Jefferies Response

I felt like the two writers were similar in their subject matter. Basically both addressed the mixing of nature with man. I felt as though both were struggling with their place and nature and the way that people interact.

In "Out of Doors in February" I liked the fact that he pointed out all the little things that begin to come back to life after a dormant winter. He notices all these little things and appreciates them. It reminded me of Lisa's story in class about her friend who says that when the birds migrate back its like her friends have come home.

I enjoyed "Absence of Design in Nature" the most of all three readings. I just liked his thoughts on everyday objects in the house and how there is really no place for them in nature. Nature has no objects that it needs in order to do its daily tasks. I thought a lot about the "beauty" of things. He says in his writing that "...the grass of my golden meadow has no design, and no purpose: it is beautiful, and more; it is divine."Sometimes I think that as humans we can only see man made things as art. We put high value on things that are made by man. But what about the things in nature? Aren't they just as amazing as a great picture of a flower or a painting of a landscape? Now I'm not saying that we need to put a price on nature, but maybe focus on what is already there instead of what we do not have.

This particular part of the writing also made me thing of Frost and Whitman. Obviously Whitman's "Leaves of Grass" came to mind. Frost's poem, "Design" also popped into my head because it has always been one of my favorites of his. He basically is talking about something very similar to Jefferies. Questioning the reason for the spider to be where it is and the reasoning for the moth. He makes comparisons to "things" in order to describe the moth and the spider, but at the same time keeps them separate from man made objects.

Here is "Design"

I found a dimpled spider, fat and white,

On a white heal-all, holding up a moth

Like a white piece of rigid satin cloth—

Assorted characters of death and blight

Mixed ready to begin their morning right,

Like the ingredients of a witches' broth—

A snow-drop spider, a flower like a froth,

And dead wings carried like a paper kite.

What had that flower to do with being white,

The wayside blue and innocent heal-all?

What brought the kindred spider to that height,

Then steered the white moth thither in the night?

What but design of darkness to appall—

If design govern in a thing so small.

Jefferies Reading Response

There are many points in Jefferies writings that really stand out to me: first, in "Out Doors in February", when he talks about birds and animals always returning to where their original home. That section made me think about the day we were bird-banding, and how surprised I was to learn that most of the birds at Merry Lea return year after year. Jefferies also brings a new light to what we might refer to as "the dead of winter" , when he says that "there is never a time when there is not a flower of some kind out.......There is life always, even in the dry fir-cone that looks so brown and sapless." Later, when he says "I think the moments when we forget the mire of the world are the most precious." really resound for me. Jefferies adoration and respect of nature is most evident in this first selection.

The next writing, "Absence of Design", is more somber and melancholy. I read a bit about Jefferies, and this writing really made a lot more sense. Jefferies struggled with both poverty and tuberculosis (which ended up killing him early in life), and his negative commentary on the human-constructed world I think must have reflected what he was going through. There must have been a thought of his own mortality when he wrote ".....I dislike the word economy: I detest the word thrift; I hate the thought of saving." What good is not enjoying the present when you might not be around in the future? Lastly, his comment on the fact that there are more than enough food in the world for all its human children really brings his writing into the present moment- with the general overall poverty that the world is battling today.

Wright....

While reading Wright, I thought to myself -Nature is, after all, her own best spokeswoman. It's creative verbal thinking, her writing allows for the seeing & feeling she names. An image, vision of a pattern, intuition, lead to a seed of thought.

Jefferies' writing felt contradictory to me. Amidst all natural phenomena -all plants & animals adapt to their environment creatively- precisely because the grass of the golden meadow is part of the divine, there is a design, an inherent purpose, even if man/woman can't see/know it. After squinting real hard to read this, I feel it's a prime example of how there are guiding stories that form the frame of reference for a people and how they understand themselves. These stories inform us, people then normalize & internalize what has been learned, and then we take apart and restructure interpretation. I assume he reached his own newer level of understanding. I hope he was able to perceive that the human being is not separate from the rest of nature.

Jefferies response

I like when people acknowledge what is human made and what is nature. Jefferies does just that at the end of 298, he comments that economy, thrift, wealth are inventions. I agree and it is important for people to see nature as a separate being from human civilization. When learning about the environment is it important to see a tree for its part in the ecosystem, for the things it does, not just seeing what the wood is used for and how we use it. That said we have also depended on nature for our world, therefore it is important to know how the environment fits in with the economy, wealth, land management.

