DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
US Environmental History Class at CSW
HTML https://cswenvirohistclass.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Mod 5, 2019
*****************************************************
#Post#: 266--------------------------------------------------
#2: Cronon and Merchant
By: TeacherRachel Date: February 13, 2019, 1:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Please actively read "Using Environmental History" by William
Cronon and "Interpreting Environmental History" by Carolyn
Merchant (pp.7-12). Also look through the quotes on pp.13-16.
Please post about these readings. You may post about whatever in
the readings calls to you, but also please connect or contrast
one of the quotes with the readings thus far and explain why and
how you draw these ties.
Make sure to do the whole assignment tonight. We will revisit
elements of it tomorrow night, too.
#Post#: 267--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: ebartel2020 Date: February 13, 2019, 2:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
William Cronon writes “American environment had gone from good
to bad in an unrelentingly depressing story that left little or
no hope for the future” (Cronon 7). He wears away from the truth
because the hard truth in environmental science is that there is
no happy ending. Many people who go into environmental history
often care about the environment. This is problematic because
back during the past we did not look at the environment in this
way. We are creating this logic from our standpoint. For
example, Nash's book Wilderness and the American Mind was
writing during intense debates about wilderness protection. The
idea that there can be a problem with environmental history if
we look at it from a sense of what has happened in the past can
affect what happens now and in the future.
We can be influenced by present situations that can make it less
accurate how we judge the past situations. Meaning because of
what we have gone through it affects the choices we make today.
By looking back we can get stuck in the negative since much of
our history is negative.
Science harmed women because it made people think that women
were not as strong as men. In a similar way, it harms the
environment due to mistakes causing significant damage.
In part one, William writes “One important contribution of
environmental history, then, has been reintroducing materialist
styles of analysis to the study of past human-environment
interactions while trying to finesse a full-blown determinism”
(Coron 8). After reading this quote, I thought about the reading
from last night and it reminded me how what we do as humans on
this plant directly relates to our environment. William
continues to say “Our strategy has been to argue for a dialogue
between humanity and nature in which culture and nature in which
cultural environmental systems….” (Conor 8). This is spot on to
my point and I think this is good to realize, the common ideas
between people with different thoughts.
#Post#: 268--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: jbass Date: February 13, 2019, 6:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
After reading these essays I am starting to really see all the
connections of how we develop as a society and how crucial the
enviroment is in that development. The concept of the fur trade
being affected by the enviroment seems obvious but I never
really would have made that connection looking at the broad
facts that history tells us. Its also interesting how far it
seems to spread. As people start moving more and more and move
to different lands you start to see how these enviromental
changes effect everyone around the world not just the place it
occurs.
#Post#: 269--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: amacdonald Date: February 13, 2019, 6:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In “Using Environmental History” by William Cronon, there are
many references to the environmental past and how it does or
does not relate to the environmental present and future. He
describes historians as “reluctant prophets” (19), noting that
when speaking about the past, they can “pretend that [they] know
the end of the story” (19). Once reading over the quotes, this
aspect of the first passage reminded me of John Richards’ quote
on page 3. In his quote, he calls for a “longer term global,
comparative, historical perspective that treats the environment
as a meaningful variable”. This is an interesting idea,
especially when paired with the Cronon passage. Cronon writes
how environmental historians “want their histories to be useful
not just in helping us understand the past, but in helping us
change the future…” (16).
In “Interpreting Environmental History” by Carolyn Merchant, she
talks about how “the human relationship to the land is
intimately connected to daily survival” (24). More so, she
explains how humans thrive off of what resources that they can
pull from the land rather than the ways in which the environment
inhibits population growth. In a quote by Donald Worster, he
talks about much of the same. He argues that we must be reminded
that “we are interdependent with all of nature” (2).
#Post#: 270--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: afreitag Date: February 13, 2019, 7:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
CONNECTIONS: “Predicting Environmental History” by Jared Diamond
from last night talks about global cultures advancing according
to their environmental resources, specifically hunter-gatherers
(Sub-Saharan Africans, Native Islanders, Native Americans of
North, South, and Central America) in the time of Eurasian
farming and advancing technology. Merchant’s essay “Interpreting
Environmental History” from tonight’s reading explains that many
food staples for Americans even to this day originated from
regions of hunter-gatherers. Europeans enslaved hunter gatherers
and implemented their gardening methods and their native foods
into their culture. It is a curious aspect of colonialism, as
Merchant claims “food is also a cultural construct”. Is this
some early form of a less subtle, less passive cultural
appropriation?
