Todd Davis brought a new theme to my idea of Mennonite
Literature. Nearly all of the Mennonite writers I have studied so far have
written about nature in some way: Di Brandt’s “This land that I love, this
wide, wide prairie” and her “The Zone: <le Détroit>” series, Sylvia Bubalo’s “WHEN YOU MENTION APOCALYPSE,”
Brandt’s comment that she cannot “write the land,” etc. However, they all use the context of
nature’s beauty and reverence. Sylvia uses nature to give God credit for
creating such beauty. Di Brandt uses nature’s beauty juxtaposed with pollution
and environmental issue to encourage environmental awareness.
Davis’s relationship with nature is much different than each
of those. He sees nature in its raw forms and loves its simplicity. He depicts
images of car crashes caused by a foggy cliff in “Veil,” an osprey killing its
prey quickly and without hesitation in “Doctrine,” his father turning into
compost and joining earth in “Turning the Compost at 50,” and burning the earth
for its own good and competing against coyotes for the life of their sheep in “Taxonomy.”
Davis seems to see nature in its simplest form, and he loves that simplicity. He
embraces natures ability to take brutal action without overthinking the
situation. Perhaps this is something he didn’t have in his own life growing up.
Or perhaps this idea happily contrasts to the new Mennonite theme of
approaching nature and God from extremely academic standpoints.
I agree! I thought Davis had an interesting perspective on nature, and not one we have heard from other writers so far. I did see some similarities, however, between Brandt's work and his that you didn't mention. I think in her assertion that she "can't write the land," also points to nature's simplicity. It diverges from Davis's perspective in that he speaks about the violence inherent in nature and she speaks about the violence done by humans to nature.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting point. I thought Davis tried to justify the violence of nature in Kingdom of the Ditch "who mercifully fills the belly of one, then offers it to the other". Yet we have Brandt criticizing the violence done toward nature by humans. If violence is a justified part of nature, where does humanity fit into the mix?
ReplyDeleteKolton--good insight into Davis' embrace of the violence inherent in nature. He wants to see and appreciate it all--it beauty and mortality, including the violence inherent in the predator and prey relationship. Hayley has a good point here, too--that both Brandt and Davis try to relate directly to nature through their writing, and bring the reader closer to understanding its power. Also, she's correct in attributing "I cannot write the land" to Brandt, not Kasdorf. I am curious about what you mean by "the new Mennonite theme of approaching nature and God from extremely academic standpoints."
ReplyDelete