- Email: [email protected]
In occupied territory: future.con
Futures 34 (2002) 561–570 www.elsevier.com/locate/futures
In occupied territory: future.con Patricia Kelly ∗ Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, Qld. 4001, Australia
Abstract Creating sustainable, diverse futures involves challenging assumptions that Western civilisation and linear, profit based models of unlimited development are universal. This is deeply threatening to many, but objections to such colonised futures are growing. Challenging these world-views means engaging with the complex and intersecting issues of culture, environment, globalisation, gender and sustainability. This paper tests Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) as a method to excavate the levels that have created the worldview behind one image of a colonised future. Analysis reveals a ‘Future.con’ which excludes most of humanity and pre-dicts a technological future in which humans may only exist to serve the machines they created. It is also the kind of image that, in a higher education context, fits and maintains pervasive but limited world-views. It could be different. Images and some of the tools of CLA can also be used in education to help envision sustainable, culturally diverse futures. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Objections to futures colonised by Western technology-based visions are growing. Galtung refers to Futurelandia; a land “effectively colonised by scientists or technologists” [1]. For Sardar, the future is “already an occupied territory” [2]. He asserts that there are four hidden assumptions of futures studies that have only recently been challenged. These are summarised below. 1. The only worldview, and the associated metaphysics and values, worthy of attention is the Western civilisation’s worldview. 2. There is only one science of nature, that is objective, positivist and universal ∗ Tel.: +61-7-3864-1651; fax: +61-7-3864-1805. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Kelly). 0016-3287/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 0 1 6 - 3 2 8 7 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 8 1 - 7
562
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
3. ‘Reality’, however it is defined, is constructed in the image of the white man 4. Cultural differences will fade away as people discover the superiority of rational Western culture [3]. In this paper I apply Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) in analysing one casual ‘occupation’ of the future, the painting ‘Cosmic Evolution’ by Robert McCall, as it appears on the homepage of the Foundation for the Future (FFF) [4]. I explore how this particular image rests on Sardar’s four assumptions and as a result, excludes alternative futures.
2. Causal Layered Analysis Causal Layered Analysis [5,6] is both a new futures research method and a theoretical framework. It offers a way of understanding better how the levels of empirical reality and cultural reality work together to produce our world-view. It developed in response to the inadequacy of other methods to create spaces for alternative futures. It suggests analysing at four levels: the Litany; Social Causes; Discourse/World-View and Myth/Metaphor [5, p. 815]. The Litany or Pop Futures level is the most common expression of problems or issues. It is often oversimplified, exaggerated and devoid of analysis. The Social Causes level identifies problems and short term causes and offers practical responses, often based at regulation level. It is the focus of most futures work and it is deficient in that it “lacks the depth and critical power to do much more than rehearse existing patterns and structures” bib:[5]. The Discourse level delves deeper and more widely to show how “the discourse we use to understand is complicit in framing the issue” [6, p. 820]. The fourth layer, Myth/Metaphor, is usually ignored. “These are the deep stories, the collective archetypes, the unconscious dimension of the problem” [6, p. 820]. CLA is timely in that it has reconstructive and transformative properties for those willing to make the effort. It has the potential to encourage people out of their comfort zones. Myths uncovered can lead to learning or un-learning. The world cannot be perceived in the same way again. Thus, it is more than simply critical. Creating distance and exposing underlying myths could lead to change, especially in areas of power relations, gender, etc. It is a woman-friendly method since it offers the potential to illuminate any tradition and any way of knowing. It also integrates poststructural concepts. As intended, these are useful tools in educational programs designed to support graduates to acquire/reacquire the confidence to take part in creating alternative futures.
3. Litany or Pop Futures level The characteristics of ‘Pop Futurist’ or ‘Litany’ thinking are “a lack of attention to underlying assumptions, a complete lack of critique, a strongly instrumentalist
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
563
outlook and a very thin and unproductive view of the future” [5]. The Cosmic Evolution image is the essence of a Pop Future or Litany view. The page is colourful and seemingly attractive. The accompanying text states its message clearly. “Dedicated to the increase and diffusion of knowledge concerning the future of humanity.” The text speaks not of a future, or futures, but the definite article, definite Future. Along the bottom is text alerting the reader to the components of the site map: Humanity 3000, Research Grants, Kistler Prize, Center for Human Evolution. I have not included these sections and other accompanying images in this discussion, but they reinforce the central image in both content and style. We all bring ourselves to any text. McCall’s drawing style was familiar to me as a person who grew up with illustrated bible stories and English-based history books. In general terms, the image depicts a linear history, from the Big Bang of elemental forces to the big bang of rockets. As the title is ‘Cosmic Evolution’, humanity, as (un)represented in the image, is intended to inherit not merely the earth but the worlds beyond.
