#and yes techno is implied to be native here

[simplepotatofarmer]

sanctuary

living on the edge of the frontier, techno is used to many things wandering onto his land. that includes dream, an outlaw who is looking for some help and a place to hide.

rating: teen & up characters: technoblade, dream tags: western au, tending to injury, blood, alcohol

written for @nekioe for the @rivalsduogiftexchange! i hope you enjoy! <3 <3

The horse’s head hung low to the ground, sniffing the ground but making no move to nibble on the grass that poked out stubbornly from the dirt in sparse clumps. It was a white horse, grey on the nose and lower legs, and it wasn’t Techno’s horse. He stood in the doorway with his tin mug of coffee in hand, staring at the horse. Even at a distance, he could see the foamy sweat around the straps of the saddle if he squinted a bit. He didn’t need to squint to see the drops of blood in the dirt or the splash of red on the saddle blanket.

“Huh,” he said and took a sip of coffee before turning back inside. He set the mug down on the table. His gun and holster hung of the back of the chair and he picked it up. The leather was well worn and supple and buckling around his waist it was second nature. Through the greased paper window, Techno could see the horse, still in the same spot, just as blurry as when he had seen it the first time.

Outside, the sun was coming over the ridge and Techno squinted as he approached the horse from the front. It lifted its head but made no attempt to move away even as he patted its neck. Sweat covered its neck, chest, and flank. The horse had been ridden right to the edge of exhaustion, the sign of either a reckless or desperate rider. Judging by the blood, Techno thought desperate. The blood left a clear trail to his barn but he took the time remove the saddle and bridle from the horse.

“You just stay right here,” said Techno, giving the horse one last pat before following the trail of blood left on the dusty ground.

The barn door had been pulled closed. Blood was smeared on it, a partial hand print that the owner had attempted to wipe away. That struck Techno as odd. They had made no other attempt to hide their presence so why try to clean up the blood on his barn? He put one hand on the hilt of his gun and pulled the door open, letting light pour inside.

A gun was pointed right at Techno’s head.

The hand holding the gun was bloody and shaky and attached to a man, propped up against a bale of hay. His other hand was pressed against his side, holding a rag that likely used to be another color but was now reddish-brown. The lower half of his face was covered by a black bandana with a curved white line embroidered onto it, like a strange smile.

“Seriously, Bawaajigan?” Techno let go of his gun. “You’re gonna break into my barn then point a gun at me?”

An annoyed snort followed by a low wince of pain left the man. He lowered the gun.

“I—I told you, stop calling me that.”

“It’s your name, man, I dunno what to tell you,” Techno said with a grin. He crossed the distance between him and the man in three large steps. He knelt. “Did ya go and get yourself shot again?”

Above the black bandana, the man rolled green eyes. His forehead was shiny with sweat, blond hair sticking to his skin.

“What, sad it wasn’t you? Again?”

“You’re the one who wanted that duel, Dream.”

“Heh. Yeah—Yeah, that’s fair.”

Techno shook his head, grin softening into a knowing smile. The moment he saw the horse, he had thought his day would go something like this.

“Lemme see how bad it is.”

Dream slipped his gun into the holster that was strapped to his leg and finally pulled the black bandana down. Techno could count the number of times he had seen the whole of Dream’s face on one hand. He frowned a little as Dream pulled his hand away from his side. Dark, almost black blood slowly oozed from the tear in his skin.

“It didn’t get anything important,” said Dream.

One of Techno’s eyebrows shot upwards as he pulled a clean handkerchief out of his pocket.

“You sure about that?” he asked, pressing the handkerchief as gently as he could to the bullet hole. Dream drew in a sharp breath, air whistling between his clenched teeth.

“Well, I mean… No, but I don’t think it did.”

The words sounded uncertain and tight. Techno clicked his tongue. He wanted to ask what had happened, who had shot him this time and who was going to come looking for him. It was unlikely that anyone would come here; the last time he had been spotted in public with Dream, he had been twenty paces away. Techno’s hand felt around Dream’s side, looking for the exit wound. There was none.

“Good news,” Techno said as he leaned back on his heels, “you’re right – for once – and it didn’t hit anything important.”

The corner of Dream’s mouth twitched.

“Go to hell,” he said. And then, with the air of someone who already knew the answer, “What’s the bad news?”

“I’m gonna have to dig that bullet out.”

Dream closed his eyes for a moment. The blood had slowed to trickle, his body doing its job to keep him from bleeding to death. It wouldn’t matter if the bullet was left in to shift or break apart and seep lead into his blood.

“Yeah, I thought so.”

His eyes were still closed and Techno took this moment to look him over more closely. Blood had soaked his shirt and the waist of his pants but also near the hem of the opposite side. His knuckles were scrapped and his cheek was puffy and yellow, the sign of a newly forming bruise. 

“Alright. Well, I don’t want to go diggin’ it out in my barn so how about I help you inside?”

“Yeah, sure.”

With a deep sigh, Dream finally opened his eyes and began to push himself upright. His hand slipped a little on the loose straw covering the floor of the barn. Techno grabbed his shoulder to steady him before unceremoniously shoving his hands beneath Dream’s armpits and pulling him to his feet. A string of curses were muttered but Techno ignored them, wrapping an arm around Dream and letting him lean against him. The first couple steps, Dream was stubborn, trying to walk without assistance but by the time they had left the barn, he was fully leaning on Techno. He squinted in the sunlight.

“I left—Spirit should be out here, somewhere,” he said.

The horse had wandered a few feet, closer to pasture where Techno’s horses were, and was grazing. He would have to be put up but for now, exhaustion and the fact the other horses had wandered over to the fence to graze closer to the newcomer was working in their favor.

“He’s right there,” said Techno, nodding his head towards the fence. “He’ll be fine. I’m gonna stop you from dyin’ on my land and then I’ll go put him up, alright?”

Dream nodded. His jaw was clenched and his fingers dug into Techno’s arm hard enough to hurt as they climbed the stairs up to the porch. Techno almost made a joke about how he wasn’t going to drop Dream, if that’s what he was worried about, but decided against it.

“Your house sucks,” Dream said as he stepped onto the porch, breathing heavily.

Techno snorted.

“At least I have a house, Dream.”

He used his shoulder to push the door open. The bedroom was straight ahead, the door already open, and Techno steered Dream in that direction. It would mean a change of blankets but he needed a relatively flat surface.  

“You’re such a bastard.”

“Yeah, yeah, I know. Lay down,” Techno said.

Dream did what he was told without argument, though he tried to prop himself up on his elbows to watch Techno dig his leather medical bag out of his trunk and only fully laid down when Techno returned and pushed him back down. He grumbled a little then but it seemed to be all he had the energy for. Techno sat on the bed and the mattress creaked.

“Pull your shirt up a little.”

