DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
US Environmental History Class at CSW
HTML https://cswenvirohistclass.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Mod 4, 2019
*****************************************************
#Post#: 46--------------------------------------------------
#3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: TeacherRachel Date: January 9, 2019, 8:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
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.
Revisit these readings, get really clear on them. Flesh out your
thinking of your own definition of Environmental History in a
paragraph. Use this paragraph to consider not just the goals and
topics of Environmental History, but also the methods and
sources that you believe it requires. Please post your
definition and paragraph on the forum and respond directly to
someone else's (you might need to post twice).
#Post#: 47--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: liamf Date: January 9, 2019, 12:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
For me, Environmental history is the study of how the
environment affects the development of humans and their
evolutionary history, and is reliant on comparing the state of
today's environment with how it was at different points in the
past. My definition of environmental history aligns mostly with
the thoughts of Diamond, but given that we re-read "Using
Environmental History" by William Cronon tonight, there are
definitely some of his thoughts that I agree with as well. While
I mentioned this at the end of my post yesterday, my conclusion
after reading Cronan’s piece was that he thinks Our environment
doesn't have to conuinte on a path from “good to bad”. His
teachings might sum up to a depressing story that the world is
going in a negative direction, yet he continues to teach
environmental history to his students. Yesterday, I figured that
he does this for one main reason: Learning about the unfortunate
history of our environment provides ourselves and others with
the insight to see what’s wrong with the way humans currently
treat the environment. After thinking more about how I define
environmental history, and rereading the Cronon passage, I now
think that he might have a different reason to continue teaching
what his students might consider depressing material:
Environmental history is contingent on the mass of culturally
constructed environmental knowledge, and my definition of
environmental history agrees with this.
#Post#: 48--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: renee Date: January 9, 2019, 1:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
For me, environmental history is the constant interaction
between humans and nature and how they have affected each other
throughout history with the caution that humans must be aware of
their actions on the environment. My definition is mostly based
on Worster’s idea that environmental history is a revisionist
history. Humans cannot blindly interact with nature anymore;
they must realize the impact they have on the environment and
how it will change their future home. I also think this is
similar to Cronon’s beliefs that both “nature and culture change
all the time” (9) and that there is no way to know the
consequences of actions on the environment until it is too late.
However, this is all about the present and future; right now we
can look back on our previous actions to learn from any mistakes
and mirror any progress. To truly understand environmental
history, we must “ramble into fields, woods, and the open air.
It is time we bought a good set of walking shoes, and we cannot
avoid getting some mud on them” (1). We cannot simply be book
smart about this topic as we live in and experience the
environment every day. Humans have been interacting with the
land and vice-versa forever and this is not the time to stop as
we can see that the environment is quickly declining.
#Post#: 49--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: Shi Shi Date: January 9, 2019, 2:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think that environmental history is the study of human
interaction and involvement in the natural world. It examines
the various influences both humans and the constantly evolving
environment have on each other. I continue to be very interested
in the idea of interdependence in the context of environmental
history. Different factors constantly are influencing one
another, creating a grey definition of environmental history
rather than a black or white one. I think that distinguishing
differing factors does not necessarily intend to separate
issues. Distinguishing differences, instead, stresses the
phenomenon of interdependence. While I found Cronon's
perspective and on environmental history to be extremely
engaging (because it offered a different perspective than my
own), I drew more parallels between my own definition and
Merchant's interpretation. At points, I thought that her piece
felt a little more focused on specific themes/ideas that strayed
away from her initial definition, however, her general
interpretation of environmental history was similar to my own.
Merchant wrote that environmental historians are "conscious of
race, gender, and class in the interpretation of history" (21).
Instead of simply reflecting on past environmental events and
how they have shaped history, I believe she directs her focus on
the idea that everything influences everything and continues to
do so.
I think that this is where my definition differs from Liam.
