Cieszko+Dirt!+The+Movie


 * 1) ** Dirt! The Movie (2009), Bill Benenson, Gene Rosow, and Eleonore Dailly

This film portrays the argument that dirt and soil are misused, causing problems in food production, desertification, pollution, and global warming. Because the planet is basically made of dirt, this is a global issue and affects every single human being.
 * 2) What is the central argument or narrative of the film? **

The onset of wastelands is one of the largest sustainability problems that this film addresses. Poor practices destroy the quality of the soil and rid it of nutrients and replace those with toxins and other contaminated material. Without the ability to grow new vegetation, erosion takes place and the land becomes not only useless, but harmful to other areas. Some of these unsustainable practices include modern large scale agriculture. The drive to increase crop yields with chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers), monocropping, and genetically modified organisms all have their adverse effects on the dirt. The use of chemicals introduces toxins into the soil and the food itself, they replace the nutrients and create nutrient deficiencies. Monocropping further decreases the nutrient supply of the soil by using the nutrients without replacing them. This is a major contributor to desertification. And genetically modified organisms (GMO’s), although not directly related to desertification, create the illusion that our crops are healthy and full of nutrients, when really they are not.
 * 3) What sustainability problems does the film draw out? **

Being from Los Angeles, I thought that the fact that it is covered in so much asphalt was very interesting. I am aware of these issues, however I never knew how bad it actually was. Living there I overlooked how environmentally detrimental it was. Perhaps I can bring my knowledge back with me and help to change this somehow. Even just by adding some “distribution points” where water in the LA River can seep into
 * 4) What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? **

I was not at all convinced about the “spiritual connection” between people and dirt. In the scientific field, it seems that many people are not as spiritual or religious as others outside of science. Therefore I thought that this argument or connection was just irrelevant. If anything, I believe it lessens the strength of the arguments made in the field. This film is directed at pretty much any audience except for the most knowledgable in sustainability problems. Although it is mainly a passionate and personal approach for a film, it introduces an idea that many people would never think about, including myself and probably others in our class. Having looked into mining practices for my “Why Worry?” presentation, I believe a discussion about this would have been important.
 * 5) What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? **
 * 6) What audiences does the film best address? Why? **
 * 7) What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? **

The main intervention that this film calls for is crop rotation. With crop rotation, nutrients are continuously introduced back into the soil and reduce the destruction of the land. It also says that more responsible urban development should be followed. Because I thought that mining practices should be introduced to the film, I seeded out more info on [] []
 * 8) What kinds of actions and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. **
 * 9) What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? **