What is Primitive?

 

Primitive was once a word used to criticize, disparage and dismiss things, people and ideas to whom we wished to feel superior. "Their tools are 'primitive'."  "It is a 'primitive' society."  "His understanding is 'primitive'."  More recently, and certainly in my case, for many the term has become one that inspires a sense of admiration, nostalgia even.  I aspire to be more primitive these days, as do many others. 

Obviously, the term "primitive" is open to interpretation.  Some would call the venerable Commodore computer primitive, though the thought of any computer being a primitive tool is laughable.  So I wanted to take a minute and see if I can't completely muddy up the picture for you.

 

In the beginning, (I know I plagiarized that from somewhere, I just can't quite remember where,) there were sticks and stones.  The original human types managed to fashion tools and implements from these simple resources.  Fire was added into the mix with, I would assume, enormous impact on the quality of life.  With these simple tools, and the animal and plant resources that they provided, humanity managed to populate the warmest, coldest, and most remote corners of the earth.  In fact, many historians believe that sticks and stones, and the objects manufactured from them, (cutting tools, spears, atlatls, and archery equipment), allowed early humans in North America to significantly reduce the large mammal populations, often called 'Megafauna.' Some of these likely became extinct because of their efforts.   These were not little whitetail deer and bunny rabbits, they were mammoths, giant ground sloths, and saber toothed cats.  Our ancestors did this, with not an i-anything between the lot of them.

 

Then came the various metal ages; copper, bronze, and iron.  Finally the machine and industrial developments.  Today could be considered a computer age.  An argument for copper and bronze ages being essentially primitive could be made, I suppose.  Rocks and fire simply combined to produce a new material.  But after that...?

My definition of primitive is anything that a resourceful human might create to survive with, if dropped naked in the middle of a wilderness.  Those naturally occurring resources close at hand being the only ingredients in the alchemy of survival.  This was enough for the vast majority of human existence.  We're talking hundreds and hundreds of thousands of years, if not millions.  The earliest shaped tools (stone) on record are associated with Homo Habilis, approximately 2.3 million years ago. (If Wikipedia is to be believed.  Sounds about right). 

If they could do it, then we can do it.  Sometimes, we should do it again.

 



Echo Archery

 

 

Very cool home business I wanted to promote.  Carson Brown at Echo Archery (here's the link  http://echoarchery.com/ ) runs a primitive and traditional archery shop (heavy on the primitive) out of his garage in Salem, Oregon.  Kind, generous man with a penchant for free advice.  His bows, arrows and other archery supplies are beautiful in a way that mass produced items simply cannot compare to.  I love the fact that he is focused on hand crafted tools that are more works of art than the term "primitive" would initially imply.  Carson offers many of his own creations, as well as items crafted by other primitive archers such as these obsidian points by master knapper, Scott Stanberry.  Please check out his website and visit his blog (which can also be accessed through the link above).

What is good about the past?

 

 

 

I used to subscribe to a magazine that I loved, that had the word "Primitive" as part of its name.  It changed owners a few years back and in the process made a number of other changes as well. 

Where once it had discussed blending with nature in order to achieve one's goals, it instead began to endorse manipulating nature to make them easier to achieve. Where once it had discussed utilizing natural materials in crafting tools, it started introducing more technologically modern ways of doing the same thing.  Where once it had highlighted the efforts of people who truly lived a lifestyle without modern conveniences, it began presenting stories about people who used modern conveniences to thrive in primitive environments.  "They do it in a primitive style" was the justification.  In general, while attention to primitive living skills was still evident, the trend was more and more away from that and increasingly about integrating into the magazine the same old modern "bigger, better, faster, more" way of looking at things.  An attitude that I was already super-saturated with in my daily life.  An attitude that the magazine had once been an escape from.  These may be subtle distinctions, inconsequential to most casual readers, but to me they were important, as discussion of "primitive" was what captured my imagination and compelled me to shell out the money for a subscription in the first place. 

