The Story of Stuff

[HamNCheese]

I considered posting this under "media," but I'm actually more curious about people's ideas and decisions than I am about discussing the film itself. Administrators- if you think I should move it to media let me know!

If you haven't seen this or heard of it, this is a film that is a must-see for absolutely anyone who has ever bought anything:

The Story of Stuff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GorqroigqM

Here's the description: From its extraction through sale, use and disposal, all the stuff in our lives affects communities at home and abroad, yet most of this is hidden from view. The Story of Stuff is a 20-minute, fast-paced, fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns. The Story of Stuff exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues, and calls us together to create a more sustainable and just world. It'll teach you something, it'll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever. -http://storyofstuff.org
____________________________________________

Annie Leonard has become a bit of a hero of mine because of this. I love that such a huge subject has been condensed down in such an easy-to-understand, straightforward and honest video. After watching this and discussing it with my family, I bought the book, and am about halfway through reading it.

So I'm curious! Has anyone seen this? What are your thoughts?

 

[caiti]

I had to watch it for my women's studies class (not really sure how it related). It was informative but seemed to be geared towards young people and I didn't really like that, i.e had cartoons and very simple language (not that those things are bad...I just didn't like the way it did that I don't know).

Overall, I thought it was really good and very thought provoking. In an issue where one argument is that things are overpriced, it pointed out that some things are underpriced for the amount of work, time and travel it took to get to the store (the $4 radio example Annie used specifically refers to this).

In my class we also read articles and watched videos about maquiladoras. There was a very good video called Maquilapolis we watched (I don't remember if it was the whole thing or an excerpt from the film)

We also watched a video of Vandana Shiva speaking about commodification and the global economy. Made me want to buy local food only but those farmer's markets are not cheap...

The way things are made and ex/imported is crazy and overwhelming to know I inadvertantly support this but it would be so incredibly time-consuming to figure out what went into every single thing I own or think of buying. Woe is life...

 

[HamNCheese]

It was informative but seemed to be geared towards young people and I didn't really like that, i.e had cartoons and very simple language (not that those things are bad...I just didn't like the way it did that I don't know).

I thought that too, at first. After watching my parent's and older family member's reactions to the video though, I'm thinking that it was pretty cleverly designed to be jargon-free and easy to understand to those people that may have never been introduced to these concepts before.

That's interesting that they showed it in a women's studies class...possibly because of the human rights aspect?

 

[momenteller]

I love this video. I watched it last year and it has really stayed with me. I can't say it informs every consumer decision I make, but it certainly gives me pause before most. I'm so glad you shared it on here; I think everyone should see it! Mostly because I frequently refer to it when chatting and often people have no idea what I'm talking about!

 

[GorillaJTA]

My ethics class in undergrad did review of this film that lasted several weeks. We watched the film, then reviewed her facts versus other theories as well as her own cited articles.

We found a lot of inconsistencies and outright lies. Just a few I can remember off the top of my head (my group did the first 10 minutes so I remember them better):
When she says that corporations are bigger than governments- she is comparing corporate earnings to government GDP's- no a valid comparison since corporate earnings make up a part of GDP's.

Most of her ranting about drinking water, forests, etc are blatant misrepresentations of data. There are more forests in the US now than there were before the Europeans arrived. Just because a forest has been logged (whether scrap logging or clear cutting) does not mean it is no longer a forest. Do we abandon every piece of farmland after we raise one crop? Her drinking water statement is just total bs. Most water sources are undrinkable anyway without some form of treatment.

When discussing production, she throws around a lot of "scary" words that in the end don't amount to much. It is really like saying that we should not drink H20 because it is only one atom away from H202. My favorite line is "There are over 100000 synthetic chemicals used today." Many of you use the "scary synthetic chemicals" every day and give them to your animals. Food flavors, medicines, vitamins, etc- almost all of them are synthetics based on the real thing. Because it would take too much effort to extract enough vanilla flavoring for everything, vanillin is used- which is just the actual active vanilla flavor, just not from the plant itself. Same molecule, different means of production. Which is more dangerous? Ascorbic acid produced in a lab, or Hemlock produced in nature?

I can go into more of the falsities and exaggerations in the video if you want me to, but I really don't feel like the best way to convince people to move to a cleaner society is to tell them lies and propagandize.

By the way, we are actually becoming MORE efficient at producing products (Most things are getting smaller and more efficient) and disposing of trash (except for those pesky new environmentally friendly lightbulbs that are so much more efficient but require hazardous chemical designations to dispose of).

 

[HamNCheese]

Hmm. I don't want to be inflammatory, but I'm curious where your class got its facts...especially the one about forests. What's the actual number? In acres? Where's the documentation? I ask because we've apparently been looking at some very different statistics here. I've also heard Mr. Rush Limbaugh quote that same statistic, and I fear that's where you/your class got its information, although it has been debunked numerous times. Here's just two of many links to the info: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mblowers/def.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation#Pre-industrial_history

Note: A clear-cut forest is no longer a forest, period. It may become one again after a number of decades if left alone or repopulated (correctly..with numerous tree species, etc.) but until it is fully regrown, it is not a forest. If you would like more information, the FSC website is a very useful resource to find peer-reviewed and published documents on the subject. http://www.fsc.org/resourcescenter.html

You are partially right about the GDP-to-corporations ratio. GDPs do measure the money moving around in corporations as well. However, it should be noted that none of these corporations considered as 'largest' are from smaller countries and smaller economies. They are all from the 'western' world and China, whose economies are still largest whether or not those particular corporations are factored in. Besides, the point of the film is to get you thinking about the sheer scale of these companies, and I believe that in 20 minutes that's about as in-depth as you can get and still get the point across.

Why must the words she used be thought of as scary? Yes, there are chemicals in everything. There are chemicals in nature. It's the toxic ones, the man-made but untested ones that we should be wary of...and whether a viewer chooses to see this as a reason to avoid everything chemical or as a reason to question what chemicals are being used is up to them. A quote, borrowed: "Don't defend the presence of neurotoxins in the products you make—just take them out." Why put up with it or justify it when it's not industry-crushing to take it out? It doesn't need to be there. It doesn't need to stay.

I agree with your statement that it is not the best way to convince people to move to a cleaner society by telling them lies and propaganda. I just really, really don't find that this video uses any of that. There are a couple of lines in the video that Annie Leonard has herself said could have been worded differently to not cause confusion, like the part in the beginning about "our government should take care of us" that so many got up in arms about. She has clarified her stance on these things in the interviews since making the film, as well as in the book.

I would agree with you as well that yes, on some fronts, we are becoming more efficient at producing products. I would argue, though, that efficiency is not the goal. Not at all. Human health and well-being, and eventually happiness, is. I'm all for any ways we can go about getting those things for everyone. I'm just happy that things like this video are reaching so many people and making them realize (or even question!) that it our consumerist/capitalist system doesn't have to be the way it is.

Point is, the system is broken. Why bother tearing down the argument, when you can just go about fixing the system in a way that you DO feel is correct?