In Octavia Butler’s, “Parable of the Sower,” in chapter 7 she states “Well, today, I found the name, found it while I was weeding the back garden and thinking about the way plants seed themselves, windborne, animalborne, waterborne, far from their parent plants. They have no ability at all to travel great distances under their own power, and yet, they do travel. Even they don’t have to just sit in one place and wait to be wiped out.” (136) This quote is explaining how seeds cannot travel by themselves, yet they manage to get taken to different areas of the world by many elements. Thus not being able to become extinct. When Butler states, “Even they don’t have to just sit in one place and wait to be wiped out.” It implies that there is force to just stay in a specific location and wait for life to unfold with no choice of how it goes. However, Lauren will not do this, she will prepare herself, and others, to be “seeds” that will carry humanity to wherever life takes them and travel on. Is this implying that the only way to survive is to leave the community she is in rather than just sit around and wait for something bad to happen to her and her family? How might Lauren “prepare” others to be seeds that will carry humanity?
One thing that really stood out to me is this new development in Oliver, the whole operation strikes me as a classic colonial tactic to exploit people with cheap labor and costly expenditures, forcing them to be stuck in a cyclical system designed to entrap people in both a debt and a dependence. “Anyone KSF hired would have a hard time living on the salary offered– The new hires could be in debt to the company. That’s an old company-town trick– get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder” (121) Debt slavery. Classic colonialism. Though we don’t yet have company cities, I find it to be quite linear to how our minimum wage has been $7.25 since 2009, and the cost of living in the United States only goes up each year. With this ever-increasing wage gap between the wealthy and the poor, do you think the future could consist of “cities controlled by big companies” (123)? Especially considering mega corporations already own almost everything that affects our day-to-day living, such as food availability and accessibility, which is one of the easiest ways to control a mass population.
Furthermore, the notion of profit over people is a consistent theme throughout this book, whereabouts wealthy people are still living relatively luxuriously with their creature comforts and armed guards protecting their communities, the wealthy are able to afford police and firefighter bills, and they’re also able to shop at the heavily guarded Hannings “shop in peace” store (174). As I mentioned briefly earlier in class, it’s concerning that even in the face of climate catastrophe, those who have money to spend along with the items that cost money (and are thus in need of consumers) are safeguarded heavily, where everything and everyone else’s worth is null and void in comparison. Is it possible that in a Capitalist nation, like ours, that runs on the perpetual purchasing of consumer goods no matter what the cost to our natural world be, that if we were in the midst of a devastating natural disaster/ climate catastrophe, would those with financial power, such as private big corporations, behave and engage this way? If so, do you agree this novel should be used as a “Cautionary Tale” (in the words of Octavia Butler) to encourage action within governmental policy reformation to ensure an environmental and political future that puts the well being of our citizens, our climate, and our natural resources at the forefront of our National enterprise before it’s too late?
In chapter 14, Lauren makes a daunting statement concerning the wealth distribution issue presented in “Parable of the Sower”. “She died for us,” the scavenger woman had said of the green face. Some kind of insane burn-the-rich movement, Keith had said. We’ve never been rich, but to the desperate, we looked rich. We were surviving and we had our wall. Did our community die so that addicts could make help the poor political statement?” Lauren’s family could be seen as the last remaining “middle class” during this corrupt time in the U.S. She described the acts of the arsonists as a “poor political statement”. Is this what the wealthy in our current version of America sees when lower to middle-class citizens protest for equity; the viewpoint of a poor political statement?
“Parable of the Sower” emphasizes the importance of community as a way to survive in their dangerous and post apocalyptic world. Towards the beginning of the story, Lauren’s dad tells Cory that he know this is no world to be alone in and, as the story progresses, Zahra, Harry, and Lauren’s friendship helps them survive as they travel north (Butler 76). Lauren recognizes the importance of this community, explaining that they will eventual need allies and that strangers don’t help each other much as she tries to befriend a young couple and their baby (207). How does Lauren’s use of community and religion to survive compare to Gandhi’s idea of soul force as a method of nonviolent resistance? How do you successful resist against problems that aren’t attributed to a clear source and are rather seen as simply being the state of the world?
The inevitability of change within ourselves and our surroundings illuminates both our fears and hopes for the future. Octavia Butler explores the unfolding of change within a post-apocalyptic world through the motivated-mind of Lauren. The current reality of Laruens life is terrifying, yet her keen awareness of change creates feelings of hope and panic within herself and the reader. Lauren is not only in tune with the reality of her own life, but can deeply feel the suffering of others. This condition allows Lauren to feel the coming of change that in this case builds from a place of unrest. That being said, Lauren is not depleted by this overwhelming sense of doom and instead she is resourceful and motivated to spark the spread of change. When speaking to her father Lauren explains in a moment of frustration as he seems to not be understanding her concerns; “But dad that’s like…like ignoring a fire in the living room because we’re all in the kitchen” (63). The change Lauren is feeling and hoping for is not a return to the old way of life, that life is gone forever. Instead she is moving towards changes that build upon her current reality and not with the ideas of the past.
What does Lauren’s reaction to her father’s initial dismissive attitude suggest about the current divide in ideas and generations within our own climate crisis discussion?
It has become increasingly scary how Parable proves to be less of a sci-fi the further along you read. So many things have struck me as important to touch upon, especially the discussion and symbolism of water throughout the book. Early on, we learn of water costing “several times as much as gasoline,” and how it is so clearly associated with wealth, like when Lauren refers to water as “as good as money,” alongside many incidents of hiding water from others, water stations with armed guards, and the like (201). The discussion of commercial water stations, water peddlers, and even the town of Olivar needing workers for desalination plants, is especially frightening given our knowledge of corporate control of water already today. “Olivar, located between the sea and Los Angeles, is getting an influx of salt water from one direction and desperate poor people from the other…” KSF, the “commercial company, intends to dominate farming and the selling of water…They mean to own great water, power…”(119). They also mean to do so, through what Lauren refers to as “debt slavery,” an “old company-town trick- to get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder,” (121). The privatization of public resources, or human rights some would say, like water, is emphasized time and time again throughout the book. Commercial water stations end up being the one place to get water where “you can depend on it not to kill you,” but you are given not one drop more than what you pay for, which requires people to partake in wage labor in order to survive unless they come up with an alternative to clean water (201). We also know the ways in which this power is held over the masses, as “there’s nothing more replaceable than unskilled labor,” (288). We see this today all too often, especially with migrant laborers in agriculture. Given our knowledge of growing corporate domination of rights like water already taking place today, and the role of debt slavery in the workforce that is the backbone of so much of society, do you think there is a turning point of disaster necessary to cause the change we so desperately need to change our path to this future? Second question- a little off topic- but, how might passing the right to water change our current path, leading to a world of water peddlers and commercial stations? Would it?
In Parable of the Sower, one of the most interesting aspects of Lauren Oya Olamina’s character is her personal creation of a belief system that is vastly different than her Baptist father’s faith. Lauren sees God in chaos,. uncertainty and change, three things that are prevalent in her dystopian society and our modern reality. Lauren calls her belief system “Earthseed”. GOD IS CHANGE! At the very end of the book, Lauren is reflecting and writes that “today we remembered the friends and family memories we lost. We spoke our individual memories and quoted bible passages, Earthseed verses, and bits of songs and poems that were favorites of the living or the dead.” (328) This quote resonated with me because I think religion will always be a powerful tool for social change.As we move forward in the fight against the climate crisis, we have to adapt and learn from cultures and beliefs that we may not always fully believe in. Although Lauren moved away from her fathers faith, she still remembered lessons and verses from her father and honored them as she reflected.
Octavia Butler says that she created this story as a warning, as a “if-this-goes-on story”, as in, if we follow the path that our society has followed in recent decades, these dystopian science fiction novel could quickly be our reality. Octavia Butler was sadly extremely accurate in her predictions for the future. In your opinion, what warnings from this book feel most applicable to our society today?