“You better not mess this up,” said Dream, pulling his torn and blood stained shirt up.

The buckle on the leather bag had long since broken and Techno pulled out a few items – clean rags torn into strips, a pair of thin metal tongs, and a bottle of whiskey – and set them on the crate serving as a night stand.

“Pfft, I’ll remind you that you came to me, man.” He uncorked the whiskey. Dream eyed the bottle warily. Carefully, Techno poured some over the wound then wiped away the blood with one of the rags. He glanced up at Dream, face beaded with sweat, and smiled. “Don’t worry, I’ll be careful.”

Lifting his hand, Dream wrapped his fingers around Techno’s wrist, his pale skin in stark contrast to Techno’s brown skin, and squeezed.

“I—I believe you.”

It was earnest and Techno inclined his head towards Dream before picking up the metal tongs. Dream let go of his wrist in favor of balling his fists into the wool blanket as Techno began his work. He found one large chunk of the bullet fairly quickly and discarded it to the side. The other two pieces were harder to find and Techno paused a few times when Dream made a pained sound, reaching out to place his hand over Dream’s for a moment. When he had finally gotten the final fragment out with a bit of twisting and pulling, Techno poured more whiskey over the wound. Dream hissed out a quiet ‘god damn’.

“Anything else I oughta take a look at?” asked Techno, glancing down at the blood on Dream’s leg.

Dream shook his head.

“N-no, I’m fine.” Techno paused in the middle of rinsing his hands off in the basin and cocked an eyebrow. Dream huffed. “It’s nothing I can’t handle, okay? I’m fine.”

Drying his hands off on his pants, Techno pulled out another strip of the makeshift bandage. He slipped a hand behind Dream’s shoulder and guided him up. A pained wince was bit back as Dream glanced at Techno sheepishly.

“I believe you, alright, I believe you,” he said. Without being told, Dream lifted his arms up so that Techno could wrap the bandage around his abdomen a few times, pulling it taut enough to help stop the bleeding but not too tight to be uncomfortable. “D’you want to tell me what happened now?”

The expression on Dream’s face was serious, hurt, and he looked away. There had only been a handful times that Techno had seen Dream’s face but the times he had, the other man had been grinning. The change was disconcerting.

“It was an ambush. I—They’re probably going to come looking for me. I figured, you know, I figured that they wouldn’t look here.”

Techno pat Dream on the knee and then handed him the bottle of whiskey. Now he grinned as he took a swig, face scrunching up as the alcohol burned his nose.

“Well, I’ve never been one to kick an injured and homeless man to the curb,” Techno said, nudging Dream a little with his knee. “You can stay here as long as you need.”

“What—You’re a son of a bitch, Techno.”

Techno’s smile stretched wider.

“That sure is a funny way of sayin’ ‘thank you’, Dream.”

A long, resigned sigh was pulled from Dream.

“Thank you.”

[skammovistarplus]

Culture and Translation - S01 E07 and SKAM+ Clip 3

I hope I get these done before season 2 starts dropping, that’s all I’ll say. 😂

CLIP 1: Foreshadowing

Es un poco rancio, ¿no? (“It’s not hip, no?”): Fucking Jorge and his untranslatable slang. Okay, so “rancio” literally means “rancid” — and a bunch of other things besides, but this is the meaning closest to the way Jorge uses it. Jorge means that the power of invisibility is overused, boring, the kind of thing someone totally out of touch would pick. Simply put, it’s not cool, and may not have ever been cool.

Es como el superpoder de los cotillas (“It’s like the gossips’ superpower”): “Cotilla” is both a busybody and someone who gossips a lot. Either way, they like being all up on your business.

I think it’s notable that this is all that remains from the og storyline where Jonas wants to meet Eva’s mom, but ultimately bails because he’s smoking weed at Ingrid’s. Eva simply puts Jorge’s request off and it’s never spoken of again.

Personally, I have to say that Eva sharing basically none of her life with her mom rang true to me. I spoke with one of the people who attended the research groups, who told me they were asked about how much or how little they share with their parents. She said most people agreed that teens spend time with their families, but they don’t talk to their parents about their lives all that much. As a teen, my parents were on a need-to-know basis when it came to who my friends were or who I was dating, much less at what point sex, booze and other drugs came into my life.

CLIP 2:  Diseased Pomeranian

Ay, que me mato (“Ah, I’m gonna die”): There’s a bit of a nuance to what Eva says. To die, in Spanish, is “morir”. “Matar” means to kill. Eva means she’s going to hurt herself getting off Jorge’s back and then die, so not quite the same as passing peacefully, lol.

Que me pica un huevo la nariz (“My nose is itching something terrible”): Indeed, Viri says that her nose is itching, but she uses “un huevo” as an intensifier. “Un huevo” would usually mean an egg, but in this register it means a testicle, heh. So her nose is itching in a testicley way.

Viri says in episode 8 that the girl that runs into Eva is a second year. At any rate, Alicia and Inés hung out over the summer with her.

We get a medium close-up of Alicia as the nameless second year passes by her. Alicia has noticed that the second year has herpes, as well. It’s a brief moment, but we can tell that Alicia puts two and two together, as well.

CLIP 3: In which ALEJANDRO tries to get a passing grade in Maths

This is an underrated moment, but I find it hilarious that Eva invokes the “not all men” defense. Especially since Inés preys  on Eva’s insecurity at the end of the clip.

No me jodas (“don´t fuck me over”): This is just one of those Spanish things that we’ll say over and over. I tried different translations through the course of the season, but I still haven’t settled on one that I think really hits the spot. “Don’t fuck me over” works, but it might come across as Eva’s feelings being hurt, rather than something we say… over and over, heh.

Please don’t miss Alejandro adjusting his junk. Lol he’s so douchey.

There’s a school desk in the bathroom. This is not an uncommon sight in Spanish high schools, but I don’t really have a good explanation for it. Like, it’s just a thing. I guess people will drag a desk over at recess, so they can more comfortably hang out in the bathrooms, and then nobody ever bothers dragging them back?

And, of course, this has been noted, but the graffiti on the wall is a pun. If you read it without the R in parenthesis, it says, “Woman, love yourself.” If you read it adding the R, it says, “Woman, arm yourself.”

Pues a la de mates le está saliendo uno (“the Maths hardass is developing a cold sore too”): What Cris actually says is, “So, the Maths [female pronoun] is developing one,” but for the sake of clarity, I rephrased it to remind the people watching that the girls see the Maths teacher as a toughie, and also, so what Cris is implying about Alejandro and the Maths teacher is more obvious.

I really love that Inés actually smells Jorge’s sweatshirt/hoodie (it’s not clear from dialogue which is it). That’s a power move in any culture.