I love winter, for many reasons but one of the reasons is to go skating on the river in Winnipeg. Every winter it is amazing for me to see the banks of the river from the view point of the river. In spring we sit on the banks and watch the ice melt and float down the river and in summer we walk along the banks to get to friends houses, or to collect clay. We see the plants and trees close up, but in winter we get to look up at where the plants and green trees are and remember the time when it was green. I liked reading Jefferies winter remembering because the seasons are amazing especially when you remember a particular spot. Remembering where plants sprung up is also a great way to deal with cabin fever.

Jeffereis and Wright

Alright so after reading Muir last week I guess I was expecting the same kind of writing this week and I was wrong. I was not that intrigued when I read Jefferies, Out of Doors in February. I kept getting off track and go back to re-read. However, I did enjoy reading Absence of Design in Nature because it was interesting to read what Jefferies was feeling during his time. It was really interesting to see how he analyzed "nature's forces." For example, when Jefferies said, "From childhood we build up ourselves an encyclopaedia of the world, answering all questions: we turn to Day, and the reply is Light; to Night, and the reply is Darkness. It is difficult to burst through these fetters and to get beyond Day and Night: but, in truth, there is no Day and Night; the sun always shines." It would have been interesting to be there with Jefferies when he figured out that the sun is always shinning even when we can't see it because it's night. I take for granted the knowledge of knowing what day and night is, but in Jefferies time (1848-1887) people are just starting to go through the steps to figuring out that knowledge. I enjoy reading these readings from this book because they help me see a new perspective on how things were or are thought.

The Story of a Garden was also a good read. I liked how Wright was able to go through a story about how a garden changes and evolves with the growing boy. This reading helped me appreciate all the surrounding aspects a garden holds. Like the music of the birds, the plants, the smells, etc.

Jefferies/Wright

"Out of Doors In February" made me think this heat had disappeared, but then I stepped outside. It's a hot one for sure. At first I thought Jefferies was similar to Leopold, but after reading "Absence of Design in Nature" I felt otherwise. Leopold was born the year after Jefferies died. Jefferies ideas could not be more different than Leopold's. I believe Jefferies "Absence" reflected some of the general scientific thought of the time. It's almost comical to think about form without function. Whenever I read a piece like this I often wonder what people in the future will say about our current line of thinking. I can here them now? Will they have a similar "inevitable conclusion that there is no object, no end, no design, and no plan; no anything that is." It could be argued that Jefferies was referring to a Divine plan, but I think he means otherwise. It's as if he sees nature as nature. A random occurrence of interactions. Suprisingly, this was possible written near Darwin's 1859 Origin of the Species. Could this be a response to Darwin's great work, or was it written before? We know that Darwin wasn't widely accepted at first. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the exact publication date of "Absence."

I've always loved the name Mabel. It was Hannah's grandmother's name, and will be the name of our first child if it's a girl, and if we ever have children. Mabel has a gift of describing the things we see, but do not see on a daily basis. She reminds us that a garden isn't just a garden. There is a microcosm of life in those beds. Mabel encourages us to sit outside and see. I now understand why the editors associate her with Michael Pollen. He too has the gift of writing about something familiar in a new way.

High on Nature...

I am sitting on the front porch of the house and dark clouds, winds and rain are coming out of no where. I am a scardy cat and go inside to finish reading. Muir on the other hand goes outside because e figures he is just as safe outside as inside. Wow. Now he goes and climbs a tree to experience the storm from above.
I really enjoyed reading Muir because he spoke about nature as a being or spirit. It wasn't all that scientific and it was clear that he had a relationship with nature. There seemed to be give and take from both Muir and nature. In some ways I am jealous that his comfort with nature is so extreme but in other ways I think that not everyone can, nor wants too.

I think that Muir has a wonderful way of thinking and experiencing nature and I know that I will never climb a tree in a storm or canoe in Alaska I think that reading him makes me understand others a little better, see the beauty that someone else sees.

Both pieces resonated that knowingness of belonging to that something greater, how alive the "who" in you becomes in the places we call wild: gazing and being gazed at, listening and being listened to.What I can appreciate about Muir's writing is how it sheds light on what how one conceives Nature as a reflection of an understanding about ourselves.