Parable of the sower is honestly quite realistic for being a fictional novel. I see a lot of similarities between Octavia Butlers dystopian reality and our current reality. Some of these similarities include a significant wealth gap, homelessness, lack of access to drinking water, refugee crisis, poor education, drug epidemics, as well as governmental bodies who don’t care about the people. There is a general distrust with police in this novel because they abuse their power and the system by forcing people to pay for their help and often arrest the people calling and blaming the easiest target to receive money. This distrust is similar to what we are experiencing today with the black lives matter movement against police brutality and racial discrimination as well as the difference in response to those of lower economic standing compared to those who are wealthy. The chaotic world that Lauren lives in has forced people to take up arms in order to defend themselves which is similar to the recent spike in gun and ammo purchases across the United States. When people get scared they tend to take drastic measures to defend themselves and their property. This novel is based in 2024 and in my eyes, not to be pessimistic or anything, but we are currently on the right track to making Octavia Butlers novel a reality. Do yall see any other similarities between the novel and our current reality?
In Parable of the Sower Lauren Oya Olamina develops her own religions called Earthseed. We are first introduced to theory that God is Change when she is 15 years old. As the novel continues, the more she develops her religion. At 18 years old, Lauren finally has the opportunity to “preach” (as Harry would say) her religion to others. While discussing Earthseed with Travis, the readers are getting a look at the foundations Earthseed, prayer is helping people feel better.. “God is Change, and in the end, God prevails. But there’s hope in understanding the nature of God–not punishing or jealous, but infinitely malleable. There’s comfort in realizing that everyone and everything yields to God. There’s power in knowing that no power in having strength and brains, and yet waiting for God to fix things for you or take revenge for you… God will shape us all every day of our lives. Best to understand that and return to effort: Shape God” (221). Lauren is saying that there’s only one given in life, Change and we might as well be the ones to mold our futures. How do you think that this attitudes relates to sustainable development? Do you believe that this attitude could call people to action rather than leaving their futures up to God?
In Ceremony, a big theme of the novel was transition, not only of the landscape but those in it as well. How do you think Tayo would react to Earthseed and the precarious situations Lauren finds herself in? Do you think that there is something about Non-Abrahamic religions that lends aids these Changes with Tayo and Lauren?
In chapter 10 of “Parable of the Sower”, we are introduced to the town of Olivar and the KSF company that has taken over with the town’s permission. KSF has promised people jobs, housing, and other amenities, but Lauren questions what they would consider good amenities and the bare minimum. We see this on page 121 when she states, “Anyone KSF hired would have a hard time living on the salary offered. In not very much time, I think the new hires would be in debt to the company. That’s an old company-town trick—get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder. Debt-slavery.” (121) She brings up the term ‘debt slavery’, which I found to be extremely accurate. Large corporations and rich countries have been using this tactic for many years. We see this in companies like Monsanto and Tyson who put farmers into debt so they can work them harder. We not only see this nationally though. Our foreign ‘aid’ and globalization tactics that we have used on other countries are for the benefit of the US. By putting these countries in debt to us, we use them for our benefit without taking into consideration the well-being of the people. What shocked me so much from this chapter is that people still fell for this trick, even though they never changed. People still believe that corporations won’t use us for their benefit and that they truly care about our wellbeing. What is it going to take for people to realize that the rich don’t care? If it’s not this apocalyptic outcome, what will?
In chapter 11 of Parable of the Sower, the popularity of Olivar is increasing, with families in Lauren’s neighborhood, including a member of her own (Cory) dreaming of escaping there for a “better life.” During a discussion, or I guess argument, about whether their family should stay or go, Lauren’s father says “This business sounds half antebellum revival and half science-fiction. I don’t trust it. Freedom is dangerous, Cory, but it’s precious, too. You can’t just throw it away or let it slip away. You can’t sell it for bread and pottage.” (122)
This made me think about what freedom means to different individuals. To Cory, freedom meant shelter, food, and security, protection from what happens outside the walls. To Lauren’s father, it seems, freedom is the ability to make a salary and come home to your family. Throughout the book, though, it seems that Lauren’s perception of freedom changes with her circumstances. Yes, freedom is dangerous, but is it really freedom if you are fighting for your life to keep hold of it? Is it freedom if one fears it could be taken from them in a matter of seconds? What do you think Butler is suggesting true “freedom” is?
Death is a consistent theme within ‘Parable of the Sower’. The way in which people or animals die is numerous and often described but yet somehow still with composure from Lauren. Right from the beginning death was brought into the reading and as it continues characters closer to Lauren are now dying off and her neighbors and lifelong peers are moving out of her life. The situation of her brothers death was an intense spark to the fire of dark days that were to follow Lauren and her family. Unable to pursue the disappearance of her father, Cory and her are forced to continue almost as if business is usual and I can’t help but to think that, especially because of Lauren’s sharing, this choice she is making to, even if subconsciously, ignore, forget, or make disappear the truth of her father and loss of her brother she is instead doing exactly the opposite of what we’d expect. When Lauren talked to her father about her thoughts and fears of the future she insisted on the need for him and everyone else to stop ignoring the truth of their fates and instead act on them and prevent them. Now as she tries to continue her life it seems as if Lauren is now the one closing her eyes on reality. Do you think its possible that by focusing on leaving Robledo Lauren is creating a path ahead of her that is not of acceptable but rather imagination?
n Octavia Butler’s “Parable of the Sower” chapter 8, she starts off by saying “TRACY DUNN HAS NOT come home and has not been found by the police. I donʼt think she will be. Sheʼs only been gone for a week, but a week outside must be like a week in hell. People vanish outside. They go through our gate like Mr. Yannis did, and everyone waits for them, but they never come back—or they come back in an urn. I think Tracy Dunn is dead. ” This chapter is disappointing to think that in the world that the characters live in there are still injustices against people of color. The hopes of Tracy returning home alive are becoming slim and individuals are in danger due to their interracial relationships. Craig Dunn and Siti Moss are at risk of being killed due to the pregnancy that resulted from their interactions “Craig Dunn who’s white and one of the saner members of the Dunn family was caught making love to Siti Moss who’s black andRichard Moss’s oldest daughter to boot, I thought someone was going to get killed. Crazy” It is mentioned that interracial couples can get married and they are lucky to be able to live in a room or garage but other than that nothing will get better. We can only hope that our future is not truly going to be like this. I do not see it going back to the old ways due to the progression that has been made over recent years. Are there any occurrences later on in the book that could be viewed as backtracking from progression that had been made?
Our reading in “Parable of the Sower” has been interesting so far and I am glad I am getting introduced to this book. The message of I found in chapter seven how impressive Laurens drive was to be a powerful impactor in her community. Her understanding of the power of knowledge and the spread of it was impressive. The beginning of chapter seven starts with “Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths.” This is a statement reflecting on the fact that plants need their seeds to travel to spread their plant life around. Just like plants, Lauren knew that this process of spreading the word was important and we cannot just stay in our own perspective of the earth. Looking towards nature is very important to learn what we should do for the future.
“Sometimes the paints like the fire so much they get too close to it. Then their friends don’t even help them. They just watch them burn”. This is a quote from Keith on page 111 regarding the fire drug. While much of the drugs aspect, as well as the face-painted and shaven individuals that use it play a large role in this story, I thought this quote was particularly interesting. How does this line relate to the greater story of Parable of the Sower? Just before this line, we learn that Keith had shot another man for his belongings, while they were both just trying to reach their goal. While both individuals were going through similar struggles, one took advantage of another. Keith seems to be bothered by the painted and their way of life, while he himself is causing permanent harm to others. What do you think this does to the reader in terms of views on violence? What examples of violence from this novel, as well as the real world is considered “justified” violence? Was Keith was doing “what he had to” in order to survive, while the painted cause violence for entertainment?
When Lauren is frustrated at Joanne for telling her parents about her plan to be prepared for what she believes to be an inevitable emergency, she describes Joannes denial as a “dumb little game of ‘if we don’t talk about the bad things, maybe they won’t happen.'” (61) This quote reminded me of Robert Nixon’s theory of slow violence, in which he describes how slow moving and temporally distant catastrophes are harder to react to and address than immediate and tangible crises right before our eyes. I found it interesting that even with so much violence realized and experienced by Joanne, she still seems to be unable to see how her situation could still change for the worse, and why preparation is necessary. I consider Joanne’s sentiment to be similar to people who understand climate change is happening, yet don’t take action to try to garner support to change the problem. For one reason or another, the situation is too daunting, too far off, or too intangible to warrant their attention, preparation and energy. Meanwhile, for those of us who strive for change, it can seem impossible to garner support from the Joanne’s of our contemporary time. Consider the advice given to Lauren by her father in this situation: “Its better to teach people than to scare them, Lauren. If you scare them and nothing happens, they lose their fear, and you lose some of your authority with them. It’s harder to scare them a second time, harder to teach them, harder to win back their trust. Best to begin by teaching.” (65-66) What might this advice tell us about how we need to frame a climate crisis in order to mobilize action and inspire change? How might this advice suggest to us to change our rhetoric in order to better communicate what needs to be done? What value can a movement for addressing climate change gain from focus less on impending climate disaster and more on education? Do you think such a communication tactic would be sufficient to bring about necessary change?