CLIP 4: Corviches are so hot right now

Encaja todo, claro (“It makes sense, of course”): The closer translation is, “It all fits, of course.” I just wasn’t sure the meaning would be clear, especially when they’re all talking so fast.

Tío, ¿y si nos acoplamos a tus hermanos? (“Dude, and if we crash your brothers’ plans?”): First off, Amira is addressing Cris, but she uses “tío” and not “tía.” This is common and there’s nothing noteworthy about it, but I wanted to mention it in case people had noticed characters of any gender addressing female characters as “tío.” Second, Amira is using slang that would be literally translated to, “what if we dock up with your brothers?” The visual is adorable (to me anyway), but I went with a less literal phrasing that makes more sense in English. I also love that this is apparently something Cris and Amira have done enough that it’s what comes to Amira’s mind first as an alternate weekend idea.

Lol easy there with the age foreshadowing, show. Looking at Cris, Jorge and Lucas specifically.

Jorge says he wants to spin tecno (or techno, in English ). In Spain, tecno has become something of a catch-all term for all EDM genres, rather than the specific mid-80s genre. In hindsight, I’d use EDM instead of electronica.

In case you hadn’t looked corviches up yet, here is a recipe + pic in English.  They’re similar to hot pockets, but the dough is made with peanuts and plantains. Also, apparently, very successful with girls! I have not had them (yet!)

Cris notes that daylight savings time ends that weekend. She and the script writers are correct! She remembers because that gives them an extra hour of partying, but the social media updates stopped before 2 am. Who knows when Cris got back home, though!

At some point in this clip, Jorge and Lucas talk to each other among the general chatter. For once, Lucas’ voice doesn’t carry over the others like a powerful siren, so I was never able to make out what they said. Missed opportunities.

CLIP 5: As if millions of voices suddenly cried out in joy and were suddenly silenced

Debuti (“G shit”): This is one of the translations that I’m happiest about. Debuti sounds very Madrid-specific to me, and so I wanted something really specific and that would stick out. “Debuti” comes up a few times over the season, but it is always said by Eva. It’s Eva’s catchphrase.

I hope it came through in the subs, but while Eva is reading Jorge’s texts, the gang is having a ridiculously hard time trying to pronounce corviches, in the background. To be fair I’m biased because I’ve studied linguistics, but it doesn’t seem like a word a native Spanish speaker would have trouble with.

We first hear Alejandro’s voice as he comes in Nora’s house! Unless you watched the Aitana extra clip, of course. On that note, there’s no animosity whatsoever between the boy squad and Alejandro’s crew. They give each other friendly high fives, it’s all chill.

This party only came to be the day before. Imagine what Cris would’ve done with a few days heads up.

I wonder if Cris was looking to hook up with Lucas at this party, and, since he didn’t feel like being social, she hooked up with Hugo, instead. Seeing how hard a time she’s had shaking Hugo off, I think it would’ve gone better for her if Lucas had agreed to a dance.

And speaking of Lucas, you can kind of see the order in which some scenes were shot, by tracking Lucas’ actor’s cold sore. And yes, it is an actual cold sore and not make up for the show, lol. It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that. What amazing timing on the cold sore’s part to be at the scab stage during ALEJANDRO FERNANDO ROBERTO’s herpes week.

Pues muy bien (“Good for her”):  It’s not exactly what Alejandro says. What he says would be closer to, “Okay, very good.” But I think “Good for her” really gets across how little Alejandro cares about what Nora is saying, at this point of the confrontation.

¿Es que no te salían pelos en los huevos? (“You didn’t grow hair in your balls?”): Omg. It’s ON. ON. I am cringing so hard at this mistake in the subs.

CLIP 6: 🙃🙃🙃

I saw someone asking on twitter, so yes, those giant plastic cups are a thing here. They have different names depending on what part of Spain you’re from. In Madrid, they’re called “mini,” and they have a volume of 750 ml (or a little over three cups). They’re most often used for street drinking.

Eva drinks KNEBEP Vodka, which is sold at (you guessed it) Mercadona, for 4 euro per bottle. My liver is crying just thinking about it.

The first song that plays over this clip is Aitana’s Teléfono (Telephone). We remember Aitana from Cristian’s party!

CLIP 7: 🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃

Te he oído que estabas con Inés (“I could hear you were with Inés”): Literally, “I have heard you, that you were with Inés.”

Por eso he coincidido con Inés (“That’s why Inés was around”): Collins dictionary says that “coincidir” in the sense Jorge is using it would be translated as, “to happen to meet.” I.e. “That’s why I’ve happened to meet Inés.” But I didn’t like it, because Jorge was at Inés’ house. Of course Inés was around. He didn’t just happen to run into her somewhere random. Hope the translation worked!

Tranquila (“It’s okay”): We had something of a debate over the way to translate this. Jorge says “tranquila,” which is the female form of the adjective “calm.” TAJTA wanted to translate it as “calm down.” I didn’t agree, because in Spanish, that would be “tranquilízate.” Jorge is simply repeating “tranquila” to Eva as a means to soothe her, like you do with a crying person. So, rather than “calm down,” I suggested that Jorge repeat “It’s okay.”

Jorge does say “tranquilízate” over the credits, and in that instance we did translate it as “calm down.”

EXTRA CLIP 3: Hugo psyches himself out

This clip takes place between clip 4 and 5! It happens on Friday evening.

At the 00:21 mark, the camera focuses on a graffiti of a blue-skinned woman, with yellow text next to her. It says, “We are the witches you couldn’t kill.”

Pero si estoy más sudado que el rabo de Nadal (“I’m sweatier than Nadal’s wang though”): This is the exact translation, word for word. I just wanted to make clear I did not make anything up in that sentence. By the way, it took a bit to settle on wang among all the many words for a penis.

Nos alegramos porque un colega nuestro está a punto de mojar (“We’re happy because a buddy is gonna get his dick wet”): Dilan is not quite so explicit, he just says Hugo is going to “mojar,” literally, “to wet.” But, it just made me realize that “get his dick wet” is pretty much what “mojar” has meant all this time, and I just hadn’t really thought about it until I had to translate it for a teen show.

Concha de tu madre (“hurry up”): This is Latin American slang. I actually had to read up on usage, because it is most often used as an insult having to do with someone’s mother’s vagina. But I’m pretty sure that, in this context, Dilan only intends to hurry Hugo up. 😂

Social media:

I just want to have a minor breakdown about Eva actually referring to Lucas as her and Jorge’s son, lol.

Jorge has the Théophile Steinlen’s Le Chat Noir poster up in his room. As I mentioned in a previous post, Tomás Aguilera seems to be both a fan of cats and of French. The three videos of Jorge messing with his DJ system are among my very favorite Skam España social media content, because for once, they’re not a selfie.

It looks as though the shipname for Hugo/Cris is Crugo, to answer a question I posed when I posted the social media updates.

