The Pulitzer-prize winning "Guns, Germs and Steel" by this dude forever changed the way I look at history. And believe me, I am a history buff of sorts so this means a lot. Unfortunately, "Collapse" fails to measure up to that classic.

The real problem with Collapse isn't the research that goes into the thesis, or even the soundness of the thesis itself (though there are some qualms I have about how politically unstable Mongolia is or basing his analysis of cod fisheries on a single popular accunt). The central contention, that population explosion, interdependency, unsustainable harvest, adverse cultural values, and about 8 other factors contributed to a society's collapse, is innocuous enough, though admittedly somewhat vague. Rather, the problem is that Diamond is so intent upon clearly and explicitly detailing every freaking argument to paint a convincing picture of the ancient/medieval societies or the current polluting industries that he often loses sight of his larger arguments. For instance, his discussion of Viking Greenland v. Iceland is insightful but whether it warrants nearly 100 pages in a 500 page book I doubt. The same could be said of his discussion of modern Australia; China, in contrast, gets really short shrift. He goes at pain to explicate the archaeological evidence by which we understand the Anasazi collapse, but here too he gets a little repetitive and locquacious. For instance, the logic behind dendrochronolgy and salinization were explained more than once to elucidate yet another nuance. Indeed, here Diamond the scientist persistently gets in the way of Diamond the popular writer. Were it not for his stellar writing skills this would have been even more of a chore to read.

Apart from the lack of effective editing, Collapse suffers from Diamond's penchant to almost bend over backward to point out that he is not engaged in a crude form of "Environmental determinism" whereby the significance of cultural and political events are misleadingly downplayed. He certainly didn't do this in Guns Germs and Steel but many people, including the NY Times, accuse him of it. Nevertheless Diamond was sufficiently sensitive to this interpretation (as well as eager to show that we can prevent environmental catastrophe) that he repeats this ad nauseum and, IMHO, belabors this point to being beyond repetitive.

The cumulative effect of all these shortcomings is that the book ends up presenting really rather very little that is new, argues persistently against straw man hypotheses, and is informative but almost in a trivial sense. At 520 odd dense pages this is a lot to ask of a reader, and it is a pity that this simply does not measure up to Diamond's earlier works.

Ha sido un buen libro. Bien enfocado a explicar el concepto de un sistema social y economico cerrado como es el propio planeta tierra pero visto des de perspectivas de sociedades historicamente aisladas cuyas civilizaciones colapsaron por la mala gestión de sus propios recursos. Principalmente capítulos como la China actual me han dejado pensativo. Al final un país que ha basado su gran potencial económico en dos pilares: alta demografía con mano barata y gran acceso a recursos abaratiendo costes de gestión ambiental. Pero al final todo sistema colapsa y se explica claramente como una mala gestión ambiental puede llevar al colapso de tu propia fuente de ingresos! Un buen ejemplo es como la sobreexplotación forestal llevo a un incremento en la economía de una determinada región, pero la falta de cubierta vegetal en las laderas montañosas llevó a mayor erosion del suelo, sedimentación de ríos y consecuente menor calado, por lo que se perdió la capacidad de transporte fluvial en epocas de sequia, con un mucho mayor impacto en la industria y economia de esa misma región.

Al final del día, aunque vivamos en un mundo globalizado, no deja de ser un sistema cerrado con materia limitada. Algo parecido a lo que pudo pasar en civilizaciones aisladas como los Mayas o la isla de Pascua

Un abrazo todas mis #GatesLesbianes!

Diamond's prior 'Guns, Germs & Steel' addresses the reasons why some peoples in some areas of the world produced civilizations and others didn't. The factors emphasized are material and the subtext is that these factors, not moral or racial inferiority, were decisive.
'Disaster' tells the other side of the story, namely why some cultures and civilizations fail while others succeed. This is done through case studies such as a comparison of Viking Greenland (failure) to the Inuits (success) and Viking Iceland (near failure, current recovery) and Creole Haiti (failure) to the Spanish Dominican Republic (success). There are many other examples, including contemporary Montana, but these are the clearest comparisons.
A common thread of the exemplary failure is that of populations outstripping resources. Another is that of cascading effects once saturation occurs.
While the outlook is bleak, Diamond is at pains to point to success stories and to discuss the means by which good decisions have been and might be made as regards environmentally sustainable practices.

