糖心网页版

Pardon me, I was dreaming; I forgot you are here
waiting for me to accept you again, tell you that you鈥檙e not dangerous. Alice Notley, Above the Leaders

With the global security system implicated in just about every scenario of civilisational and species collapse, should it be said that scholars have given too much time to chattering about geopolitical fact patterns, or actually not enough? Jairus Grove, in his 2019 book Savage Ecology: War and Geopolitics at the End of the World, poses that inhabiting modernity鈥檚 lethal 鈥渆ffects鈥� anew can itself contribute to re-directing and, to a needed extent, 鈥渄e-directing鈥� human purposes.

Whatever鈥檚 to be said about ancestral, cosmological, or evolutionary origins of unbound power and, eventually, the world鈥檚 aggressive and techno-powered unification, Grove especially doesn鈥檛 want covered up the 鈥渆lite-driven Euro-American geopolitics of industrialized war and capitalism made ecocide that is now a global historical fact鈥� (pp. 10-11).聽His chapter 鈥淎 Martial Logic of the聽Eurocene鈥� references Peter Sloterdijk for the latter鈥檚 use of First World War gas attacks to exemplify a signal moment at which even one鈥檚 environmental milieu was made a vector of annihilation (p. 82). If this is the very escalation聽of the history of violence confronted聽in Wilfred Owen鈥檚 poems鈥攍ike 鈥淓xposure鈥� (published posthumously in 1920), with its 鈥渂ullets [鈥�]. / Less deathly than the air鈥濃�擥rove mentions land clearances, species eliminations,聽and urbanisations on the American continent as earlier manifestations of the same directed development of suffering (p. 98). Scanning 鈥渢he terrain of apocalypse and war鈥� on behalf of those 鈥渕oderns no longer interested in being along for the ride鈥�, Savage Ecology affirms, however, that even a 鈥渢ortured topography鈥� carries with it 鈥渁 world of persistent provocations鈥濃�攐f vibrancy, of fragility. 鈥淸T]hinking is at its best when it is along for [that] ride鈥� (pp. 229, 282, 12).

The signature-evasive-manoeuver of Grove鈥檚 politics is represented in a sci-fi horror tale that appears as Savage Ecology鈥榮 closing pages (pp. 281-284). With this story set in the early 2060s, Grove faces readers with the latest in a long line of ghoulish imaginings of Los Angeles. His brief narrative unfolds cimematically as a drone鈥檚 camera 鈥減ans down [鈥�] in a wide landscape shot鈥� to surveil an electrically reanimated army advancing on a military compound. With overhead footage of zombies capturing war鈥檚 would-be relentlessness, Grove鈥檚 amassing victim-killers have been joined by a newest recruit whose dying words are recorded: 鈥渨e are not who we are鈥�. What soon plays out, however, is a resonant, yet less joyless, diversion. The flying killer robot spies its own beauty over the ocean鈥斺�渢itanium wings outstretched鈥濃�攁nd becomes momentarily a transport of delight. In this way, rather than allow himself to indulge an over-libidinal end-of-days narrative鈥攑erhaps by a plotline in which every unmarked data point gets revealed as just an enemy, or a hero, we haven鈥檛 yet met鈥擥rove鈥檚 鈥減ostvision鈥� (p. 9) portals to a world where at least some-body stops considering itself according to the shooting script of a filmmaker in the sky.

Grove accuses usual suspects of political closure: those who entertain plans to harness and husband the Earth at scale. But the book also calls out the bearers of what attempt to pass as more benignly or virtuously transformative solutions. Liberal managerialists or global revolutionaries offer little more than other definers and exploiters of the future to model the thought of ever giving up vast power. And in the meantime, of course, they pull focus from alternative worldly experiences. Grove鈥檚 鈥減rotean鈥� politics thus instead positions itself outside the conventionally 鈥減olitical鈥澛爄n聽magnetising聽to a 鈥渃omplexity of human and nonhuman assemblages [that] alters the expected provocateurs as well as tactics鈥� (pp. 258-259). Without insisting that 鈥渢he world slow down鈥�, a savage ecologist cultivates responsiveness to what shifts or what mutates, what surges or what melts, what coalesces, and that at any rate,聽animately聽or inanimately, has 鈥渓ife of its own鈥� (pp. 230; 264). She adventures 鈥渨eird[ly]鈥� and 鈥渃reative[ly]鈥� with the things of the world to 鈥渦nblock certain flows corralled by the arborescent strategies of fortress state craft鈥� (pp. 17; 230).