“Olé” finally makes an appearance on Skam España. I’ve decided to keep it as is, because some things would be a crime to translate. In case you’re not aware, “olé” is used to express approval and it’s commonly associated with flamenco music and bullfighting. However, it’s not just used in those two contexts. It can be used in any context. I often use it sarcastically, when someone has fucked up. 😋

[ao3feed-crimeboys]

sulfur

by netherfriends

a conversation, of sorts, where all sides have something to say but no way to say it, OR: trauma explored at 5am by me, yes sir

*

It wasn't all bad, he supposed; there were mangoes, for one. He remembers that; the taste of the ocean, the taste of mangoes. Firm in his hand, sweetness edged with sea-salt. He had to twist his wrist just right for them to fall, heavy, in his hand. He remembered sinking his teeth into the flesh; the salt-tang and the juices seeping down his chin and how his hands were thick with the grit of sand but he didn't care, he didn't care.

And then there was Dream, but that's something he only briefly pokes with a stick, memories of his time in exile blurring and swirling every time he thinks of him.

The fire crackles, yellow, Wilbur had muttered, tongue warm in his native language. Like sulfur Tommy.

* quid pro quo -- your touch for my voice, please?

Words: 2000, Chapters: 1/1, Language: English

Fandoms: Video Blogging RPF, Minecraft (Video Game)

Rating: Mature

Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings

Categories: Gen

Characters: TommyInnit (Video Blogging RPF), Wilbur Soot, Technoblade (Video Blogging RPF), Phil Watson (Video Blogging RPF)

Relationships: Wilbur Soot & TommyInnit, Technoblade & TommyInnit (Video Blogging RPF), TommyInnit & Phil Watson (Video Blogging RPF)

Additional Tags: only rated mature for the few like violent parts, just because, Suicidal Thoughts, Implied/Referenced Self-Harm, Wilbur Soot is Superstitious, let's get that a tag folks, Villain Clay | Dream (Video Blogging RPF), He's a dick, Implied/Referenced Child Abuse, wilbur kind of maybe raised tommy, they don't speak english bitch, let the foreigners flock, phil is a dude, He is here, so is techno, Traumatized TommyInnit (Video Blogging RPF), TommyInnit Needs a Hug (Video Blogging RPF), Exiled TommyInnit (Video Blogging RPF), Wilbur Soot and TommyInnit are Siblings, Older Sibling Wilbur Soot, I don't know

source https://archiveofourown.org/works/36309763

[odbele]

Translation from Swedish to English

“The stratigraphic signals were already there; the isotopes, plastic, techno physics, the cars, the broken bullets from all too many wars. The signals are a contemporary biproduct of a time when human beings placed themselves above the earth and took its stability for granted.” These are the words found on the last page of idea and environmental historian Sverker Sörlin resently published book “Antropocen – en essä om människans tidsålder ” (Antropocene – an essay on the age of human kind)

And today we will be discussing the concept of Anthropocene, usually described as the new geological age, defined by the footprints left on earth by man.

The guests are idea and environmental historian and author Sverker Sörlin, Helena Granstrøm another author with background in physics and mathematics, and Gøran Greider author. Welcome, my name is Peter Sandberg.

Peter Sandberg: So, this concept of Anthropocene – the age of mankind, was introduced already in the early 80ths, though the breakthrough in popularity first occurred at the edge of the 21th century, as a replacement of Holocene – the postglacial age heralded by the end of our last ice age 11000 years ago. Sverker, Anthropocene “the age of mankind”, why has this term reached a public interest, now, in our age/time?

Sverker Sörlin: Well, Anthropocene replaces Holocene and that is still an ongoing discussion if we are really going to take this step and officially establish a new era. It is a relevant question for geologists and in particular stratigraphicologists, a sub-group of geologists, and for up to them to decide, though the discussion today is evolving. And I think it is evolving and reaching out to different fields of professions because the concept sums up the human experiences throughout the last decades, as well as our last century. That humans have, negatively speaking, effected the climate and made footprints. Suddenly it is as if this footprint has been given a word, a concept. While doing so you catch something, and this something has spread wildly. The word brings life to images and thoughts considering this, though it also brings up the controversy and posing questions like “Who is actually responsible for this coherent footprint? Are we all contributors, and if so, have we contributed equally?” How are we supposed to view this? Suddenly you enter a field of incalculable questions that evolves from this concept. Normally, the enclosed debates within the field of geology is not a relevant topic for the public, as artists and other scientists and politicians and such, but here, it is not the case. One could also claim that there is some political touch to “Anthropocene”, which I think is important in this situation.

Gøran: Yes.

Peter Sandberg: Well, Helena, Gøran, what do you think? Anthopocene a new geological era defined by our footprints. Do we need a word, a concept, like this? Helena Granstrøm: Yes, considering the fact that this concept gestalts the irreversible traces we leave on this planet we need it, though I have got several issues with the concept, partly because of what you just pointed out, Sverker. Your book is altered on the premise that you identify with this humanity, even though you may not be amongst those who has contributed to the largest footprints. Still, you feel like you are a part of this humanity, thus you take responsibility for these actions. You personally don’t behold the power of the industrial civilization, but you identify with this power. I am imagining a situation where Latin American natives are evacuating their village to make room for a new dam, and that they might feel differently reading your words. To suggest that this is the age of humanity… (Pauses) Rather than the term being clearly political, it tends to apolitize what we are dealing with here. It is a specific human culture that produces this type of footprints, and so to suggest that it is “humanity” is to imply that it is “simply natural”, in which I strongly disagree.

Gøran: Mm.

Peter Sandberg: Hmm, well Gøran, it seems like you have been waiting for such a term to come along?

Gøran: Well, I have dealt with it by writing MOTSKILLIG years, actually. I think we possess a general need for words and terms to identify timeframes. I think it would be better if the geologists would loosen up on their iron fist regarding this discussion and for it to instead be viewed in a different light. Even if, still, it is important to remember that this is currently a term being used by academics and some artists. There has not been a viral thing or such, though I agree with you Helena; I often think in such terms myself, when we have a look at “Antropocene – the age of the human kind”, of course it “DØLJER” different systems, different mindsets, different values, different – Europe for instance, look at what we have done to the rest of the world, the debate is easily DØJED as a term, but it does not stop me from growing a fond of this concept, because I believe we need some kind of grandiose framing of time that evolves into the discussions we are having now. So, summing up, I believe it causes more good than harm.

Peter Sandberg: Well, I think the term, Anthropocene, that is, the obvious geological impact we have had on earth, but there is also some kind of existential question imbedded in this. That is to speak, our perspective on the world, human being, our culture and politics. It extremely wide and a bit like a duality as well.