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading Parable of the Sower. I think this book has highlighted so many things that are problems in our society currently. One part that I thought was interesting was Lauren’s want to leave her community. Throughout the book she talks about the rules they have to follow outside of the walls and all of the dangers they face if they go outside. It seems like she was waiting for the right time to leave and that came after her fathers disappearance. “How will they feel when I go? I’ll be dead to them… I won’t have to leave Dad now” (Butler 138). I think this is interesting how she was waiting to make the decision to leave her home and that the disappearance of her dad made her realize she was ready. Why was this what compelled her to take action? She has been thinking about leaving for a while. Is she going to do it and be able to leave behind what’s left of her family? How does this translate into a deeper meaning? What is she willing to leave behind and what did her dad represent that makes it now possible?
The lack of surprise when a death occurs throughout the book is compelling and strong. In the occurrence of death, such as that of Lauren’s father, Lauren makes sure to write about it at the very beginning of an entry. Furthermore, when Lauren writes about death, she seems to take on a very monotoned voice. Though there is some structural change throughout the neighborhood, such as families moving to the city of Olivar, there is not a significant urgency to shift from the previously implemented practices and strategies. What has to happen for people to realize that there needs to be a drastic change in survival strategies? A lot of the families in the neighborhood seem like they are just waiting for death, or that they are just waiting as long as they can for some invisible savior or solution. On another note, the idea that the teaching of Earthseed will be needed to be taken over by the younger generation is very apparent. The older generations seem to be too stuck in their ways (reflection of the older generation in real life). Are young people meant to be the catalysts of change in this novel?
Lauren’s distaste for her youth is something that I have found particularly interesting throughout this book. On multiple occasions, she mentions how she feels that time passes slowly and that she wishes she were older. She sympathizes with Keith wanting to be older, saying “waiting is terrible.” The children in the book are not protected from the realities of life because they are young. Regradless of Lauren’s age she leads, whether it is the children at the school, her brothers, and through the creation of her religion. I think this emphasis on youth parallels today in the form of youth led climate activism. As students in sustainable development, in what ways can we learn from Lauren’s leadership, and desire to create a new form of community?
A striking comparison in the book looks at the community differences of Robledo and Olivar, the company-city. Why Robledo is definitely ideal with its high security and threat from outside the walls, Olivar was once a primarily white and wealthy coastal city town that had a thriving economy, “just one more beach/bedroom suburb of LA, small and well-to-do” (Pg. 118). but now faces land instability, unnecessarily high taxes, and class structure similar to that of indentured servitude or slavery from the colonial era. The presumably transnational company, KSF, decided to profit off this crumbling town by using a tactic known as ‘script system’ that was utilized in history in the coal mining towns of Appalachia. Companies would pay the people very little, but what was made could only be spent at town stores, trapping the citizens in what seems like a never ending cycle of dependency and debt. As I type this out it almost relates to what is happening in present day United States where people are being forced to work 9-5 shifts for minimum wage while struggling with student loans and the ever rising cost of living (food, shelter, clothes, etc.). Fast fashion and exploitation of workers is a growing notion across the globe, as it is apparent profit is more powerful in this world than simply human and nature’s lives. Seeing as this is a hopeful, yet cautionary tale, do you think this book has the ability to alter reader’s minds to no longer participating in the terms of capitalistic society? This could be done on a smaller scale by shopping and eating locally, but how can we as people do anything about the constant debt entrapment forced upon our society through unbelievably low minimum wages and excessively high living standards??
Lauren has conflicted feelings about Christianity before her baptism. One of the most important aspects of her character development is her trying to reconnect with Earthseed. Earthseed is contrasted with Christianity throughout the book and the most important aspect of this contrast emerges from the way in which each religion addresses hope. A quote from Chapter 18 reads,”God isn’t good or evil, doesn’t favor you or hate you, and yet God is better partnered than fought.”
“Your God doesn’t care about you at all,” Travis said.
“All the more reason to care about myself and others. All the more reason to create Earthseed communities and shape God together. ‘God is Trickster, Teacher, Chaos, Clay.’ We decide which aspect we embrace—and how to deal with the others.”
What can religions today take from this book? Is the philosophy behind religion important to study along sustainable development theory?
“But…I thought something would happen someday. I didn’t know how bad it would be or when it would come. But everything was getting worse: the climate, the economy, crime, drugs, you know. I didn’t believe we would be allowed to sit behind our walls, looking clean and fat and rich to the hungry, thirsty, homeless, jobless, filthy people outside. (p. 187)”
This quote struck me as I read chapter 16. I find it concerning just how closely Butler’s description of the downward trend of society is in this snippet. Lauren was prepared for something catastrophic to happen but others in her community lived without a rational fear of what might become of their gated community. The way I conceptualize this quote to put it in perspective of current issues is this: the wall that separates Robledo from the happenings of the outside world represents society’s neglectful thought process (a sort of out of sight out of mind approach to issues faced worldwide), those who engage in denying or downplaying the issues that are being faced globally are the people who reside in Robledo; trying their best to push any thought of what might be, what might go wrong, out of their minds, the rest of the world, realizing the issues being faced currently (and finding themselves in a frantic state of panic to create solutions) are represented by those who are struggling on the outside of the wall, possibly (more than likely) feeling a great sense of resentment for those ignoring the issues. How does this thought process differ from your own or do you find that you conceptualize it quite similarly?
In chapter 7 of Parable of the Sower, Lauren talks about how she came up with the name Earthseed for her views on God and religion. She writes “Well, today, I found the name, found it while I was weeding the back garden and thinking about the way plants seed themselves, windburn, animal borne, water borne, far from their parent plants…I am Earthseed. Anyone can be. Someday, I think there will be a lot of us. And I think we’ll have to seed ourselves farther and farther from this dying place” (77-78). I can see how she came to the name Earthseed with how seeds plant themselves, with this explanation she’s sees herself as a seed ready to sprout elsewhere. It seems like she is the only one who wants this change, so she’s keeping it to herself for now. How is lauren going to share her earthseed with others and how are they going to react to it?
A general concept I’ve been thinking about a lot as I continue reading through Parable of the Sower is the idea of ignorance as bliss, and denial as a form of self protection. In class last week, we talked a little about the walls of Robledo being a form of false security and protection, and I think this is another facet of this underlying theme of denial as protection. The walls of Robledo serve as a false sense of security that few are at lease openly criticizing it. With the story being in the perspective of Lauren, however, we get a glimpse into the idea that these walls are only a form of denial of reality, or a clinging to any form of protection despite the fact that it may inevitably be their communities downfall. Any sense of security amidst such uncertainty and fear is considered worth it.
There are so many thoughts that stem off of this, but one I have is how closely I feel this relates to the modern understandings and acceptance of the climate crisis. The research is there, the facts and statistics have been proven, and yet somehow there is still such little action and so many people who continue their daily lives as though the end of the world as we know it is not coming. Why is that? I think a lot of it goes back to the concepts of this book that ignorance, or simply temporarily ignoring, is bliss. It is possible to live a much happier life for now if the doom of humanity is not fully accepted. It’s a false sense of security, but this is enough for people and allows them to remain complacent for a little while longer. This denial of the reality of the situation or pushing away of the hard truth is a form of protection. The ability to live with this false safety is a position of privilege, like living in the walls of Robledo is, and though things are still hard, it’s better than what’s outside.
