Fire Language: how our words shape landscape decision making
The beginning of post-fire regeneration at Moffat Falls
Agriculture currently dominates 38% of landscapes worldwide (Foley 2011; Massy 2013; Zhang 2007). This is such a large portion of land that planetary systems cannot continue to function unless agriculture is an ecologically vibrant and regenerating sector. Unfortunately, society has “simplified agricultural systems in ways that are having alarming consequences on the health of people and landscapes” (Provenza 2008, pp. 277-8). This degeneration is contributing to planetary breakdown (Campbell et al. 2017). If it is not resolved, we will continue to see fall-outs not just in the environment but in social-political and economic systems. This is because human society functions within, and as part of, the global ecology. The earth will dissolve beneath the weight of our perpetual gluttony, if we fail to recognise this truth.
The plight of landscapes goes unseen because we have mostly lost the ‘ecological literacy’ required to read them. We may not have ever seen our landscapes functioning as healthy ecosystems. Perhaps we are almost entirely removed from living landscapes. When we view a paddock that has a single improved pasture radiating a vibrant green, the majority of people delight in it. Without that capacity to read landscapes, a person’s perceptions are easily manipulated by societal norms, traditions or corporate interests. You will see what you have been trained to see. As such, you may unquestioningly correlate green pasture with healthy pasture. But, do you question the pasture’s diversity and density? Does the soil retain water? Are there fungal displays? Do you see evidence of the tree belts that once littered this place? Or stop and listen for the birdlife, and realise there is none? Is that because there is no insect life? If we do not observe and question our perceptions, not only can we no longer recognise disease but likely we will mistake it for beauty.
The way each person, and each society, perceives landscapes is fundamental to ecological health. In the Anthropocene, the vitality and resilience of landscapes exists as a manifestation of human decision making. What happens in our mindscapes manifests physically in our landscapes. However, our decision making is not impartial to manipulation, is never objective and is unconsciously influenced by conceptual realities. In particular, through language. If we wish to think and act differently, we must speak differently. “One can only say with a given language what the language permits” (Maturana & Varela 1980, p. xiii). In human worlds, nothing occurs that is outside the influence of the language we speak, and the way we speak it. It shapes how people conceptualise their reality and as such influences their actions. One particular linguistic device worth focussing on is metaphor.
What happens in our mindscapes manifests physically in our landscapes.
New metaphors can create new reality (Lakoff & Johnson 2008); or they can perpetuate a degenerative norm. Former fire Chief Greg Mullins said of the 2019/20 Australian fires; “I've been watching the enemy for 50 years now. The enemy is geared up … it's like [the enemy's] suddenly got nuclear weapons.” Mullins told the commission that, “climate change was the enemy.” This was echoed by another former fire Chief, Lee Johnson. He said that we are “fighting a climate change war.” Johnson went a step further suggesting, “national military-style training” to deal with the, “locality of battles in a greater climate change war.” He proposed a, “national command college that teaches … the strategy of dealing with very large-scale battles.” These metaphors are not unintelligible. They are coherent depending on how you perceive the world. Our farm in northern NSW Gumbaynggirr Country, suffered immeasurable damage from the fires. When that wall of smoke and flame lifted over the horizon, there was an overwhelming sense that we were bracing for ‘battle.’ But ask yourself, what is the consequence of treating ecological systems, that are in distress because of human actions, as if they are a nuclear enemy? To fight and destroy the environment is to fight and destroy ourselves. Human beings are in no way separate from the natural world. We are also an ecological system in distress, intertwined and nested within other distressed, living systems. Let’s not lose our peripheral vision. This approach has narrowed foresight; no longer can we see the potential for ecological reconciliation (Graham & Bartel 2017). Instead, we only see the ‘enemy.’
2019/20 fires at Moffat Falls
The unravelling of ecological, social and economic resilience will be exponential if we take such a reactive stance. However, compare the above metaphors with those of Indigenous land managers who take a proactive approach to the wildfires. Victor Steffensen, Indigenous fire practitioner and author, says, “the only reason we are seeing all this degradation to landscape is not just because of climate change, but it’s because of bad management.” This narrative already demonstrates a shift. Climate change is no longer the ultimate villain, human neglect shares responsibility. This is mirrored by the words of Glenn Wilcox, CEO Bega Aboriginal Lands Council, when he says, “wildfires, you can view them as a natural phenomenon, or you can see them as a man-made phenomenon; I’d suggest the latter.”
Steffensen makes the point that the western mentality or regime for managing landscape and fire is to, “just fly over the top and drop bombs on it.” This war-based metaphor perfectly supports the militaristic style of the West. It demonstrates how disconnected western approaches are from landscapes. Comparatively, the indigenous “cultural burns” demonstrate the interconnectedness of human and landscape identities. Steffensen continues that, “fire is a tool to look after land.” If it is not applied the right way, “it will turn around and it will bite us.” This metaphor paints the fires not as an enemy, but as a helpful, trusting entity that reacts negatively to poor treatment. He speaks of using fire for “manicuring the land” or “gardening in the country.” He calls it, “a spiritual thing.” Peter Dixon, who also conducts traditional burns, calls it “our cultural obligation,” and his colleague George Aldridge says, “my land is my mother, our mother. And she looks after us so it’s only right we look after her.” There is a deeper relationality in this approach.
Evacuating as the fire nears Moffat Falls
In preparing for future fires, it is not military-style training or national command colleges that Steffensen has on his mind. It is a different proposition. He says, “in the old times there used to be fire knowledge holders… we need to have these knowledge holders working within the mainstream.” There is a beautiful sensitivity in metaphorically holding knowledge. It speaks to ancient traditions of ecological literacy; of “getting to know,” “connecting to” and “becoming part of” country. As Steffensen says, “the fear of fire comes from taking people out of the landscape.”