 Sverker Sörlin: What Helena brings to the table here is a very central part of the discussion surrounding “Antropocene”. And I have written several articles about this subject, in particular this, collectivization by force, so to speak, of all human kind, like canalizing it into this “antropos”, this figure producing footprints. I have found these kind of discussions constructive because they have shown us to spot the differences. But even those who are losing their minds right now because other parts of humanity are taking too much space and are overexploiting, resulting in the consequences we face in Antarctica or other parts of the world, is to some extent already imprinted in the same discussion. After all they are a part of the same human kind. One cannot say that the collective mind of man does not exist. It does indeed exist. And this I tell you: one of the useful aspects the term catalyzes is a forced discussion about what “humanity” really is, how we define it and what is embedded in that term. Who is a part of it and, well, everyone is a part of it given a premise, but like how and where you belong, in which I think there have been great variations in the FURFLUTNA , to which I hope we take a distance. One of the chapters I have chosen here is “Who does what to whom”. There are no innocent actions that has made our planet into this all absorbing all swallowing thing, but that time is over the earth cannot sustain it all, and then the critical question of who is responsible arises.  

 Peter Sandberg: But it is hard to accuse the whole world or pinpoint a few that could be held accountable in overexploiting the recourses, I mean, we are clearly guilty in several different ways. Anthropocene is really all about “man” then, generally speaking? Gøran: Yes, well, I guess speaking of the term, what has happened is that it is mirroring the states you are referring to, the planetarian. Even those of the 4th world that are driven away now knows that there is a world we should relate to in some way or another. Even the worst climatedeniers has got some clue that we have got a planet though they are refusing to believe scientifical reports etc. But there is something here that is about a planetarian mindset -

8:42 A global mindset? Gøran: Yes, I suppose you could call it that, well, you write so lovely about it in you book, pictures of the earth arising, the Apollo voyages, when we for the first time in history experience a picture of our planet from outer space, like “That’s us, right there, on that tiny spot”. Like, we are all here, even if we are divided into different social classes or colonial submitted, and I think it is an important issue considering the term “Anthropocene”, because the global is brought to conscious.  

 Helena Granstrøm: Humanity existed a long time before this deep, destructive culture was born, and this is what I think tends and disappears in this term. Also, I think it is partly symptomatically given: if you look at it as some sort of replacement for environmental terms, it’s like destroying. The environment, the way you write about it, is this abstract something “out there”, being polluted by humans. To me, this is probably one of the most interesting aspects about this term, right, the geological perspective is very large, it speaks about billions of years, it is not concerned about destroying but rather transformation. And to me, this comes across as preposterous, like the way we exterminate species, we pollute the oceans, we are drill the mountains to pieces, though we do not call it destroying, we call it transformation. If it was the products of mankind was leveled with the ground, we would all agree that its about terminating. You bring up the term “infra politics”, right, so not the everyday politics found in papers and regular news, but some kind of underlying structure supporting the contemporary political debate, and this is, I guess, is where we find the central “infra political” question regarding the term “Anthropocene”. Like, it’s a highlighting human activity and a systematical disparagement of everything that is not a direct consequence of human actions.  

Peter Sandberg: So, infra politics. Infra descends from sound, no, like the sound you are unable to hear though you feel it in your bones, like some underlying vibrations beneath the politics, ideologies, structural systems ect. Like when you feel the urge to act but maybe cannot articulate it properly. Have I got it right?

 Yes, one could argue you do, haha, I invented that term myself, actually. It’s purposing a combo of compability and incompatibility, - like politics for instance, demands articulation, on the contrary, infra politics functions on several different levels at the same time. This is dealing with us as sensible creatures in a more sensible way than we can address. And from there on the vibrations tends in various directions. Some might be offended by the violence of nature in this, like Helena mentioned, but others have got a different version of infra politics and therefore addresses this indifferently - more spontaneously inclined a highlight of the products manufactured by human kind and from there on inclining towards transformation rather than termination. And I think it is important to accept/recognize/realize this as a perspective of value. To be able to see that. To try to increase linguistic availability to be able to look at it from counter holds, which I find political.

 Helena Granstrøm: There are some central cultural myths concerning Anthropocene, suggesting that the term is referring to the tale of human intrinsic urge for destruction. Like “it’s natural to exploit the surroundings” that is one of the cultural explanations, that I party find implied here. The second is all about “man being created in Gods image”, that there exists a virtue in administrating, which could also maintain the act of destroying, though in a sense, to continue the work on this “creation” and doing so by placing ourselves above it. And this you write on as well. What do you think, Gøran? So infra politics, unspoken politics sort of,

Yeah, well, I must admit I have grown quite a fond of this term. When I am alone I usually occupy myself with politics, like everyday politics. What I find utterly annoying is that the so critical dissidence related questions never are found to be present. Whereas in opposition this term really hits something in people. It moves them. I have even overheard directors of paper industry on vacation chatting “We need to reduce the consumption level in society” and then they go back to work, causing the straight opposite effect. There is something happening inside every human being, we feel something, something global. And this is also some of what is implied in the term (read: Anthropocene), opposed to what is presented in our everyday politics.

Helena: Well, isn’t it all because of narrowmindedness, causing us to continue believing in this “tale of progress”? Because if you don’t believe in it you cannot – then you cannot do shit.

There are several environmental activists, parts of the environmental movement, that has joined the eco-modernistic idea that postulates that they are equally narrow minded as everyone else considering FRaAMSTEGSBERETTELSEN . like “more technology is a necessity, we need new and more and better technology” like that kind of ecomodernism -  and then you might be trapped in a specific infra political understanding.

 Peter: Though, could someone spot something regarding our position? Sverker, in your book you write… Ok, so, as late as in 1930 Nobel prize winner in physics Robert Millican proclaimed that nothing can affect something as huge as our planet. So, you wright about this kind of longing for trust. It is like a scaling has disappeared.

 Svaerker: Yes, precisely, like you mention Helena, this administrational thought has increased in popularity, especially in eco modernistic groups that “we should protect and sustain this planet” can come across as an attractive alternative considering what sort of actions we are capable of going through with today minimizing the impact we have on this planet. “We can protect everything”. And I think this is an important argue, and of course you cannot deny the that there is something latent in this, we have to take responsibility for each other, but to take on the responsibility of everything, like, we are responsible for the growth, we are responsible for the sea level rising, we are responsible for - . Heaven on earth. It has to stop somewhere. There is a limit of what we can take here, I guess. And I also believe that this term, Anthropocene, that we approach this in a very confronting way, like we look in the mirror and what we see is this reflection of what we are or what we are pretending to be. A totalitarian creature that can do everything. Here, my infra political impulse is to stand up and actively say “Hell no, I don’t want to be a part of this, I want to stay small, I don’t want to be framed into these large concepts”

Gøran: I think this is a part of the phase-wise Anthropocene, that wherever we go throughout our lives we only encounter the technosphere. Like, going hiking you are basically moving inside a green industrial hall, you can witness the mechanics, and then you continue into thick forests, constructed on site by man. It is something artificial. You hardly find authenticity any more. We only encounter ourselves. That’s why you feel satisfied by the thought of “the wild nature” is reclaiming its territory.  Because it is something moving outside the technosphere.

