The Druid's Garden

Spiritual Journeys in Tending the Land, Permaculture, Wildcrafting, and Regenerative Living

Community and Connectedness: Extending our understanding of “tribe” September 30, 2013

Sociologist Geert Hosfede* has a set of cultural dimensions (which you can look at here) that helps us understand broad differences in culture. These aren’t absolute by any means, but they do give us some baseline indications of how cultures differ for the purpose of understanding intercultural communication. One of these cultural dimensions is his concept of “individualism” which indicates the extent to which a culture is based on individualism (focus on the self) vs. the community (which could be a family unit, a tribe, a town, or even a country). But in today’s blog post I really want to focus on this idea of individualism and collectivism, and the shades of gray between these two binary terms. (*As an aside, Hosfede’s other dimensions are equally fascinating, for those of you interested in these kinds of things.  Hosfede’s dimensions do work under binary assumptions, that is, the opposite of individualism is collectivism.  False binaries aside, its still a useful rubric through which to consider these issues, even if it does simplify them.)

 

Druids around the fire at the latest OBOD East Coast Gathering (photo from John Beckett)

Druids around the fire at the latest OBOD East Coast Gathering (photo from John Beckett)

The United States and many other western industrialized nations seem to be very highly individualistic societies, which manifests itself in our culture in the idea of pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps, individual rewards for individual actions, a focus on individual achievement, and, especially in the latter part of the 20th and early 21st century, a whole lot of isolationism and solitude. In my experience in living in four different states in the USA, we don’t seem to have strong bonds, even within our families, and most of us these days barely know our neighbors. We seem to have more loyalty to company brands than we do to people–and everything in our culture is structured this way purposefully, to get us to buy and consume. The idea of “me” and the “self” seems to be the most important to us; narcissism is a key American quality among our younger generations. This seems to be exacerbated by current technology which emphasizes the individual and his/her actions (Facebook’s wall, Twitter, etc.).  I make these observations partially just as someone living in this culture, but also as a professional who teaches college-age students for a living. I see the difficulties these students face with defining themselves, with their relations, and their uses of technology that seem to isolate more than they bring together.

 

Collective cultures, on the other hand, work on the level of the family or the tribe, where bonds of community are central. This leads to things like strong family bonds, extended families living and taking care of each other, and family/tribal honor. I had the opportunity to spend time with a group of close friends who were students from Korea while in graduate school–I was amazed by the bonds that they formed, their gift-giving and kindness.  One said to me once, “Dana, why is it that everyone in America asks ‘How are you?’ but nobody actually wants to know?”  The OBOD East Coast Gathering, which I blogged about last week, is another example of a tribe forming–its something that transcends the individual, and allows a supportive community to grow.

 

The USA used to have a more collective culture in its past. This is particularly true when communities had to work together for mutual survival.  Families and communities banded together, raised structures together, found/grown/hunted and preserved food together, ate meals together, and so forth, because being isolated from the community in times previous to this one likely meant death. (You can see the remnants of this in old colonial dances, where you danced with everyone in the community to build communal bonds rather than with a single partner, or older fraternal orders, like the Grange, who banded together to aid rural communities and farmers.  Laura Ingalls Wilder’s novels also have great examples of community-oriented experiences.)

 

I’d like to propose that individualism causes particular kinds of troubling trends, and would like to suggest that if we draw upon the idea of the “tribe” and extend that “tribe” quite far, it gives us positive ways of interacting with the world.  One of the problems I see with a heavy focus on the self is that it makes us lose the bonds of community and connectedness; and these two qualities are really what make us human and make life worth living.  If we disconnect ourselves from other human beings, we have less altruism, less care and compassion.  We end up with political movements like the present-day Tea Party, which is essentially an exercise in selfishness.  Since when did helping out fellow human beings become a problem? Since when is altruism a dirty word?  Another problem with the heavy focus on self is that it disconnects us from the healing power of nature–we see ourselves as disconnected from the whole, we don’t see the consequences of our actions, and we begin to treat nature like something that is ours to own and exploit rather than our mother and nurturer.