4. Social causes/problem-oriented futures work Because this image operates mainly at the levels of Litany and Myth/Metaphor, it is not overtly concerned with problems or social, political or cultural issues and their implications. Consequently, it depicts one unproblematic, uncontested history— a linear ascent of ‘Man’ (sic), although the text pays lip-service to inclusivity in its use of the term ‘humanity’. Flat-liner history is evident in the layers of the images and is reinforced by the written text, a “Timeline since the origin of the universe” [7]. It continues these constricted options in the metaphor, “Humanity is at a crossroad. Where does humanity go from here?” Galtung’s suggestion that “people are being taken for a ride they have to pay, with no return” [1, p. 24], offers a witty extension to this tired metaphor. ‘Gridlock’ is even more evocative [2, p. 11]. This linear imaging is also a good illustration of Junker’s argument, that living in only one present that itself depends on seeing only one version of its past, leads inevitably to one present [8]. In turn, as we give meaning to past events and people, by connecting them as data points on the line graph of a uni-directional, uni-linear past-leading-to-thepresent, we have no choice but to extrapolate the line, to see one, inevitable future [8, p. 19]. This operates as a ‘prediction’ which assumes that this future is already there, something to be discovered rather than something we are capable of creating. “This notion of prediction therefore interferes with multiple futures” [8, p. 21].
564
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
5. Discourse level This is a deeper level of analysis, concerned with exploring how different discourses constitute and are complicit in the way we frame an issue. It includes questioning values, beliefs and traditions to establish their genealogy. “Which discourses have been victorious in constituting the present?” [6, p. 818]. Once we understand these, we can use the insights gained to help us to envision or re-vision better or alternative futures. Solutions at this level involve transformation of world-views and as a result are complex and long-term projects. 5.1. Control—the body and beyond There is a visual discourse of male dominance and control. Images form supporting narratives. Early in this linear history, lightning hits an egg shaped creature in the sea. A chain of DNA emerges from the shape and flows with the ocean, as it forms into a white foam-topped tube that penetrates the inert globe through a vulva in the clouds. Satellites and other spacecraft circle Planet Earth. The colour of the sea foam is picked up on their bodywork. Moreover to continue this metaphor, once the egg is fertilised it becomes impervious to all other sperm. On a cosmic level, the planet is truly occupied territory, fertilised by Western science and technology to produce a technofuture in which cloning could do away with the need for women altogether. Rosaleen Love’s fear is that while “genetic techniques are science fact, the myth lies in the illusion of control” [9]. The FFF Time-line text supports this illusion. The relevant section reads, “We have harnessed atomic energy, travelled to the moon, dispatched robotic sentinels to other planets, and cracked the genetic code” [7]. The verbs here (‘harnessed’, ‘dispatched’, ‘cracked’) all emerge from and maintain the discourse of Man conquers Nature. ‘Cracking’ applies here to the human egg and echoes the egg penetration imagery described above. Moreover, no biological or technological disasters disrupt this seamless discourse, no Thalidomide or nerve gas, no blue-green algae, no Chernobyl, no burning rainforests, no ethical issues. The implied ‘we’ here is a tiny fraction of humanity and technological feats currently serve the interests of the same tiny fraction. A human family dominates the centre of the image. The ideal, (white) family, (Dad, Mum, boy, girl), stand isolated on top of the planet. This is in contrast to the extended family ideal common to most feminist utopias [10]. At this point, the previously uncontrolled power of the lightning re-emerges, but in the form of a ‘harmless’ nuclear explosion, dwarfed by the human group. Visually, it could take the place of the family ‘pet’ in this picturebook genre. In this visual metaphor, it is at the feet of the dominant family, tame, but capable of violence if let loose. Since our humans no longer need a community or Planet Earth, what future awaits them? The far right of the image reveals the next station on this ‘technophilic nightmare’ line [5]. In this ‘myopic vision’ [2, p. 15], the humans are reduced to two lone, tiny space-suited figures, possibly retained to service the machines. They fly towards their space play-station, arms fittingly outstretched in ‘Superman’ pose. Since this is a ‘phallic-phuture’, metallic rockets explode off into space to repeat
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
565
the same process elsewhere. Rosaleen Love, one of the precious, few women deemed ‘expert’ enough to be invited to comment of the future of humanity, noted similar images at the FFF’s seminar in April, 1999. “I had to wonder at the varieties of fountains, waterfalls and rocket ships. Images of orgasm each and every one—was I the only one to notice?” [9, p. 2]. It is the excluded discourses, the ignored or discarded ‘others’ who would make this future problematic. How would alternative cosmologies depict cosmic evolution? A resacralised earth would include all life forms as partners in an ongoing web of life. This vision would see humans interconnected and re-connected, not disconnected from the earth and from each other. This limited discourse persists because those who use it know no others and see no need to know others and will not, until those they silence, whose futures they so casually consume, insist on being heard. “Project future is a scandal, with decisions being made that compromise the options of future generations...” [1, p. 24].
6. Myth/metaphor “The ultimate purpose of futures work at this level is to open out productive mind spaces, to design in-depth social innovations and to prefigure more advanced stages of civilised life” [5]. Metaphors serve the discourse and support the litany. Once the ‘root myths’ are elicited, they can be refined or rejected in the process of envisioning desired futures. 6.1. The triumph of the West The myth driving this image is the triumph of the West. The nuclear family is literally ‘on top of the world’. The imagery is also basically patriarchal, white and Christian. The sun (source of light, life, Christ-like halo) is directly above the male’s head. This is amplified by another, a super halo/aura nuclear ring above it, which extends into the heavens. Man is God. His arms rest on the woman and the son (who stands at his Father’s right hand, where else?). Greek mythology offers a hint of Colossus in his wide-legged stance. The family dominates Earth with their long shadows. To their east there is a shadowy image of an atom, beckoning like a modern star of Bethlehem. 6.2. The triumph of white, male ‘reason’ Continuing the linear march of time, the family gives way to a cluster of famous heads, mainly Western; no bodies remain to disturb their ‘rationality’. They are also overwhelmingly white and male, with the usual token woman (scientist), a person or two of colour, and tucked away in the background, Confucius. This discourse neither engages with the diversity of past knowledges nor with the projected statistic that by the mid-twenty-first century, Westerners will constitute a tiny one to five per cent of the world’s population [3].