There is a beautiful sensitivity in metaphorically holding knowledge. It speaks to ancient traditions of ecological literacy.
The metaphorical construction of these two examples reflect competing discourses. The former is born of capitalism and colonialism, and hence carries heavy militaristic symbolism. This is not a reflection of the individuals who have spoken these words, so much as it is a reflection of a society still gripped with colonial power. This power dynamic is clear in the metaphors as they reinforce independence, specialisation and control. They align with common conceptual metaphors that shape western thinking on nature. For example, conquering nature, nature as machine and God as divine lawgiver, whom bestowed upon humanity dominion over nature (Lent 2017). Even steward of nature is a metaphor that reinforces ideas of control (Lent 2017). With the rise of such metaphors, “working with and within ecological systems was replaced by subjugation and conquest” (Kimbrell 2002, pp. 3-4). However, the history of Australian wildfires also reflects this power dynamic. Euahlayi man and ANU researcher Bhiamie Eckford-Williamson made the point that, “in post-disaster commissions, Aboriginal people were ignored and not listened to and specific recommendations were not made to engage with Indigenous people.” Unless we take conscious steps in making this power inequality visible to ourselves, it filters silently into our perceptions from a young age.
2019/20 fires at Moffat Falls
This has huge ecological implications. As Dan Morgan, an Aboriginal Community Support Officer said, “it’s bad enough that our people have lost our own identity … but not only that, because of mismanagement … country’s losing its own identity.” Landscapes are allowed to evolve; they are complex, adaptive systems – so they will be ever shifting and dynamic. However, when this occurs at the expense of health and resilience, that is dangerous; if not simply heartbreaking. If diverse landscape perspectives are not heard, if they are not accepted as another form of truth – planetary systems will collapse. No amount of military training will prevent it.
Fortunately language is the gift of change-creation, if we are conscious enough to listen to it. “Thinking differently requires speaking differently” (Lakoff 2014, p. xiii). In order to reframe the way people perceive reality, you must first let your own subconscious beliefs bubble into consciousness. As Lakoff says, “when you argue against someone on the other side … you should say what you believe using your language, not theirs” (2014, p. xiii). Never revert to adopting language that does not truly express what you believe. Risk being misunderstood. Once you know what you’re saying and how, it is through repetition that it enters public discourse. Tragically, the vast majority do not have access to the educational resources necessary to be empowered by a vast vocabulary.
Never revert to adopting language that does not truly express what you believe.
We must pay attention to the use of language because certain ideologies are implicit within it. When we are making landscape decisions, these ideologies pull the strings. They are so deeply ingrained that they become accepted as the norm. Individuals, organisations and governments are empowered to rebuke the dominant, ideological narratives that control them if they are aware of language use.
References:
Thomas, K., Henderson, A., 2020, ‘Bushfire royal commission hears longer fire seasons making it harder for states to help each other,’ ABC News, <https://amp.abc.net.au/article/12426530?fbclid=IwAR1i4tk6gl8BZISe9qDvs0X6SuPBqHZNQYsuNAaZcSyyX_m-ieWnnZEfKeU>
ABC News In-depth, 2019, ‘Three things I know about fire management,’ The Drum, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ_En7x8tzU&feature=emb_rel_pause>
ABC Australia, 2018, ‘Indigenous fire methods protect land before and after the Tathra bushfire,’ ABC, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM72NtXxyLs&feature=youtu.be>
Davis, J., 2020 ‘Bushfire royal commission told Aboriginal people routinely ignored in post-disaster commissions,’ ABC News, <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-18/bushfire-royal-commission-indigenous-cultural-land-management/12368292>
Campbell, B.M., Beare, D.J., Bennett, E.M., Hall-Spencer, J.M., Ingram, J.S.I., Jaramillo, F., Ortiz, R., Ramankutty, N., Sayer J. A. & Shindell, D. 2017, 'Agriculture production as a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundaries', Ecology and society, vol. 22, no. 4.
Foley, J.A., et al. 2011, 'Solutions for a cultivated planet ', Nature, vol. 478, no. 10452,pp. pp.337-42.
Gammage, W. 2011, The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines made Australia, Allen & Unwin Crows Nest, Sydney.
Graham, N. & Bartel, R. 2017, 'Farmscapes: property, ecological restoration and the reconciliation of human and nature in Australian agriculture', Griffith Law Review, vol. 26, no. 2,pp. 221-47
Kimbrell, A. 2002, Fatal Harvest. The Tragedy of Industrial Agriculture. , Island Press, Washington DC
Lakoff, G. 2014, Don’t think of an elephant: know your values and frame the debate Chelsea Green Publishing, UK.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 2008, Metaphors We Live By, University of Chicago Press.
Lent, J. 2017, The Patterning Instinct, Prometheus Books, Amherst.
Massy, C. 2013, 'Transforming the Earth: a study in the change of agricultural mindscapes', Australian National University, Canberra.
Maturana, H. & Varela, F. 1980, Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realisation of the Living, Reidel Publishing Company Dordrecht, Holland.
Provenza, F.D. 2008, 'What does it mean to be locally adapted and who cares anyway?', J Anim Sci, vol. 86, no. 14 Suppl,pp. E271-84.
Zhang, W., Ricketts, T.H., Kremen, C., Carney, K., Swinton, S.M., 2007, 'Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture ', Ecological Economics, vol. 64, no. 2,pp. pp.253-60.