Combining traditional and modern

The second set of quotes looks like an immediate contrast between ideas by the two authors. Abrams talks about traditional practices while Siebert talks of new ideas; however, it appears that Siebert understands that there had already been previous peoples that treated nature with respect. In his essay, Siebert includes quotes by Gay Bradshaw in which she says, "...live with wild animals like humans used to do" (537). Abram's quote enhances the view on what humans must do to return to "the way we used to live" with animals and Siebert just combines views on elephants to come up with a solution that may appeal to modern people, but be a solution because of the traditional ways of past humans.

Are Humans Animals?

As humans, we are well acquainted with the needs and capacities of the human body - we live our bodies and so know, from within, the possibilities of our form. We cannot know, with the same familiarity and intimacy the lived experience of a grass snake or a snapping turtle...We receive from them countless gifts of food, fuel, shelter, and clothing. Yet they still remain Other to us, inhabiting their own cultures and displaying their own rituals, never wholly fathomable (Abram 10-11).

The other part of our newly emerging compact with elephants, however, is far more difficult to codify, it requires nothing less than a fundamental shift in the way we look at animals and, by extension, ourselves. It requires what Bradshaw somewhat whimsically refers to as a new “trans-species-psyche”, a commitment to move beyond an anthropocentric frame of reference and, in effect, be elephants. (Siebert 537)

Even though a human is technically still an animal, we treat animals with disrespect as though humans are somehow better. According to Siebert, the only way to view animals as physical and psychological equals is to closely empathize with them. Siebert believes that as humans, we will have to completely change our way of thinking. On the other hand, Abram suggests that “[w]e cannot know, with the same familiarity and intimacy the lived experience of a grass snake or a snapping turtle”. Abram’s belief is that current mentality of humans’ cannot change as we have no way of communicating with other species, and consequently no way to empathize. Additionally, Abram poses the idea that animals “remain Other to us”, emphasizing by capitalization the notion that we are not animals.

Can we become elephants?

One of Siebert's main points throughout his essay is his call for us to become more like elephants. He wants us to develop an inter-species psyche. Abram's essay seems to imply that it will be impossible for us to do that. Abram believes that animals will also remain foreign to us and we can never fully understand their ways and culture. I think Abram's use of the phrase 'never wholly fathomable' is key. Abram implies that we can understand some aspects of animal culture. I think that Siebert and Abram would agree that there is no harm in trying to understand animals.

The Tale of Two Ideas

Within the third set of quotes between Abram and Siebert the concept of taking the mindset of another creature is brought up. Abram draws a line between humans and others. He talks about familiarity and intimacy with the animal mindset to imply that we can never fully connect to others because there is no possible way to understand the complexities of our own minds let alone another’s. This thought of differences is specifically shown with the capitalization of “O” in Others. By ‘others’ Abram means other creatures. He has made them their own proper noun, completely separate from humans. Siebert creates a comparison between humans and elephants and asks us to step into their shoes, and in effect think like they do. This idea is the exact opposite of what Abram is telling us is not possible.

By Abram capitalizing others he is showing shows a sign of respect towards animals, which shows that there is a complex nature to animals that are not “fathomable”. This makes it seem like there is something mysterious and majestic that humans are missing in the big picture. This is also what Siebert is saying towards elephants. Obviously people cannot be elephants, but if we put ourselves in their mindset, we may take on a different view of how the world works and how people and animals need to interact. This key allows us to understand more of how the world coexists as a single unit between the natural and modernized worlds.

Close Reading of Siebert and Abram

The way humans treat animals is an elephant of a problem and according the Charles Siebert the only way we can solve this problem is, in the case of elephants, by becoming elephants. Siebert is implying that we cannot understand other species unless we become them and them empathy. This contradicts what Abram advocates when he says “we cannot know, with the same familiarity and intimacy, the lived experience of a grass snake or a snapping turtle” (10-11). Abram’s choice of animals in significant because if we cannot become grass snakes or snapping turtles we cannot possibly become something as huge as an elephant. Perhaps the best course of action is a combination of the two. We can follow what Siebert implies and empathize with animals, but no matter how much we try we cannot hope to know everything about them as Abram points out.