566
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
6.3. Man rampant over Nature crouchant Visually, the line leads to ‘Future.con’, in which the unpredictable and frightening ‘excesses’ of nature have finally been ‘overcome’. Only a few token, trimmed bushes remain in this otherwise barren future-scape. Some line the opening to a passage, a tamed vagina minus dentata that leads to a central building, possibly a new technowomb? The chaos/profusion of nature on the left of the image, with its untamed power of water, lightning, vegetation and living creatures has gradually vanished. The animals are shown reducing in size and number until the symbolic triumph of humans on top of the planet. From this point on animals disappear from this future, as they must in this masculinised, technology driven future. Even water, the source of life, has been reduced to ornamental pools, perhaps symbolic petri dishes for this Clone-Zone world.
7. Incorporating the ‘Other’ in Higher Education Creating “genuinely alternative images of the future” [3] is a profoundly radical agenda. It is critical futures work that involves dealing with “the problematics of cultures in change and transformation” [5]. For educators, it involves more than just knowing about more possibilities. It requires a new set of learning skills and reflexive ways of thinking that we must understand and practise in order to support them in our students [11]. The following section looks at two different ways to “actively incorporate ‘Other definitions’” [3] into our work with students. 7.1. Harmonising world-views The first is a way of harmonising very different understandings of the world. The strength of this approach is that it is respectful of, and responsive to, the ‘knowings’ that students bring with them. Baker and Taylor [12] reviewed the evidence of a “poor fit” between Western science education and students from non-Western backgrounds and recommended an approach allowing for “harmonization of worldviews”. The authors do not suggest that “conversion” to a Western view is the goal of science education but suggest that it is “both possible and legitimate” to hold both scientific and traditional views of the world [12, p. 702]. Through an “old way/new way teaching” process, students from non-Western backgrounds are encouraged to recognise their existing life-world concepts. The students can then compare existing with alternative concepts and access a “better” way to understand the problem. This better way offers the options of rejecting one paradigm in favour of another, partially rejecting it or partially synthesising it or holding disparate models simultaneously [12, p. 701]. This method is equally essential for any student. It might be one way of moving past the current “simple appropriation of this or that idea or concept from this or that non-Western culture” [2]. A sustainable society will depend on all students having access to alternative views of the world and actively engaging with the chal-
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
567
lenges that traditional views make to the unlimited development model they may assume at the litany level of their learning. “New norms which elevate priorities to take care of the world in general must replace those that focus on closer-at-hand domains of concern, such as job, personal security, ego-satisfaction, and so on” [11, p. 26]. “How would the nature and practice of science change if instrumental reason was humanised and coupled with values, or if non-Western perceptions of nature become the main method of accommodating and understanding nature?” [2]. Sardar offers a wealth of examples. What is often missing, (as in the FFF image), is awareness, a degree of humility and a willingness to make the effort to access and internalise other views. Eisler’s partnership model of society (more peaceful, more sexually egalitarian and less hierarchical) involves struggling against the domination of ‘man’ over nature [13]. It depends on a “deep ecological consciousness” that we could humbly seek to (re) learn from Indigenous societies that still retain this precious cultural heritage [14,15]. However, a partnership society issues challenges to all patriarchal systems and those who support and benefit from them. This is an ongoing site of contestation across and within cultures. It could equally be a source of collaboration and cooperation. 7.2. Post-structural concepts and images as pedagogy We can use concepts from the post-structural toolbox [6, p. 818] in teaching contexts. The concept of ‘distance’ involves using alternative scenarios or images as a means of disrupting a casual acceptance of the present. To do this with first year Engineering students, I showed a five-minute video documentary called ‘Fighting Nature’ [16]. This cleverly juxtaposes old and modern film clips to trace the history of land use in Australia since European settlement/invasion. I asked students to compare the two views expressed in the short quotes below. The first uses a linear-time based, (white) male ‘Development’ discourse from a 1925 documentary film. The other is an endless-present Indigenous view of people as part of the land, from Bill Neidje, a Gagadju/Kakadu elder from northern Australia. 1925 narration - male, anonymous, dramatic-heroic style The crash of falling timber..the crackling of burning logs. It is a signal that heralds the advance of human progress. Man has come to stay. His conquest has begun. ...Fences must be put up, acres must be cleared, trees must be ringbarked, scrub must be burned and the earth yields to the dominion of man. 1997 Bill Neidjie—Kakadu Elder, simple style This ground..and this earth, like brother and mother. Goanna is dead, because they cutting its body off us … cutting our mother’s belly. We come from earth..bones. We go to earth.. ashes. This story is important, it won’t change, it is..rule [16].
