As someone who is very unfamiliar with ethnographies, the aspect of this reading that first struck me was the style and tone of writing. Rather than assuming the tone of a scientific research paper, this read much more like a novel and utilized a lot of visual storytelling. Specifically, the author’s descriptions of her experience in the forest on pages 13 and 14 paint a really interesting picture as the precursor to the first formal section of the book. As we continue to read more ethnographies throughout the semester, I am curious to compare the writing styles and levels of creativity each one exhibits.
In terms of content, I am very intrigued by the discussion of time and history as a function of progress. The author states: “The most convincing Anthropocene timeline begins not with our species but rather with the advent of modern capitalism…imagining the human since the rise of capitalism entangles us with ideas of progress and with the spread of techniques of alienation that turn both humans and other beings into resources.” (19) If we do not use technological progress as a reference point for time period differentiation, what else can we use? Is it possible to create a completely objective timeline of human history, or will all measures of time have some measurement error due to the way in which it is recorded?
Lastly, even though there is a general negative tone used to describe the idea of capitalism, the author seems optimistic that if we reframe our thoughts and slightly alter some of its rules, it can work quite well to progress a society forward. This is a much more positive view of capitalism than many other political scientists take, who sometimes suggest that capitalism from its inception was bound to fail and we must create an entirely different system from the ground up to truly institute meaningful change. As an economics major, I am curious to see if the author dives into the economic ramifications of a different form of capitalism and if this has been tested in other research/ethnographies.