Tag Archives: Casey

Week 15 — We Are Mermaids

Posted on by
1

This week’s poem, ‘We Are Mermaids’ by Stephanie Burt was super epic. Upon my first reading, I believe the author is trying to say to simply live your life on your own terms and do what makes you happy. In the first stanza, Burt compares the salt of human tears to the salt of the ocean, and in the second line relates both to the concept of sadness, but without sadness there would be no space for happiness. The third line goes on to relate the ocean to birth, which is typically a pretty incredible and happy time in someones life. On top of that, if we trace back the origin of the human race, it came out of the water a long time ago. And to further that, animals are constantly being birthed in the ocean every second of every day. To really hammer in this comparison, the ocean is often referred to as mother nature, which again relates back to the idea of birthing and motherhood. One part that got me super stoked was the part about the thermophiles. Although not entirely the same, it made me think of the extremophiles that we saw living in the radioactive waters in Sirenomelia. The introduction of thermophiles in this poem relates to the idea of being different, and being different does not mean bad, it really just means different. It goes on to say that these thermophiles live in the ocean too, and inhabit the same big old Ocean that mermaids, sharks, and all other aquatic beings do as well. “They are both predators and prey” (Burt, Line 19) means although they are different, they still fit in and actively participate in the food chain. And to be completely honest, if they didn’t exist it would throw off the balance of the food chain in the ocean. “You don’t have to be useful. You are not required to come up with something to say” (Burt, Lines 21-23) reinforces the original claim I made that this poem is about being you for the sake of being you and being happy with that decision. I think she is trying to say that you don’t have to conform or always have an idea, it’s simply okay to be who you are.

Final Proposal — Essay Thesis

Posted on by
Reply

Studying mermaids in Christian Literature, Barnum’s Feejee Mermaid attraction, the cultural influence of ‘The Little Mermaid,’ and Starbucks’ marketing tactics exemplifies the concept that marketing and Literature are one and the same. Christian allegories of mermaids resembled a physical embodiment of lust and temptation, while Barnum capitalized on the Feejee mermaid as a source of exotic entertainment. Similarly, ‘The Little Mermaid’ shaped social norms and values in young American girls, while Starbucks utilizes a mermaid as its brand image to symbolize indulgence and desire, all of which reflect the blurred line between marketing and Literature.

I think I kind of say the same thing twice but struggled to do it all in one sentence without it being a crazy run-on sentence, not sure if I should remove the first sentence or find a better way to combine it all.

Blog Post Week 14 — Chapter 5

Posted on by
1

This week I was drawn to chapter 5 of The Deep. I think it was interesting seeing Yetu’s interaction with humans, or as she calls them, “two-legs”. I found it intriguing the way that Yetu described the humans, however considering that she is an aquatic being, it makes sense that it is an ocean-centric vision. She described their hair as “large chunks of coral” (Soloman, 71). I believe this is important to note because it fully shifts the perspective of the reader outside of their human, terracentric perspectives of the world. The next part that stood out to me was the part about a war between the wajinru and humans. The book states, “Water erupted from the sea and flowed onto the surface. A war? The ocean war? The wave war?” (Solomon, 72) I believe it alluded to a huge tsunami, but claimed that it was intentionally caused by the wajinru as an act of sabotage. I’d be curious to know more about what sparked the war between them; could it be a sustainability related topic, like pollution or overfishing? Nonetheless, I am curious and hope we find out later in the story. 

The next part that stood out to me was when Yetu thinks, “Everything would be all right now that she was free” (75, Solomon). I think this is almost funny because it sounds like a foreshadowing of the trouble on the horizon. I can’t necessarily relate to being physically freed from somewhere, but whenever I think something like that or that everything will be alright, it is usually the start of utter chaos for me. I feel like it’s one of those things you don’t say as to not jynx it, but who knows we will find out as the story unfolds. Kinda going back to the first part I mentioned her describing people in terms of the ocean is that she too views the ocean differently from above. The book states, “the vastness of the ocean looked so different from above, so much less comprehensible. […] Cut off from them, she had trouble making sense of who or what she was” (Solomon, 76). It literally goes as far as saying that her separation from the ocean has flipped her identity, which we also see her get into at the end of the chapter with her expression of what she feels her role as historian was. Another point is that she can recognize that from above the ocean can seem disinviting, and that her perspective from below looking up is an entirely different relationship with the water that most humans might have. 