Van ugye az a mondás, hogy tanulhatnánk az elődeinktől, de hát mi ignoráljuk azt, viszont Jared Diamond nem (de ő mégiscak a UCLA földrajz professzora), több civilizáció összeomlásának párhuzamait vizsgálja. Ez maga nem lenne újdonság, de ő egyrészt elég távolról nézi, a megszokottól több irányból, a külső ellenségeken kívül nemcsak a társadalom szerkezetét, hanem az ökológiai jellemzőket, klímaváltozást és a szomszédokkal való kapcsolatot is vizsgálja, miközben képes lemenni egészen az egyén szempontjáig is, ha kell. Innen már csak egy lépés persze, hogy tudatosan tegyünk az összeomlás ellen, mert elkerülhető, nem kell a spanyolviaszt újra és újra feltalálni
Diamond bámulatra méltó tárgyi tudással rendelkezik és ténylegesen van tanítái rutinja, nagyon feszes, logikus szerkezetű a könyv, az adatok interdiszciplináris összefüggéseire mindig rávilágít, miközben pont jókor, pont a jó mennyiségben oldja valami személyes élménnyell, történettel, viccel az egész merevségét. Mesél Montanáról, aminek a változásait közelről látja, után régi társadalmakat elemez, amelyek a fénykoruk után megszűntek, többek között a maják, a Húsvét-szigetek társadalma, vagy a vikingek. A harmadik fejezetben pár modern társadalom folyamatait cincálja szét, ruandai népirtás, Haiti és Dominika, Kína és Ausztrália.
A könyv anyagát Diamond tanította egy-két egyetemen (vagy a tananyagból lett a könyv?), és igen, ez oda való, minden egyetemen kellene tanítani, sok kredittel, kemény számonkéréssel, a könyvben leírtakkal minden egyes diplomás embernek tisztában kellene lennie.

LESSON GIVERS ARE BORING AND NO HISTORIANS

JARED DIAMOND – COLLAPSE – 2005-2011

This book is a long collection of cases of civilizations or countries that failed, how they failed, what were the causes of their failing (plus a few success stories). This insistence on failing makes it very pessimistic in many ways. But the second characteristic is that the book does not explore the past for itself, but it is exploring the past to draw lessons for the present. The basic assumption is thus that the present world is on the brink of failing or collapsing. That takes a lot of value from the book because then the cases are understood as being illustrations if not arguments for the importance of climate change in human history, and the importance of environmental sustainability. And actually, we are brought to thinking that some cases have been over-exploited in that direction; The main shortcoming is that at times the book is retrospective. It does not try to understand what happened in the past, but it looks at it with a modern vision, a modern interpretation, something that is anachronistic in the past situations that are concerned.

That’s why he gives the conclusions in the opening prologue. We are going to start with them, I mean to list them, not discuss them. Then we will consider a few cases, hence a few chapters.

He starts with giving the TWELVE causes of collapse that he also calls threats. A first group of eight that I number here, though they are not in the book:
1-tdeforestation and habitat destruction;
2-tsoil problem (erosion, salinization, and soil fertility losses);
3-twater management problems;
4-toverhunting;
5-toverfishing;
6-teffects of introduced species on native species;
7-thuman population growth;
8-tincreased per capita impact of people. (page 6, my numbering).

To these he adds four new ones (understood as from the present):
9-thuman-caused climate change;
10-tthe buildup of toxic chemicals in the environment;
11-tenergy shortages;
12-tfull human utilization of the Earth’s photosynthetic capacity. (page 7, my numbering)

He can then consider our present and list four modern advantages:
1-tour powerful technology (i.e., its beneficial effects);
2-tglobalization;
3-tmodern medicine;
4-tgreater knowledge of past societies and of distant modern societies. (page 8, my numbering)

And to complete this listing he gives four modern risks:
1-tour potent technology (i.e., its unintended destructive effects);
2-tglobalization (such that now a collapse even in remote Somalia affects the U.S. and Europe);
3-tthe dependence of millions (and, soon, billions) of us on modern medicine for our survival;
4-tour much larger human population. (page 8, my numbering)

Without discussing these elements, we can shift to his next listing of his

“five-point framework of possible contributing factors that I now consider in trying to understand any putative environmental collapse. Four of those sets of factors – 1- environmental damage, 2- climate change; 3- hostile neighbors; and 4- friendly trade partners – may or may not prove significant for a particular society. The fifth set of factors – 5- the society’s responses to its environmental problems – always proves significant. (page 11, my numbering)