 

I looked up the reasons for the change and it was claimed that the decision was financial.  Ads bring in money.  Nobody sells sticks, bone and rocks through a magazine.  I get that.  Not a problem.  So I wrote their editorial comments page and asked the community there "what would it take to keep the magazine 'primitive'?  How much would it cost?"  I even volunteered to pay double, the issue was so important to me, and asked if it would cost the subscribers more than that.  Responses from the readers and publishers ranged from supportive, to "what's the problem?" to downright nasty.  I was told to "get with the Twentieth Century."  (I asked this guy why he was reading a mag on primitive living skills.  I didn't get an answer).  I was accused of "intolerance" when I was sharing a preference.  It was suggested that if I didn't like an ad or an article, to just turn the page, or, better yet, to cancel my subscription.  (Sensible, but insulting).  Eventually the thread was deleted.  End of discussion.

 

So, okay, I went back to reading the magazine, stayed out of the on-line forums, held my nose at ads for GPS tools (nothing wrong with that, but it isn't primitive, nor as interesting as celestial navigation to me), and tried to focus on stuff I enjoyed.  To be fair, I still liked much of what remained.  Maybe not enough to be worth the price of the subscription, but I was so starved for that kind of information that I paid it anyway.  Until a few months after my letter to the editor a satirical article appeared in an issue of the magazine, featuring a debate between modern man and a bumbling Neanderthal that shared the name ('Griz') that I wrote the editor's page under.  "Ooga Booga" actually made it in to the column.

Now that really elevated the discussion.  I canceled my subscription.

I had to mull this over.  While I grieved the loss of my beloved escape from the Twentieth Century, there seemed a disconnect between how many readers and the publishers of the magazine could celebrate the spirit of people who lived prior to the advent of modern technology, and in the next breath mock and disparage the same people.  "Ooga Booga" indeed! To those who actually study the anthropological record, Neanderthals were awesome!  Well, to me they are...except, when they're not.  I think that herein lies the answer to this disconnect.  Let me explain. 

Part of why I call this blog "Pro-primitive" is that there are, and were, pro's and con's to living in every era of human existence.  "The good old days" weren't always so good.  Neither is every modern advancement somehow intrinsically superior to how things have been done before, despite what expensive marketing campaigns may tell you. 

Neanderthals left behind skeletons with significantly thicker bones than modern humans, with enlarged attachment points to support huge musculature.  These people were physically powerful, fit individuals.  Something about their lifestyle made this true for them. 

They also rarely lived past the age of 30.  And disappeared from history.  Something about their lifestyle made that true as well.

Today, instead of shaking the water off my lettuce when I rinse it, I can put it in a 'Salad Spinner', pump that sucker a few times, and completely eliminate that unsightly little after-dinner puddle in the bottom of the salad bowl.

Even if I am obese, never go outside, smoke every day, and suffer an unfulfilling job for years on end, I will still live well past 30.  Something about my lifestyle makes that true for me.

At the risk of being painfully obvious, what if we tried to combine those elements that made the Neanderthals such amazing physical specimens, with the modern elements that allow us to survive two and three times as long despite our best efforts to kill ourselves?

In order to do this we need to look at the past with an open mind.  We need to stop the adolescent temptation to reactively disparage people and ideas that we don't understand, and use good judgment about what they have to offer, without being judgmental when we choose differently or disagree.  The Neanderthals, and other people from the past, are part of our history, our relatives going farther back than we can imagine, our grandparents.  We have built upon their discoveries and hardships, and without them we would not be what we are.  They still have much to teach us. 

Oh, yeah, before I go...

                                                                        "Ooga Booga!"

 

 



A Plug for Backcountry Hunters and Anglers

I wanted to take a moment to plug an organization that I admire greatly.  It has been both a relief and an inspiration to find that there is a group of people working to promote hunting, fishing and land conservation values that make sense and aren't filtered through the political blender first to make sure some talk show host or special interest group won't be offended.  I wrote a piece for their blog, and because I'm feeling tired and lazy today I am going to add it to mine.