   Helena:  Otherwise you move though a genuine forest that is in fact something in its own, something different, though you know that it may disappear by tomorrow. And it is something about the reliability in this big structure. Like "this is the mountain, it has always been here and it's going to stay here until infinity, this tree has been standing here since as long one can remember", though there is no such thing as consistency anymore related to the great outer structures. An interesting aspect you deal with in your book is that the world has shrieked, and that it is not only concerning high speed, efficient communication, it is concerning the reliable sphere, the sphere we hold our trust in. It is no longer trust in these great structures, it is not even the changing seasons,  it is almost nowhere to be found, it is merely reduced into what you can grasp with your hand and the few people you hold dearly in life.

 Sverker: There is an amazing poem written by Gøran Sommerby where he expresses envy for the romantical poets, like Kristel and so on, because whenever they were upset with the status of contemporary politics, they would have a walk in the wild to clear their minds. An untouched room where time stood still. This room has vanished. There no exits this type of room to rest. But this one could also interpret as a call to reevaluate our position.

 Peter: Though it is related to language as well, no? We read about this all the time, the technical and research terminology ect. I don’t know the position of nature poetics today, but it's like this fervent description of our planet and of ourselves and our position in universe. There might be a longing. You claim that there exits eco poetry.  

 Sverker: Yes, well in some ways you could call it that, or some kind of climate related poetry, recognized by its despair over the lack of space to recover/rest/recharge. Gøran: 18: 50 til Jag tycker meg senvis på forsjukning her? A few decades ago, we witnessed an explosive growth in the eco modernistic movement. It launched the mindset that could combine a broad society development with increased living standards and a cautious relation to the eco systems. The old version of "nature preservation" was considered extremely unpopular,  it was conservative and symbolic. With this Anthropocene discussion, the defense of "nature" has reappeared. Like the feeling that there is no rest, that we are savages obsessed with administrating and mending what is in reality a scale we cannot comprehend with. And then there arises a new type of longing back to - or at least – to something that is greater than us.

 Helena: Do you think that this upcoming insight at all can be expressed in political actions? I think it is interesting to have a look at how we execute these ideas and mindsets as political actions with our cultural mechanisms kept in mind. And the answer to this question is that we are extremely technooptimistic.

 Sverker: Yes, not only that, but a sort of speciesism/ species egocentric as well when you have a look at what our politicians do. Even all the climate party throughout Europe are eco modernists in some way, like, none of them claim we have to go back to a modest lifestyle, though all eco modernists, or not all, and in this sense I guess...When speaking about the "age of the human kind" an image instantly appears in your mind, an image of how selfish we are as a species. It's actually a point to it.

 Peter: You also describe various versions of what the "human" is, and you mention the "techosphere" the summation of all human activity, our buildings, roads, cables, construction sites ect. And then there is information that the techofossile diversity is exceeding the diversity of the earth and the summation of all the fossiles from earths development throughout time. It is absolutely overwhelming.

Gøran: Yes exactly, the total amount of impact we have had on earth that currently is manifested on a massive industrial scale. It is flourishing – take a random freighter, whether it is from China or another country,  it is cucked to the top of all this tiny stuff, and every day there are millions of new species being born sort of, in these commercial temples. And politically speaking there is an absurd diversity, in the future, one imagines the archeologists 10 000 years from now researching material from our time and our civilization, and that they will see our actions today as an enormous footprint. Like, our footprint as a species compared to the footprint of all of the billions other species that exists, and then one can say, well, in a short manner of time, the human kind surely went overrepresented, hehe.

 Peter: Now that is a creepy thought, hehe.

 Helena:  You also write that the fair amount of these products and inclusive the lifestock and other animals 20:15:   Is 100 000 times greater than the human, like total mass of the human kind.

 Sverker: Though is there not some sort of paradox to this? “The age of the human kind”, and at the same time biotechnics, robotics and artificial intelligence ect. It is almost like the age of the human kind/ humanity should be recognized as the time when the human is climbing down from its high horse and be replaced by... Like, we can replace almost all our organs, we can imagine that there will be a huge infratechnological leap that will give us automatical, driverless cars. There is a paradox that the age of the human kind culminates into a point of time when the human loses its unique position/role.

 Helena: To voluntarily give it up? Or.. Sverker: Yes, I suppose you could say so.

Peter: This is “Filosofiska rummet” were we are trying to address the resent term “Anthropocene – the age of the human kind/humanity”, and together with us today is ideahistorian Sverker Sørlin and auteurs Helena Granstrøm and Gøran Greider. So, it is about time as well, at high speed. Like, our glaciers are melting, deforestation, extinction of species and the geography is torn. Sverker, you write ”the understanding/vision of time that the west has lived under has been altered on the separation between the time of nature and the time of culture”. Time of culture has been fast the time of nature slow. Though now it it’s the strict opposite – the culture in falling behind the time of nature. It is hard to parry.

 Gøran: I think this is one of the fundamental shifts. Actually, I would like to say that this book in many ways is concerning a new perspective of the world that is arising. And when new perspectives on the world and versions of reality is arising, terms of movement, like time for intense…like nature is out there, stable and simply existing, and then suddenly stuff happens and it is not predictable anymore, that it is moving too fast. What we are facing now is an acceleration taking place all over the world at the same time, that is even spreading to what we used to call nature. Like, nature is becoming and almost nostalgic term even. And we still haven’t figured out yet how to control this new, high speed, because we have inflicted upon something that is uncontrollable. It is a bit ironic, no, speaking of control? Because we cannot control it, what man has kicked off is simply too fast. This is where we are right now. That is the mindset that is now arising, so new generations are going to perceive time in another way. And this defiantly affects the professional reflectors of time – the ideahistorians – are philosophizing about time, especially the recent decades.

 Peter: Yeah, I mean, it is almost as if culture and nature is merging, are we able to separate the two, and will we be in the future?

 You are asking too grand questions, hehe, though in some ways the answer would neither be yes or no, but the way one relates to time will change, of course.

 Peter: Yes, well, in your book you also discuss “modernism”. The science, the enlightenment, the nature continuingly providing us with recourses, materials ect. This is also some of what is changing, right? And also these processes in a political view. The already made decisions has been based on this logic, though it is no longer valid. Right, so the politics are also falling behind.

