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!