There are so many conversations that Lauren undergoes with her community members that reminds me of this. In chapter 5, her conversation with Joanne follows these themes, with Joanne mentioning hope that “President Donner will start to get us back to normal,”. Lauren thinks to herself, “Normal, I wonder what that is.” Through this conversation, it’s pretty clear Joanne is not fully convinced that their is hope for a normal again, or that a president could achieve such a thing, but she seems willing to settle with it enough rather than accept Lauren’s idea that there never will be normal again so it’s time to think differently. Joanne asks Lauren, “Why do you want to talk about this stuff, we can’t do anything about it.” to which Lauren replies, “We have to.” I feel I myself have had this conversation with so many friends and family. They deny as best they can that there will never be a just and sustainable “normal”, but I can hear they don’t even fully believe themselves, but they don’t know what else to do or feel they can change things so they remain complacent. I, as well as I think many other students, feel as though there is no option or room to accept false security in ignorance anymore. We have to start building alternatives, preparing for a future where we have no safety nets, and start working towards just and alternative forms of living because at this point, we have to.
I realize I forgot to add in my question regarding these ideas. To follow up, how can we turn immobilized/passive allies who understand the importance of change or the severity of the crisis we are in into active allies encouraged to do something about it? Lauren’s dad suggests not scaring people, because this turns them away. Instead, you teach them subtly through less frightening means or conversations. Do you agree with that? Is the best method to avert the inconvenient and frightening truth? Or does emphasizing the severity, including all of the doom and depression of the issue drive more action and is therefore imperative? How do we convince people to leave the safety and security of inaction, when it is a seemingly happier/easier life or mentality?
In chapter 13, Lauren mentions how someone set fire to the Payne-Parrish house and while the community was trying to put out the fire, three houses got robbed. Throughout the community, more people have been committing arson to cover up their crimes. Arsonists will set fire to people’s homes to get the neighbors of the arson victim to leave their house unguarded. They are trying to get rid of people they don’t like as well as others who are foreign or racially different from them. Lauren believes that most of these arsonists are frustrated, angry, and hopeless. She states, “They have no power to improve their lives, by they have the power to make others even more miserable. And the only way to prove to yourself that you have power is to use it” (143). Why do some people choose to show their powers in violent ways? Do they lack the hyper-empathy that Lauren experiences? Is this Lauren has chosen to use her powers for the betterment of her community?
When writing about Earthseed, Lauren writes “A tree cannot grow in its parent’s shadows.” Later, she writes, “To get along with God, consider the consequences of your behavior.” She goes on to talk about Bianca Montoya’s pregnancy, and where her life will go once she has the child- the limited choices she has. I wonder if Lauren considers people’s relationship with God (or her father’s God or whoever/whatever their God is) to that of a sort of parental relationship. I feel like there are a lot of instances in the book so far where she has had to be careful when discussing things with her father- like when she let Joanna borrow his book and talked about preparing for a big riot or fight; learning to survive. When her father finds out about it, he discourages her from talking about it with other people, claiming it scares them, and if nothing like it happens, one loses authority. While he encourages her smaller ideas, like emergency earthquake kits, he discourages the discussion of bigger changes. And as Lauren writes, her Earthseed God is change. So I wonder if, when she writes “to get along with God, consider the consequences of your behavior” it alludes to her relationship with her father, and her father’s relationship to God- both resistant to change?
A really prominent quote from Parable of the Sower reads, “a tree cannot grow in its parents’ shadow,” (82). I think this quote can be interpreted in many different ways and I connected it to climate response. In a lot of my classes when we talk about climate change we have to talk about realistic implementation and a common barrier is how people learn certain harmful behaviors to the environment from their parents. Many people tend to trust their parents and practices which have been used in their families for generations over new research on environmentally safer options. The shadows of their parents are keeping the younger generation from making adequate change to climate action. How can we encourage growth outside the shadow cast from generations before us in relation to environmental degradation?
As Lauren starts to form her group with Zahra and Harry, Harry asks her about the stuff that she writes. Wanting to learn more about her, feeling like there is a portion of her that she hides or lies about. Wanting to know the real her and not just the versions of her he has seen grow up. So she shows him the first verse of Earthseed, “All that you touch You Change. All that you Change Changes you. The only lasting truth is Change. God is Change” (Butler, 195). Lauren chose those lines as the very first page of the first book. As a way to show what Earthseed is suppose to be about, how people should be looking at Earthseed. It makes me wonder besides these lines what other lines would she want to be repeated? What other lines hold as much meaning when she’s sharing Earthseed?
I can relate to Laurens hyper empathy, clearly not in such an extreme way, but I can be really empathic sometimes. I think a lot of people in my generation can relate, with social media we are now able to see and relate to so many different people it is hard not to feel empathic to everyones problems. In chapter 24, Laurens hyper empathy distracts her from Jill getting shot to death. She missed her being buried and dint get to say goodbye. I feel like this can relate to people in the real world, they get so caught up with being concerned with everything that they lost sight of how to productively care about issues without getting burnt out or without making any effect at all. How can empathy distract us, and how can that distraction be streamlined into something productive? Is there a way to curb your empathy or is it an uncontrollable emotion? Can you channel empathy?
Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower provides a glimpse into the future in a fictional, but not quite so unrealistic, way. One thing that stood out to me was Lauren’s hyperempathy, and the dangers of feeling deep empathetic emotions. In the context of her life and surroundings, hyperempathy can definitely be viewed as a weakness, and something to hide so as to not be exploited. When Lauren finally tells Zahra and Harry about it, she states that, “In this world, there isn’t any room for housebound, frightened, squeamish people, and that’s what I might have become if everyone had known about me- all the other kids, for instead. Little kids are vicious. Haven’t you noticed?” (194). In general, people who exhibit stronger emotions and feelings are often viewed as having a flaw, or something to work around. However, it would be interesting to see hyperempathy presented in a different light, in which it is actually a positive trait to have, as she can also feel positive feelings. While in Lauren’s case in this dystopian world she did need to hide her hyperempathy around most people, it could also be viewed as a skill, or a fun trait to have as she can connect with others in deeper ways than most other people. How different would the world look if being more in touch with feelings and emotions was viewed as equally as important and positive as other skillsets?
The belief system which Lauren constructs and discusses in Parable of the Sower is the topic of this final discussion post. I would argue the following claim: that this pantheistic conception of god, one which is indifferent to human action, defined only by the reality of an infinitely changing universe, and places not requirements on its followers other than to acknowledge the truth of its existence-that existence IS change- is a step towards reconciling the authoritarian and regressive history of organized religion with the degrading environmental and socio-economic conditions experienced by Lauren. To quote Parable of the Sower, “Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths.” This simple quote achieves more than one might think. If Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths, and Lauren’s earth presently is in no condition to spread said earth-life to ‘new earths’, the initial point of concern for all followers of Earthseed is not their own individual damnation or spiritual condition, but the condition of the world around them, and the way in which those conditions affect not only their own spiritual progression, but the spiritual progression and actualization of other followers of Earthseed. Earthseed can therefore be seen as a decentralized form of religion, one defined by a plurality of potential means for achieving the above goal of spreading earth-life to new-earths. In effect Earthseed brings the concerns of its followers down to earth, as opposed to being perpetually focused on the status of their own after-life. Octavia Butler, through the story of Lauren Olamina, presents a new way in which people under the terrible conditions of ecological and socio-economic upheaval might find a form of religious revelation which is both progressive and concerned with the collective as opposed to one’s own spiritual concerns.
Can religion be reconciled as not only an individual form of spiritual-practice, but also as a way of life which implicitly involves the concern and betterment of others in their society, without devolving into regressive ideology?
Through the people that Lauren meets while on her journey, she is able to find a sense of community. This is furthered by Lauren ‘converting’ some of these members to the Earthseed religion. This is especially important in the circumstances that are being faced in Parable of the Sower, especially due to imminent and seemingly randomized forms of attack. Being able to identify people outside of her family that she feels comfortable trusting with her life, and vise versa, develops the plot towards the understanding that being in community with people that you are able to help, either in physical protection, or in other forms of mutual benefits. Considering this piece, as well as Nedije’s writings, how can a larger understanding of community benefit our mental health, specifically, our conceptions of safety? I wonder this, especially, taking into account that a relationship with community constitutes living, nonliving, human, and nonhuman beings into consideration. As trust in the non-human begins to grow, alongside the human, how can this impact one’s perception of security? I think about this question especially as degrading environmental practices can threaten one’s way of life, especially by making it harder to produce food (exemplified in Parable of the Sower by the severe droughts and lack of available water), or lack of ability to rely on nature to empower you to protect yourself.
