1. We have to remain constantly vigilant to prevent raids by those who would selfishly exploit our common heritage for their private gain. Such raids on our natural resources are not examples of enterprise and initiative. They are attempts to take from all the people just for the benefit of a few. Truman, Harry S. “Address on Conservation at the Dedication of Everglades National Park”
Jonathan Lethem quotes Harry S Truman when he is talking about the “cultural commons.” He uses the quote to emphasize the necessity of protecting the commons so everyone can use it, rather than having one individual control everything. I chose this citation because it was well written; I had underlined it during my first run through of the essay. I was surprised to find out that Lethem ripped it out from Truman.
2. The kernel, the soul--let us go farther and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances in plagiarism. For substantially all ideas are second hand, consciously or unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources and daily use by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them; whereas there is not a rag of originality about them anywhere except the little discoloration they get from his mental and moral caliber and his temperament, which is revealed in characteristics of phrasing. Letter to Helen Keller from Mark Twain excerpted from Copyrights and Copywrongs by Siva Vaidhyanathan.
Lethem employs this quote to drive in one of his main points: we all plagiarize. Plagiarism can be found in all sorts of texts. I chose this citation because I thought it poignantly summarized his argument. Lethem’s citation section explains that this phrase came from Mark Twain’s letter to Helen Keller when he was trying to cheer her up after she was accused of plagiarism. I never knew that these two famous American figures were friends, so I wanted to find out more about this letter.
3. But Jefferson's vision has not fared well, has in fact been steadily eroded by those who view the culture as a market in which everything of value should be owned by someone or other. Boynton, Robert. “The Tyranny of Copyright?” The New York Times Magazine
Boynton doesn’t make any claims in his article, “The Tyranny of Copyright?” Instead, he illuminates the conflict between the government and the Copy Left. The Copy Left says that the government should loosen up on copyright laws because the copyright laws are hurting creativity instead of nurturing it. The internet is one area of contention because people disagree on how it should be used. Should the public have total access to everything posted on the web, or should a select few entities be able to regulate the public’s access to certain materials? This type of question is relevant to Lethem’s idea of a “usemonopoly” since he defines a usemonopoly as a “government granted monopoly on the use of creative rights” (64). Lethem asserts that monopolizing the rights to creativity hurts the public.
I chose this citation because I’m interested in how copyright laws apply to us and how they are enforced by the government. At times, it seems that a corporation arbitrarily sues someone for violating copyright laws. For example, the RIAA sues people who download music illegally. Yet, people continue to download music. Piracy of this sort is a cultural thing; it would be very hard for the government to prevent everyone from illegally downloading music. Should the government even bother trying to enforce these copyright laws? That was the question I had in mind as I read through this passage in Lethem’s essay.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Sweatshop Sublime Citations
Robbins quotes Raymond Williams in his Culture and Society; The quote specifically talks about the "pulling the wrong thread" out of the metaphor for society as a "tangled web." When trying to untangle this web you can't tell which thread to pull because each has a different result that creates a different outcome. This specifically interests me because I have always been interested in the past and the future and how each decision you make creates a different future. I always find it interesting to examine what could have been done.
Robbins quotes Barbara Ehrenreich and her view on menial labor. Ehrenreich talks about how "everything we buy is a product of some other person's suffering." This interests me because she states that there is "no way to avoid it all together unless you live in the wilderness on berries." Throughout my childhood, my parents taught me to buy things made in the U.S. I'm not sure what the reason for this was, bug I guess that from Ehrenreich's point of view this did nothing. Ehrenreich's essay is one that we have already read, "Maid to Order." The main argument in this essay is to depict how maids are primarily women and of a minority group.
Robbins quotes Fredric Jameson and his opinions on products produced by sweatshops. He states that people are in a sense freed from the guilt induced by knowing how their toys and furnishings if they don't remember how they were created. This interests me because today it has become a habit to not even check where your clothing came from. If this ignorant habit were not in existence, would something have been done about this sweatshop labor by now?
Citations for “The Sweatshop Sublime” by Bruce Robbins
1) Robbins portrays the consumer’s momentary insight into the complexity and immensity of the labor process as something that is sublime; in doing so, he quotes passages from George Eliot’s Middlemarch, including the following:
“If we had a keen vision and feeling of all
ordinary human life, it would be like
hearing the grass grow and the squirrel’s
heart beat, and we should die of that roar
which lies on the other side of silence” (88).
