Monday, October 31, 2016

9 - "If a Tree Falls" & "L'Erreur Boréal"

Demetria Ekiridzo
Jessica Joncas
Samantha Zakher

            Life on Earth is great and very relaxing to the privileged western countries. We have the highest education on earth, food from every corner of the planet, and the most innovating technology. One can visit people in different continents in a maximum of 2 days, and can take a tour of the world by plane or boat. People are building more and more, opening places to immense innovations. However, has one every thought about the origins of these resources? Or more precisely, how it is being created? It is all and well to know that paper comes from trees, but do you know that 95% of the trees have been completely razed from the surface of the North America? Life on Earth isn’t actually that relaxing; unless, of course, you have been totally clueless up until now.

“If a Tree Falls:  A Story of the Earth Liberation Front”

            “If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front” is a documentary directed by Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman, revolving around the environmentalists called the Earth Liberation Front (E.L.F). This documentary was produced in the United States in 2011 and is 85 minutes; it features Daniel McGowan, his friends, family, allies of the E.L.F and many others. Daniel McGowan was a regular kid that lived in New York City, and went to catholic school. After college, McGowan realized the impacts and the problems related to the environment, and then decided to join the environmental movement. To make a change, he started joining petitions and writings letters, trying to inform the people about what was going on with the environment. When he noticed that his first actions were not effective, he and his group of activists did property destruction and civil disobedience. McGowan and his group never intended to harm anyone, they make these actions with the only intention to bring down big corporation. When McGowan noticed that these acts of protest became dangerous he and some other member of the E.L.F drop out and continued their life in a different direction. In 2005, Daniel McGowan was arrested at his workplace by federal agents for being involved into “terrorist” actions. At the end of the documentary, we see Jake Ferguson ended up walking free after traitorously giving up his friends to the federal agents. Many other E.L.F members got jail time; and for Daniel McGowan, he was sentenced to 7 years in jail.

          This video is a brief overview of the E.L.F actions :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyLcmtwk0xQ

After watching the documentary “If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front”, we could very well realize that the movie shows multiple point of views. These multiple points of view let the audience make their own opinion on the subject, as well as who they agree with. In the documentary, the content was quite biased towards the E.L.F. and the environmental issues. Although it is biased, the directors demonstrated a various amount of points of view and ideologies like the police officers and the investigators as well as the media and the businessmen. Daniel McGowan and other E.L.F members believed that what they were doing the right thing for the environment. They tried to deliver their message by by burning buildings and property damage. Daniel McGowan put himself out there to show his beliefs and ideologies. The documentary film tries to show what environmentalism is all about, the film implies that being an environmentalist is someone that supports nature and wants to protect it. Daniel's point of view in the film gives him a chance to show ideologies and makes himself an example to follow. One of the most important messages in this film is that we have to stand up for what we believe in. However, as shown in the film: there are limits. The E.L.F. wanted to shock the companies; however, their ways were drastic and dangerous. Due to those extreme methods, business owners lost their money and their hard work. 

When the director interviewed the business owners, they used their testimonies to make the documentary less biased. He also used many testimonies to show different ideologies about the saving the environment and how important the issue is. This documentary also added a lot of scenes showing police brutality, demonstrating these peaceful protesters getting pepper sprayed and being bombared with gas, etc. By doing so the director showed how the police has to follow what they are told even if they do not necessairly agree with their orders. What the environmentalist wanted to show to everyone else, is that our environment is getting worse every day, second by second, and if we keep going we are going to lose what is left of it.



