Seeing the inconvenient truths
(From The Japan Times Jan. 29 issue)

気候についての「不都合な真実」

    The observation of the senses, or at least the quick read of a few news articles, should be enough evidence of global warming for most people. Yet in this day and age, scientific fact, editorial opinion and plain old common sense seem utterly confused.

    Of course, people are busy. They don't have time to be weighing all the complex mountains of evidence on certain topics. It's easier to stick one's head out the window to decide on an umbrella or an extra sweater. Even though global warming is one of the most common essay topics for students around the world, as any teacher or parent can tell you, there still seems to be plenty of skepticism on the issue.

    It does seem hard to believe humans have left their mark on something so all encompassing as the climate. Mark Twain's quip, nearly 150 years ago, that "Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it," sounds quaint these days. At last, we have done something about the weather, and it is not good. Long-term energy use and lack of pollution controls have unbalanced nature itself.

    Yet, how do we know this? From what we see ourselves? From extensive scientific study? Or just the usual conspiracy fears common in the age of misinformation? Suspicion is justified of course, yet some sources of information and explanation are obviously more reliable than others.

    Enter: the movies. With the release of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, people are paying to watch what has been splashed across front pages for two decades. Filmgoers suddenly are as interested in relaxing with complex environmental and social issues as they are with James Bond's macho charm.

    When social policy and complex climatology become the subjects of a feature film, one wonders if the media somehow are swapping roles. Nowadays, newspapers entertain; movies inform. Or perhaps seeing really is believing, while reading involves plenty of doubt. If this trend continues, the next generation PlayStation or Wii will likely include scientific facts and careful thought amid its virtual realities.

    Maybe these days, truth is not just inconvenient, but actually so rare, that to see it in a film is a kind of wonder. Film's moving images, of course, can present realities as easily as it can offer escapism. Whether exposing the grim realities of war or offering slick performances from political leaders, an image is worth a thousand words and image come together.

    One wonders whether newspaper opinion pieces (like this one) will gradually be taken over by filmed reports in the future. Already many large media conglomerates offer online photo essays and film clips.

    To most of the computer generation, no doubt, YouTube must seem as trustworthy as any editorial writer, and a lot more fun. Short, grainy video clips somehow feel less ideological and more purely done than opinions expressed in the well-worn complexities of the first human media — words.

    Yet, all of this image making implies that the very nature of knowledge has somehow changed. We do not trust the climate experts until we see, read and experience their analysis first hand. Maybe "visual literates" simply have to see a film before being able to visualize what is really happening.

    There is always the danger, though, that over-skepticism and over-viewing can lead not toward careful thought and considered understanding, but toward apathy and inaction.

    It's easy to say that truth is always inconvenient, but really, truth is a lot of work. It involves grand concepts and abstract thought about an avalanche of data. Ask any negotiator for the Kyoto Protocol. Reaching a clear understanding must seem an impossible task even for the specialists.

    A word here, a phrase there, and suddenly, everyone disagrees. Amid all the confusion and denial, deciding whom to trust is hard for those of us who want to understand but do not really know what ozone is except that there is a layer of it somewhere.

    We cringe at the complexity of computer models for climate shifts. We either have to go back to graduate school to study meteorology or trust what the experts and their mouthpieces say.

    With that in mind, a nicely edited film summary works quite well. Al Gore is no James Bond, but science has its own kind of sexiness. Maybe the movie theater is the only place left in this frenzied, confusing age to think quietly in the dark about serious issues. The magical effect of doing that will always be to expand our horizons and let us return to basic truths, whether expressed in words or images, stories or facts, or a mix of them all.

The Japan Times Weekly: Feb. 3, 2007
(C) All rights reserved

    長期にわたるエネルギー使用と、空気汚染対策の欠如が自然のバランスを狂わせたのだ。

    ゴア元米副大統領の地球温暖化への取り組みに迫った映画An Inconvenient Truth「不都合な真実」の公開で、人々は、複雑な社会・環境問題に、ジェームス・ボンドの魅力に劣らない興味を持つようになった。

    社会政策、気候学が映画のテーマになることで、新聞が娯楽メディアに、映画が情報メディアになることもある。この傾向が続けば、ソニーのプレイステーション、任天堂Wiiの新ソフトは科学的データと問題の対策を取り入れるかもしれない。

    コンピュータ世代にとって、インターネット上の動画サイトYouTubeは社説同様の信頼性とより高度の娯楽性を持つかもしれない。

    知識の性質も変わってきている。気候専門家の分析も、実際に見て、読んで、経験するまでは信用できないが、過度の懐疑主義や映像鑑賞は、慎重な考察どころか、無関心と無為の原因になる危険がある。

    真実は不都合としても、その入手には非常な努力を要し、大局的な構想と大量の情報について抽象的考察が求められる。京都議定書の専門家の間でさえ共通の理解を得るのは難しい。

    気象学を学ぶために大学院に入学するか、専門家の言うことを信じるほかない。

    ゴア氏はジェームス・ボンドではないにしても、科学には独特の魅力がある。映画館の暗闇は、深刻な問題を熟考するために良い場所かもしれず、それによって視野を広げ、言語、映像などで表現された基本的真実に立ち戻ることができる。