A common theme among the people I have worked with over the years is that they feel themselves to be trapped in a paradox: they feel painfully aware of the ecological crises facing us but utterly unable to respond in a way that feels adequate. This often leads to frenetic action driven by fear, grief and anger – which then gets overtaken by stress and burnout. Feeling exhausted and unable to cope fuels the sense of inadequacy and the process becomes a cycle of self-abuse.
As the cycle spirals, their level of efficacy plummets. Dwindling energy and fragmented focus stifle creativity and agency. They seek ways to cope by pushing away the difficult feelings. They blame others – corporates, the government – anyone who doesn’t seem to see the world the way they do. They become overwhelmed by bitterness and cynicism. Or else they hold all this bile inside and blame themselves – and end up feeling bewildered and alone.
This is the story I hear. And it is my own story too.
The paradox then, is that we are all complicit in creating the crises we seek to avoid. All of us. Even if many of us feel that this is because we are trapped in an ecologically impossible culture.
John Keats described his notion of Negative Capability as,‘when man [sic] is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason’ (On Negative Capability: Letter to George and Tom Keats, 21, 27 December 1817). I think there is something fundamentally important about this: something that could free us from the paradox of complicity.
I think that Keat’s offers a subtle but powerful message with real practical implications for the environmental movement. On the one-hand we’re compelled through the knowledge of our own complicity to act. And that action, in our culture at least, tends to be dominated by an intellectual, factual, logical, rational, technical response. We recycle our stuff, install solar panels, drive a hybrid car, use public transport, ride our bikes, buy organic food, refuse to fly in a jet. We do not respond by creating beauty, listening deeply, writing poetry or playing music. Not as a general rule anyway. And if we did, such acts would be considered inadequate distractions – fiddling while Rome burned. They would be seen as inferior to acts informed by ‘fact or reason’.
Negative Capability offers what Meg Wheately might describe as being ‘beyond hope and fear’. It offers “lichtung” – the light filled clearing in the forest that Martin Heidegger used to describe the nature of Being. This space is still but it is not passive, it is stable but also dynamic, it is calm but it is also fizzing with potential. It is a state of holding still in extreme situations – and more importantly, of therefore having the energy, resolve, clarity, creativity and courage to act when the opportunity arises.
If we apply this to the range of responses available to us in the environmental movement we see something new emerging. Not frenetic activism fuelled by fear and blame, or passive denial. It’s something else: it’s each of us opening to a kind of active acceptance. Prepared to act completely and skilfully when what we have to offer the world, meets equally with what the world needs and with what we each love to do most.