Darcia Narváez

Authors Narvaez (a past professor of psychology at Notre Dame) and Bradshaw (who holds one PhD in psychology and another in ecology) believe humanity has lost is way. Around 10,000 years ago, they say, human cultures in several regions of the world shifted, maybe because of population pressures or changes in climate. Some societies broke from the “gift economy” of Nature [authors’ capitalization] and began to “enslave” Plants and Animals [authors’ capitalization again]. The other living things on the planet were no longer thought of as kin but as commodities over which humans had dominion. Increasingly divorced from their evolutionary ways, Homo sapiens eventually pushed the world into the “Capitalocene” era, characterized by pollution, climate disasters, the destruction of the natural world, and the erasure of indigenous cultures living in the greatest harmony with it. The dominant (Western) culture adopted a trauma-inducing lifestyle, which it continues to foist on others. The effect on humans overall? Stress, disconnection, and alienation. These themes are right up Gabor Maté’s alley. He wrote the introduction for The Evolved Nest and mentioned Narvaez’s ideas a few times in his recently published The Myth of Normal, a work I wasn’t overly keen on.

In their impassioned and very serious book, Narvaez and Bradshaw call for a future that’s “informed and reinvigorated by what the past and everlasting Nature can teach us.” As the title indicates, central to the text is the idea of “evolved nests”—the “developmental systems tailored to nurture psychological, social, physical, and neurobiological needs in a species-unique manner.” Each chapter begins with a short lyrical passage about a social animal species—its name always capitalized, like a tribe’s, to show respect and acknowledge the animal’s significance. This is followed by an encyclopedia-like entry of facts about the species, with a focus on something of critical importance in the animal’s early upbringing that may also pertain to the core developmental needs of human infants or at least serve as a springboard to the discussion of a particular psychological requirement of very young children. The authors write that the first years of life “lay down fundamental trajectories of who and how the child will be in the future.” What happens in early childhood largely determines both physical and mental health. Narvaez and Bradshaw then go on to present, sometimes in fairly dry technical terms, what they see as the scientific evidence for their thinking. (I sometimes found this information limited, vague, or unconvincing. For example, they indicate that sleep training of human infants leads to poor mental health later.)

The first animal Narvaez and Bradshaw consider is the brown bear, which, like humans, is an “altricial” species: it depends on intense postnatal care. This leads the authors to a discussion of attuned, synchronous human parenting, epigenetics (the influence of the environment on the expression of genes), and the development of three sensory systems (proprioception/interoception; exteroception; and alteroceptivity). I mention these terms, so you get a sense of the kind of language you’re in for should you choose to read this book, but I’ll leave it to you to seek clarification if so interested. The authors do a pretty good job of explaining, but I’ll admit I found their discussions rather hard going and academic at times. I would’ve liked the occasional illustrative example.

Which brings me to my next point: who is the intended audience? Academics? Parents? Those interested in ethology? Developmental psychology enthusiasts? As mentioned, there’s a lot of jargon here, and the book fairly overwhelms the reader with facts and footnotes. It’s also deadly serious, not a breath of humour.

Yes, I learned some things. I was sceptical of others. At times, I found the material thought-provoking. More often, though, I experienced the book as a grind and a chore to read. I learned I was definitely NOT the ideal audience. As far as page count goes, it’s not a long book, but, boy, it felt like it was. I don’t think further editorial winnowing would’ve hurt if the goal was to reach a general audience. In the end, I think those who liked Maté’s recent book will likely appreciate this book more than I did.

Narvaez and Bradshaw are evidently passionate about their subject matter. They evidently want to correct this life out of balance. I just wish their book, like Maté’s before it, wasn’t so dire and joyless to read—for me anyway.… (plus d'informations)

it was interesting, and illuminating, to see which of these precepts and ideas resonated with me or were harder for me to delve deeply into. especially when at the foundational level, they're really all about community and openness and sharing knowledge. there's a lot of real beauty here. i especially connected with the idea of community and sharing around competitiveness, watching my son's noncompetitive waldorf school playing against other schools in basketball right now, and how they have such different ideas of how to engage with the sport. like it's not even just that the journey is different, but it's not even the same destination. which i think is what they're saying about so much in this book.

and the way they say it - it's a really nice concept and unusual in a book like this. they introduce a quote to discuss a certain precept or idea, and then the two authors basically have a back and forth conversation about it. i wish they didn't mention their own books as often as they do, but they do also talk about so many others' writings and ideas and i love how much is incorporated into each of their short answers.

i had a hard time with the healing through centering section, while finding it also really fascinating. a strange push/pull between wanting to double down on science but also give credence to self-knowledge and everything they were saying, plus the way that the institution of medicine and science has failed us. other sections resonated less but there are a few standout ones, or ones that felt more personal, like one could expect in any sort of collection.

"As vital as place-based knowledge is, this book is designed to help those with a Eurocentric mindset to begin the journey toward a concentric relationship with the earth, starting with the larger worldview that diverse Indigenous cultures share.”

“In another example of fearless connection, those who risked their lives to rescue Jews during World War II Almohad self-efficacy and a trust in the universe. When asked why they had intervened, they said things like, ‘What else could I do? There was a human being in need.’ Interestingly, when non rescuers were interviewed, they also said ‘What else could I do?’ They were lacking the self-efficacy that comes from practice…”

“Among gift economies like those of Native Americans, gifts are not considered private property but things that are always in the process of movement. A gift is not to be kept but is rather to be given to members of the community in the pattern the local group has established. Among gift economies, which occur all over the world, the cardinal property of a gift is for it to be given away, not kept, to keep the gift alive and the momentum going…”… (plus d'informations)