[Untitled image by John E. Simpson. (Shared here under a Creative Commons License; for more information, see this page at RAMH.) The photo’s caption on Instagram read: “The end-of-year holidays are a time for families to draw together and, as families will, poke one another to the point of discomfort”… Now I’m thinking I should entitle it, “Poking the Unknowable.”]
This week, whiskey river reminded us (via its characteristically impeccable curatorship of others’ words) that (a) this is a very weird time to be traveling, but also that (b) aside from current travels, just the memory of past ones feels a little alien — even to those who haven’t been on the road:
But time has got very slippery these days. Days, weeks, months and years merge into one another. Images will pop up of work trips to the US, or Australia in the Photos widget on my phone and not only will I struggle to remember when the trip happened, the very fact that it did is becoming increasingly unreal.
All I know with any certainty is that I get up, stuff happens, and I go to sleep, over and over again. The past is a dream that I have here and now, the future a fantasy that likewise is a figment of my imagination that I experience here and now.
(Euan Semple [source])
The book I’m reading now, too, feels rather alien, exactly because it records an itinerary — several of them — formerly unimaginable to me. The author, Charles Foster, is a British naturalist; the book itself, Being a Beast, is predictably therefore about the natural world. But it’s “about” the natural world in the sense (as the title suggests) of inhabiting the natural world — not as a human, striding about on two legs and occasionally crouching down to observe wildlife, patronizingly, as though doing the creatures a favor. No: Foster set out to live the daily lives of the animals he discusses — badgers, otters, foxes, red deer, and swifts.
Like most journeys, Foster’s — into the heads of the creatures he’s curious about — mix aspirations satisfied with intentions foiled, plans (always for good outcomes) with surprises (disappointing mixed with good). (I’m only about halfway through the book so far, but have not yet encountered any disasters or tragedies. Foster’s a gifted writer, an entertaining eccentric, so perhaps he simply avoids reporting of great and genuine unhappiness.) As a badger, he manages to adjust his sleep cycle — creeping out of his Welsh hillside burrow for nocturnal foraging — and learns to eat worms, to recognize their varieties by their textures and unique slipperiness. As a fox in East End London, he’s awakened by a policeman from his daytime snooze by “under the rhododendrons.” The policeman says:
“Why do you have to sleep here, may I ask?”
“You may indeed ask, but I don’t suppose you’ll like the answer. I’m trying to be a fox, and” (I rushed on, trying to avert my eyes from the torrential hemorrhage of the officer’s residual goodwill) “I want to know what it’s like to listen all day to traffic and to look at ankles and calves rather than at whole people.”
This last observation was a bad, bad mistake. I knew it as soon as it was out…
Uncertainty and workload trumped his instincts, and he told me to “bugger off home, sir” (the italics were powerful on his lips) “and get a life.”
“That,” I said, “is exactly what I’m trying to get.”
Comedy aside, note about this passage that it presents a Janus of alienness — an animal’s face gazing at the human, a human’s at the animal, across a barrier which neither of them can ever actually climb or penetrate. The same barrier, indeed, exists between you and me, or between you and anyone else you have ever encountered — will ever encounter. Foster himself acknowledges this, in a sort of side jaunt into the nature (!) of animal/human consciousness:
The universe I occupy is a creature of my head. It is wholly unique to me. The process of intimacy is the process of becoming better at inviting others in to have a look around. The sensation of loneliness is the crushing acknowledgment that however good you get at giving such invitations no one will be able to see very much at all….
What might it mean for an unconscious creature to dream? Indeed to sleep at all? What’s being lost when “consciousness” is lost? What accompanies the creature into the world beyond the veil? If badgers aren’t conscious in a sense comparable to us, their sleeping smiles and winces are more inscrutable than consciousness itself. I prefer the lesser mystery…
When I experience a pleasurable stimulus, my facial muscles contract in a particular way. When a dog experiences a stimulus that indicates a benefit to the dog that is comparable to the benefit of which my pleasure is an index, its facial muscles contract in a more or less identical way.
And so on.
Being a Beast was published in 2016, well before the coronavirus tide flooded the world. But — in that context, and taken together with Euan Semple’s words above — it’s interesting to note: even when we’re sharing life only with other humans (and some animals, if we’re lucky), those we already “know” intimately, even after a seemingly interminable period of adopting one another’s rhythms as our own, the barriers of consciousness remain. We still live in our separate heads. We may think — fool ourselves into thinking — we know the minds on the other side of the impermeable membrane, because we know the behaviors which (surely?) highlight those minds’ motivations, decisions, and, well, essences. But no: as always, the operative word there is impermeable.
There is no challenge, no mystery at all, in thinking “I know X.” No, what makes each “same” day different, and differently worth living, is always trying to know X: trying, failing, trying again. There’s an inexhaustible source of surprise, delight — and sure, occasional disappointment — to be found on that journey. Maybe, in this small way, we can regard the pandemic as an opportunity we’d never have been offered otherwise, as — gasp — as a blessing?
Tracie Hall says
Great quotes! I may have to read Foster’s book too, but currently I’m busy with others.
I applaud Mr. Foster’s efforts at attempting to experience life as creatures might. Still, as you say, try as we may to replicate their positions, diets, or behaviors, it’s impossible to truly know.
I wonder, for example, if perhaps a beast’s vision, no matter the angle, might not fully resemble that of a crouching man’s. Perhaps a fox has a fisheye view, taking in an entire person–or, indeed, group of people. It seems a beast who could be prey or predator in any given moment, might be better served by vision/senses that absorb any single entity, and its herd, all at once. Just sayin’. :-)
John says
I wonder(ed) about those sorts of things — what do we truly know about how other species sense the world? — quite a bit, especially while reading the book. Foster convinced me that he knows the things he knows, and also knows the things he doesn’t know. The decision to try to “see what a fox sees,” for example, could be regarded as pretty hubristic; on the other hand, if one acknowledges (as Foster does) that sensory experiences take place in the brain, not in a given sensory organ (eye, ear, etc.), and that we can never share another creature’s brain, well, then, the exercise is easier to approach with humility.
That was my take on it, anyhow!
Tracie Hall says
It sounds like Mr. Foster approaches his endeavors to experience what animals might with humility, so I suspect that I would cut Mr. Foster some slack in reading the book — I’ve added it to my “want to read” list. :-)
Tracie Hall says
Oops! No doubt I made more mistakes than I am aware of in my previous comment, but it occurs to me that I meant “herd”, not “heard”.
(It is only common courtesy that one watches one’s P’s and Q’s (and “A’s) when commenting on a lexicographer’s blog. :-)
John says
Fixed that for you. ;) But I do hope the “lexicographer’s blog” you refer to doesn’t mean THIS blog, heh.
Tracie Hall says
Yeah, about that: I hope you won’t be disappointed that stumbling upon your blog was initially a case of mistaken identity. You’re no doubt aware that your name has a near doppelganger (near, because the middle name isn’t a match :-) ). On the off chance you are not, the details are that Mr. John A. Simpson wrote a book about editing the OED. Sorry about that. I am quite glad I found your blog by whatever means though. :-)