He then examines them separately and it is interesting to see the longer phrasing he uses.
1-tThe first set of factors involves damage that people inadvertently inflict on their environment (page 11, my numbering);
2-tThe next consideration in my five-point framework is climate change, a term that today we tend to associate with global warming caused by humans (page 12, my numbering);
3-tThe third consideration is hostile neighbors (page 13, my numbering);
4-tThe fourth set of factors is the converse of the third set: decreased support by friendly neighbors (page 14, my numbering);
5-tThe last set of factors in my five-point framework involves the ubiquitous question of the society’s responses to its problems (page 14, my numbering).

He then explains that his method is a comparative method, meaning that he will systematically compare crises in various societies to understand each one. And he gives his conclusion straight away:

“Globalization . . . lies at the heart of the strongest reasons both for pessimism and for optimism about our ability to solve our current environmental problems . . . For the first time in history, we face the risk of a global decline. But we also are the first to enjoy the opportunity of learning quickly from developments in societies anywhere else in the world today, and from what has unfolded in societies at any time in the past.” (page 23-24)

That is my introduction, but it is the author’s conclusions, that I did not discuss at all, given in his prologue to the book. That is not very scientific and in the book it is clear that there is no real diachrony, historicity, phylogeny of anything, but simply the synchronic study of cases with no real phylogenetic approach of each case within the general phylogeny of humanity, and this succession of synchronic studies is transferred in in the book’s conclusive chapters onto the present in the last part of the book on “Practical Lessons” which only target the possible political decisions humanity has to take to face, confront and fight in order to solve the climate challenge of today. The point is each case requires so much discussion that the practical lessons are nothing but preaching from a preacher who has interpreted the past or present, old or recent cases in his sole perspective of supporting if not validating his own political position for today’s world. I can stop there and let you discover that political statement of his that as a historian I do not even want to discuss: politics is not history.

Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU

This is an exhaustive and exhausting read. Should’ve been tightened up and trimmed down, not only did I get tired of the meandering but I got worn down from getting machine-gunned with an avalanche of what I considered often superfluous details. Still, I thought it was very good, the historical examples of collapse (and also the examples of societies that successfully changed to avoid disaster) were interesting. It put the contemporary analysis/problems we face in perspective.

I remember reading Guns, Germs, Steel and while I enjoyed it Diamond's geographical determinism was tiresome and I suspect overplayed. In this book he focuses on environmental stresses and issues playing a role in collapsing societies. I think he does a good job in explaining the multitude of factors beyond this arena, so it isn’t quite as one-tracked and only focused on environmental determinism. I think environment is crucial but it’s important to add proper qualifiers and try to not overplay your thesis.

My impression is anthropologists really seem to have an ax to grind with Diamond. Always interesting to see what people from certain fields have to say about popular books written about their domain (especially those books written by someone who isn’t part of their tribe). I haven’t read specific critiques of this book just remember some articles I’ve seen where anthropologists have absolutely smashed Diamond for his other work. I imagine some of their critique is right but it seems overly harsh, a bit overdone leading me to wonder if they aren’t just trying to protect their turf. Anyhow, I’m sure in such a huge book as this one, covering so much material, Diamond made some missteps but I think his overall thesis is ballpark correct (and important!) and the general historical analysis strikes me as solid.

Given the interwoven nature of the global economy, intricate complexity of our systems, and rates of environmental destruction and pressures we are applying on environment Diamond readily admits we are facing huge, potentially civilization changing downshifts. Grave risks, weakness or breakdown in one part of the global system can reverberate throughout. So it was kind of jarring to me when he states at the end of his book that he is “cautiously optimistic” we can turn things around in regards to preventing environmental breakdowns and catastrophes for global civilization. I was a bit surprised by that tbh, maybe I was struck by the nonchalance of his optimism especially given his devastating analysis of what we are facing. I’m certainly not as sanguine. I always kind of hope that hey, maybe I’ve just drank too much of that Jonestown Climate Change/Environmental Apocalypse kool-aid ha. Would love to be magnificently wrong on everything but I’d rather try and see things as they are than try and lie to myself with beautiful illusions. I’m just a lay person, but my sense given what I’ve read is that we are in big trouble and courting a slowly unfurling disaster.

