This page was created by Alison Morgan. The last update was by students at Xavier University.
Scott Russell Sanders
Within most of these essays, Sanders examines his Midwestern background, his father’s drinking, his opposition to war, his literary inheritance, and his feeling for wilderness (Scott Russell Sanders). Sanders’ tackles other issues such as the disruption of Earth’s climate, the impact of technology, the mystique of money, the ideology of consumerism, and the meaning of sustainability. There are a couple of penal questions that Sander’s proposes in accordance with nature such as: How should we treat one another and the Earth? And what is our role in the cosmos? Sander’s gathers his inspiration on writing this book through the pondering of people’s lives on a communal platform starting from the micro-level of the family and expanding to the macro-level in accordance with nature. In an interview with the Englewood Review, Sanders is quoted as saying that “These…..perennial human questions, and my response to them is only one among a host of responses. That these questions can never be definitively answered does not mean one can avoid asking them” (Scott Russell Sanders). One essay that sticks out the most and seems to answer most of these questions is the essay titled “The Common Life”.
In accordance with all the other essays within Sanders book titled Earth, this essay seeks to answer the question of humanity’s placement within the cosmos. Each essay has a specific level of analysis in which some essays analyze humanity’s placement within the cosmos on a macro-level and a micro-level. “The Common Life” falls within the macro-level in which it seeks to analyze how individualistic culture has negatively impacted the earth. Most of the essays start off with a positive image of his family and life style. He then proceeds to compare the family even taking place with the current state of nature outside. Usually after the beautiful depiction of what is going on during the day, Sanders enters into a moment of criticism of the world on a macro-level. As a solution to these problems, he uses his family background story as a basis for achieving some type of solution to save the Earth from decay. “The Common Life” also expresses similar themes to other essays written in the book such as individualism, selfishness, preservation of the Earth, communal relations, and the importance of being dependent to the Earth.
Literary Analysis
In Scott Russell Sanders’s essay “The Common Life”, Sanders argues that “…loving company, neighborliness, inherited knowledge and good work, shared purpose, sensual delight, and union with creation – sums up for me what is vital in community…In our common life we may find the strength not merely to carry on in face of the world’s bad news, but to resist cruelty and waste” (Sanders 165). Sanders wrote this essay because of a reminiscent moment in his life where his daughter comes home from college and she invites their neighbor’s young children over to indulge in baking bread. Sander sees the situation as soothing. He reflects on the weather for the day in saying that the smell of the baked goods compliments the sunny and fresh April day. Sanders transitions into how even though this scene is comforting to him, the world is still in disorder and chaos. He critiques American culture by calling it “individualistic”. In his essay, Sanders seeks to identify green art first by showing his readers what is not, which he examines the legal system, religion, media and literature, and war culture when green art is actually a communitarian lifestyle that focuses on the relation between humanity and the earth.
The idea of green art is prevalent in Sanders article. For non-fiction literature, green art is a representation of a communitarian lifestyle that focuses on the relation between humanity as a whole and its relation to the earth. The actions alone of Sanders’s family, and the daughters of the next-door neighbors symbolize the aspect of engaging in communitarian activities. For example, Sanders talks about how the knowledge of making bread was passed down from generations onwards (164). The passing of knowledge itself has the qualities of communitarian characteristic because it makes people have to rely on one another to achieve knowledge. This article can also be considered green art because of humanities dependence on Earth. For example when Sanders mentions the activities that take place after the bread is finished, he states “The lump in your mouth is a chunk of Earth; there is nothing else to eat. In our house we say grace before meals, to remind ourselves of that gift and that dependence” (165). Without the Earth providing humanity with food, shelter, water and other necessities, humanity would not survive in this world, and the community would never emerge. Sanders’ sees this dependence on Earth as a positive dependence through the small epiphanies that he encounters while analyzing the interactions between his daughter and the neighbors children. He glorifies this sense of community so much that he compares many of the movements made in the kitchen to the sunny, spring April day saying that they “…jostled like birds too numerous for a nest” (162-163). Although Sanders analyzes his family as doing what humanity was destined to do, which is to depend on one another and the Earth, he believes that American culture has taught people the opposite, which is to say that this culture has harmed Earth.