A 鈥減lanetary struggle for homogenization鈥� (p. 50) will have been no politics, and no struggle, if it always decides for whatever the聽Eurocene has 鈥渂uilt back鈥� itself. Yet notwithstanding Grove鈥檚 impatience with giving 鈥減olitics as usual鈥� any more time of day, I am curious when it comes to whether the savage ecologist really does best in walling off the part of life鈥檚 tableau that overlaps consensus reality. For instance, consider the 鈥渁bility鈥� heard by Donna Haraway (2016) in 鈥渞esponsibility鈥� as it bears on engaging forgotten others. Is it definitely not the case that intonations like this, response-ability, ever come to brush souls with the very aligners of the world? Do none ever catch sight of others rooms, as it were, in the rooms where they are? Are there no secret savage ecologists, out of place, maybe unaware, and passing over and over again into silence? To be sure, Grove鈥檚 own bearing, operating deep within and yet simultaneously beyond International Relations (IR) theory, should probably not be imagined to be without counterpart in other professional realms.

After a sequence on the 鈥淕reat Homogenization鈥� (pp. 33-110), as engendered in the book鈥檚 judgment by the Eurocene, and before a third part titled 鈥淢ust We Persist to Continue?鈥� (pp. 227-272), Savage Ecology鈥榮 middle chapters file investigations into a trio of 鈥淥perational Spaces鈥� (pp. 111-189): (1) killer materials spread by security forces, repurposed in聽motlier聽ways by insurgents (鈥淏ombs鈥�); (2) varicosed circulations of blood feeding a politics of racial hierarchy (鈥淏lood鈥�); and (3) the problematique of neuroplasticity for a coming neuropolitics (鈥淏rains鈥�). To go over just the first, we have the stylishly volatile 鈥渕atter鈥� of Grove鈥檚 鈥淏ombs鈥� chapter: the Improvised Explosive Device (IED). Knocked together using 鈥渨eapons left behind鈥� and a 鈥渄eluge of electronic waste shipped, dumped, and smuggled throughout the Global South鈥� (p. 130), the weapon that re-wilds the master鈥檚 tools聽speaks for聽鈥渢hings鈥� whose intimacy with the system can be one of culmination or betrayal. So far as it鈥檚 hoped that becoming attentive to things needn鈥檛 involve reorienting to technology, reflection on the IED offers an occasion to note that the dimensions of this issue could presently be said to have unworked its own tensions. A collapsed relation between means and ends in view of an apocalyptic endgame: such is, after all, Grove鈥檚 new geopolitical thought to craft with the natural and the made without treating either as 鈥渦nder construction鈥� or as 鈥渞aw material鈥�.

A passage late in Savage Ecology aims at embracing all that blasts away the single firing range of experience owing to 鈥渆lite-driven [鈥�] geopolitics鈥�. Yet somehow this vigorous moment isn鈥檛 everything it could be. Thus, in 鈥淎pocalypse as a Theory of Change鈥�, Grove embeds an聽epiphanous聽list of possible聽becomings, to wit, an Improvised Explosive聽Linguistic Device (IELD):

Becoming agonistic, becoming active, becoming rage, becoming justice, becoming quiet, becoming still, becoming disobedient, becoming graceful, becoming kind, becoming indifferent, becoming defiant, becoming gentle, becoming sacrifice, becoming fire (as many monks in Vietnam did and at least three individuals in the United States have in the face of the Iraq War), becoming generous, becoming courageous, becoming feral 鈥� (p. 230).

