Creative Writing Project: Benedict the Beeboy

By Jonatan Gonzalez

Once upon a time there was a baby bee that had fallen from his hive onto a leaf. This leaf fell from the tree and flew away until it eventually landed in the center of a large village. He was found and restored to health by Clifford, a son of the Wellshire family. The forefather of this family had started a business growing and selling flowers, a business which the boy’s father, Edmund, was very passionate about expanding. On the day of the boy’s discovery, Edmund came to him with a couple of errands for the business. He asked what he did and Clifford responded that he was saving the life of a bee. “A bee?Bollocks! Depart from ye buffoonery and come help with my errands”. Clifford was insistent in the uniqueness of the bee and his father, uninterested in taking more time away from his business, gave in to his son’s pleas. 

The child remained with the bee, who was in fact special, and healed him.The bee, with the power of love, grew almost double his size with every passing day and within a knight’s moon was as large as Clifford. Clifford had baptized the bee with the name of Benedict the BeeBoy who demonstrated great intelligence and was amazingly able to read and speak the Old English language. In contrast to Clifford, Edmund and his wife hid the creature ever since its abnormal growth had become noticeable and cursed the witchcraft that had befallen their home. 

One day, however, one of the roses that Benedict had pollinated had grown so large that Edmund’s wife remarked that it could be used as a bed. Edmund, a man of great intellect, inferred that Benedict the Beeboy could possibly recreate the growth he had spurred in the rose. Whatsmore, Edmund discovered that Benedict the Beeboy could pollinate the same roses multiple times and the rose would adapt and grow without limit. Edmund asked Benedict the Beeboy to pollinate the roses to be such great plants that would make him rich. The roses grew to great heights and very soon they were as tall as mountains and their stems had the diameters of cottages. The people and the king were marveled by the rose and they bestowed upon the Wellshire’s gifts as grand as the roses.  

Nonetheless, the petals were very heavy and when the winter winds came they fell with great force upon the village, causing death and destruction. The king himself was pierced by a thorn while he was traveling to Edmund’s home to reproach him for the present calamity. “Ye damned monster! The townhouse has been crushed by the flower’s clothes and my own garden has fallen to ye powers” were the words that Edmund told Benedict Beeboy as he stared at the sky of falling petals. Those were his last as soon thereafter petals fell and killed the remaining members of the village, the Wellshire family included. THE END.

Rev

Review Section

The Pandora Chronicle

A beeautiful story

A review of the new best selling short story Benedict the Beeboy

By acclaimed critic Jonatan Gonzalez 

The story of Benedict the Beeboy is an environmental criticism that imitates one of Aesop’s fables, namely The Shepherd and the Wolf Clubs, and which also incorporates small features from Rudyard Kiplings’ The Jungle Book. The medium is done in that of a written short story which is of course typed and published on a digital platform. This was likely done by the author to convey the fact that although the story references old literary texts and is set “once upon a time” ago, the message has contemporary importance.The form of the story is prose and is structured in a very similar manner as the fable it is based on and is even similar in that it includes very little dialogue. This latter feature plays a greater role in the allegorical representations that will be discussed later. 

The story follows the outline of the Aesop fable in which a foreign species, the bee and the wolves, are brought up by a “benefactor” and then seen as an opportunity for profit. Edmund and the shepherd are benefactors to their respective animals but their greed is the main force in their relationship. The story of Mowgli the man-cub is also found in this allegory by the name “Benedict the Beeboy” but the bee also followed a similar path to Mowgli in that he is an outsider and was not welcomed by Edmund.

These references serve to accentuate the allegorical representations. Edmund is supposed to represent the corporations that abuse resources and/or of the environment. Clifford represents the scientists and activists that seek to help the environment. Benedict the Beeboy represents special resources that help the environment and the use of a bee itself in this story also aims to put pressure on the fact that bees are reported to be dying. Edmund abused Benedict the Beeboy and it ended in his entire world’s demise.