 

Traditional cultures throughout the world were also much more collectivist–the idea of “tribe” or “clan” (such as those in ancient Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) all followed this collectivist model.  We can see these tales of tribe, of clan, of family, woven into so much of the mythology and folklore of many peoples (read the Mabinogion with this in mind). We can also see the idea of collectivism reflected in everyday interactions–in its height of power, the Iroquois nation used an elaborate system of consensus-based diplomacy to encourage fairness and equity among its members.  Even though it was made up of five (and later six) different peoples and tribes, its bonds of brotherhood were solidified by rituals and discussions in order to maintain stability and peace amongst its members (although how outsiders were treated was a different subject of discussion). In this, the bonds of family and tribe are central to living and interaction in the world.

 

What is part of our tribe? Wood sorrel?

Wood sorrel is part of my tribe! 🙂

Some cultures, such as most of those indigenous to the Americas, took the notion of tribe a step further and went so far as to include non-human persons (animals, plants, stones, etc.) within their idea of tribe.  This is the concept of animism, and remains central to understanding much indigenous cultural interaction (such as those examples provided by Dale Everett in his interactions with the Pirahas his book Don’t Sleep There are Snakes).  A basic animistic philosophy suggests a “belief in spirits”, the idea that every living being (and sometimes rocks and other so-called “inanimate” objects, have a spirit and a soul).  In his book Animism: Respecting the Living World, Graham Harvey examines four groups: Native Americans, Maori, Aboriginal Australians, and Eco-pagans to show how their animistic philosophy is enacted by expanding the concept of tribe, where being with, speaking, interaction, and engaging in magic surrounding the living, spirit filled world is a critical part of the human condition.

 

Can we once again build tribes among our fellow humans? Can we expand our own notion of the “tribe” to include all life on this planet? If we do this, what do we gain?  I would like to think that by doing this, we gain a great deal, and we begin to shift some of the destructive trends in human thinking and action; trends in thinking that have caused substantial environmental destruction, the destruction of whole peoples and cultures, and the inevitable loss in diversity that goes with such destruction.  Instead, we can focus on our connection to each other and to the land, and the community that such connection brings.

Advertisements
 

The anthropocene and the rights of non-human persons February 8, 2013

We have entered a new age, what scientists are calling the “Anthropocene,” otherwise termed the “Human Epoch” by geologists. This means, for the first time in history, rather than having meteorological activity, substantial volcanic activity, or other natural phenomena which affect the entire planet’s ecology and geology, we have human-driven activity affecting it on a larger scale. To get a sense of the enormity of this fact, the Planet Under Pressure conference put out an informative website and video.  Here’s their video (their State of the Planet declaration is also worth a read):

 

More evidence about reaching our limits, or “overshooting” beyond them, can be found in the Limits to Growth, which does a very thorough, if not depressing, job of showing the human-driven stresses on our planet (and I’ve blogged about this book before).  These limits aren’t just felt by humans–but rather, all life on this planet is being radically impacted.

 

While scientists, policy makers, and the general public can continue to debate efforts to move towards sustainable solutions (or, worse, debate the fact that we are even causing problems), which are likely not to come in time to do any real good at least in the USA, perhaps what is being lost in here are the rights of other species–plant, animal, insect, and microbial–to life and the space to grow.  These are often called “non-human persons” in animistic thinking, the idea that you can be a person and not be human, to have a soul, a spirit, a set of unalienable rights.

 

Its something we don’t usually discuss: the rights of non-human persons.  But perhaps we should.  Bolivia recently made international headlines by enacting a law that contains eleven principles giving “Mother Earth” legal rights.  Now I want to clarify–my understanding of these is that they aren’t considered “protections” as much as actual “rights” and that’s a world of difference.  In the USA, we have the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whose job is supposed to consist of protecting our natural environment.  These protections are usually shoddy, underfunded, and corrupt.  In other words, we have a shoddy agency trying to save face while corporations and individuals continue to do whatever they damn well please.

 

Whether or not Bolivia will be able to overcome their oil and profit-driven industry’s motives and create something new that goes beyond paper and into practice is another story.  At this point, the law is a start, an intention, and we’ll need to see how it plays out and if this is first in a larger series of movements that make us recognize that our tribe must extend beyond fellow humans and to encompass all life.

 

The rights of all...

