There is something about trees that sets some of the male species off. I remember going for a walk in the bush with a group including two boys who picked up sticks and slashed at the trees while the rest of us wandered along. At the time it seemed to be “just what boys do”, but I wonder now if there isn’t more to it. The defoliation that continues to be commissioned by industry in parts of Asian countries and, earlier, in our own Australian history appears to only relate to what is in front of their noses.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
We are intelligent, far thinking and responsible, aren’t we? But when it comes to trees, men in particular seem to be overwhelmed with excitement. Chop chop, slash and burn for money, to prevent bushfires, power and its OK because people need jobs.
The thinking is simplistic – particularly in the case of climate change deniers – as ancient forests are plundered.
The smoke from fires in Asia becomes a pollutant that no-one seems to care about. It creates immediate and long-term damage to people and the planet, but who with enough power cares?
When you look at ye old England, the wealthy at least planted great forests, and in many countries round the world there is a history of commitment to trees that have supported summer use and winter beauty.
But, as some of us get even more hideously greedy, propped up by ignorance, I go back to my images of boys who slash because they are boys.
I don’t have the answer to any of this. I can only really talk about symptoms. And the crux of it all locally is that there appears to be a war between electricity provision and trees, so trees are cut and disfigured for our summer safety. And true, that is one solution. Sadly, it is a violent, ugly defacement of old trees planted before our time probably/possibly in remembrance of the fallen.
So, the trees look disabled because they are and they have been massacred on command from someone who is the servant of an authority that appears (in my opinion) to make decisions in a vacuum. Is there a possible alternative? Does it cost? Of course it does? Is it worth it? Yes!
Put the electricity underground in public areas near trees of great worth. Stop slaughtering our visual environment with chopped up trees and buildings, commercial or otherwise, that interfere with views of natural assets. We can offer an example of brave and sensitive values by changing our attitude so that money is not the only consideration.
And while we are there, we could think about why some people have the right to commandeer bits of land, then get approval to build and exclude views for others. Locals lose and eventually tourists will too.
If we had the guts, our children might thank us for not allowing visual pollution to ruin one of the prettiest towns around. Visual sophistication/understanding comes from education or experience.
In most parts of Europe, buildings have been built in amazing balanced proportions in materials that relate to the setting. They enhance the landscape and that’s one of the reasons so manny people want to go there. The most relevant feature of the living history of buildings in Europe is the way in which ordinary people grow up in beautiful surroundings in old and beautiful buildings.
This awareness, conscious or not, is mostly brought to new architecture (with the exception of some hideous high rise buildings) because people know what beauty is.
Unfortunately that is an education that many Australians have never had. What is cheap, practical, temporary and mass produced seems to be the standard now.
It is sad that we don’t even acknowledge early settlers’ houses with their gracious verandahs and proportions. We copy them and whittle them down to the lowest common denominator we can find and they become cheaper and more fake, because people cannot see what matters.
I am embarrassed on my return to Oz to see again the hectares of increasingly crammed, unrelenting poorly designed housing built on cleared land without consideration of beauty.
