We cannot help regarding the phenomenon of Greta with wonder, fear,
amazement, and respect. For in her the spirit of modern childhood
is profoundly, almost magically revealed.
Following a recent post, someone who identifies as a practicing Christian and environmental activist writes quoting scripture in support of Greta Thunberg: And a little child shall lead them [Isaiah 11:6].
I have to say, I'm always a little troubled by this idea of an infant saviour - even when it turns up in Nietzsche's Zarathustra. And with reference to the case of Miss Thunberg, it's a startling model of redemption she offers; one that denies people hope, deliberately spreads panic, and desires that the entire world suffers, as she herself has suffered, on a daily basis.
Addressing a UN climate conference last year, she virtually placed a curse on all their houses, as if she were less salvator mundi and more some kind of witch. Indeed, seeing how she's enchanted an entire generation and left so many world leaders - including the Pope - spellbound, describing Greta Thunberg as a witch seems entirely justified: she's like a Swedish Joan of Arc.
Addressing a UN climate conference last year, she virtually placed a curse on all their houses, as if she were less salvator mundi and more some kind of witch. Indeed, seeing how she's enchanted an entire generation and left so many world leaders - including the Pope - spellbound, describing Greta Thunberg as a witch seems entirely justified: she's like a Swedish Joan of Arc.
I'm not saying this to denigrate her, or dismiss her message. But I do think we need to exercise caution when dealing with charismatic individuals who claim to possess (or be possessed by) special gifts and who speak with absolute conviction, seeing the world as they do in stark black and white terms.
When Greta presents her arguments within the bounds of science, I don't have a problem. But when she offers us an interpretation of the facts that veers towards apocalyptic vision, then I have my concerns - for her and for all those who share her vision. Their love - for the planet, for humanity - becomes questionable and subtly diabolic, to borrow a phrase from Lawrence, exerting as it does a destructive force.
Women like Greta - and her mother - who campaign to save the world and save the future, may have kind hearts and the very best of intentions. But, underneath, there's something malevolent; an unconscious desire for revenge on those they blame for the crisis that afflicts them at a personal level. You can almost see it in their eyes. Still, this malevolence is just as necessary as superficial goodness - maybe more so, especially when it comes to exposing the world's own corruption and stupidity.
When Greta presents her arguments within the bounds of science, I don't have a problem. But when she offers us an interpretation of the facts that veers towards apocalyptic vision, then I have my concerns - for her and for all those who share her vision. Their love - for the planet, for humanity - becomes questionable and subtly diabolic, to borrow a phrase from Lawrence, exerting as it does a destructive force.
Women like Greta - and her mother - who campaign to save the world and save the future, may have kind hearts and the very best of intentions. But, underneath, there's something malevolent; an unconscious desire for revenge on those they blame for the crisis that afflicts them at a personal level. You can almost see it in their eyes. Still, this malevolence is just as necessary as superficial goodness - maybe more so, especially when it comes to exposing the world's own corruption and stupidity.
Like that other witch-child, of whom Hawthorne writes, Greta is a being 'whose elements were perhaps beautiful and brilliant, but all in disorder, or with an order peculiar to themselves'. We say she's neurologically diverse, or has Asperger's, a condition that manifests itself in all kinds of ways; depression, obsessive-compulsive behaviour, selective mutism, etc.
And again, it gives Greta a peculiar look in her eyes that is also Pearl-like: 'a look so intelligent, yet so inexplicable, so perverse, sometimes so malicious' that one almost questions whether she's a human child. Who knows what this brave but tormented sixteen-year-old will be like as a fully grown woman. I wish her well and hope she discovers a little peace and happiness; hope, above all, that she doesn't martyr herself to her own cause.
And again, it gives Greta a peculiar look in her eyes that is also Pearl-like: 'a look so intelligent, yet so inexplicable, so perverse, sometimes so malicious' that one almost questions whether she's a human child. Who knows what this brave but tormented sixteen-year-old will be like as a fully grown woman. I wish her well and hope she discovers a little peace and happiness; hope, above all, that she doesn't martyr herself to her own cause.
See: D. H. Lawrence, 'Nathaniel Hawthorne and The Scarlet Letter' (Final Version, 1923), Studies in Classic American Literature, ed. Ezra Greenspan, Lindeth Vasey and John Worthen, (Cambridge University Press, 2003). Quotes taken from Hawthorne's 1850 novel can be found on pp. 93-94.
Note: The lines underneath the image of Greta Thunberg are paraphrased from Lawrence (writing of Pearl) in the First Version (1918-19) of the above essay, SCAL, p. 252.
For a sister post to this one on Greta as Pippi Greenstocking, click here.
Note: The lines underneath the image of Greta Thunberg are paraphrased from Lawrence (writing of Pearl) in the First Version (1918-19) of the above essay, SCAL, p. 252.
For a sister post to this one on Greta as Pippi Greenstocking, click here.
Fascinating, ambiguous and troubling post to accompany - rather fittingly - a fascinating and troubling young woman!
ReplyDelete1. I wonder what contemporary witches/Wiccans might feel about GT being dubbed as one of them on grounds of her perceived hint of diabolism - some might say it's like the Salem trials all over again, puritanically seeking out witchy traces in women whose faces or agendas 'don't fit'. (Of course, DHL had his own prejudices, fears and spiritual anxieties here too - conveniently projected onto his literary characters.)
2. Was Joan of Arc really a 'witch', as her detractors insisted? She was a soldier, a heroine, a mystic, and a likely visionary. Indeed, what, exactly, does it mean to call anyone a witch and why is it necessary - unless one is secretly a Christian and has some notion of untainted godly goodness to defend?
3. It's a distortion to say GT has preached a gospel of hopelessness (though, if she did, she would be in broad agreement with major scientists such as James Lovelock, whose Gaia hypothesis has - whether some like it or not - gained significant acceptance in contemporary ecoscience).
What she has actually said is 'until [we] start focussing on what needs to be done [...] there is no hope', but that 'it is still not too late to act'. What's required, in Thunberg's fascinatingly synchronistic metaphor vis-a vis the culture trauma of Notre Dame, is 'cathedral thinking'. What she rails against, that is to say, is not hope per se, but what she calls 'false hope' - comforting adult illusions designed to deceive all of us by denying climate change (and human beings as its stupid and seflish catalysts) and the implications for both human and non-human life - at least some parts of which almost all of us cherish.
Aye. 'Malicious', 'malevolence', 'witch', 'martyr' - for heaven's sake, it's called Lawrentian 'wrath'!
ReplyDeleteI don't think she's a saviour or a witch. She is someone completely frustrated with the inability of the current political system to do anything. If we must centre on a negative, she's a puppet or figurehead for a movement that's become conscious of the environment because David Attenborough has switched from the BBC to Netflix. I'm glad she's doing something instead of just taking it, just as I'm glad you write these contrarian posts instead of just accepting the latest poster girl.
ReplyDelete