There is an "asking" quality to his storytelling, probing the bigger question of how does woman/man consciously chose to relate to the natural world? On the other hand, I think that is telling of the clashed worldviews that transpired across the Americas
(as elsewhere in the world) on how peoples perceived natural phenomena in their environment. As evident from his description of "Digger Indians" a.k.a. the Pauite, that he conceived Native peoples as almost not being "capable of" sharing his conception of beauty; later just as Thoreau did as well, after actually having a lived exchange (actually living with Natives in Alaska, I believe) his perception of Natives changed, and I presume contemplated his notions of the savage -civilized matrix.

His reference to the class-based distinction of the business man and miner mirror what is (and will be) indeed the same today & tomorrow about how we are: whether it's the 3-piece suited corporate whatever who takes his "recreational" time in the outdoors or a person self-sustaining from their place on the land to the "other" person, we are another species part of Nature, not separate from, even as our arrested development continues...no matter what the influences upon our lives may be, it is that innate biophilia in us all -humankind-, that connects us all to being a part of this Nature. It is an older story part of our collective human consciousness.

Muir

John Muir is crazy, but in a good way. Several years ago I discovered he lived in Indianapolis, IN. Since I’m from Indiana, I was instantly interested. Before he became the Muir we all know and love, he worked at a factory in Indianapolis. He was injured at the factory and lost his eyesight. After the accident he was confined to a dark room for six weeks, and he wondered if he would every regain his ability to see. When he did regain his eyesight everything changed. He packed his bags and left for Florida. I’ve also read that he was a minimalist. On his thousand-mile walk to the gulf he took the following: “a comb, a brush, a towel, a bar of soap, a change of underclothing, a copy of Burn’s poems, Milton’s Paradise Lost, Wood’s Botany, a small New Testament, his journal, a map, and a plant press.” Incredible. I think we’ve all had these “lightbulb moments.” Something happens and suddenly our eyes are opened to a world we’ve never seen. Muir does a great job of describing the excitement that comes with these awakens. He’s always full of life. Unlike Thoreau, he never seems to lose his enthusiasm. I want to encorporate this kind of thinking in my own life. It also doesn’t hurt that he’s a birder. His description of the American Dipper, a.k.a the Water Ouzel, or the Water Thrush was amazingly poetic. It’s as if he knows the Ouzel. Some would say this is anthropomorphism. I say otherwise. Muir’s passion for nature exceeds his desire to formalize his experiences.

John Muir reflections

I really enjoyed reading A Wind-Storm in the Forests and The Water-Ouzel simply because Muir had a very beautiful method of showing people the stories of Nature. His style of writing drew me into the stories he was describing about the trees and the ouzel. After reading the two articles, I was reminded that every creature on the planet has their own story and they want others to listen to their story. Muir helped prove that the trees have a story from the way they sounded in the wind and the fragrance they produced and the way they reacted during the storms. It may be thought that trees don't have stories because they don't have voices like people, but the real fact is that they do, their voice just comes in different forms. Muir also showed that the ouzel has a voice from the beautiful song it makes and all that it touches with it's beautiful voice. Muir may be border line abstract or all the way there but he helps show me the beauty of the planet and it's creatures from his writing and storytelling.

Some pieces of the articles that stood out to me were from A Wind-Storm in the Forests on page 253, "Nature has always something rare to show us, and the danger to life and limb is hardly than one would experience crouching deprecatingly beneath a roof."
and on page 254, "Nature was holding high festival, and every fiber of the most rigid giants trilled with glad excitement."

I also thought it was cool and funny that Muir capitalized the "n" in Nature.

John Muir Response

After reading A Wind-Storm in the Forests and The Water-Ouzel it is no surprise that John Muir would be the founder of the Sierra Club. His writing is unique and it is easy to get the feeling of his intense love and connection to nature by reading these two articles. In A Wind-Storm in the Forests, I was amazed at the way that he experienced the storm and his descriptions of the sounds and movement within the forest during the storm. Although I feel as though I love nature and have a connection to it, I don't think I would ever climb to the top of a tree and stay there during a storm.