Man, The Ego, and The Mundane

Upon Mowgli’s return to the man pack, it makes it clear the general disregard for the law of jungle underneath man. Humans overall have seemed to rule above the general laws, the animals must not kill man, but the men can kill animals. Seeing human beings as above themselves really sets in stone the roots of Mowgli being a man-cub himself. “This talk went in at one ear and out the other, for a boy who spends his life eating and sleeping does not worry about anything until it actually stares him in the face” (Kipling 113). An example from earlier within the text before the move back to the village, it is shown his human attributes of being self-centered and oblivious take the reigns, making him act as if he is above the law by having no want or need to learn the law. Him battling Shere Khan and not feeling fear and killing for revenge is a major violation of the code, which is one that ultimately banishes him and makes his own teachers and friends turn their backs on him for his lack of trying. Overall his human attributes shown through rather than his original want to stay within the forest and follow the law as he claimed he had nothing to do with man in the beginning.

-Zack Johnson

Environmental Justice Through Kinship in The Girl Who Married Rattlesnake

The Native American fable “The Girl Who Married Rattlesnake” provides an interesting lens for examining Kyle Whyte’s concept of reciprocal kinship as environmental justice. In the story, a young girl marries Rattlesnake and bears him four sons, who are half snake and half human. She lives contently with Rattlesnake and their snake-children, mediating between the human and serpent worlds by preventing her sons from harming human relatives. This cross-species marriage brings the girl into the Rattlesnake’s world, leading to greater acceptance and justice. The girl teaches her rattlesnake children “No, you mustn’t bite your relatives” (Barrett 397), telling them to be nicer to humans. Because the girl and the Rattlesnake have such a close bond, their family is shown that humans are not so bad. This bond between the girl and the Rattlesnake potentially strengthens the bonds of many rattlesnakes and humans leading to greater environmental justice.

However, we also see limitations to this justice. It is not clear how accepted the girl actually was. She lived in the hole with the other rattlesnakes, but we don’t know whether they accepted her for who she was, or shunned her for it. Also, while the girl protects her snake husband and children, her parents still react in terror upon seeing him in the house. And when the snake children meet other villagers, they instinctively “coil to strike” (397). The story suggests kinship can foster justice by building reciprocal bonds but does not guarantee it. In the end, the girl’s transformation means she can no longer speak with her human family, only live among snakes. This highlights the potential sacrifices and loss involved in bridging difference even through kinship.

Ultimately, “The Girl Who Married Rattlesnake” aligns with Whyte’s perspective by showing how reciprocal bonds between humans and nature can promote justice. But it also reveals the challenges and hardships in achieving a fully just society across species. This fable supports Indigenous beliefs in kinship, while recognizing obstacles that persist on the path to justice.

– Jasper Morgal

Regenesis: Unveiling Cross-Species Kinship in The Great Race and Its Implications for Environmental Justice

In the discourse of environmental justice, the perspective of the indigenous communities and their deep rooted connection to the environment holds a paramount significance. Kyle Whyte, a very distinguished Potawatomi Scholar and environmental activist emphasizes the importance of reciprocal bonds with ecosystems and the various entities inhabiting them as a precise avenue to advocate for environmental justice. In his work, “Indigenous Environmental Justice: Anti Colonial Action Through Kinship,” Whtye underscores the notion that fostering cross species kinship, embracing and interconnected relationship with a natural world, is a fundamental expression of environmental justice (275). The paper delves into the representation of cross species-kinship in The Great Race and aims to explore whether the relationships between humans and nonhumans depicted in this fable consistently lead to environmental and social justice aligning with Whtye’s argument. 

The study explores the representation of the cross-species kinship in a Native American fable and scrutinizes whether the relationships between humans and nonhumans depicted in the Great Race always culminate in environmental and social justice, as advocated by Kyle Whyte. By examining the dynamics of these relationships and the outcomes portrayed in this fable, the analysis seeks to contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding Indigenous environmental justice and the imperative role of cross species kinship within it. For example when the buffalos challenged the human to a race to decide who would overall be the hunter and who would be hunted, it said “Agreed. We’ll choose our fastest runner, and you choose some birds to race for you” (Erdoes, Ortiz, 390). The narrative reflects the paradoxical nature of the relationship between humans and the natural world, resonating with Kyle Whyte’s argument about reciprocal bonds with ecosystems. The fable hints at God’s creation of animals and humans as equals, yet the storyline underscores the race’s symbolism, symbolizing the pursuit of freedom and equality. Colonialism is subtly illustrated through this conflict, as buffalos, akin to conquerors, exercise control and take what they desire, analogous to the historical displacement and subjugation faced by Native Americans. The birds selected to race on behalf of the humans can be seen as representative of the Native Americans’ marginalized position, driven off their land and lacking agency in their circumstances. Intriguingly, the magpie emerges victorious and gains respect among both animals and humans, challenging the notion of power and superiority. This irony underscores Whyte’s argument about the need for recognizing interconnectedness and challenges the prevailing power dynamics, revealing the potential for a more just and balanced relationship with the environment.