SD 3800 Voices in Sustainable Development 
In Octavia Butler’s, “Parable of the Sower,” in chapter 7 she states “Well, today, I found the name, found it while I was weeding the back garden and thinking about the way plants seed themselves, windborne, animalborne, waterborne, far from their parent plants. They have no ability at all to travel great distances under their own power, and yet, they do travel. Even they don’t have to just sit in one place and wait to be wiped out.” (136) This quote is explaining how seeds cannot travel by themselves, yet they manage to get taken to different areas of the world by many elements. Thus not being able to become extinct. When Butler states, “Even they don’t have to just sit in one place and wait to be wiped out.” It implies that there is force to just stay in a specific location and wait for life to unfold with no choice of how it goes. However, Lauren will not do this, she will prepare herself, and others, to be “seeds” that will carry humanity to wherever life takes them and travel on. Is this implying that the only way to survive is to leave the community she is in rather than just sit around and wait for something bad to happen to her and her family? How might Lauren “prepare” others to be seeds that will carry humanity?
One thing that really stood out to me is this new development in Oliver, the whole operation strikes me as a classic colonial tactic to exploit people with cheap labor and costly expenditures, forcing them to be stuck in a cyclical system designed to entrap people in both a debt and a dependence. “Anyone KSF hired would have a hard time living on the salary offered– The new hires could be in debt to the company. That’s an old company-town trick– get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder” (121) Debt slavery. Classic colonialism. Though we don’t yet have company cities, I find it to be quite linear to how our minimum wage has been $7.25 since 2009, and the cost of living in the United States only goes up each year. With this ever-increasing wage gap between the wealthy and the poor, do you think the future could consist of “cities controlled by big companies” (123)? Especially considering mega corporations already own almost everything that affects our day-to-day living, such as food availability and accessibility, which is one of the easiest ways to control a mass population.
Furthermore, the notion of profit over people is a consistent theme throughout this book, whereabouts wealthy people are still living relatively luxuriously with their creature comforts and armed guards protecting their communities, the wealthy are able to afford police and firefighter bills, and they’re also able to shop at the heavily guarded Hannings “shop in peace” store (174). As I mentioned briefly earlier in class, it’s concerning that even in the face of climate catastrophe, those who have money to spend along with the items that cost money (and are thus in need of consumers) are safeguarded heavily, where everything and everyone else’s worth is null and void in comparison. Is it possible that in a Capitalist nation, like ours, that runs on the perpetual purchasing of consumer goods no matter what the cost to our natural world be, that if we were in the midst of a devastating natural disaster/ climate catastrophe, would those with financial power, such as private big corporations, behave and engage this way? If so, do you agree this novel should be used as a “Cautionary Tale” (in the words of Octavia Butler) to encourage action within governmental policy reformation to ensure an environmental and political future that puts the well being of our citizens, our climate, and our natural resources at the forefront of our National enterprise before it’s too late?
In chapter 14, Lauren makes a daunting statement concerning the wealth distribution issue presented in “Parable of the Sower”. “She died for us,” the scavenger woman had said of the green face. Some kind of insane burn-the-rich movement, Keith had said. We’ve never been rich, but to the desperate, we looked rich. We were surviving and we had our wall. Did our community die so that addicts could make help the poor political statement?” Lauren’s family could be seen as the last remaining “middle class” during this corrupt time in the U.S. She described the acts of the arsonists as a “poor political statement”. Is this what the wealthy in our current version of America sees when lower to middle-class citizens protest for equity; the viewpoint of a poor political statement?
“Parable of the Sower” emphasizes the importance of community as a way to survive in their dangerous and post apocalyptic world. Towards the beginning of the story, Lauren’s dad tells Cory that he know this is no world to be alone in and, as the story progresses, Zahra, Harry, and Lauren’s friendship helps them survive as they travel north (Butler 76). Lauren recognizes the importance of this community, explaining that they will eventual need allies and that strangers don’t help each other much as she tries to befriend a young couple and their baby (207). How does Lauren’s use of community and religion to survive compare to Gandhi’s idea of soul force as a method of nonviolent resistance? How do you successful resist against problems that aren’t attributed to a clear source and are rather seen as simply being the state of the world?
The inevitability of change within ourselves and our surroundings illuminates both our fears and hopes for the future. Octavia Butler explores the unfolding of change within a post-apocalyptic world through the motivated-mind of Lauren. The current reality of Laruens life is terrifying, yet her keen awareness of change creates feelings of hope and panic within herself and the reader. Lauren is not only in tune with the reality of her own life, but can deeply feel the suffering of others. This condition allows Lauren to feel the coming of change that in this case builds from a place of unrest. That being said, Lauren is not depleted by this overwhelming sense of doom and instead she is resourceful and motivated to spark the spread of change. When speaking to her father Lauren explains in a moment of frustration as he seems to not be understanding her concerns; “But dad that’s like…like ignoring a fire in the living room because we’re all in the kitchen” (63). The change Lauren is feeling and hoping for is not a return to the old way of life, that life is gone forever. Instead she is moving towards changes that build upon her current reality and not with the ideas of the past.
What does Lauren’s reaction to her father’s initial dismissive attitude suggest about the current divide in ideas and generations within our own climate crisis discussion?
It has become increasingly scary how Parable proves to be less of a sci-fi the further along you read. So many things have struck me as important to touch upon, especially the discussion and symbolism of water throughout the book. Early on, we learn of water costing “several times as much as gasoline,” and how it is so clearly associated with wealth, like when Lauren refers to water as “as good as money,” alongside many incidents of hiding water from others, water stations with armed guards, and the like (201). The discussion of commercial water stations, water peddlers, and even the town of Olivar needing workers for desalination plants, is especially frightening given our knowledge of corporate control of water already today. “Olivar, located between the sea and Los Angeles, is getting an influx of salt water from one direction and desperate poor people from the other…” KSF, the “commercial company, intends to dominate farming and the selling of water…They mean to own great water, power…”(119). They also mean to do so, through what Lauren refers to as “debt slavery,” an “old company-town trick- to get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder,” (121). The privatization of public resources, or human rights some would say, like water, is emphasized time and time again throughout the book. Commercial water stations end up being the one place to get water where “you can depend on it not to kill you,” but you are given not one drop more than what you pay for, which requires people to partake in wage labor in order to survive unless they come up with an alternative to clean water (201). We also know the ways in which this power is held over the masses, as “there’s nothing more replaceable than unskilled labor,” (288). We see this today all too often, especially with migrant laborers in agriculture. Given our knowledge of growing corporate domination of rights like water already taking place today, and the role of debt slavery in the workforce that is the backbone of so much of society, do you think there is a turning point of disaster necessary to cause the change we so desperately need to change our path to this future? Second question- a little off topic- but, how might passing the right to water change our current path, leading to a world of water peddlers and commercial stations? Would it?
In Parable of the Sower, one of the most interesting aspects of Lauren Oya Olamina’s character is her personal creation of a belief system that is vastly different than her Baptist father’s faith. Lauren sees God in chaos,. uncertainty and change, three things that are prevalent in her dystopian society and our modern reality. Lauren calls her belief system “Earthseed”. GOD IS CHANGE! At the very end of the book, Lauren is reflecting and writes that “today we remembered the friends and family memories we lost. We spoke our individual memories and quoted bible passages, Earthseed verses, and bits of songs and poems that were favorites of the living or the dead.” (328) This quote resonated with me because I think religion will always be a powerful tool for social change.As we move forward in the fight against the climate crisis, we have to adapt and learn from cultures and beliefs that we may not always fully believe in. Although Lauren moved away from her fathers faith, she still remembered lessons and verses from her father and honored them as she reflected.
Octavia Butler says that she created this story as a warning, as a “if-this-goes-on story”, as in, if we follow the path that our society has followed in recent decades, these dystopian science fiction novel could quickly be our reality. Octavia Butler was sadly extremely accurate in her predictions for the future. In your opinion, what warnings from this book feel most applicable to our society today?