“L’Erreur Boréale”

The film “L’Erreur Boréale” is a documentary directed by Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie. It is mostly about Quebec’s nature and how it’s being treated here. But it’s really about the deforestation in Quebec. This film was made in Quebec in 1999 and is 68 minutes long. At the beginning of the film, he interviews an elderly man called Robert Monderie; he helped make this documentary with Richard Desjardin. They start talking about Lake Vaudray, in Quebec. This man says that since he was five years old, he would come and spend his summers there. However, it’s almost all gone because such a big amount of trees have been cut down by these companies. In Abitibi, Quebec, there lies one of the biggest leather factories in the world. They poisoned tons of lakes and rivers, and cut down many important trees in Lake Vaudray. Luckily, Richard Desjardins started a petition; He received one thousand five hundred signatures to stop the leather company from cutting down more trees, on the other side of Lake Vaudray. No one really realizes what’s happening to nature; since we build walls around forests, human beings cannot witness or see how people disrespect nature, and how little they care about the trees.  This is the problem Richard Desjardins is trying to show people in his documentary. The government keeps cutting down so many trees here in Montreal. Desjardins’ goal in this film was to show us citizens that we need to make a change and we need to save the forests. When the Europeans came to North America, they had already cut all the trees of the forest. However, when Jacques Cartier came to North America, he was amazed by the nature. Back in the day, the forest in Quebec used to be two times bigger than it is now! One tree used to be enough to cut a plank of wood for a table but nowadays, they need more than just one tree. In 1910, in Quebec, a new law had been created: wood had to be transformed into paper. In 1950, Trois-Rivière became the world’s capital of paper.


            The way Richard Desjardins expresses his feelings about nature and the cutting down of the trees is great. In this film, he reveals to us, the audience, what the government and industries are trying to do through the use of pictures. He is also tells us what exactly they’re hiding from people. Desjardins says that they are cutting the trees in a disrespectful and exaggerating way; they are definitely not replanting trees, they’re taking the homes of many animals and they’re slowly killing humans. The government and the industries are not respecting the environment; all they truly care about is making a profit. We need those trees because they have the oxygen necessary for our breath and survivals, our food and animals, our well being, etc.
 Check out this short video that demonstrates the changes happening to Quebec's forest.  ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgspXk58NVc
            
 The concept of this film is to teach us the importance of nature and trees. Industries have to stop cutting down so many trees. There aren’t many trees left in the world. Nobody realizes how important the environment and soon it’s all going to be gone. 

         This film presents one clear ideologie, that we have to be careful and change our ways before all our forest get cut down. L'erreur boréale denounce the clean cuts happening in the nordique forest.  Desjardins uses this film to show the issue of deforestation in Quebec and uses statistics to support his claims.

         At the end of the documentary, Desjardins shows pictures to students studying nature; those picture demonstrate what people are doing to the forest. He shows them what the industries have done to Lake Vaudray, and how there aren’t many trees left: they are quite shocked, because they’ve never seen the forest like that. Ignorance is prevalent throughout the society: Important information is withholden from naturalists themselves!

Our Thoughts on the Films

These films are very eye-opening to some, and a complete joke to others. It shows us how urgent the problem of ecology is, and yet how many people ignore it. These films can be seen as pretty challenging: to get their point across, some people decide to cause damage through their method of arson, but they keep on going until they are heard, yet they mostly manage to be seen as terrorists, and their purpose is completely invisible. It is very shocking to see how far people can go for simple trees. However, it is understandable when we see how much damage one has caused to the environment. It is very weird to see such an extremist side of the environment, since it is usually treated as an exagerated issue. The environment has become a real issue as seen the both movies our forests and environments are being destroyed and we need to take action. These films invite us to treat the environment more seriously, and to realise how much damage we are causing. Throughout the world, about 900 million trees are cut down annually, as of 2014. We never seem to realise how much we’re killing the earth because we are so desensitised to its issues. Watching these films is like taking a bath in cold water, gasping and coming back to the surface, and realising you are very much awake, but that you have chosen to be sleepy and blind. Littering, buying books, using too much water, has always been done without a care in the world. However, we now have a guilty feeling in the back of our heads. With every meter you drive with a car, another dent is put in the Earth’s lifespan.

