Make Space: Unchopping A Tree

This paper takes Maya Lin's video Unchopping A Tree as the object for analysis in the context of Gladwin's concept of spatial in/justice. By applying this concept, the relationship between human and nonhuman space in Lin's work is assessed as it enables these posthumanist terms to be applied to the two types of depicted space, the city parks and the rainforest. By first determining the difference in space it will then be concluded that Lin reconciles this difference through an assimilation of temporality and through the use of a visual medium that projects a responsibility of change and understanding onto the audience.

Before progressing to a close reading of the object it is first justified to define these posthumanist terms. To clarify, the nonhuman framework used greatly in application for this paper comes from Granjou and Salazar who, in the context of the future, define the term as animals, plants, matter, ecological and physical forces (241). Only through appreciating what is considered nonhuman in this context can one begin to unpack the juxtaposition of human and nonhuman space.

Unchopping A Tree is a short video taken from Lin's global and final memorial, a website named What Is Missing?. The website itself focuses on issues of rapidly decreasing biodiversity and habitat loss in a more accessible manner, in comparison to a traditional scientific outlook. The project draws on themes of memory and humankind's relationship with nature and the space that it inhabits. As suggested in the video's title, the central theme addresses deforestation as an environmental crisis.

Throughout the four-minute video the viewer is exposed to multiple lingering shots of prominent city parks that are each accompanied by text. The wording for each shot informs the viewer how long it would take for these areas to be destroyed through deforestation at the same rate that rainforests are currently being cut down. The comparison of the size of famous parks to unknown damaged forests alters how the audience perceives what environment and nature mean to them. It is to be hoped that the emotion provoked would be a heightened concern for nature as something that is being destroyed by us, humankind, but also something that we are actively involved in maintaining and enjoying. Lin aids us to remember that nature does not just exist in distant forests, but also in our immediate surrounding areas, the city parks as the essential example.

Over each park shot, the text claims that these areas are already destroyed. For example, “CENTRAL PARK NEW YORK CITY, USA DESTROYED IN 9 MINUTES”. After a transition to other famous parks and statements on deforestation, the video continues with thirty seconds of rewound footage of a tree being chopped down, its unchopping. The video concludes with the statement: “WE CAN'T UNCHOP A TREE. BUT WE CAN NOT CHOP IT DOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE. OR WE CAN PLANT A NEW TREE SUSTAINABLY”. This proclamation asserts the goal of the video - to inspire change through depicting the impacts of deforestation on both a global and local (glocal) scale. This inspiration is confirmed in the outcome of the video. However, it will be argued that Unchopping A Tree achieves this goal through depicting the distance in human and nonhuman spaces. The video does more than inspire: it opens up questions of spatial theory, how one sees the Other (the nonhuman) and how such disconnect has created environmental crises that can only be fixed through some form of reconciliation.

Lin's video is addressed through its use and depiction of space and the connotations that thus arise. Working from a broader background of scholars, the main approach is from Gladwin's concept of spatial in/justice, an application of spatial theory within environmental humanities where one can investigate the unjust circumstances influenced from history and society as primarily affecting humans and nonhumans across the globe (Gladwin 36). Only by defining and distinguishing between different types of space can one begin to address the distance in this affecting relationship (Gladwin 16).

Building on the work of Edward Soja's spatial justice (2010), Gladwin reiterates that space is never an empty vacuum; it is always filled with meaning, politics and ideology that create challenges with geography (Gladwin 15; Soja 9). Removing spatial theory from the environmental humanities' definition, the notion simply reflects how where one finds oneself in space, in combination with forms of marginalisation, affects the equality of treatment in society (Gladwin 15). Hence, there is a difference in treatment depending on the qualification of an area as human or nonhuman space.

The rephrasing to the reflexive 'in/justice' of Gladwin's concept, referring to unjust and just conditions of space (16), promotes progression from Soja to create a more exclusive approach to environmentalism. Soja focused on the relationship between geography and space as disciplines constructing justice relations (Williams 169), yet Gladwin looks forward with environmental humanities, leaning towards Schlosberg's environmental justice as an awareness of how humans are involved in, and seamlessly manipulate, nature and the environment (Schlosberg 43-4). This increased inclination to a perceived anthropocentric worldview draws on the depiction of space in Lin's video as showing spatial injustice towards the (rain)forest - a distant, imagined and socially constructed space that, through visual art, creates unification with more human spaces and promotes the viewer to identify their existential and creative relationships to such environments (Gladwin 5).