A next paragraph says geopolitics聽cannot be 鈥渄isowned鈥�, only, indeed, 鈥渄iverted鈥�; but marks the channels for this diversion as running toward 鈥渁rguments, justice, compassion, forgiveness, politics, resistance, grief, art, beauty, the world鈥�. It is as if the text, right away, moves to hedge the likes of聽ferality, disobedience, 颈苍诲颈蹿蹿别谤别苍肠别鈥� Indeed, the paragraph at the foot of the page that includes Grove鈥檚 鈥淚ELD鈥� (not his term) soon also refuses rage among the 鈥減ractices, bodily dispositions, emotions鈥� appropriate if one wants to 鈥渆xternalize or banish the Eurocene鈥�. Do such selections begin to set up a nominally gentler matrix for history rather, in fact, than hold moments open to events and arrangements happening unprogressively on their own time?

This seems plausibly to be so. In step with William Connolly, Grove asks explicitly for 鈥渃are鈥� in welcoming the unheard, unthought, and warding off 鈥渋ndifference to the cutting edges of change that can be violent and dismissive鈥� (p. 266). Yet consequences arise from his employment, again via Connolly, of the theorist-as-鈥渟eer鈥� (e.g., p. 239). Thinking on what it would be to become or to encounter such an insistent shepherd of re-beginnings, and leaning in to becoming鈥檚 many-many-sidedness, wouldn鈥檛 the trans-political seer be a character occupying intensely paradoxical moments? That Euro-American refinements and globalisations of violence are vulnerable to being described as careless and oblivious to care does not make the opposing quality the calling card of A-list seers. My mind runs to a poem of Alice Notley鈥檚 that operates the shamanic genre of a healing ceremony: 鈥淚 don鈥檛 care about you. I do it for the joy of it鈥� (2016, p. 104).

鈥淏ecoming鈥� itself isn鈥檛 above critique. What describes the seer鈥檚 refashioning of command if not that she, indeed, models paradox, but also teaches that if being forks-and-forks-and-forks this only truly divides possibilities if the direction and very condition of flow is part of what gets unmade in the passage?聽Hence, the atom bomb, styled by Sloterdijk as itself a sort of oracle, 鈥渢he only Buddha that Western reason could understand鈥�, he pictures as possessing, among its other qualities, 鈥渋nfinite鈥� 鈥渃alm鈥� and 鈥渋rony鈥�. It resides inside of time but also outside it as an 鈥渆xtreme objectification of the spirit of power鈥� (1987; p. 130). Grove鈥檚 seer, 鈥渇ortune-teller鈥�, supposedly isn鈥檛 in the business of patching back through to teleology: she deals in 鈥渋ncipient聽possibilities, not catastrophic certainties鈥� (p. 264). All the same, 鈥渂ecoming鈥� as a keyword seduces minds to devise a pattern for time鈥檚 energies as if one had defined their conditions. This is almost to say that to unite one鈥檚 affirmations around it is 鈥渂ecoming boring鈥�.

And what if the seer is blind, or doesn鈥檛 only look? Typical of traditional understandings of the senses, Grove emphasises 鈥淸looking and listening] for the incipient鈥�, and also incorporates touch鈥攊n recommending, for instance, 鈥淸allowing] yourself to be touched rather than always touching鈥� (pp. 253, 270). As unsurprisingly, he says less, especially positively, about smell and taste鈥攂ut for a few citations envisioning that a species 鈥淸smells its] extinction鈥�, or that the colonialist secures himself a spot to 鈥渆njoy the smell of his own shit鈥�; or where, regarding neurochemical interventions, Grove quips that 鈥渙nce mythical muses may soon be swallowed or inhaled鈥� (pp. 186, 198, 167). A savage ecologist may have to anticipate a period of reflection not only on the sufficiency of her eyes and ears but also on 鈥渟ensation鈥� as a concept with its own weightedness, history, and limits.