568
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
Responses from both international and local students as revealed in their ‘Reflective Journals’, indicate that this did help them to develop a more reflexive thinking about themselves and their responsibilities on a global scale. It shows in their apparent willingness to reorder their knowledge to admit other ways of knowing and thus the possibility of alternative futures. I have left their English as they wrote it. This shows that ethics has change through times and technology. From the Kakadu man’s quote, we can feel the ‘softness in human’. ...with technology being more advanced every day, we as engineers can help to rebuild the environment (male/non English speaking background [NESB]) Cultural sensivities and international responsibility is been more and more important now…, if we human want to lead the whole world, we will need to more care about it first. Otherwise one day there are no other creatures can live in earth (male/NESB) We have become more aware of the fact that we are responsible to protect the environment and not above it so that future generations have the chance to appreciate it (male/ESB) These students are clearly on the way to developing “a permanent capability to create viable forward views, interpret their significance and use the resulting information as regular inputs…” [5] Foresight cultures will be created by those able to engage in the difficult work of facing our respective areas of silence or contest; class privilege, racism, wealth, corruption, religion, gender equity, Indigenous rights and their complex intersections. It takes courage and energy to challenge and change our own current view of the world, but if futurists aren’t prepared to do it, who can? “Western futures studies specialists must take into account the transformations within which the world is living. They must recognise that no culture is universal. There are no ‘Western values’ and ‘Non-Western values’, no ‘Western futures studies’ and ‘Non-Western futures studies’” [17]. Most societies are multicultural and many oppress Indigenous people in the name of ‘Development’. And all of us have to deal with the effects of the current inequitable and unsustainable version of Globalisation [1, p. 24].
8. Conclusion: from ‘Space’ to spaces Pop futures or work at the Litany level can be entertaining and can introduce people to complex or new issues, but by itself or unchallenged, “it creates caricatures of the world” [5]. ‘A lot to swallow and very little to eat’ is the apt (Russian) proverb.
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
569
It is precisely because work at this level is easily accessible, understandable and attractively presented that the messages are so powerful. With this power goes commensurate responsibility. In ‘Cosmic Evolution’, the Foundation for the Future employed an artist to create an official vision, which exists unchallenged on the World Wide Web. Galtung warns that “experts who see the future for us, assume they are neutral/objective, [this] usually means ‘unexamined conventionalism’” [1, p. 24]. In this case, the artist had inappropriate guidance or knowledge or the FFF hasn’t thought through the implications of the image. Images are powerful. They speak for us and about us. Unquestioned, they maintain the status quo and give credence and respectability to what are unsustainable visions. It could be different. What if McCall’s vision was just one among many visions of Cosmic Evolution? The Foundation could invite these from interested communities, possibly through their education programs. Imagine being able to comment on a kaleidoscope of changing and contesting visions of alternative futures, in sound, image or text—from indigenous people, different spiritual traditions, women, young people, people with disabilities and endless permutations of these. Instead of Outer Space, inner spaces. References [1] Galtung J. Who’s got the year 2000 right—the people or the experts? Futures Bull 2000;25(4):9. [2] Sardar Z. The problem of futures studies. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 9. [3] Sardar Z. Other futures: non-Western cultures in futures studies. CD-ROM In: Slaughter R, Inayatullah S, editors. Knowledge base of futures studies, vol. 1, Part 4. Indooroopilly (Qld., Australia): The Futures Study Centre; 1999. [4] McCall R. http://www.futurefoundation.org/main/mccall—mural.html. Accessed 3/4/00. [5] Slaughter R. Beyond the mundane: reconciling breadth and depth in futures enquiry. Futures 2002;34:493–507. [6] Inayatullah S. Causal Layered Analysis. Futures 1998;30(8):815. [7] See http://www.futurefoundation.org/main/brochure.html#timeline [8] Junker K. How the future is cloned. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 19. [9] Love R. The accidental futurist. [URL]. EIDOLON: SF online features. http://www.eidolon.net/ ezine/features/rosaleenlove.htm, 1999, p. 2. Accessed 10/2/2000. [10] Milojevic I. Feminising futures studies. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 68. [11] For a detailed explanation of a reflexive learning model in higher education, see Ehrenfield J, Conceico P, Heitor M, Viera P. Towards sustainable universities: challenges for engineering education in the learning economy. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation, 30 August–2 September 1999. http://www.utexas.edu/depts/ic2/austin99/ abstracts/3—ehr.html/, accessed 14/2/2000. [12] Baker D, Taylor PCS. The effect of culture on the learning of science in non-Western countries: the results of an integrated literature review. Int J Sci Educ 695-670;17(6). [13] Eisler R. Dominator and partnership shifts. In: Galtung JI, editor. Macrohistory and macrohistorians. Connecticut/London: Westport/Praeger; 1997. [14] Williams R. Beyond the dominant paradigm: embracing the indigenous and the transcendental. Futures 1998;30(2/3):223–33. [15] Judge A. From information highways to songlines of the noosphere. Futures 1999;30(2/3):181–7.
570
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
[16] Fighting Nature. Episode 14. REWIND. Film Australia Ltd [video documentary]. Sydney: Film Australia. [17] Elmandjra M. Cultural diversity, our key to survival in the future. CD-ROM In: Slaughter R, Inayatullah S, editors. Knowledge base of futures studies, vol. 3, Part 2. Indooroopilly (Qld., Australia): The Futures Study Centre; 1999.
