Author: prwarren

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

A definition of THE American Wilderness is hard to compose. The definition depends on the individual asked and from where this individual lived. A person who lives out West might harbor softer and more passionate feelings for the ‘wilderness’ than say someone from a major city like New York or Chicago (who might sense the wilderness is a rugged environment). Most certainly THE American Wilderness’s definition has changed over time and continues to change with new interpretations. Should ‘wilderness’ even be a term still commonly used?

The term ‘wilderness’ developed from Eurocentric thought. Even though Europeans arrived to the New World in the sixteenth century and crafted the land for their use, almost four hundred years later, natives spoke of how the white man’s language and thought forced an opinion about the open and unconquered lands. Chief Luther Standing Bear states, “Not until the hairy man from the east came and with brutal frenzy heaped injustices upon us and the families we loved was it ‘wild’ for us” (201). Sadly, Europeans and their ancestors grouped natives and animals as wild savages and used the term ‘wilderness’ to collectively identify both.

Sometimes it is easier to define something by what it is not rather than by what it actually is. The American Wilderness is not a savage place. As Chelsea Creta said in her post on January 19, “Some students chose the cross-country trail as the most natural place on campus, for it appears untouched, wild, and uncultivated.” The wilderness is not a place of any specific wild or rambunctious behavior. The American Wilderness is a completely constructed and unnatural representation of a supposed natural place (much like Davidson’s campus). Tourists from all over visit national forests and parks. Many venture to these places to see ‘natural’ wildlife and fauna. Like Davidson’s campus, many of these places are constructed to appear natural. Yes, they are more ‘natural’ than Davidson’s campus, but humans have still intervened with the surroundings. America’s version of the wilderness is anything but natural.

The American Wilderness is used to strengthen the capitalist system.  As Roderick Nash reminds us, “The economics of land-based tours work out better for native people, but it is still foreign-owned airline companies, hotel chains, and travel agents who chiefly benefit”  (211). This concept can be applied locally and internationally. Thus, the American Wilderness is a commodity. While thoughts and actions have shifted to a more nature-preserving attitude, these actions are done to better the capitalist system. Carl Talbot states, “Thus nature was organized so as to meet the spatial, economic, and psychological needs of capitalism” (326).

The phrase itself connotes a feeling much like “The American Dream.” This is something that one cannot actually pin down. Searching “American Wilderness” using Google Images provides one with an extremely glorified version of the term (mostly in the form of landscapes). Both “The American Dream” and “The American Wilderness” are abstractions grounded in economics.

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

At first glimpse, Davidson’s campus appears to be a nature-friendly environment built to respect native wildlife and plant life. As an individual who hardly pays attention to environmental surroundings, writing about nature is most obviously different than writing about fashion. I tend to notice people’s outfits more than I notice the number of trees or flowers in bloom. A very recent trip to the college library moved my focus away from people and to the habitat in which these people walk and run.

Davidson’s campus is filled with many large trees, beautiful green grass and a cross country trail that highlights many of nature’s untouched pockets. The trees give the campus a more “natural” feeling. On any given day one can hear the birds chirping and see the many squirrels running from tree to tree. Of course, wildlife adds to Davidson’s atmosphere and appeal. However, after viewing maps from the 1940s and 1980s, one discovers that Davidson is mostly a man-made campus. Up until the twentieth century Davidson had a handful of trees, but not nearly as many as one sees today. While most, if not all, campuses are man-made (buildings and parking lots, etc.), it seems interesting that many of the trees were planted with respect to the buildings and not the other way around. Shouldn’t the buildings have been built in relation to the trees? As stated earlier, during the campus’s early years there were hardly any trees, so the only option was to bring in plant life.

Surprisingly, Davidson’s campus in the early twentieth century lacked many of the large trees one sees today. Maps of the campus from the 1930s and 1940s (available for viewing in the Rare Books Room) show a bare campus without much foliage besides small plants here and there. These maps not only show the building layout but also the specific area in which flowers and bushes were to be planted. A few of the maps are quite intricate and specifically state which types of trees or bushes were to be planted in what area. Apparently, since the mid to late twentieth century, more and more effort has been put into planting trees. In fact, the college campus became a national arboretum in 1980. Most of the large trees seen around the main part of campus are tagged with the tree’s respective name.

With the exception of some naturally occurring plant life, Davidson’s campus plant life is largely human constructed. Humans altered and added plant life to work well with the campus atmosphere and structure rather than the campus working in conjunction with the plant life. It is difficult to think of Davidson as not being “natural.” However, a natural environment is one with weeds and tall grass. If Davidson was truly a natural environment, then many of us would have to walk to class amidst much taller grass. Adding and altering plant life provides stability for surrounding wildlife, even humans. Wildlife and humans have to coexist and sometimes this comes at the cost of changing a natural environment to appear more “natural.”