Blogpost Week 13 – Aganju and Yemaja 

Posted on by
1

The reading I wanted to write about this week was ‘Aganju and Yemaja’. I found it particularly interesting and quite frankly depressing. The first part that stood out to me was in the first line that, “[t]he name Aganju means uninhabited tract of country, wilderness, plain, or forest” (Penguin, 168). This reminds me of our class discussion around the definition of nature, but again it is something that we have made up and created through the use of literature. I think it is something important to recognize, but at the end of the day each and every part of the world has been inhabited by some person or animal at one point in time; everything has been habited. However, I do find a large amount of beauty in the name, it resembles a sense of purity and beauty in the natural world. The second part of the story that I found interesting was the fact that Orungan means, “[i]n the height of the sky” (168, Penguin), which typically resembles a higher power similar to the Christian/Catholic belief in God being in the sky, or Zeus the god of the sky being the most powerful as well. However, Orungan commits a serious and awful crime in sexually advancing on his own mother. This is quite contrary to what I would believe a god of the sky would be portrayed as, but might serve as a reflection of different perspectives that I have grown up and understood in the west. What I also found to be particularly disturbing is that after the fact, he unveiled some weird Oedipus complex towards his mom, which is rather weird from my perspective. However, this might have been a bit more ‘typical’ in historic times as the idea of an Oedipus complex is quite old and to my knowledge, not necessarily socially acceptable in today’s day and age. The next part that I found a bit confusing was how if she was running away from her son, she fell backwards. I have fallen a million times while running and never have I been able to fall backwards, your momentum typically drives you forward and hence the idea of ‘eating concrete’. My confusion lies around the fact as to whether she stopped and fell backwards, or perhaps as he reached out he pulled his mother backwards, but either way I am a bit confused and curious as to if that confusion might mean or symbol something as I have realized it typically does. Although maybe this is just a simple misunderstanding or perhaps something that got confused in translation. 

Changing the Narrative Around Sharks

Posted on by
Reply

Casey Meyer

14 April 2024

Professor Pressman

Literature and the Environment: Mermaids

Changing the Narrative Around Sharks

Following the publication of the movie ‘Jaws’ in 1975 directed by Steven Spielberg, sharks have been notoriously known for their bloody, gruesome, and intimidating presence in the ocean. In recent years, scientific and statistical research has proven quite the contrary, with one beautiful piece of media by Hannah Fraser standing as one of the most influential works of art on the topic. The short film, Tigress, released in 2020 on YouTube and various news channels, depicts a mermaid dancing and swimming alongside the most deadly sharks in the world. This video was released in an attempt to bring an end to shark hunting and convince scared ocean-goers that sharks are not the threat that they have been made out to be through the use of costume choice, setting, and physical movements. This video encourages viewers that sharks can be friendly and in some cases, even cuddly and attention-hungry. 

Being that sharks can’t speak the human language, Hannah Fraser and her team have taken it upon themselves to fight on their behalf to protest shark culling in their community. Dressed like a mermaid and painted blue with an airbrush, Hannah demonstrates a respectful infiltration to the sharks home and habitat while maintaining a peaceful energy towards and from the sharks. In a setting unnatural to humans, Hannah demonstrates a lighthearted and positive attitude. This is done with the intention of demonstrating harmony with these beasts, and her sense of coolness simply reinforces the fact that they do not aspire to kill and hunt humans, and that shark attacks are rare and truly are unfortunate accidents. Another interesting aspect pertaining to clothing choice is the fact that she is wearing a black wig, airbrushed blue, and possessing mermaid paint strokes prompts the idea to step away from a terracentric perspective. This embodies a hybrid view, that although underwater it is still half-human which makes it more relatable to humans while still giving half of the respect to the ocean, and more importantly the sharks. Combined, the overall clothing choice was strategically selected to invoke feelings of unity and relatability in the viewers, ultimately with the hopes of swaying consumers into the concept that sharks are not as scary as they have been portrayed previously. 