A question of whether Grove鈥檚 use of 鈥渟ensation鈥� is sufficient to itself, or for that matter to all the ways in which people receive ideas, and gauge the weight of what they manage to sense, closes in again on the relation of savage ecological practice to that play of interior images whose practical embodiment is poetry. Grove matches the contemporary considerations of poets in mourning the murders and starvations of languages of recent centuries. At the same time, the official course of his argument gives verbal languages wide berth on account of their exclusivity within the possibilities of the 鈥渃orporeal鈥� (p. 258). But languages鈥攂y their revisionings, veerings-off, their frail vibrations鈥攁re complicit not only in death-dealing unifications and expulsions but also in methods for introducing lightness, fluidity, life. Thus, for instance, Ta-Nehisi Coates, in a quoted passage, calls for 鈥渁ctions over states鈥�, 鈥渟truggle over hope鈥�, but also 鈥渧erbs over nouns鈥� (p. 17). What if, regarding this, one should remix Grove with IR writers who sense 鈥渂eyond the catastrophe of our times [鈥�] a more poetic subjectivity鈥� (Evans and Reid 2014, p. 203)?

Savage Ecology in fact opens onto a Walt Whitman poem鈥斺�淎s I Sat Alone by Blue Ontario鈥檚 Shores鈥濃�攚hich, into the folds of 鈥測ou and me鈥�, names, among others, 鈥減ower, weapons鈥�, 鈥渓ies, thefts鈥�, 鈥渨ar鈥�, 鈥淎merica鈥�, 鈥淣atural and artificial鈥�, but also 鈥淔reedom, language, poems, employments鈥�. Later linking Whitman to Kerouac and Ginsberg鈥攁nd he could have named Gregory Corso, and his 鈥淏OMB鈥� (1960)鈥擥rove illustrates inheritances of form generally with poetic 鈥減rocreation鈥� (p. 262). He offers early on that 鈥淲e can study airports, poetry, endurance races, borders, bombs, plastic, and warfare, and find them all in the world鈥� (p. 27); not to mention that, throughout, the written prose of Savage Ecology itself is metaphoric, characterful, honest. Might its author, then, have oriented more evenly among聽thingly聽and oral particulars鈥攊f not toward a 鈥減oetic subjectivity鈥�, toward a selectivity without prejudice, a response-ability, in the passing of any resonance? 鈥攊n the object world, okay, but also in the voices, or better, tongues, that try to speak the world of things.

Nowhere even does Grove decipher the particular thought-shape of his book鈥檚 title, which thus awaits readers like a puzzle in relating destructuring and aliveness. So, if one might try puzzling it out: Might 鈥渟avage ecology鈥� be the script stuck to by that species whose performance of a self-centred cosmos begins chewing the scenery? Does it name a world of dangerous things as well as what Eurocene-tric humans had denied about nature? 鈥攖he IED become Gaia, or Gaia as the ultimate in improvisatory explosiveness. Zooming in, the charged word 鈥渟avage鈥� relates to the 鈥渨ild鈥�, out of the Latin,聽silvaticus: 鈥渙f the woods鈥�. Savage ecology, then, goes to forest ecology, and so a certain combined de-territorialisation聽and re-territorialisation. To be sure, when Grove refers to聽arborescent strategies of fortress state craft, it鈥檚 practically to juxtapose managed and legible to other more labyrinthine tree-scapes.

Thus, the聽metaphorics聽themselves already regrow a thicket of non-knowing鈥攚here discovering new details, or finding out what鈥檚 happening, can be matters of bodily or imaginative migration and not of gaining a security clearance or deferring to an expert.聽鈥淓cology鈥�, for its part in this, stems from the Ancient Greek,聽oikos补苍诲听logos. Former term binding to the household, the latter to a putatively unifying discourse, a聽savage ecology, besides, then, being a聽forest ecology, is also a savage鈥攁蝉 violent, yet also as forest-like鈥�discourse on the home as well, indeed, as a聽discourse on the home as the forest, and it could even indicate an orderly forest household. Grove does discuss聽oikos as common core of 鈥渆cology鈥� and 鈥渆conomics鈥� (pp. 121, 131). Yet a missed reflection via logos would go to a surplus vibrancy and unsurpassable fragility of that which formats a household but never solves for its own polemicism. The expression 鈥�Savage Ecology鈥�, hence,聽certainly itself lends to explosions of thought that themselves teem with (de)composition.

