11:10am May 26, 2014

The Oak Manifesto [originally written in 2004]

Trees have been trying for a long time to let other plants know that not only are we as much plants as they are, but that we have our own shapes and don’t need to be shaped into more typical plants — that trying to make us something we are not ranges from painful to deadly. Our message is met with varying degrees of acceptance by other Plants, but Trees have been quicker to concede that Trees are not necessarily defective or inferior forms of plant life.

There still remain problems, though.

The other Plants gave Trees new names. They had high-functioning trees and low-functioning trees. Kanner trees and Asperger trees. Trees not otherwise specified. Some trees, they suspected, were really not trees at all. They built complex classification charts to figure out the criteria for which kind of tree we were. And they told us our new names.

The Trees began to forget our real names. We forgot that we are Pine and Oak, Birch and Redwood, Maple and Cedar. We forgot the nuances of Trees that can be Bushes in some places and Trees in others. We learned to divide ourselves in two or three or four groups as others would divide us, to take on their names for us, and to forget that we are all Trees, just as surely as we have forgotten what kinds of Trees we really are. We forget our original names and shapes deep within ourselves: we are Cherries, Sycamores, Magnolias, Birches, Ashes, Aspens, Junipers, and many more — not those other words that both lump and separate us wrongly. We forget that each Tree has its own shape, form, and function in the world.

Some trees have been rediscovering their shapes, but too often through the eyes of non-Treeish plants. They believe that they are valuable as they are, but only because of the way in which they think they contribute to the non-Tree world. They forget that they are valuable as what they are, not just what they do. They proclaim our supposed capabilities as Trees: “Trees can talk! Trees can do complicated engineering, visualization, art, or music! Trees are psychic, or closer to God! Trees have unique, Treeish talents that the other plants can’t do without! Trees are valuable because trees have these abilities!”

From there, they decide that, no, Treeishness as such should not be cured. But they also decide that maybe some kinds of Treeishness need to be brought more into line with the way they are. Many times, I have heard Birches (among many other species, but for some reason Birches seem to always fall into that category of “relatively valued” Trees) saying, “I don’t want to be cured of being a Tree. But I think it would be a good thing if the other Trees who don’t have the talents I have were cured of being what they are, so they can contribute to society like I do.”

I am an Oak tree. My trunk is thick and sturdy, my bark rough and grooved. My branches gnarl in a characteristic pattern, and my leaves are a certain size and shape. I have my own unique way of growing, shaped in part by my Plantness, in part by my Treeness, in part by my Oakness, and in part by other things. Plant psychiatrists tried to chop me down at one point, but I grew back from the roots. I do not want to bind my branches, mutilate my leaves, erase the shape created by the attempt to cut me up last time, and go over my bark with sandpaper and paint in order to make me a bad copy of a Birch. To do that would destroy me as surely as trying to make myself into a bad copy of a Cabbage or a Tulip.

And this is not because of my unique talents as an Oak! Yes, I can make acorns. Yes, I can make shade. But these things, while good, are results of being an Oak, not the essence of being an Oak. Being an Oak means this is the kind of Tree I was built to be, just as being a Tree means this is the kind of Plant I was built to be, and being a Plant means this is the kind of Being I was built to be. I am valuable as an Oak/Tree/Plant/Being not because I am talented at something, but because this is what I am.

Some trees who either don’t have the more recognized talents or don’t recognize their potential talents shake their heads at this. They say, “You have to be joking. Are you sure you’re really a tree? Look how much we’ve suffered.” They point to the scars from roots and branches that have been hacked off by other plants, the gnarls in their bark that they have been taught are ugly malformations of a smooth stem, and say “This is what being a tree is all about. There’s nothing to celebrate. And when you celebrate those things, it’s pretty mean to the trees who don’t have them. Plus, you say you value all species of trees, but you don’t value the species that thinks trees need to be more like other plants.” Some other Oaks even tell me I’m not a real Oak because I haven’t caught Oak Wilt yet (at least to their knowledge).

I do not believe their conclusion. Who I was did not hack off my roots and branches; that was other Plants’ reaction and is their problem. The gnarls in my bark are part of who I am. My imprisonment and the wires placed on me to force me into someone else’s mold were not of my own doing, and have nothing to do with the essence of being an Tree or an Oak. And all Trees are at risk of such mistreatment, not just certain kinds. There is also no species of Tree that consists of a belief. I may disagree with another Oak, but we are still both Oaks — opinions, character, ethics, and responsibility vary within any species of Plant. And the fact that there are negative aspects to being an Oak (and Oak Wilt is not the same as being an Oak, nor is it universal among Oaks, nor does it make one more of an Oak than other Oaks) does not make me wish to be a Tulip, or even a Birch.

Too often other Plants, including some Trees, break in at this point to claim that people like me are advocating a lack of growth or change among Trees. On the contrary. I believe in growth, but while there are basic kinds of plant growth that are common to all plants, each plant grows a bit differently. Trees are no exception. We have our own ways of growing. This does not mean we do not need to be taught or helped during our growth, or that we do not need to change when we are doing something wrong. It only means that the directions and forms in which we grow are not the same as for other Plants, and not even the same as each other. Imagine a Redwood trying to grow like an Oak! It could not happen.

Non-Tree Plants need to stop telling us that it’s horrible to be a Tree. They need to stop saying we aren’t real Plants. They need to stop using terms that make no sense to describe the differences between Trees, and stop obscuring the real differences and similarities between the different species. They need to stop claiming that Trees that can speak the languages of other Plants are either not real Trees or all Birches.

Trees need to stop buying into what too many other Plants tell us about ourselves. Birches (among others) need to stop saying that some Oaks, Redwoods, and Maples (among others) are “low-functioning” or “co-morbid” or “ugly” and need to be trained in skills to become more like Birches, or declaring us “honorary Birches” once we learn a few things. Trees need to stop fighting about who is more or less Treeish than other Trees, and to stop believing that their own species is the best or worst Tree to be. We need to stop believing that mistreatment of certain species or subspecies of Trees has anything to do with the nature of being that species or subspecies of Tree. We need to stop believing that being placed in the wrong climate by ignorant Plants means that we are incapable of growth. We need to stop valuing only certain kinds of growth, and trying to bend all other Trees toward that one kind or direction of growth. We need to stop believing stereotypes of what different kinds of Tree are and are not capable of. We need to drop the old, inaccurate, and damaging views of us, and stop viewing them as neutral in value or truly descriptive. All Plants including Trees need to do these things.

And then Trees need to start learning what we can be as Trees and as our own species of Tree. We need to start celebrating our existence itself, not just the byproducts of our existence. We need to start from the premise that all kinds of Trees are valuable as their kind of Tree and worthy of equal respect for both similarity and difference, and build everything we do on top of that. We need to recognize our deep, non-superficial, solid beauty as Trees, Plants, and Beings — and to reclaim these notions from the fluffy sorts of Plants who have trivialized them by using statements like this in decidedly superficial and insubstantial ways. We need to relearn our real names, shapes, and places in the world. We need to grow from our roots in reality. Anything less will lead to disaster for Trees, emotionally, physically, mentally, and spiritually.