Parable of the sower is honestly quite realistic for being a fictional novel. I see a lot of similarities between Octavia Butlers dystopian reality and our current reality. Some of these similarities include a significant wealth gap, homelessness, lack of access to drinking water, refugee crisis, poor education, drug epidemics, as well as governmental bodies who don’t care about the people. There is a general distrust with police in this novel because they abuse their power and the system by forcing people to pay for their help and often arrest the people calling and blaming the easiest target to receive money. This distrust is similar to what we are experiencing today with the black lives matter movement against police brutality and racial discrimination as well as the difference in response to those of lower economic standing compared to those who are wealthy. The chaotic world that Lauren lives in has forced people to take up arms in order to defend themselves which is similar to the recent spike in gun and ammo purchases across the United States. When people get scared they tend to take drastic measures to defend themselves and their property. This novel is based in 2024 and in my eyes, not to be pessimistic or anything, but we are currently on the right track to making Octavia Butlers novel a reality. Do yall see any other similarities between the novel and our current reality?
In Parable of the Sower Lauren Oya Olamina develops her own religions called Earthseed. We are first introduced to theory that God is Change when she is 15 years old. As the novel continues, the more she develops her religion. At 18 years old, Lauren finally has the opportunity to “preach” (as Harry would say) her religion to others. While discussing Earthseed with Travis, the readers are getting a look at the foundations Earthseed, prayer is helping people feel better.. “God is Change, and in the end, God prevails. But there’s hope in understanding the nature of God–not punishing or jealous, but infinitely malleable. There’s comfort in realizing that everyone and everything yields to God. There’s power in knowing that no power in having strength and brains, and yet waiting for God to fix things for you or take revenge for you… God will shape us all every day of our lives. Best to understand that and return to effort: Shape God” (221). Lauren is saying that there’s only one given in life, Change and we might as well be the ones to mold our futures. How do you think that this attitudes relates to sustainable development? Do you believe that this attitude could call people to action rather than leaving their futures up to God?
In Ceremony, a big theme of the novel was transition, not only of the landscape but those in it as well. How do you think Tayo would react to Earthseed and the precarious situations Lauren finds herself in? Do you think that there is something about Non-Abrahamic religions that lends aids these Changes with Tayo and Lauren?
In chapter 10 of “Parable of the Sower”, we are introduced to the town of Olivar and the KSF company that has taken over with the town’s permission. KSF has promised people jobs, housing, and other amenities, but Lauren questions what they would consider good amenities and the bare minimum. We see this on page 121 when she states, “Anyone KSF hired would have a hard time living on the salary offered. In not very much time, I think the new hires would be in debt to the company. That’s an old company-town trick—get people into debt, hang on to them, and work them harder. Debt-slavery.” (121) She brings up the term ‘debt slavery’, which I found to be extremely accurate. Large corporations and rich countries have been using this tactic for many years. We see this in companies like Monsanto and Tyson who put farmers into debt so they can work them harder. We not only see this nationally though. Our foreign ‘aid’ and globalization tactics that we have used on other countries are for the benefit of the US. By putting these countries in debt to us, we use them for our benefit without taking into consideration the well-being of the people. What shocked me so much from this chapter is that people still fell for this trick, even though they never changed. People still believe that corporations won’t use us for their benefit and that they truly care about our wellbeing. What is it going to take for people to realize that the rich don’t care? If it’s not this apocalyptic outcome, what will?
In chapter 11 of Parable of the Sower, the popularity of Olivar is increasing, with families in Lauren’s neighborhood, including a member of her own (Cory) dreaming of escaping there for a “better life.” During a discussion, or I guess argument, about whether their family should stay or go, Lauren’s father says “This business sounds half antebellum revival and half science-fiction. I don’t trust it. Freedom is dangerous, Cory, but it’s precious, too. You can’t just throw it away or let it slip away. You can’t sell it for bread and pottage.” (122)
This made me think about what freedom means to different individuals. To Cory, freedom meant shelter, food, and security, protection from what happens outside the walls. To Lauren’s father, it seems, freedom is the ability to make a salary and come home to your family. Throughout the book, though, it seems that Lauren’s perception of freedom changes with her circumstances. Yes, freedom is dangerous, but is it really freedom if you are fighting for your life to keep hold of it? Is it freedom if one fears it could be taken from them in a matter of seconds? What do you think Butler is suggesting true “freedom” is?
Death is a consistent theme within ‘Parable of the Sower’. The way in which people or animals die is numerous and often described but yet somehow still with composure from Lauren. Right from the beginning death was brought into the reading and as it continues characters closer to Lauren are now dying off and her neighbors and lifelong peers are moving out of her life. The situation of her brothers death was an intense spark to the fire of dark days that were to follow Lauren and her family. Unable to pursue the disappearance of her father, Cory and her are forced to continue almost as if business is usual and I can’t help but to think that, especially because of Lauren’s sharing, this choice she is making to, even if subconsciously, ignore, forget, or make disappear the truth of her father and loss of her brother she is instead doing exactly the opposite of what we’d expect. When Lauren talked to her father about her thoughts and fears of the future she insisted on the need for him and everyone else to stop ignoring the truth of their fates and instead act on them and prevent them. Now as she tries to continue her life it seems as if Lauren is now the one closing her eyes on reality. Do you think its possible that by focusing on leaving Robledo Lauren is creating a path ahead of her that is not of acceptable but rather imagination?
n Octavia Butler’s “Parable of the Sower” chapter 8, she starts off by saying “TRACY DUNN HAS NOT come home and has not been found by the police. I donʼt think she will be. Sheʼs only been gone for a week, but a week outside must be like a week in hell. People vanish outside. They go through our gate like Mr. Yannis did, and everyone waits for them, but they never come back—or they come back in an urn. I think Tracy Dunn is dead. ” This chapter is disappointing to think that in the world that the characters live in there are still injustices against people of color. The hopes of Tracy returning home alive are becoming slim and individuals are in danger due to their interracial relationships. Craig Dunn and Siti Moss are at risk of being killed due to the pregnancy that resulted from their interactions “Craig Dunn who’s white and one of the saner members of the Dunn family was caught making love to Siti Moss who’s black andRichard Moss’s oldest daughter to boot, I thought someone was going to get killed. Crazy” It is mentioned that interracial couples can get married and they are lucky to be able to live in a room or garage but other than that nothing will get better. We can only hope that our future is not truly going to be like this. I do not see it going back to the old ways due to the progression that has been made over recent years. Are there any occurrences later on in the book that could be viewed as backtracking from progression that had been made?
Our reading in “Parable of the Sower” has been interesting so far and I am glad I am getting introduced to this book. The message of I found in chapter seven how impressive Laurens drive was to be a powerful impactor in her community. Her understanding of the power of knowledge and the spread of it was impressive. The beginning of chapter seven starts with “Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths.” This is a statement reflecting on the fact that plants need their seeds to travel to spread their plant life around. Just like plants, Lauren knew that this process of spreading the word was important and we cannot just stay in our own perspective of the earth. Looking towards nature is very important to learn what we should do for the future.
“Sometimes the paints like the fire so much they get too close to it. Then their friends don’t even help them. They just watch them burn”. This is a quote from Keith on page 111 regarding the fire drug. While much of the drugs aspect, as well as the face-painted and shaven individuals that use it play a large role in this story, I thought this quote was particularly interesting. How does this line relate to the greater story of Parable of the Sower? Just before this line, we learn that Keith had shot another man for his belongings, while they were both just trying to reach their goal. While both individuals were going through similar struggles, one took advantage of another. Keith seems to be bothered by the painted and their way of life, while he himself is causing permanent harm to others. What do you think this does to the reader in terms of views on violence? What examples of violence from this novel, as well as the real world is considered “justified” violence? Was Keith was doing “what he had to” in order to survive, while the painted cause violence for entertainment?
When Lauren is frustrated at Joanne for telling her parents about her plan to be prepared for what she believes to be an inevitable emergency, she describes Joannes denial as a “dumb little game of ‘if we don’t talk about the bad things, maybe they won’t happen.'” (61) This quote reminded me of Robert Nixon’s theory of slow violence, in which he describes how slow moving and temporally distant catastrophes are harder to react to and address than immediate and tangible crises right before our eyes. I found it interesting that even with so much violence realized and experienced by Joanne, she still seems to be unable to see how her situation could still change for the worse, and why preparation is necessary. I consider Joanne’s sentiment to be similar to people who understand climate change is happening, yet don’t take action to try to garner support to change the problem. For one reason or another, the situation is too daunting, too far off, or too intangible to warrant their attention, preparation and energy. Meanwhile, for those of us who strive for change, it can seem impossible to garner support from the Joanne’s of our contemporary time. Consider the advice given to Lauren by her father in this situation: “Its better to teach people than to scare them, Lauren. If you scare them and nothing happens, they lose their fear, and you lose some of your authority with them. It’s harder to scare them a second time, harder to teach them, harder to win back their trust. Best to begin by teaching.” (65-66) What might this advice tell us about how we need to frame a climate crisis in order to mobilize action and inspire change? How might this advice suggest to us to change our rhetoric in order to better communicate what needs to be done? What value can a movement for addressing climate change gain from focus less on impending climate disaster and more on education? Do you think such a communication tactic would be sufficient to bring about necessary change?