 Yeah, though we are also… I think you are quoting a Adorno, an old German philosopher, though he formulates it “over the perfect enlightened world are rays of catastrophe”. Modernity and the enlightenment, well it has been a tale of progress, though we spot in the horizon the total destruction of the biosphere. And this does something to the mindset of modernity. Right, so you wright that here lies loads of nostalgia in the term nature, and in terms like “the time of coal” and such, hehe. Though maybe not everyone sees this destruction, like why should we keep this old wall, is it really efficient or…speaking about eco systems I feel like, in the aftermath of the term “Anthropocene” there is a lot of…like the scientists are predicting that 50% or 2/3 of all species will be extinct by a hundred years, caused by the combination of climate change and human validation of territory/ radical disturbance of livelihoods. And the answer to this is to construct some kind of modern “Noahs Ark”. And then the question is “Well, what kind of species should we spare, which do we choose”. In some ways this is resolving our old thinking patterns, but in another sense they are amplified, even taken into extremes. That we with a certain obviousness take on this character as administrator of existence. Conspicuously, I think, in relation to this...

 And Noahs Ark occurred after the fall, right so…

 Noahs Ark is a non-option, hehe. One can say “Eco systems – we have to interfere to preserve them”. The coral reefs for instance, pale inspires – blekninger 27.12, several of our eco systems are under pressure. Like 60 or 70 present of our eco systems are under pressure. In the age of the human kind we have to act to secure and preserve our eco systems.

 Helena: But we have to preserve them, we do, and it is because we are not prepared to stop putting them under pressure, or what?

 Yes, I suppose you could stay that, but –

 Helena: It is not that complicated to reduce the pollution, for instance, to decrees the carbon dioxide you could stop driving a car there are many – speaking of infra politics – there are many sets of seeing the implied agreements, that we will never intend to actually adjust our lifestyles. (said ironically ->) It is not worth the hassle, after all.

 Yes, that is a returning issue. Eco modernists thinks that the solution is to continue believing in stronger technology ect. Though the real question is: To what extent do we have to reduce our construction?

 Helena: Though this we perceive as a cost. Then we have to sacrifice something. But to every day deplete, I don’t know how many, species per day…Most people don’t have an active relation to these concepts, because it does not have an impact on their everyday lives.

 Sverker: Yes, well, when I mention infra politics I mean, the lemur, the very last lemur existing.  I believe that there is something growing inside every human being, or most human beings, that there lies an authority…I suppose it is some kind of moralistic ontology of mine, that there is an authority within the human kind that is established into this lemur.

 Helena: Though does this authority manifest - Sverker: No! It does not, no. Helena: - into the cohesive practice? Because then -

 Sverker: No, though then you – and I would like to add a thing to this –

 Peter and Gøran laughts Sverker: - that makes me into some kind of reformist in this, hehe. And then I would really like to argue that one should think of “modernity” as the era of the hundreds of years we have endured. And almost all our surroundings has been constructed within that period of time, or perhaps not agriculture which is much older. For not to mention: we have laws, principals, rules, a moral perception determining right or wrong. All of these things has been created in a manner of centuries by people quite similar to ourselves. I imagine it as a necessity to come up with a different statutory framework the two or three hundred years to come. We simply have to find new principles and new structures and stuff for example an agreement that preserves the world as we know it today, we call it capitalism, confused with democracy. Though I don’t believe it can go on like this for much longer like this, it has to change, though it will not occur within the twenty or thirty years to come, it demands a long term transformation. And, I am going to be held completely accountable for what I am saying now, because I am dead by the time it will happen, but I think there is already much progress. Like, returning to a “progressive thinking” and a constructive and interesting perspective on having a rested nature. Or to have nature at all (or having one in the first place, I think) is a crucial thought, it is a totally different thought then what existed 130 years ago when the first nature preserving companies were created. It was in reality a complete conservative and symbolic nostalgia, pretty pointless really. Peter: Though what about the modernity that we cherish, it has provided us with so much welfare. We cling to it, right. A bit like peeing in your pants, really. (This is only me thinking:  No-no, modernity did not provide welfare – welfare was provided by the brave, thinking, bright, autonomous individuals and collectives in, various manners, questioning and acting upon the established structures of their time.) Sverker: Yes, absolutely! It is going to be a huge sacrifice. Look at the force the nostalgia in Trumps politics brings forward, - though I think it is doomed. Gøran: Yes, well this is no coincidence, and there is a survey suggesting that increased construction and welfare generates happiness to a certain level and then it begins to decrease. Like, the general living conditions in the late 60s is enough, most people realizes this as well. And that is a new feeling. And that is even a seed, an embryo to rethink the concept of never ending growth and increased standards. And this new. Never mind how it (read:Anthropocene?) will be defined in the law books, I think it is something worth believing in.

 Helena: Though it is not simply concerned about, like I think you have to have a larger perspective than reforming economical politics. No former political ideology has not mainly perceived nature and outer surroundings as potential resources, as something to exploit. It is necessary for something completely different to come up in that case.

Peter: Though the hope is based on a “technology optimism”. Like, one is supposed to…like, global warming is supposed to be reduced by new fuel, alternative energy resources ect, though this optimism, in its core, is a denial to make those radical decisions and to act on them. Sverker, you write in your book that technology shall be replaced by suffering.

 Sverker: Yes, well this is what the modernistic, the eco modernistic…

 Peter: Though no one will take on this suffering. Sverker: Yes, and it has been impossible up until now to suggest such a suffering in political terms. And if we have technology and access – and contrary I do not see technology as an enemy, I think there is plenty of good technology. Though the crucial part here is what is implied in this. That there exits a “blueprint” of what is our progress, “ways of how our happiness can spread and so on”, though I believe it provides a fake image even, and it is a project of ridiculous character to try transforming this superficial/fake image into a more representative image of what we are capable of doing while in a volatile state.

 Gøran: Though in these implied…I am very fascinated,  probably because of the Marxism in my spontaneous perspective on the world, though today under “Anthropocene”, Marxist idea historians are encouraging us to wright a story on our species. To get an objective tale on homo sapiens in our history books. Even if capitalism is to blame for the acceleration under and after the 2. World war, with increased constructing ect, perhaps there is an invasive feature to the human, to the species, homo sapiens. And this is because we possess the quite unique quality of collaboration. This quality is often expressed in positive ways considering the “welfare-state” though it also occurs to high extents in warfare. The attack on Iraq in 2013 was a shining example on a large scale, united collaboration, which has caused tremendous destruction and suffering. I find it interesting that even the Marxists suffering from biology horrors, under the “Anthropocene” considers this in biological terms. That there might be something in us, in our biology, in us as biological beings in the biosphere, that we need to acknowledge and seek to understand. Peter: Yes, exactly, I mean, we are the consumers, it is us that create the political ideologies it is us who have disturbed the balance here. Helena: Excuse me, but to an answer to what Gøran is saying here; it is important to keep in mind the cultures that has not contributed to exploitation of environment. Obviously, there is a potential for such a behavior to occur in the human spectrum, though there also lies a potential for completely other behaviors as well, which I think is important to remember.