With the use of six pound leaded boots, she dances alongside these great beasts. Had Hannah even wanted to, she would not be able to swim towards the surface, demonstrating her undoubted faith and belief that they were not attempting to hunt and eat her. To further reinforce that point, she is without a mask nor any protective gear, relying entirely on her team and trust in the process running smoothly as can be–without being bitten. In ABC news’s behind the scenes video, they mention that even one small nudging bite would result in death before they could even make it back to the boat. With such intense repercussions following one slight error, it makes the viewer wonder whether it was calculated beyond belief, or if sharks just might not be the human frenzy-eating monsters they have been depicted as for so many years in the past. Another important aspect of the setting in this video is that it could have been filmed in an aquarium or more controlled atmosphere where they could ensure full safety and have amenities for a bite had something gone wrong. Instead it is filmed at the bottom of the ocean in an area in which they chummed to draw as many sharks as possible. This means that the amount of sharks that showed up that day was unknown until they started filming, and that these sharks are as real as it gets. These aspects combined translate the idea that Hannah and her team’s faith in the sharks being harmless should be translated to the viewers as to lessen their fears around these animals. 

Another important aspect of this video is that Hannah Fraser–who on stage name is Hannah Mermaid–is underwater performing various dancing maneuvers. When one typically thinks of humans and sharks interacting, the humans are normally in full dive gear and very brief in their contact if they even touch the sharks at all. Another common way humans interact with sharks is with the utilization of cages or tanks, something the shark would not be able to penetrate with if a shark indeed were to attack. To further this, humans rarely interact with sharks at the bottom of the ocean floor, and especially not while they are dancing. Both chum and humans float, meaning that to perform this protest dance both would need to be weighted as to sink to the bottom of the ocean. To further this, the way that Hannah performed would not be possible on the surface nor somewhere in between the seafloor and surface. This again reinforces that she is in shark territory, and has full faith in not being attacked. Another important aspect of her doing an underwater dance performance is that sharks sense movement through their lateral line, and dance movements similar to hers would most certainly be detected by all of the sharks. Originally, Hannah had intended to wear a mermaid fin, but the day of the shoot decided against it as to not appear like shark prey and make an excuse for the sharks to eat her, ultimately disproving their overarching goal. Although lacking a tail, Hannah still resembled a mermaid, again proving that this was methodical and done with the intent of being fair to the sharks and proving that humans should have little to no fear of their presence in the Ocean that we share together. 

In conclusion, Hannah Fraser and her team have gone to extreme lengths to stop the misinformation being spread around sharks. Through the use of costumes, location, and dance routines, Hannah and her team have used the video ‘Tigress’ to convince consumers that sharks are not the threat they are perceived as, and to put an end to shark culling across the globe. In the years to come, it is important that sharks are treated with a new level of respect and appreciation in our oceans, similar to the way mindsets around whales have been shifted. Without sharks in our ecosystems, the entire balance could be thrown off, resulting in consequences mankind does not have the technology or ability to deal with. 

Blogpost Week 12 – The Water Will Carry Us Home

Posted on by
1

To be quite frank I totally blanked on work coming out of break but more importantly I wanted to still be able to understand what was happening in class tomorrow and I am glad I still decided to watch the video. Although I lack complete understanding of the short story, I thought that it was brilliantly put together and tells one incredibly powerful and dark story of our history. The eye displayed on the hand of the man with the key is a typical sign of wisdom, and the fact that he has a key attached to it (which unlocks the door) resembles the concept of unlocking hidden wisdom. In my personal opinion, I believe that knowledge is power, and the man with the hat possesses much of it. Furthermore, merpeople (and more specifically sirens) have been known to hold the secrets of the world, which tend to lead sailors off course. The idea that Omambala, the water spirit, will still serve as a guide and source of hope along this horrific journey is something to take note of. I am not sure if Omambala represents an afterlife, and an afterlife of wisdom, power, and understanding due to being killed along the journey or if instead, she resembles a choice to subject oneself to that alternative lifestyle, and as other merpeople convince others of the same fate that might have been better than what was waiting on the other side. In a nutshell I really have no idea but I am very fascinated by the entire video all around and am excited to hear other people’s opinions. Something else I found that spoke to me was the quote at 1 minute and 21 seconds, “[t]he water spirit Omambala brought us here. The water spirit Omambala will bring us home” (Tesfaye). I find this to be beautiful because it resembles something huge of hope. It seems to me like a resounding, unquestionable sense of faith and hope, something that I think I personally lack and envy; and the pure fact that it is a water goddess with wisdom and power makes it that much more attractive to me. I think I am probably at a similar level of confusion as the Sirenomelia video, but after having learned so much I have high hopes for the discussions we have about this one. Lastly, I think it was super cool that when the music stopped, the lady (maybe Omambala?), started building an earthy headset, and the second she put it on the music continued. 