SEPARATE THOUGHTS: Merchant’s essay is such an important piece
to consume. Environmental racism especially is a massive issue
in America today and perhaps the least addressed of all
environmental problems. One might say environmental racism is
quintessentially American. The idea ties together race, class,
economics and, of course, environmentalism. On my own time I
frequently research the relationship between specifically animal
agriculture and racism, and many issues listed in this paper
involved animal agriculture. Animal agriculture is listed as the
#1 way in which environmental racism manifests in low income
(and non-urban) communities. Land is cheaper in these areas,
creating a greater population of people of color and factory
farms. It mainly applies through pollution, causing major health
problems in communities. The jobs available in factory farms are
largely filled by people of color who face horrifying work
environments and often come out with serious trauma. The animal
agriculture industry is an environmental, social, and ethical
disaster.
I will link some works I have read about the topic below as
sources. If anyone wanted to learn more about environmental
racism, they’re there for you.
HTML http://www.foodispower.org/environmental-racism/
HTML https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/Industrialization_of_Agriculture_and_Environme.htm
HTML https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/20/north-carolina-hog-industry-pig-farms
HTML https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672924/
HTML https://www.jstor.org/stable/29768134?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
HTML https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/42982376.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
#Post#: 271--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: samfarley Date: February 13, 2019, 7:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Reading these two pieces was very interesting, as they had
similar takes but got at their points in different ways. My main
takeaway from the Cronon piece was the importance of looking at
environmental history as a more broad, more wholesome look at
the world, but also having a more inclusive view of this type of
history itself. He talks about how humans are often viewed
separately from the earth, as clearly distinct from other
animals as well as just removed from what people invision as
nature. When describing how people view the two as separate,
Cronon said that “Nature time is cyclical time, while the time
of modern humanity is linear.” People very much see the two as
different, but Cronon then argued that Humans are in fact very
central and important to nature and the earth, but are also not
the only ones that make history: “Human beings are not the only
ones that make history. Other creatures do to, as do large
natural processes, and any history that ignores their effects is
likely woefully incomplete.” Humans are important to the concept
of history, but we do not live in a void from anything else.
In Merchant’s article, she also references how humans have an
interesting relationship with nature and the environment, but
that our social conventions and norms themselves have a heavy
impact here as well. Early on in her argument, she asks “What is
the character of a just society in which environmental goods and
services are distributed in humane ways and in which all people
have access to a high quality of life?” People often think of
culture and customs as separate from nature, but she gives
several anecdotes that prove just the opposite of that, and
argues that “Race, gender, and class are lenses through we view
history and interpret human interactions with the environment.”.
It might be challenging to think of these notions, which come
across as very human-like, as integral to the environment, but
Merchant argues that they are in fact related, because humans
practice them, and as states before, humans are not as removed
from the environment as much as we might sometimes think.
#Post#: 272--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: zwalker2020 Date: February 13, 2019, 7:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There were definitely a few connections I found between
tonight's reading and last night's reading, the first being how
Diamond (in the second essay) gives a great, and arguably
all-encompassing example of environmental history on why
Eurasians had the power to have political influence over the
rest of the world, and why other cultures didn't have this
privilege. Cronon argues that "all human history has a natural
context", meaning that "environmental systems" (nature as a
whole) affects humanity, both culturally and politically, and
this leads to humanity making changes on said environmental
systems. I can't really think of a better example of this than
what Diamond wrote about, because it shows that Eurasian
cultures having power over other indigenous cultures can go all
the way back to them having a natural advantage with many more
species of animals available to domesticate. Another reason for
this is the natural shape of the continents, showing that both
Eurasian wildlife and cultures were able to spread over more
latitude, while American cultures and wildlife would have had to
spread across longitude, making the climate much more different
over a shorter amount of distance. The second reading, written
by Carolyn Merchant, is completely related to this topic, but
merchant puts the subject of environmental history into the
perspective of race, gender, etc. Basically social issues as a
whole. She states that lately environmental historians have had
a lot more "racial awareness", and cites examples of revisionist
history from the perspective of Native Americans and Africans.