In occupied territory: future.con Patricia Kelly ∗ Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, Qld. 4001, Australia
Abstract Creating sustainable, diverse futures involves challenging assumptions that Western civilisation and linear, profit based models of unlimited development are universal. This is deeply threatening to many, but objections to such colonised futures are growing. Challenging these world-views means engaging with the complex and intersecting issues of culture, environment, globalisation, gender and sustainability. This paper tests Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) as a method to excavate the levels that have created the worldview behind one image of a colonised future. Analysis reveals a ‘Future.con’ which excludes most of humanity and pre-dicts a technological future in which humans may only exist to serve the machines they created. It is also the kind of image that, in a higher education context, fits and maintains pervasive but limited world-views. It could be different. Images and some of the tools of CLA can also be used in education to help envision sustainable, culturally diverse futures. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Objections to futures colonised by Western technology-based visions are growing. Galtung refers to Futurelandia; a land “effectively colonised by scientists or technologists” [1]. For Sardar, the future is “already an occupied territory” [2]. He asserts that there are four hidden assumptions of futures studies that have only recently been challenged. These are summarised below. 1. The only worldview, and the associated metaphysics and values, worthy of attention is the Western civilisation’s worldview. 2. There is only one science of nature, that is objective, positivist and universal ∗ Tel.: +61-7-3864-1651; fax: +61-7-3864-1805. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Kelly). 0016-3287/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 0 1 6 - 3 2 8 7 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 8 1 - 7
562
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
3. ‘Reality’, however it is defined, is constructed in the image of the white man 4. Cultural differences will fade away as people discover the superiority of rational Western culture [3]. In this paper I apply Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) in analysing one casual ‘occupation’ of the future, the painting ‘Cosmic Evolution’ by Robert McCall, as it appears on the homepage of the Foundation for the Future (FFF) [4]. I explore how this particular image rests on Sardar’s four assumptions and as a result, excludes alternative futures.
2. Causal Layered Analysis Causal Layered Analysis [5,6] is both a new futures research method and a theoretical framework. It offers a way of understanding better how the levels of empirical reality and cultural reality work together to produce our world-view. It developed in response to the inadequacy of other methods to create spaces for alternative futures. It suggests analysing at four levels: the Litany; Social Causes; Discourse/World-View and Myth/Metaphor [5, p. 815]. The Litany or Pop Futures level is the most common expression of problems or issues. It is often oversimplified, exaggerated and devoid of analysis. The Social Causes level identifies problems and short term causes and offers practical responses, often based at regulation level. It is the focus of most futures work and it is deficient in that it “lacks the depth and critical power to do much more than rehearse existing patterns and structures” bib:[5]. The Discourse level delves deeper and more widely to show how “the discourse we use to understand is complicit in framing the issue” [6, p. 820]. The fourth layer, Myth/Metaphor, is usually ignored. “These are the deep stories, the collective archetypes, the unconscious dimension of the problem” [6, p. 820]. CLA is timely in that it has reconstructive and transformative properties for those willing to make the effort. It has the potential to encourage people out of their comfort zones. Myths uncovered can lead to learning or un-learning. The world cannot be perceived in the same way again. Thus, it is more than simply critical. Creating distance and exposing underlying myths could lead to change, especially in areas of power relations, gender, etc. It is a woman-friendly method since it offers the potential to illuminate any tradition and any way of knowing. It also integrates poststructural concepts. As intended, these are useful tools in educational programs designed to support graduates to acquire/reacquire the confidence to take part in creating alternative futures.
3. Litany or Pop Futures level The characteristics of ‘Pop Futurist’ or ‘Litany’ thinking are “a lack of attention to underlying assumptions, a complete lack of critique, a strongly instrumentalist
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
563
outlook and a very thin and unproductive view of the future” [5]. The Cosmic Evolution image is the essence of a Pop Future or Litany view. The page is colourful and seemingly attractive. The accompanying text states its message clearly. “Dedicated to the increase and diffusion of knowledge concerning the future of humanity.” The text speaks not of a future, or futures, but the definite article, definite Future. Along the bottom is text alerting the reader to the components of the site map: Humanity 3000, Research Grants, Kistler Prize, Center for Human Evolution. I have not included these sections and other accompanying images in this discussion, but they reinforce the central image in both content and style. We all bring ourselves to any text. McCall’s drawing style was familiar to me as a person who grew up with illustrated bible stories and English-based history books. In general terms, the image depicts a linear history, from the Big Bang of elemental forces to the big bang of rockets. As the title is ‘Cosmic Evolution’, humanity, as (un)represented in the image, is intended to inherit not merely the earth but the worlds beyond.
4. Social causes/problem-oriented futures work Because this image operates mainly at the levels of Litany and Myth/Metaphor, it is not overtly concerned with problems or social, political or cultural issues and their implications. Consequently, it depicts one unproblematic, uncontested history— a linear ascent of ‘Man’ (sic), although the text pays lip-service to inclusivity in its use of the term ‘humanity’. Flat-liner history is evident in the layers of the images and is reinforced by the written text, a “Timeline since the origin of the universe” [7]. It continues these constricted options in the metaphor, “Humanity is at a crossroad. Where does humanity go from here?” Galtung’s suggestion that “people are being taken for a ride they have to pay, with no return” [1, p. 24], offers a witty extension to this tired metaphor. ‘Gridlock’ is even more evocative [2, p. 11]. This linear imaging is also a good illustration of Junker’s argument, that living in only one present that itself depends on seeing only one version of its past, leads inevitably to one present [8]. In turn, as we give meaning to past events and people, by connecting them as data points on the line graph of a uni-directional, uni-linear past-leading-to-thepresent, we have no choice but to extrapolate the line, to see one, inevitable future [8, p. 19]. This operates as a ‘prediction’ which assumes that this future is already there, something to be discovered rather than something we are capable of creating. “This notion of prediction therefore interferes with multiple futures” [8, p. 21].