There were some great sections. I liked the one where he spells out something like a list of 10 reasons/statements people use to minimize environmental problems. This includes people who have magical belief in deux ex machina future tech that will come save us from problems we have or are causing. I’m glad he hates this because I hate it, it really drives me bonkers, the use of this concept is a great way to sidestep any responsibility or accountability for present actions and greenlights continuation of pernicious status quo. I do think tech and innovation can be tools to help us, but they all have various externalities and can cause new problems of their own, plus in regards to environment, since the systems are all so interconnected you destroy or damage one aspect it can lead to a grand cascade. At that point tech can maybe help minimize issues but it is hard (impossible?) if damage is too great the unleashed cascade will shudder throughout the systems. Good luck putting the genie back in the bottle, some changes are irrevocable (6th extinction underway is a good example, even the destruction of what can seem an innocuous tiny microorgamisn can completely change the ecosystem with implications for species in that system). Diamond also points out another argument people use to justify environmental destruction: well the environment is a luxury and we need to do everything we can for our economy (which includes destroying the environment). The economy is driven by the environment! you break the environment (or elements of it) and you will likely hamstring your economy in various ways. Happens again and again. And it's not simple, I understand the tension in this dynamic because if you are hungry today you need to do whatever it is you can to put food on the table and sometimes that includes destroying the environment which will have long term implications, but if you are hungry and desperate you don't have as much luxury to think about or emphasize the long term.

I’m not sure how I feel about his soft defense of corporations and his emphasis on the consumer. I think it annoys me, lol. He doesn’t give corporations a free pass, but he tries to explain why they do what they do. He tries to play a balanced view on all this, hey corporations have to operate under their prime directive (PROFITS! at all costs) or they will be sued by shareholders if they don’t (regardless of damage done to environment, community, etc). He also very much emphasizes consumer ability to exert pressure on companies to shift to more environmentally friendly habits. I believe this is a good tactic but can also be limited (not to mention not all consumers have luxury to shift to more environmentally friendly consumption nor the luxury of time to research and learn what those options might be). Ultimately I am of the belief one has to reform the systems we are operating in, this includes reforming how corporations operate (instead of monolithic submission to shareholders I believe in a multi-foundational mission for corporations where community, workers, management, shareholders are all taken into consideration. This is more holistic in my view than the blind submission to shareholders who hold companies and company policy/strategy hostage).

The concept of sustainable living might be a high priority for me but it is very hard given the way the system is set up, I still generate a massive amount of trash and use tons of energy… this is not to sidestep accountability, because I should be held accountable and I can do better and many things I can do... but I think even the best intentioned have a hard time because our society is set up in such a way that we are nudged (pushed!) towards more environmentally destructive options (these are cheaper, more convenient options usually, sometimes the only option). Diamond doesn’t really get into this concept of reforming corporations or the infrastructure and systems within our society.

I think this is a good book but if you are looking for a concise systems analysis text on the environmental issues we are facing and the earth’s capacity to sustain it I highly recommend Donna Meadows Limits to Growth (30 year edition): https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7...

This was my favorite quote from the book and I think it is very good and can be applied to how blinded our thinking can be, including my own:

“[T]he values to which people cling most stubbornly under inappropriate conditions are those values that were previously the source of their greatest triumphs.”

Oh, and here is another good quote. Diamond touches on this concept and it is pertinent to many problems: elites being insulated from the problems they create. It is often elites/corporations who extract wealth then hightail it out of there with no consequences for their actions/environmental destruction (letting other people deal with the destruction or messes they create, while elites pocket all the $$$). This quote is more about the insulation of elites on the consumption side of things, but the extraction (production) side is important imo and I was glad to see Diamond explore that problem:

“In much of the rest of the world, rich people live in gated communities and drink bottled water. That's increasingly the case in Los Angeles where I come from. So that wealthy people in much of the world are insulated from the consequences of their actions."

Voy a ir al grano y sin anestesia: A menos que usted esté haciendo una investigación técnica o asistiendo al curso del autor en la UCLA, no debería leer este libro.

No les voy a hacer lo que Jared Diamond me hizo a mi: Me obligó a leer casi 700 páginas de datos, tecnicismos, términos complejos, relatos bastante densos antes de entregarme "el curibito" del libro. El quid del asunto. Yo lo voy a relatar en unos cortos párrafos.