I'd argue that these examples, as opposed to more recent
discrimination of African Americans by whites is the better
argument, because recent discrimination (I believe) is more
attributed to the political system of 19th and 20th century
America. Even if there is a relation to environmental history,
I'd say it's much more ideologically related than natural.
#Post#: 273--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: ngood Date: February 13, 2019, 8:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Misc thoughts/connections:
Cronon saying that his students were “profoundly depressed” by
his environmental class feels very, very relatable.
Conversations about climate change can often (justifiably) be
bleak and show no hope for the future. I agree with Cronon’s
assertion that despair isn’t a useful emotion and instead is
disempowering.
The reading from Merchant reminded me of USO and how Native
Americans could not be enslaved by the settlers because they
knew the land too well (and better than the colonizers). The
enslavement of Africans was possible due in large part to the
fact that they had been transplanted in an alien environment.
Somewhat similarly, the Lost Race of the Mound Builders theory
that was popular in the Jacksonian era enabled the removal of
Native Americans from their land—by claiming that Native
Americans had no real tie to their lands and that they had
instead exterminated a previous, more “advanced” (and therefore
white) civilization.
Merchant’s reading also made me think about the different
cultural perspectives on the relationship between humans and the
environment, where one view is that the relationship is one in
which nature is passive and humans exert dominance over land and
animals (largely a Western viewpoint) versus another in which
humans take part in a reciprocal relationship with an active
nature. This connects a lot to Beth Conklin’s article “Thus Are
Our Bodies, Thus Was Our Custom” about the Wari’ peoples
interactions with outsiders from the Brazilian government and
missionaries in the ‘60s.
#Post#: 274--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: Annaliese Date: February 13, 2019, 8:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In “Using Environmental History,” William Cronon writes about
environmental history being more than simply looking at the
decline of the American environment and lack of hope for the
future. He argues that there are positive morals to learn from
studying environmental history as well. However, environmental
historians do worry about the usefulness of this field. Many
environmental historians approach their work with present day
concerns because many people working in this field are also
environmental activists. However, it is important not to only
focus this kind of work on present day issues even from a
political standpoint. One major topic Cronan writes about how
nature influences culture and both change significantly over
time. However, he also states that not all change is good but
most past societies have had much less of an impact on nature
than our society today. These concepts are similar to the quotes
from John Opie in “Environmental History: Pitfalls and
Opportunities.” He states that “the environmental historian
participates in the gulf between the ecological ideal and
historical reality, between the two cultures of science and the
humanities, and between disinterested objectivity and the
ethical obligation of advocacy.” Both this quote and Cronan’s
essay focus on this balance between what would be ideal
ecologically, and the ethical and political concepts that play
into environmental history as well. To focus too much on the
decline of the environment or focus too much on the activist and
political standpoint would over simplify environmental history.
#Post#: 275--------------------------------------------------
Re: #2: Cronon and Merchant
By: smartins2019 Date: February 13, 2019, 8:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
When reading the Cronon portion, I thought it was interesting
that he put environmental history almost on the same level as
social studies/ histories. On the second page of the reading, he
talks about how environmental historians often question the
legitimacy of their practices. “Like the several other ‘new’
histories born or re energized in the wake of the 1960s— women’s
history, African-American history… environmental history has
always had an undeniable reaction to the political movement that
helped spawn in.” At first, to me it was a little strange that
he put these studies in the same categories. But, now that I’m
thinking about it, it makes sense. In our readings last night,
they talked about how not everyone has the same idea of what
‘environmental history’ actually is. This inconsistency leads to
almost a sort of attack between historians, by belittling each
others methods/ studies. Maybe this is just because I know
nothing about environmental history, but I’m not sure how it
could be described as just one thing. I don’t really see how one
could argue that it’s this or that… I don’t know if this is
making any sense. But getting to my point, I’m now thinking
about how other historians battle about the legitimacy of black
history or women's history. It’s sort of the same way I’ve
learned history my whole life. I have always learned of American
history being solely about the successes and battles of white
people, but I know that’s not all that has happened. Again, I
don’t know if this is making any sense, but if you’d want to
discuss it in person I think I’d have an easier time explaining.
:D
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page