564
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
5. Discourse level This is a deeper level of analysis, concerned with exploring how different discourses constitute and are complicit in the way we frame an issue. It includes questioning values, beliefs and traditions to establish their genealogy. “Which discourses have been victorious in constituting the present?” [6, p. 818]. Once we understand these, we can use the insights gained to help us to envision or re-vision better or alternative futures. Solutions at this level involve transformation of world-views and as a result are complex and long-term projects. 5.1. Control—the body and beyond There is a visual discourse of male dominance and control. Images form supporting narratives. Early in this linear history, lightning hits an egg shaped creature in the sea. A chain of DNA emerges from the shape and flows with the ocean, as it forms into a white foam-topped tube that penetrates the inert globe through a vulva in the clouds. Satellites and other spacecraft circle Planet Earth. The colour of the sea foam is picked up on their bodywork. Moreover to continue this metaphor, once the egg is fertilised it becomes impervious to all other sperm. On a cosmic level, the planet is truly occupied territory, fertilised by Western science and technology to produce a technofuture in which cloning could do away with the need for women altogether. Rosaleen Love’s fear is that while “genetic techniques are science fact, the myth lies in the illusion of control” [9]. The FFF Time-line text supports this illusion. The relevant section reads, “We have harnessed atomic energy, travelled to the moon, dispatched robotic sentinels to other planets, and cracked the genetic code” [7]. The verbs here (‘harnessed’, ‘dispatched’, ‘cracked’) all emerge from and maintain the discourse of Man conquers Nature. ‘Cracking’ applies here to the human egg and echoes the egg penetration imagery described above. Moreover, no biological or technological disasters disrupt this seamless discourse, no Thalidomide or nerve gas, no blue-green algae, no Chernobyl, no burning rainforests, no ethical issues. The implied ‘we’ here is a tiny fraction of humanity and technological feats currently serve the interests of the same tiny fraction. A human family dominates the centre of the image. The ideal, (white) family, (Dad, Mum, boy, girl), stand isolated on top of the planet. This is in contrast to the extended family ideal common to most feminist utopias [10]. At this point, the previously uncontrolled power of the lightning re-emerges, but in the form of a ‘harmless’ nuclear explosion, dwarfed by the human group. Visually, it could take the place of the family ‘pet’ in this picturebook genre. In this visual metaphor, it is at the feet of the dominant family, tame, but capable of violence if let loose. Since our humans no longer need a community or Planet Earth, what future awaits them? The far right of the image reveals the next station on this ‘technophilic nightmare’ line [5]. In this ‘myopic vision’ [2, p. 15], the humans are reduced to two lone, tiny space-suited figures, possibly retained to service the machines. They fly towards their space play-station, arms fittingly outstretched in ‘Superman’ pose. Since this is a ‘phallic-phuture’, metallic rockets explode off into space to repeat
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
565
the same process elsewhere. Rosaleen Love, one of the precious, few women deemed ‘expert’ enough to be invited to comment of the future of humanity, noted similar images at the FFF’s seminar in April, 1999. “I had to wonder at the varieties of fountains, waterfalls and rocket ships. Images of orgasm each and every one—was I the only one to notice?” [9, p. 2]. It is the excluded discourses, the ignored or discarded ‘others’ who would make this future problematic. How would alternative cosmologies depict cosmic evolution? A resacralised earth would include all life forms as partners in an ongoing web of life. This vision would see humans interconnected and re-connected, not disconnected from the earth and from each other. This limited discourse persists because those who use it know no others and see no need to know others and will not, until those they silence, whose futures they so casually consume, insist on being heard. “Project future is a scandal, with decisions being made that compromise the options of future generations...” [1, p. 24].
6. Myth/metaphor “The ultimate purpose of futures work at this level is to open out productive mind spaces, to design in-depth social innovations and to prefigure more advanced stages of civilised life” [5]. Metaphors serve the discourse and support the litany. Once the ‘root myths’ are elicited, they can be refined or rejected in the process of envisioning desired futures. 6.1. The triumph of the West The myth driving this image is the triumph of the West. The nuclear family is literally ‘on top of the world’. The imagery is also basically patriarchal, white and Christian. The sun (source of light, life, Christ-like halo) is directly above the male’s head. This is amplified by another, a super halo/aura nuclear ring above it, which extends into the heavens. Man is God. His arms rest on the woman and the son (who stands at his Father’s right hand, where else?). Greek mythology offers a hint of Colossus in his wide-legged stance. The family dominates Earth with their long shadows. To their east there is a shadowy image of an atom, beckoning like a modern star of Bethlehem. 6.2. The triumph of white, male ‘reason’ Continuing the linear march of time, the family gives way to a cluster of famous heads, mainly Western; no bodies remain to disturb their ‘rationality’. They are also overwhelmingly white and male, with the usual token woman (scientist), a person or two of colour, and tucked away in the background, Confucius. This discourse neither engages with the diversity of past knowledges nor with the projected statistic that by the mid-twenty-first century, Westerners will constitute a tiny one to five per cent of the world’s population [3].