Todos los que han leído al bien respetado Diamond saben que es un gran narrador de historias y Colapso no fue la excepción. La narración es impecable, entretenida y con todo el rigor científico (creo yo, que no soy científico) que merece una empresa como escribir este libro. Entonces el tema no es la narrativa, sino la extensión técnica de los detalles que a mi modo de ver, para un libro divulgativo debió ser más económica.

Llegando al final, tan anhelado después de una maratón de lectura de casi un mes Diamond deja entrever sus apuntes finales, conclusiones y recomendaciones para las sociedades modernas. Aunque leí el libro 15 años después de su publicación, este autor es muy pertinente en sus apreciaciones, casi todas ellas muy contemporáneas y apegadas con fuerza al discurso mundial actual sobre el cambio climático, el consumo de los recursos tan acelerado, la crisis energética, entre otros asuntos de gran interés por nuestros días.

Es un libro que te tocará tu fibra de conservación del medio ambiente, del consumo responsable y de las decisiones diarias. Te pondrá en el centro del problema y te relatará las opciones que como "consumidor" deberías tomar para proteger nuestro debilitado planeta.

Dado el timing con que leí el libro, también me parece valioso resaltar la transformación de China que le resultará evidente al comparar lo que se conoce hoy del gigante asiático vs. lo que hace 15 años eran apenas perspectivas de un gran cambio. Entre otros ejemplos de sociedades antiguas y modernas, exitosas y colapsadas termina Colapso siendo uno de esos libros que no quise haber empezado pero que me enorgullece haber terminado.

4.5 stars

A study on the collapse, near collapse or resurrection of eighteen different 'civilizations' that were in danger either due to environmental destruction and or lack of raw materials.

My favorite chapters and the most insightful were:

1. Rwanda's genocide - the war was in large part due to overpopulation

2. Pitcairn Islands - deforestation leads to inability to build seagoing boats to connect to other islands.

3. The Dominican Republic and Haiti - perhaps my favorite chapter explaining why the Dominican Republic per capita income is 5x that of Haiti. It involves a dictator who wanted to save the Dominican forests.

4. The Maya Collapses - overpopulation and rainfall differences between Mayan regions had a lot to do with who prospered and who collapsed.

5. Mining Australia - fascinating science behind why farming is so unsuccessful in Australia and it is not just lack of water.

I think Diamond is one of the most interesting non-fiction writers of the past thirty years.

This would have been a better book at about half the length. Diamond is a devotee of that style that is heavily promoted for oral presentations – say what you are going to say, say it using bullets for emphasis and clarity, and say what you just said by way of summary. The dreaded PowerPoint syndrome, in other words. So, when ploughing through the admittedly interesting and illuminating chapters, I found I was waiting each time for the Five Points That Indicate Society’s Success or Failure, and yes, I was not disappointed, for every chapter has the same structure. Example cascades over example; it’s not that the message is wrong or untimely, but it’s so relentless!

The ultimate point of Collapse is of course to highlight the parallels with our own society and perhaps provide a sort of roadmap for the future. But for all of his conclusions that there is hope for us, he really does not provide much evidence, so the end is a bit of an anticlimax.

Collapse was written before our own latest financial “collapse” in 2008. It would have been interesting to know what Diamond’s thoughts about that were, and I had hoped the epilogue written in that year might have addressed that. But no, the extra pages about Angkor Wat really adds nothing to the book.

My objections to Collapse are nearly identical to the ones I voiced in my review of Guns, Germs, and Steel. Jared Diamond's thesis that past societal collapses have largely been due to five main factors is a good thesis, and he makes a compelling argument. However, Collapse is poorly written and edited; Diamond reiterates his points so much that it feels somewhat patronizing.

Diamond analyzes the collapse of six past societies: the Easter Islanders, the Pitcairn and Henderson Islanders, the Anasazi, the Mayans, and the Vikings. He then compares these societies to modern societies (both societies that face problems and ones that have solved some problems which previously led to collapses). All of these analyses are very well-thought out, well-presented arguments that support Diamond's overarching thesis (if somewhat belaboured). One of the most useful aspects of these repetitive case studies is how Diamond points out which of his "five factors" influenced each society's collapse. (The five factors, by the way, were: environmental damage, climate change, decrease in interaction with friendly foreigners, increase in hostilities from foreigners, and how the society responds to environmental concerns.) For instance, deforestation played the major role in causing the demise of the Easter Islanders; on the other hand, the Inuit survived in Greenland because they adapted to their environment in a way that the Eurocentric Vikings refused to do. By pointing out these differences, Diamond elevates this book above the typical "well, some societies had problems, so they collapsed" tone of a TV documentary. Each case study is interesting in its own right and well worth further investigation--Diamond provides plenty of suggestions for further reading.

