Category Archives: Week 8: Defining “The Environment” and “The Wilderness”

Week 8: The Trouble with Wilderness

Posted on by
4

The reading for this week was the first reading to really pinpoint and dissect the notion that perhaps humans and nature are one and if so why is it that we feel separate from it. It seems no matter what text you read in this class, a Christian value can be spotted somewhere in its interpretation. In this particular case, I felt the religious aspect added to not only the awe and beauty of nature, but also the fear and otherness it gives off. Cronin pointed out that in “—early Christian saints and mystics had often emulated Christ’s desert retreat as they sought to experience for themselves the visions and spiritual testing He had endured. (Cronin, 10)” I think this urge to go into the unknown and truly immerse yourself into something natural. Like the desert, to experience something supernatural or unnatural, pulls on the idea that we as a human race knew very little of the natural world around us during this Romantic period, but it was this era of curiosity that gave these natural environments a sort of mysterious personification. It was no longer supposed that nature was simply a desolate plot of land, but when given meaning by the Bible, nature began to warrant respect from its human counterparts. I also thought this idea showed through in the quote “[God] would most often be found in those vast, powerful landscapes where one could not help feeling insignificant and being reminded of one’s own mortality. (Cronon, 10)” It would seem that in order for humans to respect nature and view/understand its value, a hierarchical mindset must be employed. Since God was above all, of course he would chose places that remind you, you are but one single human he has created in this vast world he has crafted. It would seem that for humans to give value to anything, they must see themselves below it, which may warrant the question why humans respect things they feel powerless to? I’m not sure exactly what it all means but I thought these ideas were striking in the reading so hopefully one of my fellow classmates can further elaborate my thoughts.

The Trouble with Wildness

Posted on by
3

“Satan’s home had become God’s own temple” (Cronon 9). Cronon outlines the transition from wilderness being seen as a dangerous and unloveable place to becoming a cherished land for Americans to visit. I think it’s interesting how Cronon highlights the change from wilderness being a place that the poor were forced to be into a place that the wealthy sought out. In my experience with the wilderness, I have certainly sought it out as a haven from the urban world. This transition from most of the world being wilderness to most of the world we see being developed and covered in concrete has certainly contributed to this desire to travel into nature.

Thoreau’s book about a simple life in the natural world is one of the drivers for this craze to seek a simple life outside the confines of society. This lifestyle and the gifts of the wilderness are referred to as the “sacred sublime” by Cronon.

I like that he is challenging the arguments of deep ecologists that environmental destruction started as soon as agriculture began. Cronon claims that it is silly because we would essentially be reversing society back into becoming hunter-gatherers if we wanted to reverse environmental destruction and become one with nature again. I agree that this is unlikely because humans are constantly driven to progress in science and technology. On the other hand, there is a major connection between the early agricultural areas in the Middle East / Mesopotamia and the disconnect from nature. I would say that Cronon’s arguments are a little far-fetched because the anthropological standpoint is that the agricultural societies consumed way more than the hunter-gatherers. I think that it is impossible to achieve this, but in hunter-gatherer societies, there was no wealth and no belongings. Without trade and merchandising, a separation between classes was impossible. Communities were based on sharing and helping each other. The disconnect we have from transactions we make every day is what drives the continuous environmental degradation. If I cannot directly see the consequences of my consumption, or feel them right away, then I will not change my behavior.

Week 8: “The Wilderness”

Posted on by
1

“The Trouble with Wilderness: Or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature”, by William Cronon, discusses our long and ever-changing history with the wilderness and nature. Cronon explains that nature has become a place for us to escape our own lives and civilization, the wilderness “stands as the last remaining place where civilization, that all too human disease, has not fully infected the earth”. However, the wilderness is a human creation, “a product of that civilization”, and its definition has changed greatly throughout our human history. Nature acts as a mirror which reflects ourselves, and our own constructed civilization.

I found that evolution of the word “wilderness” interesting. It used to mean “barren/desolate”. In a religious sense, the wilderness used to represent a place far from god that held the temptations of satan. The word now means the complete opposite, both literal and in a religious context. With popular environmental writers, such as Thoreau and John Muir, feelings toward the wilderness changed, “Satan’s home had become God’s own temple”. With changes in civilization during the Victorian era and the introduction of romanticism, nature became a place to protect instead of conquer. Yosemite was declared by California as a wildland park in 1864, and Yellowstone became the first national park in 1872. The wilderness becomes a place we must protect from ourselves, or protect from civilization.