The film “L’Érreur Boréale” was eye-catching because we got to see how so many industries treat our environment in such disgusting ways. Desjardins showed us what an industry had done to Lake Vaudray and I thought it was just so sad to see someone’s home being destroyed like that. Every year, more and more poor animals become extinct, due to human actions. It is sad to see those beautiful creatures be gone forever. 

 It is not very likeable to be treated as Earth’s criminals. No one likes to be seen as a hateful and disgusting person, yet these films has human beings be seen like so. It is trying to make us realize and make us accept that with every action we take, we are causing environmental damage. Seeing all the police brutality against peaceful protesters is shocking: it is unbelievable that the government itself is fully ignoring the damage they are causing to the environment, and are weeding out the people who do care about it. Image after image, scene after scene, the message of these films finally get embedded in our brain, and we feel somewhat guilty. Obviously, it is too difficult and almost impossible to radically change our lifestyle, but small actions are better than nothing.

            I would say that the filmmaker have done a good job in conveying their ideas; it was a bit shocking to see how developed of a crime the eco-terrorists have done, without being a single bit guilty about it, in the moment. It is good to see how they’ve reflected on it, without degrading the purpose of it. However, it is a bit unnecessary to see how much empathy the filmmakers wants us to pour in the film to feel bad for Daniel. It is important that we see him as a human being, but seeing to much of him in a positive light erases the crimes he has done. Desjardins has done a successful job of demonstrating how intensely important information is hidden from us, with the example of naturalists students being shocked at his pictures. The anecdotes were also interesting, yet not totally convincing without the proof of solid evidence.
          
          After watching these two documentary, we realized that we should take action to save the planet. Just looking at my neighborhood the municipality is taking over our forest to build condos. I remember when I just moved in, their was only two or three streets present in my development and now there is about 10 to 12 streets. This has made me open my eyes to what the environment is facing. The two documentary made me notice that the I need to take action, so lately I tried taking care of the environment even more, I have tried to reduce my ecological footprint.   

To conclude, we shall end with the obvious; the environment is extremely, tremendously, important. ‘If A Tree Falls’ demonstrate how desperate the environmentalists are, for the cause is urgent: L’Erreur Boréale, likewise. Both films show us the effects of the long-term damage we have created.  We must realise how much damage we are causing to the Earth, and we must change our lifestyles to ensure a better life for us and the future generations. We need to rally against the corporations who ignore the damage they cause on Earth, and protest peacefully, because extreme reaches will only bring us backwards. Going slow yet steady is the best method. However, are we truly capable of change?

Want to help make a change, here are 10 simple things you can do to make the planet healthier.

15 comments:

  1. Excellent blog, I enjoyed reading every bit of it. I found it reminded me of a movie I watched a while back called Avatar, how humans settled on a distant planet called Pandora and farmed the resources without any concerns for the life on the planet. I find it relates strongly to situation that the E.L.F. are fighting for in the documentary “If A Tree Falls” because it shows how we let our greed get in the way of what truly matters in terms of life on our planet. That we should think about the needs of the planet first instead of the needs for resources.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Indeed, this movie presents different point of views. For myself, I partially agree with all the point of view presented in this film. I found that they all have valuable arguments for some of the actions they undertake. I think that we do need to exploit our natural resources, like cutting the trees to be able to build houses. But there is always a limit; cutting up to 95% of the native American forest becomes more a way of making money than a way to respond to our needs. This is why I also agree with the activists. We need to make pressure on the companies to force them to reduce their environmental activities and damages. I agree with the fact that no social change happens without applying any pressure, but there is also a limit of the actions we take to make pressure. Burning the properties of businessmen is certainly not the right way to apply pressure even though it does change things.