Much of the book is a treatise on the fragility of our biosphere. Diamond attempts to convince us that he's unbiased when it comes to environmental concerns, claiming he is neither pro- nor anti-environment. I doubt that any reader would believe this claim after the first chapter, and certainly no one could accept it after the end of the book. However, while Diamond is pro-environment, he demonstrates that he is not necessarily anti-business. In fact, he spends much of his time trying to show that businesses can and will clean up their act if pressured into doing so or shown how it will benefit them. I approve of this stance, just as I approve of the fact that Diamond carefully avoids "environmental determinism"--i.e., that a society's surroundings totally dictate the fate of a society.

After examining past societies, Diamond looks at modern societies, both what's working and what isn't. He takes an excruciatingly detailed look at Montana, but I don't fault him for this, since it's apparently an area with which he has much experience. Once again, he extols Papua New Guinea as an excellent country full of awesome people--I skimmed that part, having read enough such praise in Guns, Germs, and Steel. I actually found the chapter on modern Australia the most interesting; I hadn't reflected before on the problems, which in hindsight are logical consequences, caused by the colonization of this rugged continent. Collapse is a reminder that even so-called "First World" countries have their share of problems; Diamond's framework is universal rather than restricted only to poor or isolated societies.

The last part of the book concerns what we can do to stem the rising tide of problems that could cause future societal collapses. This is particularly important, since Diamond notes that globalization means a collapse affects the entire world, even if it is localized to a single country or even continent. Diamond throws out some suggestions and also refutes common "lines" supplied by opponents to the call to arms he's taken up. After the rousing chapter on Australia, this part was lacklustre at best. If it weren't for the monotonous emphasis on supporting Diamond's thesis, I would think I was reading a novel with a climax and then a disappointing resolution! To be fair, however, the final chapter was interesting if not entertaining.

I'm more pessimistic than Diamond at this time. Then again, as I write this I'm only 19, much less mature and experienced than most people who ruminate upon these problems, particularly Diamond himself. Unfortunately, I've already come to the conclusion that Diamond and others are attempting to communicate now: we cannot continue like this. The Earth cannot support our population with our current methods of managing our resources and the current level of impact we have, as individuals, on the planet. Something's gotta give, and it may just be our quality of life--something we pampered First World citizens are very reluctant to surrender, much less reduce. Diamond finds some hope in the fact that, with better management of our resources, we can sustain both our current population and quality of life while still reducing our impact on the planet itself. It's up to us, the public, to push governments and businesses to take the necessary steps.

Collapse was as interesting an argument as I had hoped, although this comes with the caveat that it's a poorly written book. There are certainly worse ways to spend an afternoon (or in my case, a couple of afternoons), and if you're a fan of Diamond's previous work, you'll find this tolerable. If this is your first Diamond book, I think that Guns, Germs, and Steel was marginally better. However, the subject matter of Collapse is still fascinating, and Diamond does it justice.

Very good. Ranges credibly across multiple academic disciplines and historical periods in a way that is serious, accessible and engaging. Crucially for such an emotive topic the conclusions are balanced, with Diamond eschewing single cause explanations for past societal collapses and challenging those who hold specific business sectors or industrial practices responsible for all the world’s current environmental and socio-economic challenges. As Diamond himself acknowledges, this approach leaves him exposed to criticism both from ideological purists and deep subject matter experts on the various societies and issues he examines. However, the methodology is clearly explained, the sources fairly attributed and the synthesis achieved without taking any major liberties, all whilst articulating some punchy and challenging arguments. I’m not sure you can ask much more of a work of popular history/science/anthropology/geography/philosophy.

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

- "Ozymandias" by P. B. Shelley

O Noble Head! Adorned with the
Tilak and well-groomed hair
You who planned to rule the world
Have become a worthless skull...

(free translation of a famous song from the Malayalam movie "Harishchandra")