This prompts the question of whether we are part of nature, or separate. Cronon says “In the wilderness the boundaries between human and nonhuman, between natural and supernatural, had always seemed less certain than elsewhere”. I enjoyed the inclusion of William Wordswort’s poem about his personal, almost religious experience of the sublime in the Alps, “Were all like workings of one mind, the features, Of the same face, blossoms upon one tree;” We are nature but also separate, nature and religion come together, “mountain as cathedral”. Is nature still the other, are we part of nature, or have we become too far separated. Is the sublime in the power of our own minds, or the power of nature and the wilderness.

This was very interesting to read, by learning and attempting to understand our relationship with the wilderness and nature, we can understand our own history. Our relationship with nature has changed, both in definition and feeling, are we part of nature, or separate? Our own notions of nature reflect human history.

Week Eight Reading Response

Posted on by
1

I appreciate how this reading defines wilderness and the environment. It helped to enrich my understanding of these concepts when considering them in conversation with mermaid mythology. The idea of wilderness had always seemed to be a naturally occurring thing. Something that simply existed and humans affected. To realize that wilderness is but a human construct and a rather narrow and exclusionary point of view is fascinating.

            Whilst reading, it was interesting to notice the how the ideas of wilderness and mermaids shift over time. By this I mean that as the wilderness becomes less and less a place of evil and more a place to consume recreationally, so too do the attitudes about Mermaids shift. She becomes less of an evil monster and is commercialized in the 19th century. This also gives me a better understanding of why she is often used as a representation of nature and wilderness. On page 17 Cronon describes wilderness as a “siren song of escape.” I find this particularly interesting because we are learning that wilderness in many ways is a social construct that is a product of myth. The idea that nature and civilization operate on separate spheres is likewise a myth. We see this even in the story of Melusine. The beginning of the story describes that nature is in many ways a man’s domain, it is for a man to find adventure and prove their bravery by conquering it. Constantly humans infringe upon nature but so many stories show the mermaid as being the invader. Many years later we see these same sentiments still being echoed in the figurehead of The Virginian. I appreciated that the text also does away with the Christian idea of wilderness as untouched and “virgin” first because it denies the presence of natives that were forcibly removed from their homes; Second because to say that wilderness is virginal and that it is the environment in which the individual man can enforce their freedom and masculinity is deeply troublesome. When gender is considered as these elements of power, it is not difficult to understand how we end up with so much history of misogyny. It further reinforces the texts claim that to think of the wilderness through such a narrow scope also influences who we view as human and worthier of protection. If the point is to save the environment by keeping it pristine and untouched then what of the people that live in constant relation to the land and see themselves also affected by the same environmental issues affecting the natural world. Does that mean that these humans are not worth protecting? Again, we are put into the conversation of defining who is human who is not and what and who is worth saving.

Week 8: The Trouble with Wilderness

Posted on by
3

What stood out to me was Cronon’s return to his main argument, “there is nothing natural about the concept of wilderness. It is entirely a creation of the culture that holds it dear, a product of the very history it seeks to deny.” (16) Cronon challenges the widely believed perception of wilderness as a natural, undisturbed state. He begins by claiming that the concept of wilderness is not natural or innate, but rather a product of human society. He challenges the notion that wilderness exists irrespective of human impact. He contends that wildness is a product of the society that values it, highlighting the importance of cultural values and views in creating our understanding of nature. Furthermore, Cronon emphasizes the contradictory character of wildness, claiming that it is “a product of the very history it seeks to deny.” He contends that the romantic idealization of wilderness as a clean and unspoiled landscape ignores the rich human history associated with these locations. By recognizing the historical context in which wilderness ideals developed, Cronon encourages readers to critically evaluate the cultural structures that impact our impressions of nature.

However, I am in partial agreement with his argument. I value Cronon’s critique, but I also believe that preserving select wilderness regions is beneficial to biodiversity conservation and ecosystem health. I agree that the distinction between wilderness and civilization is arbitrary, and that humans have influenced ecosystems throughout history. However, I appreciate the value of designated wilderness regions for conservation. Also recognizing both the cultural creation of wilderness and the significance of preserving specific landscapes for their biological value. But I believe it is critical to prioritize the preservation of wilderness regions as a means of conserving biodiversity and ecological health. I believe that wilderness is valuable in and of itself, regardless of human impact, and that rigorous protection measures should be implemented to keep these areas clean. I would argue that Cronon’s critique hinders efforts to protect wilderness and natural places from further degradation. What concerns me is that stressing human influence on wilderness may lead to complacency or a reduction in conservation efforts.

