Discussion Assignment 5A: Easter Island
11 unread reply.11 reply.
As Jared Diamond states, in one of this week’s readings, the story of Easter Island has fascinated people for generations. For some (including Diamond), it is a cautionary tale of environmental exploitation and collapse. The traditional view is that Easter Islanders basically undermined their own lives and livelihood by clearing the island of trees. However, in the last few years, a few archaeologists and other researchers have challenged this version of the story. In Krulwich’s account, Easter Islanders were not directly responsible for “ecocide” but rather were scrappy survivors making the best of a situation that they had little control over.
I will borrow the question for this DA from Krulwich: There is an “old” version of the Easter Island story (as told by Diamond), and a “new” version (as told by Krulwich). Which worries you the most? Include the following in your post:
Identify at least one similarity and one difference between the older and newer accounts of Easter Island’s collapse. What assumptions and evidence are shared? What evidence is disputed?
Explain which of the two versions of the Easter Island story is more compelling to you. Which seems more believable or accurate?
As noted, one reason why people continually retell the older story of Easter Island is that it can serve as a parable of the dangers of overconsumption and environmental collapse. Even if the new version of the story is true, does Easter Island still present cautionary warnings about the environment? Why or why not?
