the connections one might find between Ceremony and parable of the Sower. In Ceremony the use of poetry is a method for expanding the narrative of the story to encompass non-typical representations of culture and social-life, and through this craft a more holistic representation of the complex associations and realities comprising our social and cultural life. Similarly to this divergence in approach, Octavia Butler sets out to, and I would argue achieves, in the desire to present a different kind of science fiction protagonist. However this divergence applies not only to Butler’s decision to make the protagonist someone representing typically un-represented demographics and identities’, but also to her re-interpretation of typical notions of religious revelation and social movements. Lauren’s religious awakening is not only unique for who is participating in the revelation, but also in what is being ‘revealed’, namely the following: that our typical spiritual interpretations of the world need not be regressive, nore do they need to make reference to any extensive system of beliefs which form a complex historical ideology. No, in Butler’s presentation of Lauren’s religious awakening, and in the description of her god as being indifferent, non-anthropomorphic, and loosely defined, we see an attempt to deconstruct the literary motifs we are common to see: the messiah character, beset on all sides by degradation and corruption, finding divine revelation, and in seeing the truth, forges a path of redemption out of the deteriorating conditions they and their community are experiencing. A question I would ask is this: Does this method of deconstructing typical literary traditions and motifs achieve its goal of providing outlets for different interpretations and solutions to social-ills and present social phenomena?
Lauren’s understanding of her ever-changing relationship with God, as she says “God is Change” (p4), relates to an apocalyptic idea of what God means in this post-disaster(s) society. Similarly, Bill Neidje explores a world where there has been great disasters to the way of life his people had known for hundreds of centuries. Neidje writes, “Now Aborogine losing it/ losing everything./ Nearly all dead my people,/ my old people gone.” Both Lauren and Bill Nedije provide explanations for this happening as they understand it, within their own frameworks. Lauren’s understanding of her religion and conception of creating a religion which is based upon the principle of change is indicative of the presence of uncertainty in her world, similarly to Neidje’s work, which has a clear mournful, yet hopeful, tone.
Both of these framings help us to understand the worldview of Lauren and Neidje, especially as they consider themselves as pieces of a whole which is larger than themselves. For Lauren, she is very aware of her place within her family, community, and finally, begins to gain an understanding of her conception of the world around her, and thus herself, through her religion. Neidje’s wisdom and reflections serve as a meaningful guide to understanding one’s relationship with the land, as well as their relationship to other people, within the Gagudju community or outside of it. Further, these framings allow readers to think in terms of self-determination. In Lauren’s case, she is able to exercise autonomy from her father and his religion, and provide understandings for the processes she sees happening around her through her religion. Neidje, discussing the changes which have occurred alongside colonization exemplify the amount of destruction which has impacted the Gagudju community.
When looking through the lens of religion, how can having a theology based in a simultaneously influential and influenced God provide hope for people living through uncharted and uncertain times? How can understandings of evolving epistemologies that survive alongside people help guide the unprecedented impacts of climate change?