Landscapes of the Sacred2 - Spencer Beeson

"the traditional native conviction that nature “talks back,” that it participates in the experience humans have of it.”
At first it’s thought, how can nature talk back? This abstract concept is hard to wrap the mind around. This brought me to think of the idea that, what seems like many, humans believe these days. This is the idea that humans are separate from nature, that nature is some obstacle, something that can be conquered. This is clearly not true; humans are as much a part of nature as the trees or the animals in the forest. So how can nature talk? Well, humans are nature and they talk, birds can chirp. Every animal with vocal chords or a way of producing sound can communicate, but what about trees or a desert? It seems as if every part of nature can communicate in some way or another, but why do we only recognize the ones we can hear? The inaudible aspects of nature must have a way to communicate, and this is through a feeling. Nature has to participate in the experience humans have of it. If it didn’t then humans could not have the experience of it. How could humans feel in awe or mesmerized by a place if it was not participating in some way or another? This holds true with the first of Lane’s four axioms, that sacred place chooses it is not chosen. There is no doubt that place participates in the sacred experience. If a place can’t physically talk then it must communicate with the human in one of their other senses. Take the desert for example, it makes little sound but the heat is overwhelming. The sun reflects of the dry cracked desert floor and gives the human a feeling. The desert uses other elements to communicate with you. Another example is the forest. The tree itself cannot talk but it does make a sound when the wind blows against its leaves. This is evidence that nature “talks back.”