I really enjoyed The Water-Ouzel. Again, I enjoyed the way he wrote about the bird and his descriptions of it. I felt as though he felt connected to this bird. Throughout this story, I kept thinking that he was not only describing the bird, but also describing himself. While reading it was easy to tell that he has an intense respect and amazement by the Water Ouzel.

One part that I found fascinating was on page 264. He says, "Were the flights of all the ouzels in the Sierra traced on a chart, they would indicate the direction of the flow of the entire system of ancient glaciers, from about the period of the breaking up of the ice-sheet until near the close of the glacial winter; because the streams which the ouzels so rigidly follow are, with the unimportant exception of a few side tributaries, all flowing in channels eroded from them out of the solid flank of the range by the vanished glaciers--the streams tracing the ancient glaciers, the ouzels tracing the streams."

I enjoyed this because I find it fascinating that the water-ouzels follow these streams while flying. I also was fascinated to find out that they dive down in the water and even will do so in whitewater. When I looked up a picture of the bird, I couldn't believe that they were so small but still powerful enough to dive straight down in whitewater.

Muir Reading Response

The correlation between these two entries- the first on the majesty of coniferous trees in a storm, and second, the resilience of one unusual little bird, is absolutely brilliant. Where else, but in nature, could a tiny little bird possess the same powers as a towering pine tree. Muir's account of these species and their reactions to a massive thunderstorm had so much depth to them. The "human" quality of individualism that he gave them is also very interesting. It was difficult to read about the movements of the trees and their seeming "lack of fear" in the storm and to not imagine them having mental capabilities! The adventurous water-ouzel's account was also enthralling, especially at the end when Muir talks about feeling down-hearted and alone in Alaska, but then suddenly the adventurous Ouzel appears and instills comfort in his soul once again. Muir, for obvious reasons, is completely in awe of this creature, and so was I after reading his account of a bird that is braver than most any person I can think of. Muir's stories about nature bring to my mind things that I frequently hear people say about plants and animals, such as "they don't feel any pain- they're only an animal/plant." Or, "there's so many more of them from where they came from. It's just a_________. ." Tell that the John Muir.

Most if any of the disgust I ever digest, hardly comes from any beast other than two-legged's.
I wonder most, how we come to capture humility and when/how do we honor being humbled, living the image of beauty we were created in, birthing a freedom rather than manipulation/dominating.... because there's nothing really between us.
What makes us feel less worth?
What kind(s) of survival set-ups are out there that exemplify the very fraility of life -whether a DDT-laden land field, mercury stored in the fat tissue of fish and then the PCB breast of wombyn who cannot feed their young, ...the reverance for the sacred seems scare; that ghetto mentality echoing entitlement mantras around the globe . It's in the face of such destitution that reclaiming beauty and imagination from right there and not somewhere else that heals and keeps us going...
Maybe it's not so much that the ancients could imagine more than existed, while the moderns cannot imagine so much as exists, but that we've concealed who we really are in this web -a mere strand, no more, no less than. How did we get this far apart? How do we conspire? Can we surrender to what we cannot see?

Thoreau/Kingsley Response

It is difficult for me to not read these words and have vivid pictures of the species both of these authors are describing run rampant through my mind. In a time before most people had access to photographs of the natural world (i.e. Ansel Adams), these two men's descriptive writing feels more real to me than what any photograph now could capture.

Reading these words tonight, I am remembering the awe and wonder I felt as a child the first time I saw the ocean, witnessed a spider monkey in it's natural habitat, or recently as I watched my son ride a horse for the first time. Thoreau had it right when he wrote that "...the most important requisite in describing an animal, is to be sure and give its character and spirit....You must tell what it is to man [woman]." A horse is not merely a horse anymore by those words- it is a creature of enormous strength, stature, capable of exciting a small child and also his mother. We must look at the natural world as we do the people in our lives- as a sum of multiple parts, having multiple facets, not just a name or even a photograph.

Natural History Response

I enjoyed both the readings today, but I have always been a fan of Thoreau and delight in reading any of his nature writing.

In the journal entries from Thoreau, I really enjoyed his descriptions of the things that are around him. In each entry that we read, it seems as though he pays attention to every detail of the animal or plant. He is also able to do this in ways that anyone would be able to understand. This is one thing that I have always enjoyed about nature writing. By reading his entries, we are giving insight into how Thoreau saw the world. It may give us a new perspective on somethings or we may disagree with it, but either way it is new and refreshing to the readers mind.