The rights of all…

An animistic perspective has something to offer to this discussion as well.  In animism, all living things (birds, trees) and natural material objects (rivers, stones) possess a spirit, a soul, something that transcends their physical well being.  (We can set this in stark contrast to the view held in various Christian religions, where only humans have souls).  This means that when you destroy a tree, or a river, or some other natural thing, you aren’t just destroying the physical thing, but you are also impacting a spiritual entity connected to the same web of life that you, yourself are connected to.  I think that thinking about the world in these terms makes us understand why mother nature, as a whole, and individual spirits within her great web (birds, plants, rivers) should have rights–the same rights that humans enjoy.

 

For who can decide what has the right to live, the right to consume resources, the right to take up space, and who does not?  Is that really our right as human beings? I would argue that in this age, we need to stop thinking about our rights and start thinking about those whose rights have been trampled.  We need to take more positive actions as Bolivia is attempting, we need to recognize and own up to the consequences of our own behaviors, and we need to build a better world.

 

Living With Rather than Against Nature July 31, 2012

A central concept in Druidry is peace.  At the beginning of each druidic ritual, we declare peace in the quarters.  We a say a prayer for peace (which you can see in my painting I posted earlier this year).  But all of this is lip service unless you work, consciously and tirelessly, to enact peace in your daily life. And this includes living at peace with all living things.

 

And what does this peaceful living look like? Well, one way that peace can be enacted is by re-evaluating our relationship with the natural world.  Humans often engage in an unnecessarily adversarial relationship with nature.  Why is this?  On a larger scale its simple—we have unbalanced nature in various ways and we take up too much space.  We don’t allow wild spaces to flourish—we must control them, plant them full of things that don’t belong and may cause imbalances in the ecosystem, dump them full of chemicals that harm all who come in contact with them, maintain them with fossil fuels that heat up our world, or worse, cover them over with concrete.

 

Take something as innocuous as the dandelion. Most yard owners work to eradicate it and are at “war” with it, as some recent chemical commercials for eradicating dandelions seem to suggest. And all this war against dandelions is for reasons I simply can’t understand (since it is medicinal, edible, and breaks up compacted soil, looks very whimsical and beautiful, among other things). The yard is far from a natural, balanced natural state.  In fact, the yard is quite “unnatural”; as described in Gaia’s Garden, its a throwback to the Victorian Era when wealthy landowners could afford to keep big swaths of land for no purposes other than their amusement and keep cropped close to the ground by sheep. Its a status symbol, a symbol of the bourgeois. So why do dandelions keep growing in your yard? Likely because your yard has compacted soil, which means the soil is very hard packed from repeatedly mowing it with heavy equipment, making it difficult for anything other than grass to grow. Dandelions come in and break up that soil so that other things can later take root. In other words, dandelions are the first stage of nature healing your yard. Yet yard owners dump millions of pounds of chemicals trying to eradicate something that is like nature’s cry for help. And so, we call the wild things that aid nature’s regrowth process “weeds” and declare war on them, and we call things that we import halfway across the world and plant without thought to their relationship to the native ecosystem as “plants” and pamper them. And, like all things, an industry has built up around maintaining the myth that dandelions are bad and that you need to buy products to eradicate them.

 

Mixed Media piece I finished a few years ago.  I "liberated" a rusty chainsaw from a forest that was logged to create a story of peace and healing.

Mixed Media piece I finished a few years ago. I “liberated” a rusty chainsaw from a forest that was logged to create a story of peace and healing.

So called “nuisance” animals are another example of humanity’s war with nature. Yes, there is no doubt that a groundhog is a nuisance in your garden. I learned this firsthand this year, and will tell that story at some point in this blog. But even so, the high prevalence of groundhogs, raccoons, squirrels, moles, mice and other animals have more to do with the impact of human activity than their own. Humans have taken unprecedented amounts of land, turned it into–spirits forbid–lawns, slaughtered these creatures’ natural predators and disrupted the food chain. After all of this,  we then wonder why we have problems with groundhogs? And again, the “solution” often ends in the taking of a life: the dropping of poisoned food into holes, trapping them, shooting them, etc. And of course, let’s not forget the countless products and services that can be purchased to aid the frustrated homeowner in their approach to killing or otherwise eradicating nuisance animals (because all of these relationships, today, are tied to consumerism).