Gladwin's concept is directly applicable to Unchopping A Tree because it does exactly the opposite of this anthropocentric worldview. By concluding that humans are inherently spatial, we define spaces in order to validate our existence on Earth (Gladwin 36, 53), it is entirely appropriate to take spatial in/justice as a central focus in culture. By drawing spatial theory in with environmental humanities, the human species becomes decentralised and the nonhuman is elevated (Gladwin 52) thus the portrayal of these different spaces in Lin's video allows for the narrative of the nonhuman to be spoken for in order to equate it with the human.

By looking towards definitions of space one can garner better understanding of its difference in Unchopping A Tree. Space is concluded to be socially produced (Gladwin 16; Soja; Williams 162) and Lin directly depicts such socially constructed areas. For the purposes of this paper the different spaces have been paralleled with posthumanist terms. The lingering park shots show the human spaces, areas of nature within an urban scope. They all depict distinct human impact, for example, the New York buildings surrounding Central Park or the Eiffel Tower in Champs de Mars hence their spatial aligning with the human. The juxtaposed nonhuman space therefore is the forest containing the unchopping footage that concludes the video. The midpoint framing statistic of “90 ACRES OF RAINFOREST ARE DESTROYED EVERY MINUTE” suggests where the unchopped tree is situated - a nameless rainforest - and thus it becomes the nonhuman as ascribed to the definition previously outlined (Granjou and Salazar 241). There is no (urban/direct) human involvement or shots of humans in the unchopping footage, thus displaying the distance between the two types of space. The focus on the one tree as a specimen of nonhuman also aids distinction. By labelling these spaces as different to begin with, progression is made to state how Lin deconstructs this binary within the video to create an inspiration for action in spatial justice by depicting the injustice that underlies it.

Gladwin's concept goes past defining the abstract idea of space and looks towards “place” as a term to be understood as “space imbued with meaning” (29). If space is socially constructed, “place” takes this idea further. It is a crucial concept when looking toward creative visual texts like the video as it links human perception and experience (29). Environmental activists and ecologists identify place, areas known as bioregions that have a focus in biodiversity, as key to understanding ecological concerns (Gladwin 31). From this definition Lin's unchopped forest becomes a place, rather than a meaningless space. It becomes imbued with meaning and the viewer is forced to associate the forest with the human places that already have been displayed - the parks. The forest is now instilled with feelings of concern from the viewer through an assimilation with the parks.

The assimilation of the human and nonhuman spaces, parks and forest, to places, is created by Lin through the overlaying text on the park shots. By claiming that the areas are already destroyed, following with the statistic of 90 acres of rainforest destruction and then proceeding to the unchopping footage, the video progresses to show different attitudes to nature and the environment. The audience is happy to protect and enjoy the human places, those spaces immediately impacting their mostly urban lives, yet is unwilling to see the destruction outside of the human jurisdiction. However, the nonhuman rainforest becomes assimilated with the human parks through a shared fear of destruction.

The temporality of the video aids this assimilation of spaces/places. The use of past tense “destroyed” creates memorials of the parks even though one knows they still exist. This brings up questions of what we, as humans, want to consider and remember as nature, what aspects of the environment we want to mourn. The viewer is faced with potential ecological destruction on their doorstep through Lin's narrative of deforestation. The video identifies imagined spaces that become real and in danger through this visual context. The visual medium therefore aims to influence how the audience acts on their relationship with the environment. The reality of What Is Missing? as a project focusing on endangered species also frames the video's reception of space. By assimilating the two types of space, Lin successfully highlights that all areas need protection and consideration, yet also emphasises human involvement with the nonhuman. Humans must realise that we are also part of an ecosystem where our species is susceptible to extinction, the distinction between human and nonhuman becomes worthless and action through reconciliation becomes focal.

By transforming the rainforest from a space to a place within the narrative of the video, Lin creates a message of action and activism. This is a common trope of environmental movements, according to Gladwin, and explains why the choice of a visual medium, through the video and the website, is so important. Rather than changing and commanding place (Gladwin 30), Lin has created a plot around spaces from which direct action can be inspired. She has shown how the nonhuman forest, as a previously imagined space, ignored by the everyday human, is just as important as the real inhabited and human places (Gladwin 30) and thus creates spatial justice by reclaiming this forgotten nonhuman through the visual.

Application of spatial theory to environmental humanities has culminated in Gladwin's concept of spatial in/justice. By applying this concept to Unchopping A Tree it highlights the inequality of spaces and those beings who inhabit them. By assimilating the city parks with the damaged rainforest and its (un)chopped trees, Lin has created an inspiring piece of visual art and activism that promotes change within the relationship of people and the environment, the human and nonhuman.