Maybe I am understanding it in the wrong way, but I see his
definition as focusing more on understanding the past -- similar
to how I interpreted Diamond. I think it was interesting to see,
though, how parts of his thinking and definition changed due to
re-reading Cronon's piece to connect well with Cronon's ideas in
terms of parables and "usefulness". I often feel overwhelmed (in
a good way) while reading the assigned readings and find my
definition of what environmental history constantly changing due
to the many perspectives.
#Post#: 50--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: kellyf Date: January 9, 2019, 3:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=renee link=topic=4.msg48#msg48 date=1547063353]
For me, environmental history is the constant interaction
between humans and nature and how they have affected each other
throughout history with the caution that humans must be aware of
their actions on the environment.
[/quote]
From your definition (and your post more broadly), it seems
environmental history has a political, or at least moral
message: be good to the environment. So that raises the
question: Are environmental historians environmentalists? Or at
least can they be 'ok' with the way nature is progressing today?
#Post#: 51--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: kellyf Date: January 9, 2019, 3:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Goal of Environmental History: "Deepening our understanding of
how humans have been affected by their natural environment
through time and, conversely how they have affected that
environment and with what results." - Worster (pg. 2)
Method of Environmental History: Cronon's morals (1. All human
history has a natural context 2. Neither nature nor culture is
static 3. All environmental knowledge is culturally constructed
and historically contingent - including our own 4. Historical
wisdoms usually comes in the form of parables, not policy
recommendations or certainties) which are used as a framework
for gathering knowledge.
Content of Environmental History: As evidence by Diamond and
Merchant's essays - diseases, domestication, climate, food,
disasters, etc. Or in a broader term, "the nonhuman world." (pg.
2)
Thus bringing all this together, my definition of environmental
history is - the study of the human past using modified
historical (Hume style) assumptions to focus on the
natural/nonhuman on how they affected/were affected by humans,
with the ultimate goal of understanding how to proceed in the
future.
For those who do not know Hume, he believed knowledge is built
up empirically/solely based on custom rather than an ultimate
truth.
#Post#: 52--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: ccogswell Date: January 9, 2019, 4:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I find myself most often defining things using their purpose -
things are what they do. However, I don’t think this applies to
environmental history, so I’m going to challenge myself and try
to define it apart from the purpose it serves. My personal
definition of environmental history is most similar to Cronon’s.
I believe nature and history are not just inseparable from one
another, but complete each other. They do not exist in full on
their own, and must be combined, compared, and contrasted in
order to achieve an accurate and whole understanding of the
environment and the humans within it. This, as Diamond also
reasons, is a way to answer the “why”s. Additionally, examining
relationships between people and their environments can be used
to reveal information about those people, and their
relationships with other people, granting us an understanding
that may not have been provided by historical accounts passed
down by those in positions of privilege.
#Post#: 53--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: ccogswell Date: January 9, 2019, 4:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Shi Shi link=topic=4.msg49#msg49 date=1547064499]
I think that environmental history is the study of human
interaction and involvement in the natural world. It examines
the various influences both humans and the constantly evolving
environment have on each other. I continue to be very interested
in the idea of interdependence in the context of environmental
history. Different factors constantly are influencing one
another, creating a grey definition of environmental history
rather than a black or white one. I think that distinguishing
differing factors does not necessarily intend to separate
issues. Distinguishing differences, instead, stresses the
phenomenon of interdependence. While I found Cronon's
perspective and on environmental history to be extremely
engaging (because it offered a different perspective than my
own), I drew more parallels between my own definition and
Merchant's interpretation. At points, I thought that her piece
felt a little more focused on specific themes/ideas that strayed
away from her initial definition, however, her general
interpretation of environmental history was similar to my own.
Merchant wrote that environmental historians are "conscious of
race, gender, and class in the interpretation of history" (21).
Instead of simply reflecting on past environmental events and
how they have shaped history, I believe she directs her focus on
the idea that everything influences everything and continues to
do so.