 

Where does this adversarial “man vs. wild” relationship come from?  Many places.  Cultural narratives we gain through advertising that teach us that “weeds are bad” and the best way of getting rid of them is by going to your local big box store and buying some expensive chemicals to dump to solve your problem.  And this consumerist culture is so short-sighted that it doesn’t consider the long-term ramifications of dumping chemical after chemical to solve perceived problem after problem.  Housing associations and local township ordinances (such as my own in Independence Township, MI) that literally ban beneficial “roadside weeds” like chicory from appearing in your front yard. Books on lawn care, gardening, etc, that ascribe to philosophies that do not privilege whole-ecosystems designs.

 

But I suspect that the root cause an underlying cultural narrative, developed over centuries, that is the product of a Christian-focused worldview.  The American worldview, one that was (and is) very heavily influenced by the Bible, we see that the book of Genesis immediately puts humans and plant/animal kingdoms in an adversarial relationship. Adam was given the power to name animals and to lord over them. This view gives humans the perceived right to do just that—dominate, create war, and generally shape nature to their demands. Manifest destiny, the philosophy of US government and society that stripped millions of acres away from their rightful indigenous owners, is just another version of this “power over others” philosophy (and in the case of Native Americans, it is power over “heathens.”) If you look at some of the reasons that Europeans wanted to find new land at all, it came down to natural resources (which were dwindling in Europe) and exploitation (read the history of North Carolina and the Long-Needle Pine and shipbuilding, for an example of this). And if you read many journals of the early colonials and others who were working to own/colonize/exploit the Americas, you’ll see them referencing their “God-given right” to do so. That’s not to say that all Christians today ascribe to this philosophy–in more liberal Christian views, discussions of “eco-spirituality” abound.  But I do think that, for too long, Americans have used their faith as a way of exploiting other humans and non-human persons around them.

 

We must be one with the world!

We must be one with the world!

Alternative views—both spiritual and practical—suggest more reciprocal, peaceful relationships with nature.  These relationships embrace all of nature–including so-called “weeds” and so-called “nuisance animals” as part of a natural system. The Native American tribes hold a diversity of belief systems, but at the heart of all of them was their deep respect of nature in all of her forms.  We see this respect–living with the world, rather than apart from it–repeated in indigenous belief systems throughout the world. Some more modern philosophies also help us re-envision our relationship with nature. A permaculture philosophy, to which I ascribe, place dandelions as a top-rated plant: its a great foraging food for animals and humans alike, it has a deep tap root to bring up the nutrients and break up the soil, it provides ground cover, its quick to grow.  An animist philosophy, to which I also ascribe, would recognize the living, sentient spirit of all living things.

 

Cycles of Life, Death, and Rebirth April 21, 2012

Filed under: Change,Cycles,Death,Growth,Life — Dana @ 11:36 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

Seven years ago, one of my closest friends, Alfred Struble, lost his 3-year battle with cancer, dying before he was even 30 years old. While I have long since accepted his passage from this world into the otherworld, I find that the anniversary of Alfred’s passing is a good day to reflect upon the cycles of life and death.

Alfred entering a crevice

My friend Alfred, entering a crevice between two massive rocks. Where does this path lead?

Since coming to druidry and embracing an animistic worldview, death has taken on new meaning to me. The Christian worldview, the religion of my birth, teaches that we are imperfect, sinful beings always striving to reach the state of ultimate happiness (heaven) through salvation from ourselves and our own human natures. This view assumes a “one-shot” attempt at life; a linear progression from nothingness, to something faulty, to something eternal. But this path, from birth to salvation, doesn’t really reflect any other cycle or path in real life (except if you were to believe that every life only has one opportunity on this earth to live). The more that I considered this path, when I was still within a Christian worldview, the more it made little sense to me.

I like to look to the patterns of nature to explain life and death. There are several worth bearing mention here:

 

1) The pattern of no waste. If you look at a forest, it’s a perfect system. Life gives way to death, which is then used to foster more life. Nothing in a forest is wasted, and everything is recycled—air (from oxygen breathers to oxygen makers); dirt (living plants consume the energy from dead ones); water (streams, rivers, water trapped by rich hummus in the soil, the trees forming as a canopy to keep the moisture contained within). If we look at our planet, it too is a perfect system. The process of photosynthesis forming the basis of plant life, which is then fed upon by animal life, which, when it dies, nourishes the plant life.

Nowhere, in any natural system, is the idea of “waste” generated. Everything in a natural system has a purpose—everything fits. What then is the place of spirit or soul in this system? Does it, too, go through a recycling/rebirth?