– Jasper Lee

Animal and Human Kinship: The Delivery of Important Messages Through Indigenous Fables

Cross-kinship is prominent throughout indigenous folklore, always leaving a message for the next generation. As a bit of a foreclosure, most native storytelling is an oral tradition, not necessarily meant to be told just from reading alone. There is more sustenance to be gained through the oral tellings. However, like Kyle Whyte explains in his excerpt of his essay, humans, especially those whom are indigenous have a strong physical and spiritual connection to the environment, meaning environmental justice is important not only for them but their ancestors, the plants, and the animals that inhabit the land. There was mention of how most reservations and lands traditionally owned by natives were hot in biodiversity, and biodiversity is an important thing to keep ecosystems running and strong.

Within the fable “The Dogs Hold an Election”, there is description of dogs trying to elect a leader for their pack. Right off the bat you can tell the dogs are anthropomorphized, most likely an allusion to humans and their leadership elections as well. “We don’t think much of the white man’s elections. Whoever wins, we Indians always lose”. (Sioux 403). The start of this fable expresses how the election rules of white man always give them a disadvantage, which leads into the need for social and environmental justice, as the white man elections give a disservice to their land and people. Within the fable the dogs give ideas of who to elect. The bulldog because he is strong, the greyhound because he is fast, and the ‘dog who smells good underneath his tail’. None of the dogs could seem to come to an election agreement, giving reasons and excuses for why one candidate doesn’t work over the other. “When you go out for a walk, just watch the dogs. They’re still sniffing” (Sioux 403). The mention of how the dogs are still sniffing is how they are still searching for that right leader, and nothing seems to be getting done. The use of dogs as an example of humans suggests the connection of human nature and doglike behavior.

Environmental Justice and social justice is continuously prevalent in the tale, effectively supporting Whyte’s argument on the messages given from indigenous fables almost exclusively give way for environmental justice and animal kinship.

-Zack Johnson

The Eagle and the Scarab Beetle

Aesop’s “The Eagle and the Scarab Beetle” depicts a story about an eagle who, seeing how small and insignificant a scarab beetle is, chases down and eats a hare despite said scarab beetle’s warning not to. As revenge, the scarab beetle then makes sure that every time the eagle tries to lay her eggs, they eventually break before they are able to hatch. It is said at the end of the tale, that this is why eagles do not lay eggs when scarab beetles may appear.

The moral that accompanies this tale is “not to despise anyone. One must say to oneself that there is no being so feeble that he is not capable one day of avenging an insult”. The latter part of the moral remains true to the story since even though the scarab beetle is much more smaller and weaker than the eagle, it was still able to cause harm to the eagle despite the eagle’s many efforts to lay her eggs. However, the beginning of the moral ironizes the tale a bit, as although it is teaching one “not to despise anyone”, the only animal this could really apply to is the scarab beetle. The eagle was merely hungry towards the hare and had a feeling of superiority towards the scarab beetle. It wasn’t necessarily despising any of them. The beetle, on the other hand, could be seen as despising the eagle, as it spends its time later on to make sure that the eagle is never able to have offspring. As seen at the end of the story, the beetle successfully carries out its revenge and future eagles make sure to never nest whenever they know scarab beetles are active. Knowing this, the moral of the story feels a little off when one realizes that although it teaches one not to despise others, the beetle, full of despise for the eagle, comes out the clear victor in the story.