566
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
6.3. Man rampant over Nature crouchant Visually, the line leads to ‘Future.con’, in which the unpredictable and frightening ‘excesses’ of nature have finally been ‘overcome’. Only a few token, trimmed bushes remain in this otherwise barren future-scape. Some line the opening to a passage, a tamed vagina minus dentata that leads to a central building, possibly a new technowomb? The chaos/profusion of nature on the left of the image, with its untamed power of water, lightning, vegetation and living creatures has gradually vanished. The animals are shown reducing in size and number until the symbolic triumph of humans on top of the planet. From this point on animals disappear from this future, as they must in this masculinised, technology driven future. Even water, the source of life, has been reduced to ornamental pools, perhaps symbolic petri dishes for this Clone-Zone world.
7. Incorporating the ‘Other’ in Higher Education Creating “genuinely alternative images of the future” [3] is a profoundly radical agenda. It is critical futures work that involves dealing with “the problematics of cultures in change and transformation” [5]. For educators, it involves more than just knowing about more possibilities. It requires a new set of learning skills and reflexive ways of thinking that we must understand and practise in order to support them in our students [11]. The following section looks at two different ways to “actively incorporate ‘Other definitions’” [3] into our work with students. 7.1. Harmonising world-views The first is a way of harmonising very different understandings of the world. The strength of this approach is that it is respectful of, and responsive to, the ‘knowings’ that students bring with them. Baker and Taylor [12] reviewed the evidence of a “poor fit” between Western science education and students from non-Western backgrounds and recommended an approach allowing for “harmonization of worldviews”. The authors do not suggest that “conversion” to a Western view is the goal of science education but suggest that it is “both possible and legitimate” to hold both scientific and traditional views of the world [12, p. 702]. Through an “old way/new way teaching” process, students from non-Western backgrounds are encouraged to recognise their existing life-world concepts. The students can then compare existing with alternative concepts and access a “better” way to understand the problem. This better way offers the options of rejecting one paradigm in favour of another, partially rejecting it or partially synthesising it or holding disparate models simultaneously [12, p. 701]. This method is equally essential for any student. It might be one way of moving past the current “simple appropriation of this or that idea or concept from this or that non-Western culture” [2]. A sustainable society will depend on all students having access to alternative views of the world and actively engaging with the chal-
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
567
lenges that traditional views make to the unlimited development model they may assume at the litany level of their learning. “New norms which elevate priorities to take care of the world in general must replace those that focus on closer-at-hand domains of concern, such as job, personal security, ego-satisfaction, and so on” [11, p. 26]. “How would the nature and practice of science change if instrumental reason was humanised and coupled with values, or if non-Western perceptions of nature become the main method of accommodating and understanding nature?” [2]. Sardar offers a wealth of examples. What is often missing, (as in the FFF image), is awareness, a degree of humility and a willingness to make the effort to access and internalise other views. Eisler’s partnership model of society (more peaceful, more sexually egalitarian and less hierarchical) involves struggling against the domination of ‘man’ over nature [13]. It depends on a “deep ecological consciousness” that we could humbly seek to (re) learn from Indigenous societies that still retain this precious cultural heritage [14,15]. However, a partnership society issues challenges to all patriarchal systems and those who support and benefit from them. This is an ongoing site of contestation across and within cultures. It could equally be a source of collaboration and cooperation. 7.2. Post-structural concepts and images as pedagogy We can use concepts from the post-structural toolbox [6, p. 818] in teaching contexts. The concept of ‘distance’ involves using alternative scenarios or images as a means of disrupting a casual acceptance of the present. To do this with first year Engineering students, I showed a five-minute video documentary called ‘Fighting Nature’ [16]. This cleverly juxtaposes old and modern film clips to trace the history of land use in Australia since European settlement/invasion. I asked students to compare the two views expressed in the short quotes below. The first uses a linear-time based, (white) male ‘Development’ discourse from a 1925 documentary film. The other is an endless-present Indigenous view of people as part of the land, from Bill Neidje, a Gagadju/Kakadu elder from northern Australia. 1925 narration - male, anonymous, dramatic-heroic style The crash of falling timber..the crackling of burning logs. It is a signal that heralds the advance of human progress. Man has come to stay. His conquest has begun. ...Fences must be put up, acres must be cleared, trees must be ringbarked, scrub must be burned and the earth yields to the dominion of man. 1997 Bill Neidjie—Kakadu Elder, simple style This ground..and this earth, like brother and mother. Goanna is dead, because they cutting its body off us … cutting our mother’s belly. We come from earth..bones. We go to earth.. ashes. This story is important, it won’t change, it is..rule [16].