 

2) For the second principle, we come to Isaac Newton, who claimed that matter can be neither created or destroyed. If we accept the basic principles of law of the conservation of energy, this also provides us some insight into life and death. Does this same law apply to non-material things? Like souls and spirits?

If the universe is a perfect system, a system that doesn’t produce waste; and if energy can be neither created nor destroyed, does this suggest the recycling or renewal of our souls?

 

3) In nature, we see a cyclical pattern everywhere. From the wheel of the year where we mark the passage of the seasons to the cycles of water, of air, and of plant and animal life, we see that everything passes in a cycle that is connected to the whole. It seems that even if the matter does not stay in the same form (ice to water to gas), something about its essence is preserved (in the case of water the atomic building blocks of water remain).

Can this same cycle be applied to the soul?

 

4) Finally, we can look to evolution to see why a one shot path seems inconsistent with the patterns in nature. Recently, I was able to attend a talk by Richard Dawkins, who was talking about his new children’s book The Magic of Reality (which is an amazing read!). At the beginning of his talk, Dawkins presented a view of evolution that was so insightful, it bears repeating here. He argued that if you look at the short scale, say of only a few generations, there appears very little or no change between you, your parents, your grandparents, your great grandparents and so on. But each generation changes a little tiny bit, and if you went back far enough and widened your scope, you would eventually get back to something that looked nothing like you or your current generation. He then displayed a graphic that went back 40,000 generations, leading to a rather hideous fish-looking thing. His point was that evolution is slow, and many successive generations refine and adapt and grow to something greater.

Does evolution only happen, again, with living organisms? What about the spirit, the soul of such organisms? Can our souls evolve, grow, learn, and adapt just as our own species has done?

 

Concluding Thoughts – The Web of Life and Cycles of Rebirth

Some modern animist thinkers describe this as a great web of life—each node, an individual life, and the strands going out in millions of directions, connecting us to each other. When one passes on, he/she is reabsorbed into that great web, and within time, forms a new node. Is that node like the last? Likely not. Its evolved, its grown, and the cycle continues.

In the end, everything that I’ve written is philosophy. But I’d like to think that nature teaches us lessons—and these lessons can be applied to our understanding of and interaction with the otherworld.

Our lives are but a small fraction of the whole!

Our lives are but a small fraction of the whole!

 

 

 

Our lives are but a small fraction of the whole!

 

 

[ This blow post will be in the Oct 1st 2013 Animist Blog Carnival]

 

Druidry and the Environment June 22, 2011

Someone on the AODA listserv put out a call for people to talk about their connection between druidry and environmentalism. It was a good experience to think, and articulate, my own thoughts on the issue.  I thought I’d share the questions–and my answers–here. 

1. Describe your spiritual path?
I am an animist druid. I see my spiritual path as being one of closeness and understanding the interconnectivity of all things. My work involves healing of the land, listening to the spirits, and protecting and celebrating all things.
Everything that I do, I do as a druid. I don’t see my life, my career, my artistic pursuits, or anything else as separate. When I go and teach in a classroom or when I sit quietly by the stream, everything is druidic. Because I hold myself up to this standard, it means that I am constantly working to better myself and live up to the principles that define my spiritual beliefs.

