This seemed like the most suitable forum to post this, so…
In my grand plan to acquire rewilding skills, I’ve always felt awkwardly obliged to try learning every last one of them to an “academic” level without exception. Not because I necessarily want to, but the little tribal sage in my head says that because dedicated labour specialisation is a defining characteristic of civilisation, and that primitive peoples lived (with the possible exception of the shaman) as jacks-of-all-trades, I somehow ought to cover the whole spectrum simultaneously.
This can appear overwhelming when I consider the working proficiency in hunting, foraging, tracking, flint-knapping, firelighting, hide-preparing, etc. I’d have to pursue to call myself comprehensive.
I wondered what all of you here thought of the specialist vs. comprehensive spectrum, where you’d currently place yourself on it, and where you’d like to be on it. I’ve often thought that inevitably some people would find themselves better at skill A than skill B, throughout the many millenia of human history, but how far would they indulge their talents? at how much expense to their other skills? How much would the close-knit tribal model take up some of the slack from individuals’ deficiencies? Could it work differently for post-crash humanity? Can allowances be made for the fact that non civilised people had a whole lifetime from birth to learn these skills, whereas rewilders have for the most part have squandered that childhood phase where learning is easy and constant? So many questions…
That’s my discussion provoker for today, so… consider yourselves provoked.