Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Natural

I respect Emerson. Very few people in the 19th century had time to give to the outdoors. This was probably because they were struggling to feed themselves and not living off their rich wives. Emerson had the time that others didn't. Doug put it to me "he just says the obvious stuff in a cool way", but such stuff was not obvious back then. It might be obvious to us because we live here, in Telluride.
Emerson's way of finding his self in nature, is the way I feel most myself. Opening up to the wide open areas. If I can escape, onto to the river, out into the snow. It isn't quite possible to become one with nature because the nature we see is just our perception of nature. The animals, the plants, the leaves all fit in and if we could remove ourselves from ourselves we could truly be a part of nature. Imagine that you had an out of body experience, you would see yourself hiking or floating along in nature, and you would be a part of nature. We belong in nature but it is our consciousness and society that forcibly removes us. We can become the transparent eyeball, see all without being seen. But we can't become immersed in nature with out losing our conscious perception of nature. We can't think about becoming part of nature, if we lose the thought process we become a part of nature. It is hard to explain, but you can't be a part of something if you think about becoming a part of if. As long as you are thinking, as long as you are conscious, you are yourself. The loss of thought is true entrance to nature.

1 comment:

  1. Victor,

    Thanks for this engaging and provocative post! I am most interested in your notion that consciousness (the very vehicle through which we perceive Nature) is at the same time a barrier between us and it (and yes, I do think that Emerson is proposing something along these lines). This raises an interesting question: if Nature seems so wonderful because of out "personal" experience of it, what does it mean if we have to surrender that 'personality'--that sense of 'self'--in order to appreciate it fully? Perhaps you can explore this question further in future posts.

    ReplyDelete