Here, Robbins is able to connect Eliot’s poetics with his argument that one’s realization of being “the beneficiary of an unimaginably vast…social whole” (84) is often so transcendental that it makes one become a “purely disinterested” (88) person of apathetic inaction. In other words, when we “hear the grass grow” by recognizing the tremendous intricacy upon which the commodities of our daily life depend, we “die” and accordingly retreat back into the safety of our “everyday smallness” (Robbins 85) to escape the world’s deafening “roar.” My interest lies in how the effects of the latter compare with the influence of the inherent inaction that Robbins states is “built into [our] conceptual structure” (89) and that appears when action is called for. Does our failure to act then result from the stagnation that already exists within our natures or from the inertia that overwhelms us after we experience moments of “hearing the grass grow?” After reading this passage, I was thus intrigued by the relationship between these two seemingly separate descriptions of the origin of our inactivity in light of the sweatshop problem.
2) In addition, Robbins makes use of the term “national-popular” that appears in Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (compiled by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Smith). Specifically, Gramsci expounds on the capability of linking “the thoughts and feelings of ordinary people to the fate of others” (Robbins 86) in order to trigger nationalism. I was interested in how Robbins extended Gramsci’s idea of collectivizing fates from a national to an international domain in order to spur anti-sweatshop action [hence his conception of the “international-popular” (86)] and how specifically he would suggest the implementation of this. Where would the movement start – at the level of the individual consumer or at that of a global organization?
*3) Frederic Jameson states in his Postmodernism; or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism that “in consuming culture, [we do not] particularly want, let alone need, to forget the human producer” (95), and thus effectively makes the claim that there is a common desire to not hide the “traces of production” (Robbins 95) that go into the making of art. Jameson justifies his point by arguing that because these products of culture are “signed” (Jameson 315), the consumer wishes to recognize the artist behind the signature. According to Robbins, if this yearning to actively acknowledge the human producer in art can be channeled into realms that generate other products, it can be used as a motivational force for action in support of the anti-sweatshop movement. The shared sentiment of wanting to “remember” (Robbins 95) the human producer, in other words, can serve as a means of uniting people and inciting universal action through a shared recognition of the many actors who occupy the stage of global labor. I was interested in this citation because of the way in which Robbins compares its original conception of the consuming of art to the consuming of other parts of culture (in the sense that in both these cases, the consumer may want to know who “signed” the product). In short, I wondered whether another parallel between the two “products” also applied, namely that of the “artist” sometimes forsaking his signature and preferring to remain anonymous. Even if we desire to know the identity of the human producer, the creator of the culture we consume, is it possible that the individual artist might conversely desire to shield what we want to remember in an effort to preserve his or her anonymousness? Or does that phenomenon occur solely in the realm of art, and thus should we assume that other human producers (including those working within the division of labor) generally do wish to sign their products and have their presence be known?
1) Robbins portrays the consumer’s momentary insight into the complexity and immensity of the labor process as something that is sublime; in doing so, he quotes passages from George Eliot’s Middlemarch, including the following:
“If we had a keen vision and feeling of all
ordinary human life, it would be like
hearing the grass grow and the squirrel’s
heart beat, and we should die of that roar
which lies on the other side of silence” (88).
Here, Robbins is able to connect Eliot’s poetics with his argument that one’s realization of being “the beneficiary of an unimaginably vast…social whole” (84) is often so transcendental that it makes one become a “purely disinterested” (88) person of apathetic inaction. In other words, when we “hear the grass grow” by recognizing the tremendous intricacy upon which the commodities of our daily life depend, we “die” and accordingly retreat back into the safety of our “everyday smallness” (Robbins 85) to escape the world’s deafening “roar.” My interest lies in how the effects of the latter compare with the influence of the inherent inaction that Robbins states is “built into [our] conceptual structure” (89) and that appears when action is called for. Does our failure to act then result from the stagnation that already exists within our natures or from the inertia that overwhelms us after we experience moments of “hearing the grass grow?” After reading this passage, I was thus intrigued by the relationship between these two seemingly separate descriptions of the origin of our inactivity in light of the sweatshop problem.
2) In addition, Robbins makes use of the term “national-popular” that appears in Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (compiled by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Smith). Specifically, Gramsci expounds on the capability of linking “the thoughts and feelings of ordinary people to the fate of others” (Robbins 86) in order to trigger nationalism. I was interested in how Robbins extended Gramsci’s idea of collectivizing fates from a national to an international domain in order to spur anti-sweatshop action [hence his conception of the “international-popular” (86)] and how specifically he would suggest the implementation of this. Where would the movement start – at the level of the individual consumer or at that of a global organization?