I think that this is where my definition differs from Liam.
Maybe I am understanding it in the wrong way, but I see his
definition as focusing more on understanding the past -- similar
to how I interpreted Diamond. I think it was interesting to see,
though, how parts of his thinking and definition changed due to
re-reading Cronon's piece to connect well with Cronon's ideas in
terms of parables and "usefulness". I often feel overwhelmed (in
a good way) while reading the assigned readings and find my
definition of what environmental history constantly changing due
to the many perspectives.
[/quote]
I really like this, and I totally agree with your thoughts on
interdependence! I'm curious if you believe environmental
history is most practical in understanding the past, or
predicting/preventing events in the future, or both? And how you
think it applies to the present as well?
#Post#: 54--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: mayafb Date: January 9, 2019, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think environmental history is another way to view the world.
For instance, there is the classic way of teaching WWII and then
one could also view it from just looking at trade during that
time and how the entire global economy got interrupted and
shifted. Therefore, environmental history studies how the
environment around humans has impacted the development of the
past and conversely (a little Worster jargon in here) how humans
have shaped the landscapes they live in. However, I struggle
with this definition because it seems that I, like other
versions of history, are truly separating humans from the
natural world. Understanding Worster’s argument on how
traditional disciplines of history assume “that [humans] have
not been and are not truly part of and are not truly part of the
planet (pg. 2), makes me wary of how the definition is phrased
because it inherently is hard to talk about two subjects without
disconnecting them. By viewing history through this lens, just
like viewing it through other lenses, it seeks to find the
greater truth in the past. However, as discussed in class, this
truth eludes the historian as they are constrained by their own
biases. Therefore the goal of environmental history is to open a
window that can incorporate the natural world into the viewing
of the human past. To research in the field of environmental
history, there is a constant comparison of hard climate data and
understanding of geography with accounts of the historical
events. When comparing these two, the historian looks for cause
and effect of the environment of the human and of the human on
the environment. Although these historians are not climate
scientists, I am wondering how closely they all must work
together to uncover some of the hidden secrets of the past and
to understand what drives people to do what they did.
8)
#Post#: 56--------------------------------------------------
Re: #3: Cronon and Merchant, continued...
By: mayafb Date: January 9, 2019, 4:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=kellyf link=topic=4.msg51#msg51 date=1547070184]
Goal of Environmental History: "Deepening our understanding of
how humans have been affected by their natural environment
through time and, conversely how they have affected that
environment and with what results." - Worster (pg. 2)
Method of Environmental History: Cronon's morals (1. All human
history has a natural context 2. Neither nature nor culture is
static 3. All environmental knowledge is culturally constructed
and historically contingent - including our own 4. Historical
wisdoms usually comes in the form of parables, not policy
recommendations or certainties) which are used as a framework
for gathering knowledge.
Content of Environmental History: As evidence by Diamond and
Merchant's essays - diseases, domestication, climate, food,
disasters, etc. Or in a broader term, "the nonhuman world." (pg.
2)
Thus bringing all this together, my definition of environmental
history is - the study of the human past using modified
historical (Hume style) assumptions to focus on the
natural/nonhuman on how they affected/were affected by humans,
with the ultimate goal of understanding how to proceed in the
future.
For those who do not know Hume, he believed knowledge is built
up empirically/solely based on custom rather than an ultimate
truth.
[/quote]
Your definition seems to focus on a lot of what we discussed in
class today about using the history to understand how to
proceed. This aligns with Cronon's ideas of parables, is this
the only use for environmental history? I see the subject as a
perspective that combines the natural world into the
understanding of how human history went down and not only
creating a guide for the future. Maybe I am misunderstanding
your point because I am not well versed in Hume, or what he
really believed (thank you for the little explanation. That
helped a bunch) but I think I disagree with the point that
environmental history is to help dictate future actions.
8)
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page