Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
towards_a_third_human-plant_movement [2012-03-30 15:07] – lbilliet | towards_a_third_human-plant_movement [2012-03-30 15:16] – lbilliet | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ===Towards a third human-plant movement?, by Rolsalind Perrez=== | + | ===Towards a third human-plant movement? |
+ | Rolsalind Perrez, April 2028, L.P. Billiet (Ed.), New Göteborg Press, 10 p. | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
---- | ---- | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
- | //Editor’s Note: | + | Editor’s Note: |
- | Many of the facts and references mentioned in this essay appear to be inexact or fake. Furthermore, | + | Many of the facts and references mentioned in this essay appear to be inexact or fake. Furthermore, |
---- | ---- | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
- | //In this short critical essay, Rosalind Perrez offers an analysis of the sociological and scientific facts that shaped the evolution of the human-plant (H-P) relationship over the last five decades. Proceeding from the intellectual heritage of Denis Koblak and other theoreticians of the second H-P movement, Perrez discusses the succession of paradigms that held sway over this topic since the birth of political ecology in the 1970s up to the recent events of Curitiba in 2023.\\ | + | In this short critical essay, Rosalind Perrez offers an analysis of the sociological and scientific facts that shaped the evolution of the human-plant (H-P) relationship over the last five decades. Proceeding from the intellectual heritage of Denis Koblak and other theoreticians of the second H-P movement, Perrez discusses the succession of paradigms that held sway over this topic since the birth of political ecology in the 1970s up to the recent events of Curitiba in 2023.\\ |
During the last decades of the 20th century, plants were the object of numerous analogies and metaphors, most of them coinciding with a personified vision of nature – a mysterious ' | During the last decades of the 20th century, plants were the object of numerous analogies and metaphors, most of them coinciding with a personified vision of nature – a mysterious ' | ||
Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
A new turn emerged in 2017, when progress in genomics revealed the plant origin of a large portion of the non-coding human genome, giving rise to the second H-P movement. But the metaphysical revolution predicted by authors like Jin-Ti Karlova never really happened, mainly because – according to Perrez – the debate has been monopolized by an academic elite, confusing the ' | A new turn emerged in 2017, when progress in genomics revealed the plant origin of a large portion of the non-coding human genome, giving rise to the second H-P movement. But the metaphysical revolution predicted by authors like Jin-Ti Karlova never really happened, mainly because – according to Perrez – the debate has been monopolized by an academic elite, confusing the ' | ||
- | But the story does not end there. Beyond an accurate analysis of the second H-P movement, Rosalind Perrez wants to convince us that the case of the ' | + | But the story does not end there. Beyond an accurate analysis of the second H-P movement, Rosalind Perrez wants to convince us that the case of the ' |
related topics: [[parn]] | related topics: [[parn]] |