Tuesday, December 12, 2017

Loren Eiseley: The Long Loneliness (from The Star Thrower)

Loren Eiseley
"The Long Loneliness"
an essay in The Star Thrower

The first two paragraphs of "The Long Loneliness,"  one of the essays in  The Star Thrower.


There is nothing more alone in the universe than man.  He is alone because he has the intellectual capacity to know that he is separated by a vast gulf of social memory and experiment from the lives of his animal associates.  He has entered into the strange world of history, of social and intellectual change, while his brothers of the field and forest remain subject to the invisible laws of biological evolution.  Animals are molded by natural forces they do not comprehend.  To their minds there is no past and no future.  There is only the everlasting present of a single generation--its trails in the forest,  its hidden pathways of the air and in the sea.   

Man, by contrast, is alone with the knowledge of his history until the day of his death.  When we were children we wanted to talk to animals and struggled to understand why this was impossible.  Slowly we gave up the attempt as we grew into the solitary world of human adulthood, the rabbit was left on the lawn, the dog was relegated to his kennel.  Only in acts of inarticulate compassion, in rare and hidden moments of communion with nature, does man briefly  escape his solitary destiny.  Frequently in science  fiction he dreams of world with creatures whose communicative power is the equivalent of his own.

Later in the essay, he introduces  the research of Dr. John Lily and his studies on the porpoise.  So far, we haven't been able to determine whether porpoises actually communicate as we do or whether they have simply evolved a complex signaling system with little or no flexibility.   Maybe, some day,  we will find that we aren't as alone as we think. What will it be like to encounter another sentient species in the universe?

I wonder if this sense of isolation has anything to do with the prevalence of talking animals and fairies and trolls and dragons and all sorts of talking creatures that don't exist.  Most cultures have myths and legends and tales filled with talking animals, some of whom actually exist,  while others are products of creative and imaginative minds..  Tradition has it that King Solomon owned a ring of power that enabled him to understand and communicate with animals.  


Eiseley's comments also resonate with much of SF.  Stories about aliens are very common in SF, and there's even a subgenre called "First Contact."    How will we communicate with them?  Or, can we?   And, what is behind the belief in UFOs so prevalent today?  Is that another sign of that loneliness?


In many SF tales of contact with aliens, it is often observed by someone in the story that this will be the most important event in human history.  Is it and why?

It seems to me that we as a species spend a considerable amount of time fantasizing about   communicating with other species, real or imagined.  In addition we also spend a lot of time trying to communicate with other species here on this planet and attempting to detect signs of communication out there among the stars.

Eiseley states, There is nothing more alone in the universe than man.  Is he right? 


16 comments:

  1. That existential angst has been with human beings since the dawn of time. Consciousness can be a living Hell for some people. Many people find coping mechanisms. Your point about SF and imaginary creatures makes a lot of sense. I suddenly recall Marianne Moore's line about imaginary gardens with real toads (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/poem/2009/06/marianne_moores_poetry.html). And I find myself being drawn like a moth to light to a book collecting dust on my shelf: A History of God by Karen Armstrong. Perhaps God is the most significant Rx for our existential angst and consciousness. To many, He is preferred over other options. Well, those are my meandering musings in response to your stimulating posting. Thanks for setting my mind in motion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. R.T., I agree, God is the probably the most satisfying solution for most people. Karen Armstrong's _A History of God_ has been on my TBR list for a long time. Thanks for reminding me of it.


      Ancestor worship? Perhaps that also might fit in here?

      Delete
    2. Yes, and I can see also how ancestor worship dovetails into belief in God (i.e., so many people in the Bible become objects of worship).

      Delete
    3. R.T., and in one sense, they become surrogates for us, communicating with the Other in our place.

      Delete
    4. Fred, I guess my main surrogate has been Job; I’m essentially an OT creature, and the NT, without surrogates, comforts me and makes me uneasy at the same time

      Delete
    5. R.T., I'm also more interested in the OT.

      Delete
  2. I am not sure if I can anwser Eiseley's question. But it does illustrate the strange place in the universe that humanity seems to be in. If we ever do contact extraterrestrial and intelligence it will of course change this question. It will change so much.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian, agreed. Being able to communicate with another species will be an eye-opener, I suspect--in our similarities (if any) and in our differences.

      Delete
  3. Hi Fred. I don't believe man is ever alone in this life time. We are always with God whether we are aware of Him or not. I do think, however, afterwards, those who don't want to be with Him, will be allowed to get their way.

    Nevertheless, there are a lot of very lonely people on this planet and people should reach out to each other more. We're too self-absorbed. I know I am guilty of this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sharon, Yes, belief in God does seem to be the most prevalent solution to the problem.

      If God has no beginning and no end, how can God understand the feelings of those who know they have a beginning and an ending?

      Perhaps that is why we still search for the Other--in fiction and science.

      Delete
    2. If God is omniscient and He came to earth to live life as a human so he was tempted and suffered as a human He is capable of understanding they very people He created, don't you think?

      Delete
    3. Sharon, you say "if." If it didn't happen, than what can I say? If it did happen, then not being omniscient and human at the same time, I cannot comment on the depth of understanding that may exist. It is clearly beyond my capabilities.

      Delete
    4. A man said to the universe:
      "Sir I exist!"
      "However," replied the universe,
      "The fact has not created in me
      A sense of obligation."
      Stephen Crane

      Delete
    5. I meant "if this is true, then this must also be true".

      Romans 1:20.

      Delete
    6. R.T., chuckle. . .

      I think Crane got it exactly right. Others differ, of course, but that's my POV.

      Delete
    7. Sharon, then ignore the first part of my response.

      Delete