    Very well done blog!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it would have been interesting to focus more on the actions taken by McGowan. Like you mention, at first his actions have no impact so he radicalized himself but after he left the ELF, he starts to work for different organisations that are already in place and trying to change the world. A sort of more organise resistance. Also, it can be related to "No impact man". Colin Beavan is astonish at all the organisations that already exists and try to save the earth through small actions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really enjoyed reading this blog, especially because I found the ELF intriguing. I think that as you said the movie was good at demonstrating different points of view on this topic, yet I still felt the bias from the directors in favour for the ELF and Daniel McGowan. I found this film interesting as I was not aware of these environmental extremists. When watching the movie, I agreed with the argument that we are damaging our environment and how we can try and cut back on our actions that impact the environment negatively. However, I believe that the actions that the ELF took part in are wrong. In other words, I agree with their goals, but not the actions that they took to reach those goals. I don't believe that people should just be allowed the burn down properties, and create fear even if they think that it gets their message across, I strongly believe that these actions crossed a line. Overall, I really enjoyed this blog well done!

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is difficult to choose a side in the film "If a Tree Falls" as both sides have valid reasoning behind their actions. The activists perform some extreme protests and are punished for them however they are fighting for what is right and what they believe is killing our earth. The movie really does open our eyes to see how much really happens without anyone really knowing it is happening. It shows how almost everyone contributes to endangering our planet by just the littlest of things.

    -Tomas Colicchio

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think this issue can be compared with “This is democracy” as they show how people who protest and speak out are so easily attacked by the media and those benefiting from it. I believe that the ELF was in the wrong to burn down those building but definitely understand the frustration and the point they were trying to make. I agree with you that these films do open up our eyes to what we have been ignoring and help us become more conscious about our lifestyle. Since the earth is our home we all need to treat it respect, films like these help spread awareness and help the planet.
    - Shannon Robertson

    ReplyDelete
  7. I completely agree with this blog that the documentary "If a Tree Falls" shows both sides of the argument: the lawyers and business men, as well as the environmentalist and protesters. The documentary, like you said, was biased towards the environmentalist side because we only see Daniels full story (his childhood and up to when he decided to join the E.L.F) and we don't see the full story of the business men. I think this documentary needed to be biased because it is making a statement about the environment. If North Americans' are watching this film, it's safe to assume that most of the audience consumes and is a part of a capitalistic society so this film brings a new perspective to some lifestyles.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think the documentary ''If a Tree Falls'' was pretty biased for the environmentalists’ side because they only briefly showed the business men's perspective and they did not address all their hard work for building their industries. I personally think that the environmentalist’s actions were grave crimes and I do not think they should have done them because I think there are more pacifist ways of showing their disagreement with the way the businesses they attack treat the environment. I strongly disagree with the E.L.F.'s actions, however, I do understand their point of view and why they did it. They were desperate for people's attention and recognition which they were not able to obtain through the Medias who only represented them in a bad light. I think they did not succeed their mission of sensitizing people to the environmental problems we face today but worsened their case and their reputation with the vandalisms. I still think the documentary is interesting because we can really put a face on the actions and humanize the people that do them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I like this blog entry because it points out exactly my view on the movie but stating that the movie was very biased towards the environmentalist however, we got to saw part of the point of views of different groups such as the lawyers and business mens. Personally, I agree that there is a problem with our environment however, the ELF went a little bit too far with their actions which gives a bad reputation to environmentalists. Like in the movie "No Impact Man" Colin did something for the environment and influenced a lot of people without actually using terrorists acts.
    -Mathieu Morin

    ReplyDelete
  10. One of my favourite blog entries up to date! I found it very interesting how we are able to compare and contrast what is happening in Quebec in comparison to the united states. From reading your blog it it seems like we are making the exact same disastrous decisions with our boreal forests. Now whether or not environmental extremism or ''terrorism'' is the answer to solving the problem I am uncertain. But what I am certain of is that there is a serious need to lobby both our federal and provincial governments to take serious action and intervene in order to preserve some of the last intact boreal forests in the world. I believe in taking personal action like Collin Bevan has done with his no impact man project, is the best action individuals can take to agrees environmental change. Any violent course of action will result in a loss of credibility and simply add more gasoline to the fire.
    Benjamin Copithorne

    ReplyDelete
  11. The film "If a Tree Falls" brings up a very important message about the environment. Some of the facts about the amount of forest that is being lost to logging companies astonished me. I agree with the reasons for which the Earth Liberation Front chose to take action, but I strongly disagree with their method. It was wrong to burn down all those buildings and it was a very desperate act on their part. Burning down those buildings only made them look like arsonists, it did not help their cause.