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading Parable of the Sower. I think this book has highlighted so many things that are problems in our society currently. One part that I thought was interesting was Lauren’s want to leave her community. Throughout the book she talks about the rules they have to follow outside of the walls and all of the dangers they face if they go outside. It seems like she was waiting for the right time to leave and that came after her fathers disappearance. “How will they feel when I go? I’ll be dead to them… I won’t have to leave Dad now” (Butler 138). I think this is interesting how she was waiting to make the decision to leave her home and that the disappearance of her dad made her realize she was ready. Why was this what compelled her to take action? She has been thinking about leaving for a while. Is she going to do it and be able to leave behind what’s left of her family? How does this translate into a deeper meaning? What is she willing to leave behind and what did her dad represent that makes it now possible?
The lack of surprise when a death occurs throughout the book is compelling and strong. In the occurrence of death, such as that of Lauren’s father, Lauren makes sure to write about it at the very beginning of an entry. Furthermore, when Lauren writes about death, she seems to take on a very monotoned voice. Though there is some structural change throughout the neighborhood, such as families moving to the city of Olivar, there is not a significant urgency to shift from the previously implemented practices and strategies. What has to happen for people to realize that there needs to be a drastic change in survival strategies? A lot of the families in the neighborhood seem like they are just waiting for death, or that they are just waiting as long as they can for some invisible savior or solution. On another note, the idea that the teaching of Earthseed will be needed to be taken over by the younger generation is very apparent. The older generations seem to be too stuck in their ways (reflection of the older generation in real life). Are young people meant to be the catalysts of change in this novel?
Lauren’s distaste for her youth is something that I have found particularly interesting throughout this book. On multiple occasions, she mentions how she feels that time passes slowly and that she wishes she were older. She sympathizes with Keith wanting to be older, saying “waiting is terrible.” The children in the book are not protected from the realities of life because they are young. Regradless of Lauren’s age she leads, whether it is the children at the school, her brothers, and through the creation of her religion. I think this emphasis on youth parallels today in the form of youth led climate activism. As students in sustainable development, in what ways can we learn from Lauren’s leadership, and desire to create a new form of community?
A striking comparison in the book looks at the community differences of Robledo and Olivar, the company-city. Why Robledo is definitely ideal with its high security and threat from outside the walls, Olivar was once a primarily white and wealthy coastal city town that had a thriving economy, “just one more beach/bedroom suburb of LA, small and well-to-do” (Pg. 118). but now faces land instability, unnecessarily high taxes, and class structure similar to that of indentured servitude or slavery from the colonial era. The presumably transnational company, KSF, decided to profit off this crumbling town by using a tactic known as ‘script system’ that was utilized in history in the coal mining towns of Appalachia. Companies would pay the people very little, but what was made could only be spent at town stores, trapping the citizens in what seems like a never ending cycle of dependency and debt. As I type this out it almost relates to what is happening in present day United States where people are being forced to work 9-5 shifts for minimum wage while struggling with student loans and the ever rising cost of living (food, shelter, clothes, etc.). Fast fashion and exploitation of workers is a growing notion across the globe, as it is apparent profit is more powerful in this world than simply human and nature’s lives. Seeing as this is a hopeful, yet cautionary tale, do you think this book has the ability to alter reader’s minds to no longer participating in the terms of capitalistic society? This could be done on a smaller scale by shopping and eating locally, but how can we as people do anything about the constant debt entrapment forced upon our society through unbelievably low minimum wages and excessively high living standards??
Lauren has conflicted feelings about Christianity before her baptism. One of the most important aspects of her character development is her trying to reconnect with Earthseed. Earthseed is contrasted with Christianity throughout the book and the most important aspect of this contrast emerges from the way in which each religion addresses hope. A quote from Chapter 18 reads,”God isn’t good or evil, doesn’t favor you or hate you, and yet God is better partnered than fought.”
“Your God doesn’t care about you at all,” Travis said.
“All the more reason to care about myself and others. All the more reason to create Earthseed communities and shape God together. ‘God is Trickster, Teacher, Chaos, Clay.’ We decide which aspect we embrace—and how to deal with the others.”
What can religions today take from this book? Is the philosophy behind religion important to study along sustainable development theory?
“But…I thought something would happen someday. I didn’t know how bad it would be or when it would come. But everything was getting worse: the climate, the economy, crime, drugs, you know. I didn’t believe we would be allowed to sit behind our walls, looking clean and fat and rich to the hungry, thirsty, homeless, jobless, filthy people outside. (p. 187)”
This quote struck me as I read chapter 16. I find it concerning just how closely Butler’s description of the downward trend of society is in this snippet. Lauren was prepared for something catastrophic to happen but others in her community lived without a rational fear of what might become of their gated community. The way I conceptualize this quote to put it in perspective of current issues is this: the wall that separates Robledo from the happenings of the outside world represents society’s neglectful thought process (a sort of out of sight out of mind approach to issues faced worldwide), those who engage in denying or downplaying the issues that are being faced globally are the people who reside in Robledo; trying their best to push any thought of what might be, what might go wrong, out of their minds, the rest of the world, realizing the issues being faced currently (and finding themselves in a frantic state of panic to create solutions) are represented by those who are struggling on the outside of the wall, possibly (more than likely) feeling a great sense of resentment for those ignoring the issues. How does this thought process differ from your own or do you find that you conceptualize it quite similarly?
In chapter 7 of Parable of the Sower, Lauren talks about how she came up with the name Earthseed for her views on God and religion. She writes “Well, today, I found the name, found it while I was weeding the back garden and thinking about the way plants seed themselves, windburn, animal borne, water borne, far from their parent plants…I am Earthseed. Anyone can be. Someday, I think there will be a lot of us. And I think we’ll have to seed ourselves farther and farther from this dying place” (77-78). I can see how she came to the name Earthseed with how seeds plant themselves, with this explanation she’s sees herself as a seed ready to sprout elsewhere. It seems like she is the only one who wants this change, so she’s keeping it to herself for now. How is lauren going to share her earthseed with others and how are they going to react to it?
A general concept I’ve been thinking about a lot as I continue reading through Parable of the Sower is the idea of ignorance as bliss, and denial as a form of self protection. In class last week, we talked a little about the walls of Robledo being a form of false security and protection, and I think this is another facet of this underlying theme of denial as protection. The walls of Robledo serve as a false sense of security that few are at lease openly criticizing it. With the story being in the perspective of Lauren, however, we get a glimpse into the idea that these walls are only a form of denial of reality, or a clinging to any form of protection despite the fact that it may inevitably be their communities downfall. Any sense of security amidst such uncertainty and fear is considered worth it.
There are so many thoughts that stem off of this, but one I have is how closely I feel this relates to the modern understandings and acceptance of the climate crisis. The research is there, the facts and statistics have been proven, and yet somehow there is still such little action and so many people who continue their daily lives as though the end of the world as we know it is not coming. Why is that? I think a lot of it goes back to the concepts of this book that ignorance, or simply temporarily ignoring, is bliss. It is possible to live a much happier life for now if the doom of humanity is not fully accepted. It’s a false sense of security, but this is enough for people and allows them to remain complacent for a little while longer. This denial of the reality of the situation or pushing away of the hard truth is a form of protection. The ability to live with this false safety is a position of privilege, like living in the walls of Robledo is, and though things are still hard, it’s better than what’s outside.