Week 11 — Sirenomelia

Posted on by
1

After watching Sirernomelia for the first time I was thoroughly confused and remotely scared to be honest. I had a wide variety of mixed feelings and was surprised it didn’t show a mermaid until the latter half of the video. I wasn’t quite sure what I was looking at during the kaleidoscope scene, but I would imagine it was a satellite or a telescope of some sorts. This made me question what it has to do with mermaids or the video in general, which made me realize that the same level of fear and confusion I am feeling about these above-water shots of manmade structures is similar to how many people feel about the ocean. This goes back to what we were talking about last week in that so much of the ocean is unexplored and unknown, it is a foreign entity in our backyard that we don’t know much about. I believe this video was trying to instill this same mindset in the viewers, while at the same time relating that feeling to random man made structures that are above water; simply because it is unknown does not mean that it has to be intimidating. On the other hand, I felt like the ocean was portrayed as a bit scary, especially with the scene where all the water went black and looked like oil spilled (although I believe it was just editing). This reminds me of some of the old and original paintings we saw in class of the ocean being a scary mess that did not appear inviting. Being that I try to get in the water everyday I like to think of the ocean in a bit different light, but all things considered I am normally in much warmer water with more people and more marine life around me. Another thing to consider too is that although it’s cold, dark, and scary, there is obviously plant life existing along the structures there. I can’t confidently say whether it’s kelp or a type of algae, but either of those typically serve as the bottom of the food chain for larger fish and animals. This means that as barren as this undisclosed location seems, there is probably a much larger ecosystem at play that is not being captured in the film.

Week 10 Blog — Stepping Away from Terracentrism

Posted on by
1

This week I found both readings to be pretty interesting because I feel like I have taken classes on a variety of the oceanic topics pertaining to the currents, winds, the amount of energy each possess, and how together they can impact food chains, coastlines, and much more. The main points of these papers are to shift away from our land-oriented/terracentric perspective of history to be inclusive of (if not centered around) our oceans. I personally like this idea and mindset because when thinking of the past it prompts consideration for the future. As stated in the reading, this perspective shift has already started to reinforce and make way for trends promoting responsibility towards our oceans and impacts on climate. What was both reinforcing of this concept and personally empowering was when the author says, “[t]o capitalize Ocean is to challenge the conventional wisdom that the seas can be taken for granted. They cannot.” (Roorda, page 4).  When we take a step back and consider everything that has been happening with the history of our oceans we can see some incredible correlations relating to climate change. The ocean holds a vast amount of the carbon we emit and is supposed to to an extent, but when it captures too much it starts impacting the shells of many animals and creatures at the bottom of the food chain. This can then throw off what balance there is in the food chain and is all rather visible through studying oceanic patterns/trends. If we can encourage and pass on this perspective change to future generations, we can start proactively making amends to our lifestyles that are not conducive of a sustainable future which is what I believe the author might have been trying to prompt in the readers. One way or the other, I am on board and support this view!