Sanders begins his argument by critiquing American culture and calling it an individualistic culture. He proceeds to divide our understanding of individualistic culture into four categories which are our individualism being taught through the legal system, religion, media and literature, and war culture. In terms of legal individualism, Sander’s begins by giving a brief historical overview of the European contact with Native Americans and the establishment of the U.S. regime based on private property, which had an impact on the U.S. laws. Sanders states, “Our criminal justice system is so careful to protect the rights of individuals that it may require years to convict a bank robber who killed a bystander in front of a crowd, or a bank official who left a trail of embezzlement as wide as the Mississippi” (Sanders 166). Sanders believes that the legal system is so tainted with individualism that it actual promotes violence and reckless behavior instead of rightfully convicting an individual who has enough evidence to be proven wrong. Sanders’ furthers his condemnation of legal individualism by ridiculing the second amendment. He states, “Thus, by reading the Second Amendment through the lens of individualism, we have turned a provision for public safety into a guarantee of public danger” (167). Sanders’ analysis of the U.S. law and constitution shows that American citizens have no obligation to one another but instead they allow these laws to become a foundation in life. This results in the lack of responsibility and accountability of each other, which makes people become more separated from each other instead of promoting community. Ultimately, American society has understood freedom negatively rather than positively because they focus on the release of being constrained rather than making a decent life through community.
Sanders also believes that the American-Western religions promote individualism. Within the same section where he critiques colonialism and the first interaction between Europeans and Native Americans, Sanders believes that religion plays a crucial role in increasing individualism. Sanders states, “Our religion has been marked by an evangelical Protestantism that emphasizes personal salvation rather than social redemption. To ‘Get Right with God,’ as signs along the roads her in the Midwest gravely recommend. Does not mean to reconcile your fellow citizens to the divine order, but to make a separate peace, to look after the eternal future of your own singular soul” (166). Although these religions do have a few communal aspects, Sanders believed that through these religious doctrines they ultimately further the individualism in America. As a result, Sanders believes that religions contribution to society results in failed utopias.
Individualism is also identified and taught in American culture through media and literature. Sanders’ describes American literature and media as celebrating drifter, rebels, and loners, which takes away from the community. For example, a few movies and literature that Sanders’ critics is Huckleberry Finn, Kate Chopin’s The Awakening, and films such as The Invasion of the Body Snatchers. In terms of literature, Sanders states “In our literature, when community enters at all, it is likely to appear as a conspiracy against the free soul of a hero or heroine” and in media and film regarding Invasion of the Body Snatcher, he states “Along with dozens of other invasion tales, the film was a warning against Communism, I suppose but it was also a caution against the perils of belonging, of losing our sweet self in the group, and thus it projected a fear as old as America” (168). Although the main characters in American media and literature are portrayed in a positive heroic fashion, media and literature are neglecting the importance of community in order to have one person save the world or humanity. As a result, according to Sanders “The majority opinion fills best-seller lists and cinema screens and billboards with isolated, alienated, rebellious figures who are too potent or sensitive for membership in any group” (168). Through media and literature, individualism is perpetuated in American culture even more, which contributes to the lack of community and care for others.
Along with media and literature, the impact of war culture on people contributes to an individualistic American culture. Sanders begins by describing domestically how people flock to certain groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, gangs, and religious groups (169). The only contrast that Sanders has with these groups and the community is that these groups do not seek to include everyone but instead, they choose to cause danger and focus on their own goals. This ultimately makes them selfish and individualistic as a group. He proceeds from this notion to then analyze how war does the same for the American public. Sanders states that “Anyone who has lived through a war knows that mobs may pretend to speak for an entire nation. I recently saw, for the first time in a long while, a bumper sticker that recalled for me the angriest days of the Vietnam War: AMERICA – LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT” (169). This creates an “Us versus Them” doctrine that does not promote community. Instead, it promotes individualism with the exclusion of those who don’t agree with the actions of their government. According to Sanders, this is a form of despotism because the actions of the government become the actions of the many. The result of this is that it results in the lack of change and acceptance of diversity of opinions. Also, one’s disagreeing beliefs make them become ostracized from the community whereas Sanders is arguing for an inclusive nature of community.