Reciprocal Relationships

The traditional tribal shaman, I came to discern, acts as an intermediary between the human community and the larger ecological field, ensuring that there is an appropriate flow of nourishment, not just form the landscape to human inhabitants, but from the human community back to the local earth. By his constant rituals, trances, ecstasies, and "journeys," he ensures that the relation between human society and the larger society of beings is balanced and reciprocal, and that the village never takes more from the living land that it returns to it - not just materially but with prayers prayers, propitiations, and praise. The scale of the harvest or the size of a hunt are always negotiated between the tribal community and the natural world that it in inhabits. To some extent every adult in the community is engaged in this process of listening and attuning to the other presences that surround and influence daily life. but the shaman or the sorcerer is the exemplary voyager in the intermediate realm between the humans and the more-than-human worlds, the primary strategist and negotiator in any dealings with the Others. (Abram 5)

The other part of our newly emerging compact with elephants, however, is far more difficult to codify. It requires nothing less than a fundamental shift in the way we look at at animals, and by extension, ourselves. It requires what Bradshaw somewhat whimsically refers to as a new "trans-species-psyche," a commitment to move beyond an anthropocentric frame of reference and, in effect, be elephants. (Siebert 537)

On a quick overlook of these two quotes, the reader sees the similarity between both Abram's and Siebert's ideas. Both authors are talking about a relationship humans must have with animals, a reciprocal relationship; they give to the animals, and the animals give back. While Abrams includes all animals with the terms "landscape" and "local earth", Siebert is referring specifically to elephants. The most contrasting point between two quotes though is apparent upon closer inspection of the word usage. In the passage by Abrams, he uses words like "traditional" and describes the rituals and customs of how the Shaman abides by this "trans-species psyche," as Siebert would say, for readers to get an understanding of how old this has been in effect. Meanwhile, Siebert uses the wording "newly emerging," so it is clear that Siebert is arguing that this necessary reciprocal relationship has yet to spread. Taking Abram's ideas in context with the passage by Siebert, there seems to be a vast gap between the two cultures in discussion. Abrams is describing a closed off set of people, by bringing up villages only. Siebert's idea, while whimsically brought up by Bradshaw, is calling for widespread apprehension of what Abrams is describing of the Shaman; bringing it to light for a more westernized culture.

"A New Kind of Family"

“A New Kind of Family”

In “An Elephant Crackup?” Siebert describes the fabric of elephant society and how the elephant families and relationships work. In this specific passage, Siebert demonstrates a different kind of society- a “mutually benefiting interspecies culture”, in which humans and elephants regard one another with mutual respect and love. The word “mutual” is so key in the idea of “trans-species psyche” because both species really need to understand one another’s essence. They need to become sort of like a family. In this passage about the Sheldrick Trust, we see that the trust and sanctuary is essentially, a family environment. The fact that elephants come back to visit their allomothers, even bringing their children, creates a family web that bonds elephants and humans in a way that has never existed before. As humans, we have always been taught that “birds of a feather flock together”. These new human- elephant relations toss that cliché out the window and their existence proves that humans can, and must, adopt a new way of looking at animals- a “trans-species psyche”, for both species to heal. This word “healing” stood out to me because I feel that both species benefit from the Sheldrick Trust. Elephants get the attention they need and humans get a sense of humanity restored in them by helping these elephants. The “trans-species psyche” helps both species connect and realize that while their anatomies may differ, their spirits are more similar than anyone could have imagined.

A New "Interspecies Culture"

Despite the rise of violence in the Human-Elephant Conflict, Siebert notes that there are efforts to rehabilitate and release elephants back into the wild. Sheldrick Trust is a prime example, as he has helped over 60 traumatized elephants and “reintroduced them into wild herds”. His methods include having humans replace or become substitute allomothers. Bradshaw states that humans can now help heal the wounds of a species other than humans; these are the beginnings of a new “interspecies culture”. They are also supporting our two species co-existence. The Elephant Sanctuary’s human allomothers occasionally receive a visit from the rehabilitated elephants with their wild-born calves. Our progress in the new “trans-species psyche” is slow, but steady. The trauma that some of elephants have may never be healed, but we can work around it and come to an understanding with them.

Close Reading #1

In the given quote, the author points to the fact that, even though the human – elephant relationship has reduced over time, there is still hope to save it. Recent efforts by humans have shown encouraging results, as given in the quote. Researchers have studied the concept of anthropomorphism and based on it, they have used trauma therapy on elephants. People such as Gay Bradshaw have shown that elephant society and family life is in fact very similar to the human society. Thus, humans themselves have served as “allomothers” to young elephants, and it has proved successful as some elephants returned to their human allomothers. This little but positive effort shows how both humans and elephants can make a joint effort in improving their relationship. It is as simple as educating people worldwide about how to live peacefully with elephants. Thus, the human – elephant bond can hopefully grow gradually with time.