Week 8 — Modern Day Frontiersmen

Posted on by
3

Although I have only read half of the reading thus far, I found the large portion of the text to be rather interesting. I have read a handful of Muir’s, Thoreau’s, and Roosevelt’s works from this time and it was cool to see a piece that incorporated all of their works together. I have found that I personally struggle to support both the industrial movements to attempt to overrule the land and the religious ideologies that came into place to protect our national parks/wilderness landmarks. I think it is great that through romanticism and religious ideologies that we were able to develop this appreciation for nature; it makes sense that the religious appeals were what worked for the people in this time period. However today, we still have these issues going on with large corporations attempting to tap into the resources of beautiful environmental landscapes but religious ideologies will not suffice in halting their activities (especially in other countries with different religious beliefs). On top of that, we have many US companies that are intentionally going to other countries to exploit labor and natural resources because it’s cheaper and not deemed illegal the way it is in the US. This plays on the concept of NIMBY (not in my backyard), which is nice to know that the states are protected, but doesn’t stop Americans from going elsewhere for resources, still prompting the question about how much we really care for our earth. 

One part that spoke to me was when the author mentioned views and actions towards the wilderness. It states, “[f]or them, wild land was not a site for productive labor and not a permanent home; rather, it was a place of recreation. One went to the wilderness not as a producer but as a consumer, hiring guides and other backcountry residents who could serve as romantic surrogates for the rough riders and hunters of the frontier if one was willing to overlook their new status as employees and servants of the rich” (Cronon, page 15). This speaks to me as I led ocean tours along the Palos Verdes Peninsula for many years. What frustrates me is that in this context, I would be deemed a guide for the hunters of the frontier, which is a humorous joke. I know those waters, landscapes, animals, and everything there is to know about that area. The people that I take out are not frontiersmen, they are typically wealthy people that have no appreciation for the ocean nor any understanding of the powers it has (until they take my tour). In this regard, I think it is ironic to say that the tourists flocking in with money are rough-riders. However, to play devil’s advocate, without wealthy individuals coming and paying for guides and tours, we wouldn’t have the money to protect and serve the environment the way we do. At the end of the day, I think I have a heightened sense of appreciation for the environment because I have watched some of my favorite places on earth get destroyed by anthropogenic activities. I struggle to understand another perspective that might attempt to destroy what I find has innate beauty simply because it wasn’t manmade.

The Trouble with Wilderness

Posted on by
1

A point that stood out to me interesting and almost a reality check was, “It is a place of freedom in which we can recover the true selves we have lost to the corrupting influences of our artificial lives. Most of all, it is the ultimate landscape for authenticity. Combining the sacred grandeur of the sublime with the primitive simplicity of the frontier, is the place where we can see the world as it really is, and so know ourselves as we really are — or ought to be.” (16). This stood out to be as is makes me question how invested people are with their lives that we forget who we are. We live in this almost fake world where main priorities are how many likes you get on a post, how many people saw what you were doing, and where essentially capturing your entire life by phone defines who you are as an individual, when in reality it does not. As defined the wilderness is “a place of freedom” and that is something we lack in our day to day lives, it is something we aren’t able to reach because we are being consumed by so many other factors like relationships, family conflict, managing personal schedules and so many other things that pile on top of each other that we forget who we are. The ending of the sentence “ought to be” makes me wonder if it was intended to leave the reader question who they really are? Have they lost themselves? It’s a real reality check as to question if you are still the same person you thought you were.

I enjoyed the idea that nature is the only place “in which we can recover the true selves we have lost” as I believe it is true. Almost majority of the places in which you believe you are free to yourself is not entirely true as there can be interruptions, distractions, and ultimately feeling that there is a time clock on how much you can be to yourself before the constant worrying of getting back to day-to-day life comes into place. Compared to being in nature you purposely set that time apart for yourselves, to have a peace of mind, and reset yourself internally so you are not being consumed with the life you are constantly living and that is slowly taking over you each and every day.

