Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved).




Saturday, October 11, 2008

Predator or Prey

So we had the hero and anti-hero, which generally speaking people are pretty familiar with, but now comes a way of looking at human behavior that is not so familiar.

Last year I wrote a post called Caretaker or Destroyer referencing in it something from the book, The Shape Shifter by Tony Hillerman. An element of the plot had interested Farm Boss enough to discuss with me. The villain had decided the world was divided into predator or prey. By his reckoning, predators take from prey. He saw everyone in terms of his definition. You will be one or the other.

After recently reading the book myself, I thought about the idea again. Is the breakdown that simple? And in our world, where we are generally so removed from the more elemental struggles of life, how would we identify which someone else was or maybe even know about our own nature?

When I sat down to write about it, something from The Long Hot Summer came to mind. Maybe you remember it, starring Paul Newman as Ben Quick, based on the book by William Faulkner. Ben Quick tells Clara Varner (Joanne Woodward), "The world belongs to the meat eaters, Miss Clara, and if you have to take it raw, take it raw." He was clearly a predator but what was she?

One thing to do here is look at this as it would be in nature. Predators are not villains, nor are prey innocents. If we go by animals who eat other animals, it would make most humans predators; but in the book, Shape Shifter, the definition is more of a spiritual or emotional one-- which can lead to action.

Determining who is a human predator might seem easy. If someone is posturing and blustering, predator, right? Not the predators I have seen in the animal world. Posing means no dinner. Attacks are focused, done quickly, effectively, or the predator doesn't continue to exist long. Posturing is reserved for mating. :)

Although I think Hillerman's villain presented an interesting concept, I think it doesn't go far enough, and his inability to see that was his downfall.

In the animal kingdom, there are effective and ineffective predators and prey. Some are skilled at what they do and some don't get very old. So if we are looking at humans as to whether someone is predator or prey, they might be a predator who isn't very good at it. Prey can attack if it has reason enough.

In humans, I think, there would be a further division-- good or evil. If you are looking at people and trying to decide is this person predator or prey, a good and evil addition further complicates the problem. (If you don't like the word evil, come up with one that suits you for those who do good and help others and those who do bad and hurt others).

Whatever word you use, if a predator is a good person, they won't be going around hurting others. They might even appear to be weak to someone who is flexing their muscles, but when the time comes to confront an event, they will deal with it effectively and to the level required-- which makes them a good, effective predator.

Looking around, thinking of what I read, I think, as did that villain, that there are some humans who are prey-- and not the wily, alert type, who in the animal kingdom live into their own old age. Are these people born such or trained? Does it suit some cultures to make a lot of their population into weak prey? Whatever the case, some are victims waiting for someone to take advantage of them. They want the world to be what they imagine it should be; and when it is not, they are incapable of adjusting. This is why all people need governments. The idea that no government is needed is ignoring human reality.

Is the dye firmly cast for whether we are predator or prey, effective or ineffective or even more so good or bad? Can we change once we have started down a certain road? Will we? If our nature is one or the other, perhaps it's better to stick to being sure we are good rather than bad and as effective as we can be rather than inept in what is for us our nature.

So where is this going? To the next blog--

(Fawn and doe photos from cabin near Livingston. Grizzlies from 1998 visit to the Grizzly & Wolf Discovery Center in West Yellowstone. My only photos of grizzlies in the wild are at a much greater distance, and I'd just as soon see it stay that way. )

6 comments:

Sylvia K said...

It's a very interesting concept that suddenly these days has a whole new meaning. I wonder if we are going to end up being prey or predator?

Diane Widler Wenzel said...

I want to commend you on your creative and brave train of thought. I am keeping an open mind on the concept of being either pray or predator until I understand your third blog. Putting a new cosmic view in three installments is an excellent approach.

Darlene said...

Like Parapluie I am waiting for your third post to see where this is leading.

At this point I think we can take the roles of both predator and prey in our lifetimes. Some people are natural predators and they usually end up in powerful places. (Think a president, CEO, etc.)

Kay Dennison said...

I can look at my life's history and I am prey. Life has beaten me up more times than I care to think about. It's given me a mental toughness and determination to fight back against a lot of things but when it comes to people and relationships I wind up losing.

OldLady Of The Hills said...

I kept wondering while reading this where the analogy was to those that are actively persuing the Office of President & Vice President these days, if indeed, there IS an analogy...!

Fran aka Redondowriter said...

I love Tony Hillerman's work, but I had not thought of this predator/prey theory outside of the animal kingdom. I can imagine where this post is going, Rain. Love your photos. Like Darlene, I think I have been both prey and predator in my life. Hmmm.