According to Sanders, the influence of individualism through the legal system, religion, media and literature, and war culture, individualism has a negative impact on the Earth. Sander’s says that as a result “What we have too often neglected, in our revulsion against tyranny and our worship of the individual, is the common good” (170). Sanders believes that since society lacks a common good due to individualism, it is visible in the decay of cities, despoiling of land, the fouling of rivers and air, the haphazard commercial sprawl along highways, the glutinous feeding at the public trough, the mortgaging of people’s children and grandchildren’s future through the refusal to pay for current consumption. People would rather be considered consumers instead of conservers or restorers of the Earth’s abundance. Sanders’ believes that humanity has a dependence on the Earth to provide people with these products that they buy on a consistent basis. He ultimately believes that American culture has made people become acquisitive with the end in sight being rich. Although philosophers such as Adam Smith promoted the pursuit of private wealth should result in unlimited public goods, Sanders believes this was a lie. He goes even further as saying “Wealth does not precipitate like dew from air; it comes out of the Earth and from the labor of many hands. When a few hands hold on to great wealth, using it only for personal ease and display, that is a betrayal of the common life, the sole source of riches” (170). So, the result of individualism leads people to acquire riches, but this further separates people from one another, which creates a world of chaos because it means that other people will use force to take from those who have more or people who have more won’t share what they have with others. Ultimately, this betrays the common life and neglects the dependence that mankind has on the Earth’s resources.
While Sanders believes that all of American culture is individualistic, he does acknowledge that there is some form of community being taught to people, but it is only applicable in places such as schools, town halls, and museums. He begins by talking about Alexis de Tocqueville’s account of the United States in which Tocqueville describes Americans’ as “carried to the highest perfection the art of pursuing in common the object of their desires…In no country in the world, do the citizens make such exertions for the common weal. I know of no people who have established schools so numerous and efficacious, places of public worship better suited to the wants of the inhabitants, or roads kept in better pair” (171). These institutions are positive, but they are mainly driven by common desires and passions. These common desires and passions aren’t individualistic enough to be exposed in American society in which Sanders is quoted as saying “This history of local care hardly ever makes it into our literature, for it is less glamorous than rebellion, yet it is a crucial part of our heritage” (171). Those who seek to advance institutions such as schools and town halls are not represented in American culture because of the over exposed images of independent, loner attitude. This is all the more reason why Sanders believes that the common life is the solution to this backwards-individualistic society that seems to be causing more chaos than good.
After critiquing American culture and the negative impact that individualism has on the Earth, Sanders proposes that the common life is the only solution to saving the Earth. According to Sanders the common life is a simple life surrounded “in a web of relationships, the many threads tugging at you while also holding you upright” (173). Sanders’ believes that these communities arise not from obligations or money but from the free exchange of people who share a place, share work and food, sorrows and hope. Inevitably, people differ from one another, but Sanders believes that as long as we respect these differences and the things that people have in common, communities will thrive and last longer (173). This is what Sanders considers the “give-and-take” method that will last longer than any national anthem or religion that is obligated to hold people together. If people do not learn to live together, then humanity’s survival is at stake. As a result, Sander’s believes that “We need to make of this common life not merely a metaphor, although we live metaphors, and not merely a story, although we live by stories; we need to make the common life a fact of the heart” (176). Sanders concludes that all life forms on Earth have one source in which they come from, which is the planet Earth. Sanders believes that humanity should suppress their individual attitudes and come together as a community to save the Earth from further decay, learn to live with one another, and embrace the dependence of humanity to the Earth.
Overall, Sanders’ critic of American culture and its negative impact on the Earth lead to the common life being the solution to the decay of the Earth. His premise of the common life also fits within the definition of green art because it focuses on the innate dependency that human beings have for one another, and the dependency that humanity has on the world. Unfortunately, Sanders believes that in American culture, people are taught individualism through the law, religion, media and literature, and war. While all of these categories have sought to expand the state of humanity, these categories have done nothing but separate people and humanities dependence to the Earth. Through the common life, which is the simple life aimed at forming relationships and connecting people together, this is the only solution to save the Earth from decay, acknowledge humanities dependence to the Earth, and bring people closer together by addressing what people do have in common versus what is different between people.
Works Cited:
“Scott Russell Sanders.” Accessed March 18, 2016. http://www.scottrussellsanders.com/biog.html.
Sanders, Scott Russell. Earth Works: Selected Essays. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2012.