568
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
Responses from both international and local students as revealed in their ‘Reflective Journals’, indicate that this did help them to develop a more reflexive thinking about themselves and their responsibilities on a global scale. It shows in their apparent willingness to reorder their knowledge to admit other ways of knowing and thus the possibility of alternative futures. I have left their English as they wrote it. This shows that ethics has change through times and technology. From the Kakadu man’s quote, we can feel the ‘softness in human’. ...with technology being more advanced every day, we as engineers can help to rebuild the environment (male/non English speaking background [NESB]) Cultural sensivities and international responsibility is been more and more important now…, if we human want to lead the whole world, we will need to more care about it first. Otherwise one day there are no other creatures can live in earth (male/NESB) We have become more aware of the fact that we are responsible to protect the environment and not above it so that future generations have the chance to appreciate it (male/ESB) These students are clearly on the way to developing “a permanent capability to create viable forward views, interpret their significance and use the resulting information as regular inputs…” [5] Foresight cultures will be created by those able to engage in the difficult work of facing our respective areas of silence or contest; class privilege, racism, wealth, corruption, religion, gender equity, Indigenous rights and their complex intersections. It takes courage and energy to challenge and change our own current view of the world, but if futurists aren’t prepared to do it, who can? “Western futures studies specialists must take into account the transformations within which the world is living. They must recognise that no culture is universal. There are no ‘Western values’ and ‘Non-Western values’, no ‘Western futures studies’ and ‘Non-Western futures studies’” [17]. Most societies are multicultural and many oppress Indigenous people in the name of ‘Development’. And all of us have to deal with the effects of the current inequitable and unsustainable version of Globalisation [1, p. 24].
8. Conclusion: from ‘Space’ to spaces Pop futures or work at the Litany level can be entertaining and can introduce people to complex or new issues, but by itself or unchallenged, “it creates caricatures of the world” [5]. ‘A lot to swallow and very little to eat’ is the apt (Russian) proverb.
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
569
It is precisely because work at this level is easily accessible, understandable and attractively presented that the messages are so powerful. With this power goes commensurate responsibility. In ‘Cosmic Evolution’, the Foundation for the Future employed an artist to create an official vision, which exists unchallenged on the World Wide Web. Galtung warns that “experts who see the future for us, assume they are neutral/objective, [this] usually means ‘unexamined conventionalism’” [1, p. 24]. In this case, the artist had inappropriate guidance or knowledge or the FFF hasn’t thought through the implications of the image. Images are powerful. They speak for us and about us. Unquestioned, they maintain the status quo and give credence and respectability to what are unsustainable visions. It could be different. What if McCall’s vision was just one among many visions of Cosmic Evolution? The Foundation could invite these from interested communities, possibly through their education programs. Imagine being able to comment on a kaleidoscope of changing and contesting visions of alternative futures, in sound, image or text—from indigenous people, different spiritual traditions, women, young people, people with disabilities and endless permutations of these. Instead of Outer Space, inner spaces. References [1] Galtung J. Who’s got the year 2000 right—the people or the experts? Futures Bull 2000;25(4):9. [2] Sardar Z. The problem of futures studies. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 9. [3] Sardar Z. Other futures: non-Western cultures in futures studies. CD-ROM In: Slaughter R, Inayatullah S, editors. Knowledge base of futures studies, vol. 1, Part 4. Indooroopilly (Qld., Australia): The Futures Study Centre; 1999. [4] McCall R. http://www.futurefoundation.org/main/mccall—mural.html. Accessed 3/4/00. [5] Slaughter R. Beyond the mundane: reconciling breadth and depth in futures enquiry. Futures 2002;34:493–507. [6] Inayatullah S. Causal Layered Analysis. Futures 1998;30(8):815. [7] See http://www.futurefoundation.org/main/brochure.html#timeline [8] Junker K. How the future is cloned. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 19. [9] Love R. The accidental futurist. [URL]. EIDOLON: SF online features. http://www.eidolon.net/ ezine/features/rosaleenlove.htm, 1999, p. 2. Accessed 10/2/2000. [10] Milojevic I. Feminising futures studies. In: Sardar Z, editor. Rescuing all our futures. Connecticut: Westport; 1999. p. 68. [11] For a detailed explanation of a reflexive learning model in higher education, see Ehrenfield J, Conceico P, Heitor M, Viera P. Towards sustainable universities: challenges for engineering education in the learning economy. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation, 30 August–2 September 1999. http://www.utexas.edu/depts/ic2/austin99/ abstracts/3—ehr.html/, accessed 14/2/2000. [12] Baker D, Taylor PCS. The effect of culture on the learning of science in non-Western countries: the results of an integrated literature review. Int J Sci Educ 695-670;17(6). [13] Eisler R. Dominator and partnership shifts. In: Galtung JI, editor. Macrohistory and macrohistorians. Connecticut/London: Westport/Praeger; 1997. [14] Williams R. Beyond the dominant paradigm: embracing the indigenous and the transcendental. Futures 1998;30(2/3):223–33. [15] Judge A. From information highways to songlines of the noosphere. Futures 1999;30(2/3):181–7.
570
P. Kelly / Futures 34 (2002) 561–570
[16] Fighting Nature. Episode 14. REWIND. Film Australia Ltd [video documentary]. Sydney: Film Australia. [17] Elmandjra M. Cultural diversity, our key to survival in the future. CD-ROM In: Slaughter R, Inayatullah S, editors. Knowledge base of futures studies, vol. 3, Part 2. Indooroopilly (Qld., Australia): The Futures Study Centre; 1999.