*3) Frederic Jameson states in his Postmodernism; or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism that “in consuming culture, [we do not] particularly want, let alone need, to forget the human producer” (95), and thus effectively makes the claim that there is a common desire to not hide the “traces of production” (Robbins 95) that go into the making of art. Jameson justifies his point by arguing that because these products of culture are “signed” (Jameson 315), the consumer wishes to recognize the artist behind the signature. According to Robbins, if this yearning to actively acknowledge the human producer in art can be channeled into realms that generate other products, it can be used as a motivational force for action in support of the anti-sweatshop movement. The shared sentiment of wanting to “remember” (Robbins 95) the human producer, in other words, can serve as a means of uniting people and inciting universal action through a shared recognition of the many actors who occupy the stage of global labor. I was interested in this citation because of the way in which Robbins compares its original conception of the consuming of art to the consuming of other parts of culture (in the sense that in both these cases, the consumer may want to know who “signed” the product). In short, I wondered whether another parallel between the two “products” also applied, namely that of the “artist” sometimes forsaking his signature and preferring to remain anonymous. Even if we desire to know the identity of the human producer, the creator of the culture we consume, is it possible that the individual artist might conversely desire to shield what we want to remember in an effort to preserve his or her anonymousness? Or does that phenomenon occur solely in the realm of art, and thus should we assume that other human producers (including those working within the division of labor) generally do wish to sign their products and have their presence be known?
3 citations- Cronon
The Trouble with Wilderness- William Cronon
1. Cronon uses William Wordsworth's poem, The Prelude, where he recalls climbing the Alps and going across the Simplon Pass. I like this citation because I think that it adds another element into Cronon's essay. It is no longer just his words or prose for that matter. By adding in the poem there is a change in the wording and flow of the paper. I also think that the description poem is able to give is a lot easier for the reader to relate to so it adds even more emphasis on the visual and emotional ties humans have with nature.
2. Cronon references the historian Frederick Jackson Turner from his writing in 1893. Cronon uses him in three paragraphs right in a row, emphasizing Turners points and linking them to his own. This part of his essay talks about how the frontier was being lost and the free land that Americans were taking to live and survive would be gone because it would all be settled. The losing of the 'free' land was during Turner's time and with Cronon quoting his writing there is a direct reference to the time period Cronon is describing. This adds strong evidence to back up what Cronon is trying to get across to his readers.
In Turner's essay The Significance of the Frontier in American History talks about how in this time, around the 1890s, most of the frontier had been broken up by isolated settlements of people. He uses census facts to show how the frontier was limited in the beginning of the essay. He also makes sure to distinguish the difference between European and American frontiers. Throughout the essay his strategy seems to be an attempt to describe the advances of the Americans throughout the expansion from east to west. He also touches on reasons why people would move; ranching, hunting, or for fun. He argues that exploring the frontier is what brought America to the point it is at today, including its customs, development and power. Turners essay goes together with Cronon because Cronon sets up his essay with the idea that the wilderness, which had perviously been seen as the frontier, was only present in areas where humans distinctly kept it. Where Turner saw how how unused land was becoming extremely scarce and therefore land opportunities were diminishing, Cronon sees that this land serves a different purpose now. This citation interested me because it made Cronon's argument more concrete in the past as well. I think using Turner utilizes American history and how in his time the free land was diminishing. This was a turning point for America that eventually led to the fight to preserve what wilderness we have left.
3. Cronon cites Dave Foreman, founder of Earth First!. Foreman talks about the separation of humans and wilderness. I think that the Earth First! sounds like an interesting organization benefiting Cronon's argument with more recent data. Foreman hits on the main focuses that Cronon has so it reinforces that what he is trying to say is actually relevant.
1. Kimmel quotes Donald hall's book , "Fathers playing catch with sons" I find this quote interesting in that he claims baseball is something fathers and sons do together but football is something that only brothers do together. I think the idea of a father and son playing catch with a baseball could easily be replaced with a father and son playing catch with a football. Also in this quote he links all generations together simply by the fact that everyone has played baseball and because of this it encloses what we are.
2. Kimmel quotes Chief boy scout Ernst Thomson Seton in David Mclouds book " Building character in the American boy" saying that consumer society had " turned robust manly , self reliant boyhood into a lot of flat chested cigarette smokers with shaky nerves and doubtful vitality" I find this quote interesting because it adds to his argument of the crisis of masculinity at the time. I also found this interesting because of the general theme of what was considered masculine or in masculine at the current time.
3. Kimmel quotes Teddy Roosevelt in Thompsons book Vigorous men, A vigorous nation, " the greatest danger that a long period of profound peace offers to a nation is that of creating effeminate tendencies in young men". This quote from Teddy Roosevelt adding to the general theme of what was consider masculine at the time period. I found this interesting because he also quotes Teddy in other places in the essay, he seems to be an ideal figure of what was masculine at the time.
2. Kimmel quotes Chief boy scout Ernst Thomson Seton in David Mclouds book " Building character in the American boy" saying that consumer society had " turned robust manly , self reliant boyhood into a lot of flat chested cigarette smokers with shaky nerves and doubtful vitality" I find this quote interesting because it adds to his argument of the crisis of masculinity at the time. I also found this interesting because of the general theme of what was considered masculine or in masculine at the current time.