Despite the woodsy title, when offering readers a lived-in feel for 鈥渋ncipience鈥� Grove鈥檚 exemplary landscape isn鈥檛 the forest鈥攐r the 鈥済rove鈥濃�攂ut a different scene of ignorance before excessive beyonds: the shore. Via Foucault, we鈥檙e asked to anticipate modern 鈥渉umanity鈥� 鈥渆rased like a face drawn in sand鈥� (p. 186). Later, before probing whether the sandprint 鈥渋rreversibly alters the pattern on the beach鈥�, Grove evokes an 鈥渆ssential experience鈥� marking humans as bearers of 鈥�thingness鈥�. 鈥淭ry鈥�, he poses, 鈥済iving up and allowing the cross-current of the ocean to drag you down shore鈥� (pp. 270-271). 鈥擬aybe there鈥檒l be no irreversible human alteration, regardless the over-representations of the Eurocene. And yet, even as certain ends of the world are arriving, embodied and poetic gestures can go on energising, encapsulating, and prolonging new intricacies and successions. To be sure, Grove鈥檚 argument having already put the 鈥渆mergence鈥� in 鈥渆mergency鈥�, a kaleidoscope of temporalities may already be felt to await transcription at the tips, and beyond the idea, of our senses. Thus, has the body buoyed by waves tired itself, or is it calming itself, in desiring to convey something else to other islands of experience? As Grove concludes in his own voice before pressing play on his postvision: 鈥淚 am experimenting with the role of the seer in order to push further into the metaphysical fallout of cosmic fragility鈥� (p. 280).

Grove writes of an 鈥渁cademy of refuge鈥�, a discipline of 鈥渄eviants鈥� (pp. 26-27). To this army of the Euro-unseen, Savage Ecology offers an immersive initiation: a book desirous that what Notley in her ceremony calls the 鈥渕achine I must be part of, causing planetary death鈥� be morphed 补苍诲听materialised聽into a school of life through the act of reading (2016, p. 110). With sources ranging from pop culture to military manuals via Mearsheimer and DeleuzeGuattari, the book lives large even in dreaming of lying low. A decision to sign-off鈥攂elow the remark about 鈥渕etaphysical fallout鈥濃�攚ith a call to 鈥�#DIFFERENTIATE #SPECIATE鈥� could, like priority lanes for 鈥渃are鈥� or 鈥渂ecoming鈥�, be deemed over-doctrinal (p. 280). But such an expression鈥攄oubling, multiplying, as a mission statement and as a plea or epiphany鈥攃ould as well resemble a movement of transforming-becoming. Landing readers in a聽thoughtscape聽designed for the rolling aftermath rather than in decisional anticipation of military and economic geostrategies鈥攁 scene in which expectations of the worst aren鈥檛 met by projects and projections of global betterment but by glimmers of 鈥淸lives] worth repeating鈥� in the transpiring struggle (pp. 26-27)鈥擥rove conspires to elevate the output of IR theory, and, more than anything else, its passion.

Savage Ecology: War and geopolitics at the end of the world by Jairus V. Grove. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2019, 368pp. ISBN: 978-1-4780-0484-4

For more about this book, read Michael Murphy鈥檚 to this book-review section.

References:

Evans B and Reid J (2014) 聽Resilient Life: The Art of Living Dangerously. Cambridge: Polity, 208 pp.

Haraway DJ (2016)聽*Staying聽with the Trouble: Making Kin in the聽Chthulucene.*Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 312 pp.

Notley A (2016)聽*Certain Magical Acts.*New York: Penguin, 144 pp .

Sloterdijk S (1987 [1983])聽Critique of Cynical Reason, trans. Eldred M. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 600 pp.