Thoreau addressing this point in "seeing". He brings up the fact that no two people are going to see the same landscape the same way. This is what is so wonderful about exploring places together. We are able to somewhat see through other peoples eyes and gain a new perspective on the place. One person may see nothing interesting but the person standing next to them may see something awesome! It is in sharing this that we are able to learn from one another and share a greater appreciation of any place.

I also enjoyed "Tenacity of Life". I found it interesting to get Thoreau's view on Darwinism, which was very present in this journal passage.It again, brought up many thoughts that I have not had about natural selection and the natural world.

Charles Kingsley seemed very different in some ways, but the two were also very similar. I likes the fact that Kingsley says that we need to appreciate everything because they are God's creation. No matter if you believe this or not, I think we can all gain something from this. I especially enjoyed the part where he says "...for everything is beautiful and perfect in it's place". I am going to keep this in mind and think of it next time I see something that I think is ugly or out of place so that I may gain some perspective on the thing I am looking at.

Norton Reflections

Dylan said “the times they are a’changin,” but have they changed that much? I get the sense Thoreau felt some of the same daily pressures we feel, and is surrounded by similar distractions. He recognizes that the theatre, post office, and travel remove us from our place. Even though he didn’t write about cell phones, television, or Facebook, I feel the same sentiment. “Foolish people imagine that what they imagine is somewhere else. That stuff is not made in any factory but their own.” I think we all feel this way at some point in our lives, especially during the teenage years. I often hear, “This town sucks,” but ironically I’ve also hear that from teenagers in Chicago. It takes time to realize the importance of place. I don’t have a strong connection to my birthplace of Hartford City, but I do have a strong connection to the town in which I now live. I’ve wondered if it’s because I’ve begun to appreciate “place.” As a teenager Hartford City is the town that “sucked”. North Manchester has become my home because I recognize my role in the community. Yes, I long to see new places, but I no longer “imagine somewhere else.”

This was my first introduction to Charles Kingsley. Often students will ask me, “why are there mosquitoes?” They usually then follow with, “we don’t need mosquitoes!” The interconnectedness of environmental science strikes again!

Rachel's Response: July 12

I found the readings that were in Nature Writing hard to follow sometimes because it was so wordy but I mange to pull through.... woo.

I did enjoy the one reading called "Seeing." This reading helped remind me that people's minds are wired so differently and we all have different stories and view the world from different lens. I sometimes get frustrated with people when they aren't on the same page as me, but then I remember to be patient and listen to the other person's point of view. It's so easy to shut people out, but I think a important aspect to being n environmental educator is to listen to people and educate people in a way that everyone can be on board with. I liked this quote from "seeing" on page 214-215, "The actual objects which one person will see from a particular hilltop are just as different from those which another will see as the persons are different." People operate so differently from each other but that's not a bad thing, it's just important to understand where each other are coming from.

Another reading that spoke to me was "Tenacity of Life." It was an interesting way to describe nature, more of in a poetic way rather that scientific. "Nature opposes to this many obstacles, as climate, myriads of brute and also human foes, an of competitors which preoccupy the ground. Each suggests an immense and wonderful greediness and tenactivity of life." All the creatures of the Earth are just trying to survive, it's survival of the fittest if you will.

Tanya's July 12th response

A year back I was reading Walden and I had the impression that he was a little pompous and narrow minded in his writing, that image stayed with me through these selections of this writing as well. I felt that in Walden his approach to living and seeing nature is simple and that economics and society can be ignored. Although we may not see eye to eye I do appriciate his writing at the bottom of page 214. We are only able to see as much beauty (whether in nature or in the city) as we are "prepared to appreciate".
After readying Thoreau and Kingsley I tried to imagine them seeing the same thing, lets say a compost bin that hasn't been well kept. They are turning the bin together and an aweful smell and steam arises from the heap. Thoreau may have commented on the amount of heat, or the many insects he saw, Kingsley on the other hand may have shrunk out of disgust.

I believe that this is key to understanding different peoples experience in nature. As an EE it is important for me to understand that what I see as beautiful on a hike others may not see the same beauty. This gives me an opportunity for explaining why I see something as beautiful or showing the people around me.

Reading Reflections

Post your reading reflections for  the Natural History course to this blog.