The very first Enviromental Studies class grabbed my attetion instantly. We started off covering key concepts and dates for the course and we finished off the class by watching part of The Lorax. The Lorax is a short film based on the popular childrens book written by Dr. Suess. For some reason it had never occured for me to really watch the Lorax from an anyaltical perspective and once I did it really opened my eyes. Firstly, the product the Oncler, the main character and represtentor of corporation, creates is called a 'Thneed'. The word 'need' is literally in the name of the product and that is all the Thneed is, something that consumer's veiw as a need. When Annie talked about the Thneed from the story she described it as being only valubable
…show more content…
We have this odd need to keep moving forward and keep making things better and better. In a book I read for one of my courses last year, Ronald Wrights A short History of progress, Wright discusses a concept called a progress trap. This is based around the idea that progress, to a certain regard, is false and that in the past civilizations have gotten to a point in progress where they just collapse. Such as the Easter Islanders, which are and example wright uses, who used all of their resources to build giant statues to pray to, ironically to bring more resources. Their statues got bigger and better as time went on until the last tree was cut and there were no more resouces left for there statues. This is like the last tree in the Lorax being cut for the last thneed, the Oncler and his community came to the end of the progress trap. One main question for me remains, why didn't couldn't the thneed have been sustainable? Why couldn't the Oncler have slowed his production rates and only cut a few trees at a time? The best answer I suppose would be greed. The truth for me is that the Onclers society mirriors our own, which is prehaps why the lorax film has been banned from so many places. Because maybe if people as consumers finally understand that unless carfully attended to nothing lasts
We have this odd need to keep moving forward and keep making things better and better. In a book I read for one of my courses last year, Ronald Wrights A short History of progress, Wright discusses a concept called a progress trap. This is based around the idea that progress, to a certain regard, is false and that in the past civilizations have gotten to a point in progress where they just collapse. Such as the Easter Islanders, which are and example wright uses, who used all of their resources to build giant statues to pray to, ironically to bring more resources. Their statues got bigger and better as time went on until the last tree was cut and there were no more resouces left for there statues. This is like the last tree in the Lorax being cut for the last thneed, the Oncler and his community came to the end of the progress trap. One main question for me remains, why didn't couldn't the thneed have been sustainable? Why couldn't the Oncler have slowed his production rates and only cut a few trees at a time? The best answer I suppose would be greed. The truth for me is that the Onclers society mirriors our own, which is prehaps why the lorax film has been banned from so many places. Because maybe if people as consumers finally understand that unless carfully attended to nothing lasts