Here's the link.  Please visit and consider joining.    

www.backcountryhunters.org/

Bridging the Gap

It has been a long time since I put words to paper regarding my passion for wild lands.  However, my mind has never stopped wondering at Nature’s devalued status in our society, nor has my heart stopped breaking from the relentless destruction of wild places in the name of this or that political or financial objective.  For a while, I have felt ‘alone’ in my concern.  There is an essay in this blog regarding stewardship of lands, in which the author states that he often sways between wanting to save the world, and wanting to savor it.  Long ago, a younger, idealistic and more energetic version of myself lost heart and stopped trying to save the world in order to focus almost exclusively on savoring it.  Wilderness, especially then, is a refuge for me, as it is for so many others.  It was the antidote to the sense of being alone that trying to save the world had given me.   My thought was “better love it while you can because it will be gone soon.” 

I surprised myself the other day with the strength of anger that I experienced when an older friend of mine, who himself is no fan of “tree huggers,” spoke those same exact words to me.  With resignation in his voice he said “better enjoy it while you still can.”  As though the destruction of what I loved most outside of my family and God was a foregone conclusion.  As though it were the last piece of pizza in the pan, and it’s ‘everyone for themselves.’ The sense of betrayal and disgust that I felt toward this person I respected and I looked up to as one who actually has the experience and influence to make a difference, was, truly, unfair.  What I actually felt was a sense of disgust for myself.  I had betrayed my own values by giving up and, whether it is a lonely journey or not, I have a responsibility to protect what I love, and a responsibility to defend that which cannot defend itself.  When we as humans apply these same principles to our families, I believe anyone can understand this feeling of responsibility. 

So I am putting words to paper again, and while I am reclusive by nature and dislike the idea of putting myself out there in the face of the scorn and ignorance surrounding this issue, I am once again choosing to become involved in a direct way.

Part of my sense of being alone has been due to my being both an avid hunter/fisherman, and a devoted “tree hugger.”  I have found that despite the obvious common ground, (maybe I am the only one who sees it), traditionally these two groups have been at odds with each other.  The one asks “How can you kill what you love?”  They envision Elmer Fudd, and heartless, thoughtless machismo as the stereotype of the ‘hunter,’ and then paint the rest of us with the same, scornful brush.  The other disdains what seems a tendency toward over-dramatization.  They see young, inexperienced, over-educated and elitist blowhards who are willing to take their views to extremes; destruction of property in the name of “protest,” the dangerous spiking of trees, and the (admittedly mutual), demonization of those who disagree.  Both of these stereotypes are grounded somewhere in truth, but truly miss the boat.  The result, as I see it, is that both are less effective in achieving their goals.  On bad days I see this as unforgivably stupid.  On good days, it’s a tragedy that sucks the energy out of people with the heart and the will to make a real difference.

BHA is a ray of hope for me, and, I believe, for many others.  While I would not presume to know the minds of those who had the courage to begin the organization, it appears to have the potential to provide a bridge between these aforementioned groups.  Maybe not for the small portion of extremist views on each side, who utilize disparagement and blaming as their only tools for change, but for the vast majority who are ruled by common sense, kindness, and reason.

As an organization, BHA appears to understand the nearly religious nature (some would say precisely religious nature) of back country living for those who hunt and fish.   A person who actively participates in the activities that were at one time necessary for our species’ survival understands his or her own connection to Nature in a manner that the typical Nature observer simply cannot.  That is not to say that those who love the natural world and choose not to hunt or fish have a lesser connection.  It is just different, but no less powerful and important. 

There also is acknowledgment within my experience of BHA that without the committed stewardship of the land that the environmentalist movement also champions, the undisturbed wild lands that these outdoor activities require to maintain the full integrity of the experience will disappear. 