Week 9 — AI Modeling an Eco-Friendly World

Posted on by
1

This week’s reading was super interesting to me and I found that I enjoyed the author’s approach in that they basically say here are the ways that we think are best to view/treat the environment and here are their drawbacks. They clearly stated in the beginning too that they are not out to destroy or dissect any bad ideas, it’s really just pooling what they believe are some of the best approaches. For my blog post, I want to talk about something that my roommate sent me off of reddit the other day and how it relates to this reading. I liked their introduction to explaining how environmental humanities will become a prevalent study in the near future. It reads, “Carolyn Merchant has argued that “a partnership ethic would bring humans and non-human nature into a dynamically balanced, more nearly equal relationship.” Such a new ethic requires a new narrative. This new story “would not accept the idea of sub-duing the earth, or even dressing and keeping the garden, since both entail total domestication and control by human beings. Instead, each earthly place would be a home, or community, to be shared with other living and non-living things” (Emerret, page 6). The other day my roommate sent me this link where someone asked Chat-GPT to “describe a world where the power structures are reversed. Add descriptions for images to accompany the text”. If you click on the link I would hope you are as baffled and interested as I am. It’s interesting to see in this world that we cohabit the environment with nature, opposed to the typical western approach of conquering the environment. Seeing cities and houses that look equally modern as they do ‘nature-ish’ is a wild sight, and in my opinion would be a sick world to live in. My only contingencies in this world is that for starters, I think it would be nearly impossible to get each and every person on earth on this same level of understanding and appreciation towards the environment, especially losing the emphasis on monetary growth in large corporations. Secondly, and what scares me the most, is a world that is predominantly run by AI. I think the concept of AI having no biases is super cool and could be extremely powerful, but in a nutshell someone has to create and train that AI model, and if fed with some level of bias it will inevitably surface in its decision making. But who knows, AI will continue to develop, peoples opinions around: money, positions of power, and environmental relationship could also be subject to change allowing room for this type of society in our world at some point in our future. If anyone checks out the link, let me know what you think! Is it a world you would want to live in? Is it a realistic future? 

Week 8 — Modern Day Frontiersmen

Posted on by
3

Although I have only read half of the reading thus far, I found the large portion of the text to be rather interesting. I have read a handful of Muir’s, Thoreau’s, and Roosevelt’s works from this time and it was cool to see a piece that incorporated all of their works together. I have found that I personally struggle to support both the industrial movements to attempt to overrule the land and the religious ideologies that came into place to protect our national parks/wilderness landmarks. I think it is great that through romanticism and religious ideologies that we were able to develop this appreciation for nature; it makes sense that the religious appeals were what worked for the people in this time period. However today, we still have these issues going on with large corporations attempting to tap into the resources of beautiful environmental landscapes but religious ideologies will not suffice in halting their activities (especially in other countries with different religious beliefs). On top of that, we have many US companies that are intentionally going to other countries to exploit labor and natural resources because it’s cheaper and not deemed illegal the way it is in the US. This plays on the concept of NIMBY (not in my backyard), which is nice to know that the states are protected, but doesn’t stop Americans from going elsewhere for resources, still prompting the question about how much we really care for our earth. 

One part that spoke to me was when the author mentioned views and actions towards the wilderness. It states, “[f]or them, wild land was not a site for productive labor and not a permanent home; rather, it was a place of recreation. One went to the wilderness not as a producer but as a consumer, hiring guides and other backcountry residents who could serve as romantic surrogates for the rough riders and hunters of the frontier if one was willing to overlook their new status as employees and servants of the rich” (Cronon, page 15). This speaks to me as I led ocean tours along the Palos Verdes Peninsula for many years. What frustrates me is that in this context, I would be deemed a guide for the hunters of the frontier, which is a humorous joke. I know those waters, landscapes, animals, and everything there is to know about that area. The people that I take out are not frontiersmen, they are typically wealthy people that have no appreciation for the ocean nor any understanding of the powers it has (until they take my tour). In this regard, I think it is ironic to say that the tourists flocking in with money are rough-riders. However, to play devil’s advocate, without wealthy individuals coming and paying for guides and tours, we wouldn’t have the money to protect and serve the environment the way we do. At the end of the day, I think I have a heightened sense of appreciation for the environment because I have watched some of my favorite places on earth get destroyed by anthropogenic activities. I struggle to understand another perspective that might attempt to destroy what I find has innate beauty simply because it wasn’t manmade.