Environmental justice is conceptualized in this story as there is an obvious power imbalance between the animals that affect their health and environments. The eagle is much more powerful than both the scarab and the hare, which lets it believe that it can affect their environment without any consequences by eating the hare. In return, the scarab beetle has the human-ascribed moral of taking revenge and affects the eagle’s environment by making it so that the eagle can’t ever lay its eggs. No animal in the tale really has the choice to vote on what happens to their environment, but they do affect others’ environments throughout the story.

-Kristina Wong

The Soda Can Man and The River

Once there was a man named Jack. He was your average person and lived in a house near a dried-up river. He lived in a house that could be called a shack, but nevertheless it was a house. Jack had a habit of drinking a soda can every day when he was coming back from work on the way to his house. Where did he get said “soda can”? The soda can was purchased from a Soda Can Merchant that sells soda cans near his home. It was run by a pretty woman named Betty. Ever since Jack discovered the soda can merchant, he made it a habit of going there to buy a can of soda every day after work despite the weather. He would drink the soda can on his walk back to the house and then would finish it by the time he arrived home. Although, before he enters his house he would throw the soda can away behind him into the empty river with no thought of whether it was right or wrong. This continued to happen for the next couple of years. It was one soda can after another, an unending cycle, but little did he know that this cycle was soon to end.  One day a terrible storm came with immense rain, it started to fill the once empty river with water once again. The pile of soda cans that Jack had repeatedly thrown in had started to rise along with the river. Jack, not knowing what was happening in the river, went about his day, endured the rain, and went to buy a can of soda. As he was walking back down the path to his house, he threw away the soda can behind him as usual. However, the second Jack threw the soda can away he heard a “clink, clink, clink, clank” sound above him. The storm and rain had formed a current, which had blown all the cans he had ever thrown into the river right in front of him onto his house, along with the can he just threw away. The very can he had thrown away landed perfectly right in front of him as if to mock him. The only thing Jack could think of at that moment was “That which was behind me I now see in front of me.”

In this imitation, I rewrote in my own way the beast fable, The Camel Who Shat in the River, and made the setting to be in modern times. The difference between mine and the original is that unlike the original the main character is a human, not an animal. Mine follows the general idea of the original text of how something that was once behind the camel aka the poop, one way or another ends up in front of it. Being that the poop is represented by the soda can in my story text. I also made it a bit longer to keep the interpretation of the fable I had of the story and what it was trying to express. Which was about how humans often don’t think about the consequences of small actions they make. That those small mistakes eventually build up to something that later hurts us or ends up right in front of us where we can no longer look away. As shown in my story where Jack’s little action of throwing away the soda can instead of properly taking care of it later builds up to become a problem which makes him confront it himself with no choice left. The reason why I chose this fable is that it addresses in a way how human can easily neglect something since they think it is small, but don’t pay attention or addresses it until it becomes a bigger problem and starts to affect them. This can be connected to animals as well because the little problem we thought nothing of can be affecting animals much sooner and were suffering from it much sooner than we were. It can also affect the environment like how with Jack was throwing away soda cans into the river. It would then float those soda cans out to sea or contaminate the water in some way hurting not just us but the animals as well. Like how due to us current day people throwing plastic out into the sea it started to hurt not only us but the marine animals as well.

-Rodolfo Gutierrez

Reality Beyond Pandora

I enjoy a good sci-fi film as much as the next person, however when a sci-fi film makes 2.84 billion – that’s another story. What is about James Cameron’s Avatar that drove people to go see it in the first place? I’ll admit the beautiful planet of Pandora pulled me in, especially in 3-D I started to feel a part of the Na’vi world. Yet, over ten years after it being released and the second film (finally) about to be released, there’s questions about Avatar that keep me thinking about the reality behind such an interesting fictional world. In his essay, “A Sense of No-Place: Avatar and the Pitfalls of Ecocentric Identification,” Hannes Bergthaller dives into the problematic issues of not understanding the environmental message. His quote, “The Na’avi exemplify the project of a sustainable society modelled on the life of pre-modern indigenous peoples, characterized by a place-based spirituality and sensual intimacy with the natural world. Yet the film’s ability to compel spectators to identify with the Na’avi appears inseparable from its capacity to aesthetically dislocate them from their ordinary lives.” (158). This quote emphasizes how the life of the Na’vi relates to people of indigenous cultures with an advanced way of living. The entirety of Pandora, their way of live, and the beauty/danger of it all is alluring. It pulls (me) the watcher and then when leaving the movie theater and taking off my 3D glasses, I feel the dislocated effect Bergthaller mentions and the “Post-Pandoran depression” due to coming back to Earth. The scene where Jake and Neytiri are linked together through their bond feels special and private even. Many people assume Avatar is a great film (it is), yet there are important ideas including colonialization and environmentalism that get overlooked because of the planet’s beauty serves as a distraction. This ritual and tradition are beautiful, but again unattainable in our real world. It could never happen in real life. The more important take-aways are understanding how the Na’vi interact with their world, the respectful kinship like they and real indigenous cultures follow by, as well as not ignoring how Jake turns from a colonizer to the white savior.