Close Reading

Bradshaw discusses that people and elephants can now form a new culture that will incorporate both humans and animals, and both groups will benefit from the union. The word union is defined in the OED as "the action of joining or uniting one thing to another or others". They will resolve their violent relationship by re-uniting. They will both have a sanctuary, safe place or a refuge. Also, Sheldrick Trust explains trans-species psyche. Trans species means some kind of idea that transcends or crosses species and psyche is a state of mind. It is the state of mind that crosses species. So, human and elephants need to understand their perspectives. Furthermore, people can help revive elephant culture by establishing a greater sense of safety and the need to build a peaceful relationship.

New Culture

In the quote Siebert makes the claim that through the rehabilitation of the elephants humans and elephants are making a new connection. The connection is mutual, not only the humans but the elephants can also feel the connection. Rehabilitated can be defined as "to reestablish the good reputation of one's name or character". This word is used perfectly in this quote because the good name of the elephants is being restored through the rehab. They are no longer being viewed as killers that can lash out at any time but gentle creatures who have much in common with humans, such as their families. All of this combined is causing a change in our relations with elephants. According to the passage "out on this uncharted frontier of the new trans-species psych".

Close Reading Assignment 1

Siebert points out that the elephant-human relationship is effectively being rebuilt by recent efforts from both sides due to an acceptance of each other in recent times. The human side has greatly helped the elephants by “[actively participating] in the healings of both themselves and non-human animals.” Humans have been recognized by elephants as a “human allomother”, a pseudo-mother, allowing for such centers like the Sheldrick Trust to successfully exist. Humans and elephants have therefore created a “mutually benefiting interspecies culture.” The success is only proven by periodic visits from the elephants released into the wild to the sanctuary where they were raised; some elephants towing their offspring to introduce to their “human allograndmothers”. The creation of these centers has greatly helped repair the relationship that is currently soured. However, what these centers have accomplished is hoped to only be a small fraction of what we will achieve in the future.

Close reading assignment 1: Elephants and Humans

Siebert supports the idea of being open minded about elephants and their culture and he gives an example that shows how effective it can be. The keyword in the opening sentence of the quote is “successfully” and by using the positive word, Siebert immediately gives his readers a sense of encouragement. The Sheldrick Trust, according to Siebert, has been very influential for elephants. The elephants that went through rehabilitation treat their caretakers as their own which, according to Siebert and other researchers, is very important. Bradshaw, a researcher, describes this phenomenon as “trans-species psyche”.

Siebert then quotes Bradshaw who says that humans’ acts of sympathy and empathy towards elephants is helping in “healing of both themselves and non-human animals”. Bradshaw calls this a “mutually benefitting” relationship between humans and elephants. This is something that early men used to practice in order to live peacefully with animals, but the idea was lost in the years with all the attacks on elephants. Siebert and Bradshaw believe that this is start of a new society in which humans and animals live in harmony.

Close-Reading assignment:How Humans and animals benefit from nature

Nature is a source of healing for both humans and animals. Elephants consider nature as their home and they are very free in that environment. People look at nature as a place of freedom and a place to look at the world form the outside looking in. When elephants go through rehabilition for their trauma they are in a different and sometimes uncomfortable in the confined environment for the sanctuary and learn alot in their rehabilitation ceneters and when they are let free back to nature they are able to teach their herd or other elephants what they learned.

Nature can also be a place for learning for animals as well as humans. When Bradshaw says "Now humans can participate actively in the healing of both themselves and non-human animals" he states states humans are doing a good deed in helping the elephants in the centers so when go out to the wild they are trained. Also humans can heal in nature by getting away from their daily activites and just enjoy what nature has to give. Humans and animals use nature greatly in healing as well as learning from each other.

Rebuilding our Relationship with the Elephants

In Charles Siebert's essay, "An Elephant Crackup" explains how humans and elephants are connected. In fact humans are connected to all animals, we just choose not to see it. In the recent years, the elephants have become violent because humans have been killing them and causing many psychological problems. Although the humans have caused this inter species problem, we are trying to fix our mistakes. Siebert mentions, "A number [of elephants] have periodically returned to the sanctuary with their own wild-born calves in order to re-unit them with their human allomothers"(538). Here Siebert enhances his point that the humans are helping the elephants because the ones that went through rehab come back. This creates a "trans-species psyche" because the two species start to rely on each other and treat each other like family. The humans are starting the long road to rebuilding their relationship with the elephants and with time the elephants violent outburst will be a thing of the past