Gøran: Yes, so do I think, - Helena: Because this drifts towards a merging of the human kind as a species and human kind as a specific sort of human culture. And I think it is important to separate those two terms.

Gøran: Yes, though we have to face duality in this, well…so nature, nature is such a problematic word these days, I almost feel like it is stuck in my mouth. We have to face the duality in our generic being here, where the goal of cooperation is expressed in that we create stabile societies that does not rely on exploitation of recourses. Though it can also shoot of like under the agricultural revolution or the industrial revolution so that it potentially destroys large amounts of the biosphere.  I am fascinated by the Marxist thinkers proclaiming these things to day and articulates a need for putting these thoughts on the agenda. We need to wright the story on the species , it is not enough with the history of society ect., we need to reflect upon ourselves. And I think this is something that has taken place in our time. Peter: Though that is the toughest issue right now, right?  “Anthropocene” - the age of the human kind, though what is…

 Sverker: A cure that is within reach, that is not as utopian as many of the other things we are discussing here, because to wright the history on the human kind/mankind is only possible by an increased access and distribution of intellectual energy – or know-how-. So, what the “species” has come up with is for example – let’s call them – biologists, scientist, experts or analysts, and they have executed high quality craftsmanship in describing certain characteristics to the being we have named “human”. Though all too few from society-research related fields, the human-ethical fields and the artistic fields, have engaged in this matter, it has partly been taboo. And I think what Dipesh Chakrabarty, Chicago historian that has written a lot on this topic, and others mean is not to make historians into biologists – but this is an urge to address and understand what these incredible tight-woven nexuses looked like. In prehistorical times where almost stripped from contact with the biological, now some sort of new interrogation is occurring to better understand our age and the previous ones. And in this case, I in some ways think that there will be more options in terms of how one perceives and thinks around the future. A positive aspect about the capitalism, is after all its receptiveness it has potential of never ending renewal and if one can upgrade what we used to call nature, or if we can upgrade the global, - it would be a part of the solution to increase the value of nature itself. Like, not only monetary though also the moral instances. Gøran: Though we are still stuck. If capitalism is to upgrade nature, it would still be within the frames of the market. With limited resources the cost will rise and so on, and that’s the infra structural. Helena: Though introspection is one of homo sapiens best qualities. The modern version of it at least. Is it not what is demanded as well? I would argue that as a culture, we do not recognize other subjectivities than the human subjectivity. When we act on it, we create this image of the world where we solely are the feeling and thinking beings, and if other beings should inherit the same qualities it is simply a mechanical behavior. Rather than to examine and review ourselves, we should seek to be more responsive to our living environment.

 Sverker: I think this also occurs in the Anthropocene discussion, it is so much going on considering animal studies. Like, an attempt to appreciate? innkännande the closer surroundings, comes across to me as a new and staggering project.

Gøran: Yes, it is new, and science on dogs for instance, or craws or livestock. Like, the line which separates the human being from other primates or animals is thinned out. Helena: Yes, this is interesting when reading about it, though what is consequences? How does it affect our lifestyles? Gøran: Yeah, well, this is in the matter of many thousand years. Helena: Though what does it make us into? It makes us into quite grotesque violators, should I say, if one really… Peter: Though I think… to pin-point what the human being is was an easy task up until a certain time. When it “exploded” sort of, after the enlightenment or the modernity or so, but since then everything has progressed so quickly – commercialism, atom bombs, plastic – in this case, haven’t we lost our prospects somewhere along the way under what we call “Anthropocene”? Gøran: I think that for every new child being born. Then the conscience is restored. Another word for infra politics would be, on an individual level, would be that consciousness. That the conscience is the opportunity to a moral instance that takes more than it can explain. Helena: Speaking of animals, I am thinking, not that you explicitly discuss it, though the image of the technological progress as unstoppable… Now we are discussing humanity and the different options and ways for humans to proceed to. If you go with that thought all the way, maybe we do not have that much of a choice. In some sense, we are relying on the technology system we have been deceived to create. What do you think around this? Do you see the dynamics that have been put into action as something we are able to influence without taking influence over? Sverker: I think that is a superb question, and the answer would be that “Anthropocene” is helpful, at least I have found it helpful in viewing this footprint as a historic product up until now. And that is a pretty strange image, to see this enormous power, though this is a distinct formulation concerning the future. I do not think that it is an irreversible development, “a priori” at least, I think it will be difficult to stop it, but, in principle, it is not unstoppable. It is responsive. And therefore, it is so important to relate it to politics, because it is only by political means one can head in a new direction. It is utterly necessary to do so. And I have, in several books, for instance “Naturkontraktet” from the 90s, expressed optimism regarding the possibilities, even if some literal traces may come across as frightening, and continue to do so, I am convinced that it is possible. And that it is important to keep holding on to that thought. And when I say, “infra politics” it is maybe because I find it important that things proceed inwards, like the organic that is hard to formulate, also considering the politics. Peter: I was thinking about something you mentioned earlier, about the smallness, that you miss former scale, when the earth was still grand. Now, the human being is grand. May the question be if man has grown to grand for its own good?

Yes, well. Peter: Because what are we to do, emission from New York and Europe is causing the Antarctica to melt, it is heating the water which affects the monsoons in India. It is so fragmented and difficult to make sense of, it is difficult to be political in that context… Gøran: We simply must exercise in being “small”. It is not of unimportance. Say you go and buy a flower tree, planting it at a nice spot where it gets the right amount of sun and shadow, and you have an active thought “this is the right spot, the tree will thrive”. Or if you have pets, like cats, dogs or sheep, the interaction with other types of consciousness, other subjectivities than yourself, becomes a practice in making yourself smaller. And I think that is a pretty important thing. People are opening their eyes and realizing this, which is providing hope.

 Peter: So, you think the man in the street will pick up on “Anthropocene” in a matter of time? The word is a bit difficult, it is a bit abstract. Sverker: I heard from someone that had read this word and believed it should be pronounced “Antropoken”, it sounds a bit more like, hehe, fighting the human being. Gøran: Well, is it not remarkable, sometimes you meet children that questions the killing of mosquitoes. That is something new I guess, because it is a harassment of other beings. (outro music) Peter: “Filisofiska rummet”, today we have been discussing the new term “Anthropocene – the age of the human being/humanity”. You heard Sverker Sørlin idea and environmental historian and author of the recent book “Antropocene – en essä om människans tidsålder”, Helena Granstrøm, author with background in physics and mathematics, and author Gøran Greider. Techniques were provided by Marie Person and the show was produced and hosted by me, my name is Peter Sandberg, good bye.