-Jade Graham

Is Pandora Obtainable?

In Hannes Bergthaller’s essay, “ A Sense of No-Place: Avatar and the Pitfalls of Ecocentric Identification ”, he argues that the movie, Avatar, intensifies the problem they are trying to deal with. In his essay, Bergthaller states, “The Na’avi exemplify the project of a sustainable society modeled on the life of pre-modern indigenous peoples, characterized by a place-based spirituality and sensual intimacy with the natural world. Yet the film’s ability to compel spectators to identify with the Na’avi appears inseparable from its capacity to aesthetically dislocate them from their ordinary lives. Even as Avatar‘s narrative advocates a ‘return to one’s senses’, it in effect threatens to exacerbate the condition it criticizes” (158).

The Avatar movie is one of the most famous films and remains the highest grossing movie. However, the movie failed to let their audience relate to the Na’vi tribe or obtain awareness on environmental issues. Those who have seen the film can agree that we became mesmerized by the colors and different environments created. The film did a fantastic job creating a completely different planet where many of us wish to be; however, the environment on Pandora seemed to be unobtainable on earth. This made the viewers of the movie to rather wanna leave the reality of their lives and live in Pandora instead of trying to fix the issues created on earth. The film wanted its viewers to fully grasp the ‘return to one’s senses’, one must live in reality and not run from their problems. Unfortunately, the movie makes the audience want to leave its reality to go to a place like pandora.         

In Hannes argument, he seems to hold a valid point that a viewer would want to dislocate themselves from their reality to live in an environment such as in Pandora. When introduced to the forest in Pandora, we notice how different our environment is with the trees, the atmosphere and the species. But what sets our two worlds apart is that Pandora is spiritual based. The Na’vi tribe always have an intimate connection to an organism in the forest and the bottom of their braids, tswin, are what allows for them to obtain this connection. Just like when in the scene where Jake finally needed to choose its Ikran and only by ‘sealing the bond’. This means that Jake needed for both his and the Ikran’s tswin to bond together for Jake to obtain all of the Ikran’s senses. In that scene alone, we know that we are not capable of physically creating a bond on earth with a tswin. Pandora has become an unobtainable place that many of us would rather live in the imagination instead of reality. 

-Angeles Hernandez

A matter of Perspective

In his essay, “A sense of No-Place: Avatar and the Pitfalls of Ecocentric Identification,” Hannes Bergthaller makes a critical analysis on the film, Avatar, for its hypocrisy. He explains how the film fails in its attempt to encourage people to reconnect with reality by connecting with their roots and becoming one with the environment. This is because the alien world and people act as an escape from the real world through its 3D cinematography. It is difficult to connect the alien world, Pandora, to our world, Earth. There is this divide despite the similar devotion to connect spiritually with nature among the Na’avi and the indigenous people, (158). This can be seen when the Na’avi are gathered together holding hands and rocking side to side chanting/praying. Their bodies connect with the world as an array of lights illuminate the scene at the Tree of Souls. It is a very powerful scene, to say the least, because of its beauty. However, Bergthaller may argue that this is not how the real world works. Trees don’t have lights, our hair/bodies can’t physically connect to the Earth, etc. Still, I think this is just a matter of perspective. This same scene can be taken as an idea of what it may feel like to be connected with our roots. Of course we can’t physically do it, but we can learn to do it spiritually. This scene and so many others throughout the film are simply the first step to lure spectators in.

-Elizabeth Preciado