 Finally, there appears to be awareness in BHA that the true threat to these activities is neither the environmentalist, nor the outdoor sportsman, but those who make no connection to the environment except as a means to make money.  Or, as in the case of unrestrained ATV use, those who see the wilderness as their personal playground and have little concern for the impact of their recreational activities.  These attitudes are not evil, but do seem ignorant and short sighted.  Unfortunately, because money buys power and the attention of the powerful, these attitudes are more clearly represented in government, where policy decisions are made, than the perspectives of those who see the value of lands in their natural and unaltered state.  I do see wealth in what is left alone.  I see a spiritual value and experiential richness, which is not the kind that you can spend, or consume, or even summarize in the cost/benefit analysis model that we currently attempt to cram every possible scenario into these days.  The kind of wealth that is substantial and precious, nonetheless.  With a few exceptions, the business community rarely gets it.  Nor should we expect them to, as their bylaws typically require that they do what it takes to maximize profit for their shareholders.  Neither does the urban based politician get it (usually), who identifies success and stability with “growth,” often at the expense of wild areas.  If nothing else, BHA gets it. 

As I have been a part of both sides of the issue (sportsman and environmentalist), and have seen both moderate and extreme views on each side, I would like to acknowledge the best, and the worst, in each. 

Where I reside, aside from the clear cuts, nobody treats the forest worse than the most ignorant members of the hunting community.  To those who dislike us already, it is not the ethical hunter that is noticeable.  It is the hunting slob; who leaves garbage around overused campsites, or drives off-road vehicles at high speed in places that are not capable of handling the impact, or treats the wildlife that they hunt with casual indifference and disrespect.  (I am reminded of an ad I saw recently that states “Nature looks best when mounted on my wall”).  This “Whack ‘em and Stack ‘em” mentality is the dark side of a community that also contributes more wildlife dedicated financial assistance, through a self-imposed tax, than any other group in the US.  Living inside of the hunting community I probably see more problems with it than even the anti-hunter does.  But I also see the good will, the positive intentions, and the traditional values that in actuality are more like the environmentalist values than not.  This I believe is true because they are the values of good people in general, whether hunter, environmentalist, or neither. 

I went to college at a school that touted itself as “for the environment.”  While there I saw the full range of what you might expect from young, impressionable and idealistic students at such a school.  I saw the PETA folks in the student lounge, shaming those wearing leather and completely intolerant of even polite disagreement.  I met the folks who took pride in “monkey wrenching,” an illegal activity that gives thrills, satisfies a need for spiteful revenge, and provides a false sense of achievement to the people who partake of it, but is essentially polarizing and fuels negative attitudes and labels such as “tree huggers” and, “eco-nazis.”  No one who uses or thinks in these terms is inclined to interact politely with those to whom the labels are applied.  And yet if this is all we see in the environmentalist movement, we would again completely miss the boat.  In college level environmentally and ecologically focused classes, we learned about Teddy Roosevelt, John Muir, Aldo Leopold, and Gifford Pinchot.  These are the same icons of outdoor living and conservation discussed in many hunter safety courses throughout the states.  I met teachers who made a point of introducing students to cattle ranchers in the Southwest, an area embroiled in conflict over grazing impacts and wilderness values.  This allowed for some incredible meals, warm interactions, and experiences of awestruck respect, witnessing the tenacity and love for nature demonstrated by those same ranchers.  Their generosity toward a bunch of punky twenty-somethings alone was enough to change perspectives for the better.  So even within the halls of the institutions that identify as “for the environment” there is an understanding of the importance of knowing both sides of an issue before developing an opinion.  And there are those who understand that mutual consideration is a principle that extends beyond simple disagreements over the details.

The point is, good people exist in both arenas and demonstrate respect for each-other, themselves, and the world we share.  Through this letter, I hope to inspire those good people on both sides of the issue to begin a conversation with each-other, rather than letting the fringe elements create the paralyzing gridlock of anger and shaming that prevents positive movement.  The hunger in our nation for resources and financial gain does not rest, and will not pause to wait for us to get our acts together.  Without guidance and input from those who care about backcountry we are in danger of losing untouched and wild natural areas that cannot be replaced.  This is a tragedy I don’t want my children to have to experience.  Thank you for your time.

 

(Originally published in BHA's Backcountry Blog.  Link below.)

http://www.backcountryhunters.org/index.php/backcountry/adventure-blog