Week 8: The Trouble with Wilderness

Posted on by
1

Reading William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness” made me realize that our era of “aesthetics” has always existed. He describes the wilderness as “not a pristine sanctuary where the last remnant of an untouched, endangered, but still transcendent nature can for at least a little while longer be encountered without the contaminating taint of civilization.” I thought this was really funny and so accurate to refer to human civilization as a “taint” contaminant because anything we touch and access we ultimately destroy. Our idea of wilderness is a fragment that we created. Cronon continues by noting that “As we gaze into the mirror it holds up for us, we too easily imagine that what we behold is Nature when in fact we see the reflection of our own unexamined longings and desires.” Our perception is flawed because we only see through the lens of our own cultural experiences and desires. Cronon highlights this by pointing out that “what brought each of us to the places where such memories became possible is entirely a cultural invention.” I found this to be interesting because at one point in time, the idea of wilderness was cultivated around a biblical meaning, and it was associated with terror and fear. As society progressed and people and politics became more secular, the idea of wilderness followed that secular path.

Week 8: The Environment and The Wilderness

Posted on by
Reply

In the reading this week, I think the author touched on a lot of important topics that I don’t really tend to think about. There was a quote that really stuck out to me that reads, “The removal of Indians to create an “uninhabited wilderness”-uninhabited as never before in the human history of the place-reminds us just how invented, just how constructed, the American wilderness really is” (pp 15). The idea that the American wilderness was viewed as “unhabited” is inaccurate because Indigenous people had created and built their lives in these areas long before the Europeans even arrived. The assumption of an untouched wilderness erases the history and presence of the Indigenous people who lived there for centuries. The concept of wilderness itself is socially constructed. It has made us view of nature as something separate from human influence or habitation. Western viewpoints were focused on the fact that nature existed for their own use and benefit. On the contrary, many Indigenous cultures have a strong connection with nature, spiritually and physically. They tend to view nature and humans as interconnected and they have the want to protect and preserve the land for their future generations. They often have more sustainable practices and a balanced relationship with nature, which could not be said the same for the Western world.

I hadn’t really thought a lot about how our relationship with nature has been constructed by the ideals our country was built on. The idea that we “dominate” the natural world has been passed on for generations and is the building blocks of how we have treated the nature around us. In many religious contexts, there are connections described between humans and nature, where humans are depicted as having been given dominion over the Earth. This can be interpreted as exploiting nature for human benefit and prioritizing human activities over nature. It makes me rethink how I view nature and how much we rely on it in our day to day lives without even realizing it. I think our society as a whole needs to appreciate our surroundings more and not take what nature has given us and continues to give for us for granted.

Week 8: The trouble with Wilderness

Posted on by
1
When doing this weeks reading, The Trouble with Wilderness was quite interesting. It discussed not only the human impact on our environment today, but also how the wilderness connects to our relationships with the non-human world. On page 8 it says “Remember the feelings of such moments, and you will know as well as I do that you were in the presence of something irreducibly nonhuman, something profoundly Other than yourself. Wilderness is made of that too.” This comparison between the Wilderness and us is distinct here, as we get a description of a feeling we get when we are in nature, something non-human. This is what connects us to nature and the wilderness, our awe of it, the feelings we get when we are in beautiful scenery. I thought this really helped the articles voice of the importance of Nature, and why we need to protect it. Where would we get these feelings of awe if not for the natural beauty around us? I am not sure, and this felt like a reminder of that.
Not only is this feeling of awe surrounded by the idea of Wilderness, but also the feeling of terror. This article uses examples of 18th century English literature, and its descriptions of the Wilderness or the Wild. It states “To be a wilderness then was to be ‘deserted’, ‘savage’, ‘desolate’, ‘barren’ – In short, a ‘waste’, the word’s nearest synonym. Its connotations were anything but positive, and the emotion one was most likely to feel in its presence was ‘bewilderment’ or terror.” This is one of the many examples in this article used to describe past connotations of the Wilderness, that it was something to be afraid of. As the wilderness is still something people are wary of, it is less looked at in that way now, or at least for some people. For me, I would like to say I am not afraid of the Wilderness, sure when I think of it I usually think of it as Nature or something beautiful. The unknown is scary, which is why these connotations for the Wilderness are still used today. People hate the unknown, they hate the undiscovered. I think this article really painted the picture of that fear, and how we should try to celebrate and protect it, not destroy it our of fear and greed.