Richard Flanagan's reply to Peter Volker is interesting.
On one side he mocks Mr Volker's "spurious high school debating distinctions" about monoculture, but a few paragraphs earlier he goes into hair-splitting-mode discussing the differences between "'had dried up'' and "are drying up".
The source of Mr Flanagan's argument is The Mercury, not precisely the Tasmanian bastion of scientific information. From there he cites the explanation of "a respected Hobart geologist and geophysicist", who has not provided his models for scrutiny. In science, and this may be different from literature, one does need to provide evidence (normally in a peer-review process) to support one's claims. "Because I say so" is not, and has never been, enough in a scientific discussion.
I am very respectful about the right of people to express their opinions. At the same time, one may face criticism for those opinions, even coming from government officials. Is that censorship? I believe is merely part of a healthy democratic discussion.
Mr Flanagan may enjoy presenting himself as a David wrestling with the Goliath of government and Gunns, but the fact of the matter is that he is using his moment of fame for purposes that may be considered political.
Mr Flanagan's Manichaean view of the forestry debate, reserving the high moral ground for the selfless writer while condemning the always guilty greedy corporations, looks dramatic but is simplistic.
Moreover, Mr Flanagan's account of the life in Tasmania is a good setting for a novel, but is it a good reflection of reality?
I would not dare to comment about who said what during Tens Days on the Island, a problem that I find utterly irrelevant. That is an example of counterproductive discussions, abundant on adjectives, which take us nowhere.
Tasmanians will be much better served by the actors of the debate finding points in common and ways of moving forward in the discussion.
Finally, in my opinion we have not lost a paradise because there was never one. Tasmania is a great place to live, with normal people working hard to make the best of the opportunities and challenges we face. You may call that a paradise if you wish; I just call it home.
Dr Luis A. Apiolaza "is a forest researcher who was born in South America. He has lived in five different countries and has been lucky enough to visit many more. Because of this, he thinks that globalisation is a positive trend, describes himself as a citizen of the world, and calls Tasmania home. Luis often writes letters while sipping a cup of earl grey tea or a caffe latte, sitting somewhere in Hobart".
RAPID RESPONSE EMAIL: What do you think?
If you bounce,
tuffinlindsay@hotmail.com
Wednesday, April 28, 2004