2. Describe your connection to the earth on both a physical and a spiritual level.
I am very connected to the land, both on a spiritual and physical level. I am gifted with the ability to sense the land in multiple ways and to interact with spirit guides and spirits of the land that help me better understand this connection. When I see the land suffering, I suffer. Sometimes I reach out and give healing energy. Sometimes, the land heals me. In both cases, we learn and grow from the experience.
3. Did you feel this level of connection to the earth and the environment before you began following your current path?
Yes and no. I have always been connected to the land, especially growing up in the forested mountains. This is where I spent my time, and where I learned my most valuable lessons. Even as a child, I would speak to the trees—and they would speak back. Since becoming a druid about six years ago, I have learned more about this gift and how to use it. My senses have deepened since undergoing druidic training, particularly discursive mediation and energy work.
4. Since starting your current path, how has your view of nature changed.
I think I understand the complexities and interconnectedness much better than I used to. I used to want to protect the land, and have always been an environmentalist. But it wasn’t until I worked closely with healing the land, hearing the stories of the lost and forgotten forests, and sharing these stories with others that I truly understood environmentalism and protection on a spiritual level. With this knowledge, however, comes great responsibility. The desire to protect and preserve has never been stronger.
5. Do you consider an environmentalist?
Yes. Absolutely. I don’t see my environmentalism as separate from my druidic path. I actually find this question kind of silly, because I don’t really think that someone can call themselves a druid, or walk any pagan/earth-based spirituality and not be an environmentalist. Or if they are, they are likely fooling themselves.
6. What pro-environment things do you do (i.e. recycling, etc)
I do everything in my power to reduce my impact on the planet and to give back, locally and internationally. I have made radical lifestyle changes to support this goal.
1) I try to eat a locally-based, vegetarian diet, that reduces my consumption, carbon footprint, and supports local sustainable agriculture.
2) I grow my own food (and have just started doing this, but am learning)
3) I compost and reduce my waste output. We now throw away less than one garbage bag every two weeks (for a family of 2).
4) I make all of my own soaps and detergents from naturally-based materials. I teach others how to make them.
5) I reduce the amount of travel and trips; we own two fuel efficient vehicles (one hybrid, one 40 mpg), I carpool.
6) We have made various home improvements to reduce our overall energy consumption and making our home more efficient.
7) I write letters daily to representatives, local papers, etc. on issues of environmental concern.
8) I use sustainable feminine hygiene products.
9) I shop exclusively at second-hand stores and yard sales and work hard to ensure that if I can purchase it used, I will do so. There are a few things I must buy new, but not that much!
10) For my teaching, I do not use textbooks, but rather make all materials digitally available. I ask students to submit their work digitally to avoid producing excess paper waste (and quite a bit can add up as the semester progresses!)
11) I can my own food and practice other food preservation techniques (root cellaring)
12) I participate in local cleanups and pick up trash in forests.
13) I financially support a number of environmental organizations.
14) I post environmentally-supportive material to my Facebook account and share it with family and friends to help raise awareness on these issues.
15) I will gladly learn, and gladly teach, and work hard to educate others about their own environmental impact.

7. What sort of things would you like to do but don’t?

I would like to live a completely sustainable life. Right now in America, to do this seems to require an inordinate amount of funds (solar power panels, expensive vehicles, etc.). It is also nearly impossible due to cultural conventions and norms (such as the lack of good public transportation, etc.). I wanted to get a car I could convert to a greasecar—the car manufacturers don’t produce cars that allow you to do so. I wanted to install a composing toilet in my house—the township won’t allow it. If you’ve ever read the book, “Everything I do is Illegal: War Stories from the Food Front (found on amazon) you’ll understand what better what I’m talking about. Most of what I feel I can’t do has little to do with me and my desire, and more to do with larger social systems that are in place to encourage and facilitate our unsustainable way of life.

Everything in our culture is geared to be used and thrown away, and while some things are easy, others are way harder. The worst thing is that “green” has become a new consumerist mindset—but it still doesn’t actually solve the problem. As long as we are still buying way more than we need, it doesn’t matter if its green or not.

So I think my limitations have less to do with my own desire and more to do with a larger cultural tradition that is incredibly difficult to escape. At the same time, I’m also aware of my own shortcomings.

8. How does that ideology fit with your spiritually?
I work as hard as I can at what I can, as a druid and human being, and live as ethically as I can (and in my mind, ethics have to do with how we treat the earth and each other). And what I can’t do now, I work to change on a larger level, and support systems of change (like supporting local, sustainable food producers).
9. What role should Druid play in the environmental activism?
The better question is what role shouldn’t druids play? I think we need to lbe the change we want to see in others. I think we need to be at the forefront of this change, and continually push to improve our own lives, and the lives of everyone else on this planet, human or not. In animism, we talk about non-human persons and their rights. This is very applicable here. I don’t want to live at the expense of other lives.
As I said earlier, I am baffled and shocked by those who claim to be following an earth-centered tradition and do nothing to protect it. I couldn’t live with myself without doing something to help—our planet is in pain, and every day with every action, humans cause more of it.

At the very local level, I am currently cleaning up a garbage dump in the forest behind my house. I’m removing and recycling all materials that can, re-purposing what can, and otherwise doing what I can to help. I like this work because it is tangible and I can physically see the difference. But then, I still have another 30 – 40 feet of trash to get through… ☺.