“We have not searched for straw men to demolish; rather, we
have focused on what seems the most intriguing and potentially productive
approaches.” The closing statement of the introduction suggests that the authors would like to provide an observation of some environmental humanities approaches in the past. One early criticism that I have is that it was claimed very early on that environmental humanities as a field has only been around for the last one hundred years. Although the article does discuss the exploitation of indigenous/native people in the US (including the creation of national parks), it fails to give much context to the Western creation of science. I think it would be useful for readers to understand some of the practices that indigenous peoples have passed down to preserve their local communities. For us to see the whole picture, we need to realize why the concept of environmental humanities was even created. Last time I checked, Native Americans weren’t given much credit for their ability to exist symbiotically with their surrounding environment. This concept of Environmental Humanities seems to cover the scale of the whole Earth because we now have a globe that is connected not only physically by roads but a vast network of communication creating a place with little isolation. Because of this, it creates the assumption that the Environment includes everything on Earth. Now more than ever, actions that affect the environment on a local scale may cause some environmental damage on a large scale.
I like the dilemma of conservation brought up by the authors. It’s a difficult question to answer sometimes. Do we conserve this so-called pristine wilderness and kick out those who have been living symbiotically in that area? In Africa, there have been issues of gorilla conservation which requires locals to be removed from the land they’ve always lived on. Do we value the gorillas more than the livelihood of our own kind? Where do we draw the line of morality when it comes to conservation? I’d like to see what happens in the future of conservation and preservation, the balance has proven difficult.
Wonderful post. Indeed, you ask an important question: why EH and why now? You write, “For us to see the whole picture, we need to realize why the concept of environmental humanities was even created. Last time I checked, Native Americans weren’t given much credit for their ability to exist symbiotically with their surrounding environment. This concept of Environmental Humanities seems to cover the scale of the whole Earth because we now have a globe that is connected not only physically by roads but a vast network of communication creating a place with little isolation. Because of this, it creates the assumption that the Environment includes everything on Earth. Now more than ever, actions that affect the environment on a local scale may cause some environmental damage on a large scale.” I am eager to pick up this thread in class to discuss EH but also the emergence of all disciplines, including “science”, in order to understand (again) how the most “natural” things are actually historically constructed and constituted. Eager to hear from you today!
Hi River,
I also have been noticing that the readings we’ve been exploring haven’t really given the Native Americans credit for being peaceful and having a good relationship with the land they lived on. Their culture was focused on preserving the environment and practicing sustainable practices for centuries and they haven’t truly gotten recognition for their contribution in the environmental humanities. I feel like a lot of Native American communities are overlooked in terms of their conservation practices and respect for nature, which is unfair to them and their community.
Hey River, I think your insight about the start of the environmental humanities field was so interesting! I had not realized how the field excludes whole communities when it discussed its conception. Your example of conservation made me think about how our priorities change when we talk about the environment, especially when it has to do with communities that Western societies deem as less important.
I like the idea of the dilemma of conservation you mentioned. It is an extremely difficult discussion because in a way we are simply just deciding which species to prioritize. Even with such a discussion there is no general guideline to follow when trying to decide what to do, it is impossible for everyone to agree unless more and more generations grow up being taught the same thing. Unfortunately, though, global warming may finish its course before enough generations evolve to care.