There are so many conversations that Lauren undergoes with her community members that reminds me of this. In chapter 5, her conversation with Joanne follows these themes, with Joanne mentioning hope that “President Donner will start to get us back to normal,”. Lauren thinks to herself, “Normal, I wonder what that is.” Through this conversation, it’s pretty clear Joanne is not fully convinced that their is hope for a normal again, or that a president could achieve such a thing, but she seems willing to settle with it enough rather than accept Lauren’s idea that there never will be normal again so it’s time to think differently. Joanne asks Lauren, “Why do you want to talk about this stuff, we can’t do anything about it.” to which Lauren replies, “We have to.” I feel I myself have had this conversation with so many friends and family. They deny as best they can that there will never be a just and sustainable “normal”, but I can hear they don’t even fully believe themselves, but they don’t know what else to do or feel they can change things so they remain complacent. I, as well as I think many other students, feel as though there is no option or room to accept false security in ignorance anymore. We have to start building alternatives, preparing for a future where we have no safety nets, and start working towards just and alternative forms of living because at this point, we have to.
I realize I forgot to add in my question regarding these ideas. To follow up, how can we turn immobilized/passive allies who understand the importance of change or the severity of the crisis we are in into active allies encouraged to do something about it? Lauren’s dad suggests not scaring people, because this turns them away. Instead, you teach them subtly through less frightening means or conversations. Do you agree with that? Is the best method to avert the inconvenient and frightening truth? Or does emphasizing the severity, including all of the doom and depression of the issue drive more action and is therefore imperative? How do we convince people to leave the safety and security of inaction, when it is a seemingly happier/easier life or mentality?
In chapter 13, Lauren mentions how someone set fire to the Payne-Parrish house and while the community was trying to put out the fire, three houses got robbed. Throughout the community, more people have been committing arson to cover up their crimes. Arsonists will set fire to people’s homes to get the neighbors of the arson victim to leave their house unguarded. They are trying to get rid of people they don’t like as well as others who are foreign or racially different from them. Lauren believes that most of these arsonists are frustrated, angry, and hopeless. She states, “They have no power to improve their lives, by they have the power to make others even more miserable. And the only way to prove to yourself that you have power is to use it” (143). Why do some people choose to show their powers in violent ways? Do they lack the hyper-empathy that Lauren experiences? Is this Lauren has chosen to use her powers for the betterment of her community?
When writing about Earthseed, Lauren writes “A tree cannot grow in its parent’s shadows.” Later, she writes, “To get along with God, consider the consequences of your behavior.” She goes on to talk about Bianca Montoya’s pregnancy, and where her life will go once she has the child- the limited choices she has. I wonder if Lauren considers people’s relationship with God (or her father’s God or whoever/whatever their God is) to that of a sort of parental relationship. I feel like there are a lot of instances in the book so far where she has had to be careful when discussing things with her father- like when she let Joanna borrow his book and talked about preparing for a big riot or fight; learning to survive. When her father finds out about it, he discourages her from talking about it with other people, claiming it scares them, and if nothing like it happens, one loses authority. While he encourages her smaller ideas, like emergency earthquake kits, he discourages the discussion of bigger changes. And as Lauren writes, her Earthseed God is change. So I wonder if, when she writes “to get along with God, consider the consequences of your behavior” it alludes to her relationship with her father, and her father’s relationship to God- both resistant to change?
A really prominent quote from Parable of the Sower reads, “a tree cannot grow in its parents’ shadow,” (82). I think this quote can be interpreted in many different ways and I connected it to climate response. In a lot of my classes when we talk about climate change we have to talk about realistic implementation and a common barrier is how people learn certain harmful behaviors to the environment from their parents. Many people tend to trust their parents and practices which have been used in their families for generations over new research on environmentally safer options. The shadows of their parents are keeping the younger generation from making adequate change to climate action. How can we encourage growth outside the shadow cast from generations before us in relation to environmental degradation?
As Lauren starts to form her group with Zahra and Harry, Harry asks her about the stuff that she writes. Wanting to learn more about her, feeling like there is a portion of her that she hides or lies about. Wanting to know the real her and not just the versions of her he has seen grow up. So she shows him the first verse of Earthseed, “All that you touch You Change. All that you Change Changes you. The only lasting truth is Change. God is Change” (Butler, 195). Lauren chose those lines as the very first page of the first book. As a way to show what Earthseed is suppose to be about, how people should be looking at Earthseed. It makes me wonder besides these lines what other lines would she want to be repeated? What other lines hold as much meaning when she’s sharing Earthseed?
I can relate to Laurens hyper empathy, clearly not in such an extreme way, but I can be really empathic sometimes. I think a lot of people in my generation can relate, with social media we are now able to see and relate to so many different people it is hard not to feel empathic to everyones problems. In chapter 24, Laurens hyper empathy distracts her from Jill getting shot to death. She missed her being buried and dint get to say goodbye. I feel like this can relate to people in the real world, they get so caught up with being concerned with everything that they lost sight of how to productively care about issues without getting burnt out or without making any effect at all. How can empathy distract us, and how can that distraction be streamlined into something productive? Is there a way to curb your empathy or is it an uncontrollable emotion? Can you channel empathy?
Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower provides a glimpse into the future in a fictional, but not quite so unrealistic, way. One thing that stood out to me was Lauren’s hyperempathy, and the dangers of feeling deep empathetic emotions. In the context of her life and surroundings, hyperempathy can definitely be viewed as a weakness, and something to hide so as to not be exploited. When Lauren finally tells Zahra and Harry about it, she states that, “In this world, there isn’t any room for housebound, frightened, squeamish people, and that’s what I might have become if everyone had known about me- all the other kids, for instead. Little kids are vicious. Haven’t you noticed?” (194). In general, people who exhibit stronger emotions and feelings are often viewed as having a flaw, or something to work around. However, it would be interesting to see hyperempathy presented in a different light, in which it is actually a positive trait to have, as she can also feel positive feelings. While in Lauren’s case in this dystopian world she did need to hide her hyperempathy around most people, it could also be viewed as a skill, or a fun trait to have as she can connect with others in deeper ways than most other people. How different would the world look if being more in touch with feelings and emotions was viewed as equally as important and positive as other skillsets?
The belief system which Lauren constructs and discusses in Parable of the Sower is the topic of this final discussion post. I would argue the following claim: that this pantheistic conception of god, one which is indifferent to human action, defined only by the reality of an infinitely changing universe, and places not requirements on its followers other than to acknowledge the truth of its existence-that existence IS change- is a step towards reconciling the authoritarian and regressive history of organized religion with the degrading environmental and socio-economic conditions experienced by Lauren. To quote Parable of the Sower, “Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths.” This simple quote achieves more than one might think. If Earth-seed is all that spreads Earth-life to new earths, and Lauren’s earth presently is in no condition to spread said earth-life to ‘new earths’, the initial point of concern for all followers of Earthseed is not their own individual damnation or spiritual condition, but the condition of the world around them, and the way in which those conditions affect not only their own spiritual progression, but the spiritual progression and actualization of other followers of Earthseed. Earthseed can therefore be seen as a decentralized form of religion, one defined by a plurality of potential means for achieving the above goal of spreading earth-life to new-earths. In effect Earthseed brings the concerns of its followers down to earth, as opposed to being perpetually focused on the status of their own after-life. Octavia Butler, through the story of Lauren Olamina, presents a new way in which people under the terrible conditions of ecological and socio-economic upheaval might find a form of religious revelation which is both progressive and concerned with the collective as opposed to one’s own spiritual concerns.
Can religion be reconciled as not only an individual form of spiritual-practice, but also as a way of life which implicitly involves the concern and betterment of others in their society, without devolving into regressive ideology?
Through the people that Lauren meets while on her journey, she is able to find a sense of community. This is furthered by Lauren ‘converting’ some of these members to the Earthseed religion. This is especially important in the circumstances that are being faced in Parable of the Sower, especially due to imminent and seemingly randomized forms of attack. Being able to identify people outside of her family that she feels comfortable trusting with her life, and vise versa, develops the plot towards the understanding that being in community with people that you are able to help, either in physical protection, or in other forms of mutual benefits. Considering this piece, as well as Nedije’s writings, how can a larger understanding of community benefit our mental health, specifically, our conceptions of safety? I wonder this, especially, taking into account that a relationship with community constitutes living, nonliving, human, and nonhuman beings into consideration. As trust in the non-human begins to grow, alongside the human, how can this impact one’s perception of security? I think about this question especially as degrading environmental practices can threaten one’s way of life, especially by making it harder to produce food (exemplified in Parable of the Sower by the severe droughts and lack of available water), or lack of ability to rely on nature to empower you to protect yourself.