    -Sebastien Christie

    ReplyDelete
  12. While I don't condone damage or violence, it's undeniable that its results are often successful. Terrorists incite terror. Riots raise awareness. Arson in this film got results (in one case, however). It is easy to see how these people resorted to destruction. Children, when they're upset, throw a tantrum. Even as an adult, breaking something when frustrated feels good, momentarily. I think that that is part of what made the eco-arsonists (I don't like that they're labeled terrorists) do what they did.

    Marcus Tappert

    ReplyDelete
  13. I really enjoyed this blog a lot! After watching the film, I could understand such the big divide between the viewers regarding wether the actions of the E.F.L. were right or wrong. I myself stand in the middle as I don't condone violence in any way but the fact that they never had in goal to harm a human was a plus. It seems as tho they had no other choice but to resort to instilling fear as their voices and protests were not being heard by there government. A great example of that was when the mayor pushed the cutting of the trees to the day before the city council was supposed to meet with the people to talk about the issue. Some of there actions seemed very harsh but they came out with many of the results they wanted. Personally i think they could have achieved their goals in a non violent manner but it probably would have taken much longer to accomplish.

    ReplyDelete
  14. What I liked about this blog, besides the obvious fact that it is an extremely important subject that needs to be addressed as soon as possible, is how you wrote it in a way that drops us, the readers, straight into the thick of it. You present us with what we know already; our way of life, and then immediately transition into how the planet is being sacrificed for our way of life. And though many take it for granted, there are some who will go to extreme lengths to fight back for the environment. Personally I do not believe that the actions taken should have been considered terrorism, and I believe that, as it was stated i the film, something had to be done, and the regular stuff wasnt working. Anyways, I believe this blog was excellently structured as well as written, and to tie it all together, the subject was both interesting as well as important. Great work.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The movie "If a tree falls", is an interesting one. It stirs a conflict within the viewer because the arsonists seem to have had reasonable motives for doing what they did, but at the same time, our morals tell us that violence is bad and that it is never the solution. It shows us how we are destroying the environment and how the environmentalists tried to protest and protest but no change came until they resorted to more violent measures. Your blog does a really good job of explaining what the documentary is about in a very detailed manner but I feel like you left out a very important detail at the end of the second paragraph, and that is that not only did Daniel get 7 years of jail time, he was also officially labeled an eco-terrorist for the rest of his waking life and being labeled a terrorist of any sort in today's society is as good as being satan on earth. That has many implications for Daniel's future. Just like you said in your blog, Daniel was just trying to bring change and raise awareness about the environment but nothing happened and instead he and his peers were subjected to police brutality and so violence became the voice that they needed to make themselves heard. Overall, I enjoyed reading the blog but I feel that even though the individual analysis of the films were pretty good, there were no comparisons or any analysis of similarities anywhere. I would've also liked to have seen some sort of similarity analysis but otherwise, the blog is nice. Good job.

    -Sean Handa

    ReplyDelete

You comments should address at least one of the following topics:
- The content of the entry (if there is anything you’d like to add, to precise, to nuance, to correct);
- Your understanding and experience of the films (ideas or emotions you didn’t have a
chance to share or develop fully in class);
- Some comments on other films (fiction or non-fiction), which you feel are relevant to the entry and the weekly topic;
- Personal experiences related to the content of the films or the lesson.

Don't forget to include your name!

(The comment feature is reserved to members from the Documenting Myths course - thank you for respecting this...)