On my walk one morning this summer, I watched a raven fly by with a baby bird in its beak—most likely a vermilion flycatcher, given the vermilion flycatchers that were chasing the raven and crying. It was not the first time I’ve seen “nature, red in tooth and claw” on my morning walks. In fact, I periodically have to clean up the remnants of a hawk’s breakfast pigeon from my own yard!

Pondering modern American sensitivities, I wonder how we are to view such moments. Is the killing of one bird by another cruelty or necessity? Given that they are both birds, is it even murder? We call it murder when humans kill each other. But nature operates on a take-as-you-need-it basis, a kill-as-required-to-eat necessity. This is in stark contrast with the mass slaughters that humans undertake.

Is such seeming cruelty simply the way life is on earth? Nature is not cruel, in the sense of intentionally causing massive death and destruction. Instead, death is woven into the structure of the web of life. After all, that baby in the raven’s mouth may not be destined to reproduce more vermilion flycatchers, but it is feeding the future—in the form of raven babies. Life incorporates death, death feeds life, and the web of life endures.

I enjoy Earth’s vast and varied beauty. I’m also increasingly recognizing its ephemeral nature. Would we treat our world as more precious, in both its beauty and its cruelty, if we accepted the transience, the fragility, and the inherent limitedness in it?

Being at the top of the food chain, I’m not concerned that I will be hunted down for breakfast. Ultimately, I know I will die and contribute myself to Earth’s web of life. Someday, my ashes will balance the soil around a pine tree somewhere. But that’s not a worry for today.

Today, I’m more concerned with the violence resulting from the unnatural random cruelty that humans generate as a consequence of how we mistreat each other.

What are your thoughts about Earth’s ephemeral beauty and nature’s supposed cruelty?

Share This