3. Kimmel quotes Teddy Roosevelt in Thompsons book Vigorous men, A vigorous nation, " the greatest danger that a long period of profound peace offers to a nation is that of creating effeminate tendencies in young men". This quote from Teddy Roosevelt adding to the general theme of what was consider masculine at the time period. I found this interesting because he also quotes Teddy in other places in the essay, he seems to be an ideal figure of what was masculine at the time.
Oops! These are Sarah's citations
Citations from Jonathan Lethem's critical essay The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism
"Art that matters" to "bought and sold." Hyde, Lewis. The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World. Knopf Publishing Group, 2007.
In The Gift, Hyde proposes that art is not only bought and sold, but it is also a gift to those who experience it. This is because a work of art produces an effect (emotional, spiritual, intellectual, etc.) on its audience that cannot be quantified, or even adequately described. This experience is the artist's "gift" to his audience, and it coexists with the commercial relationship between audience and artist (i.e., the relationship in which the audience members pay a fee to experience the work). Hence, there are two economies, a gift economy and a market economy. The gift relationship in the artistic world constitutes the main difference between the artistic and commercial spheres, and it is also what allows works of art to endure for long periods of time. Art could survive without the market economy--yet without the gift relationship, art necessarily perishes.
Jonathan Lethem uses exactly this concept of two economies in The Ecstasy of Influence as part of his argument that plagiarism in the cultural sphere may be acceptable, even desirable, despite current laws regarding intellectual property. The artist, by displaying his works, is giving his audience a gift in the form of whatever they take away from it spiritually, emotionally, intellectually, etc. Thus, because of its status as a gift, art should be part of a cultural commons (public domain is another way to think of it) in order to allow all potential artists to build upon the ideas set forth in any particular work--without being penalized.
I chose this reference because I find the concept of two different economies that can coexist highly interesting. I also gained a new perspective on the split between the artistic and commercial worlds: before, I had accepted that the two were separate and in some ways fundamentally different, but I had never thought of them as two economies.
"...enabled by a kind...freely reworked." Mcleod, Kembrew. Freedom of Expression: Overzealous Copyright Bozos and Other Enemies of Creativity. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2007.
Lethem uses this source to discuss blues and jazz musicians who have freely and directly copied others' works (melodies or song fragments) without anxieties about originality and with positive results. This caused me to think further on the merits of plagiarism.
"the primary objective..." to "unfair nor unfortunate." Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. No. 499-340. Supreme Ct. of the US. 27 March 1991.
This reference offers a new perspective on the purpose of copyright: Lethem proposes that the objective of copyright laws is not to "reward labor" (68), but to encourage the growth of the arts and sciences. People should therefore build freely on what others have produced, an idea Lethem believes to be perfectly fair and beneficial. I chose this reference because I had never considered the purpose of copyright in this light before.
Kimmel Citations
1. Kimmel uses several quotes from Roger Angell. Angell is an author who primarily talks about baseball and the various issues, concepts and ideas that baseball presents to any viewer.Specifically Kimmel uses Roger Angell's book Late Innings written in 1982. This book is one of many books and essays Angell has written and helped him gain the title of one of the best baseball writers ever for his analysis and deep insight he has on the game of baseball. I found this citation interesting be4cause of the quotes Kimmel used from this work. The citations help support Kimmel's view on baseball as a cultural past time because it brings together many generations together creating a common bond within family and friends.
2. The second interesting citation is from William Mckeever's book Training the Boy. In this book Mckeever has a section titled "The Baseball and Accessories" which explains the importance of baseball at a young age for a child. This caught my eye because it is used to support Kimmel's concept of a child growing into a man through the sport of baseball. Both Mckeever and Kimmel mention and agree that baseball equips a young child to develop traits to be able to become successful. I t allows a child to communicate and relate with other kids who have the same interest in baseball which will enable him to become successful as he goes from childhood to manhood. I found this citation more interesting because the parallel claims Mckeever explains in his various short essays in the book. He lays the pathway in the idea of baseball not being a sport of violence but a sport in which each individual can help each other in a more manner and civilized way. It portrays the numerous traits baseball instills in those who participate. Kckeever mentions it as a "moral refinement" (101) because it teaches valuable lessons and aids young children to be successful and strong men when they grow older and this helps America grow too.
3. One citation that really helped Kimmel convey and grasp all these various ideas and concepts throughout his essay was from Alber J. Spalding's book America's National Game. This quote listed every aspect and corner Kimmel covers in the idea that baseball is not just a sport for pleasure but a social event in where many people can relate and build bonds. Baseball builds and creates the traits of determination and discipline in a young boy and any individual that participates. it also mentions how baseball plays a vital role in America's success as a nation creating this sense of "American spirit" (Spalding 4).
2. The second interesting citation is from William Mckeever's book Training the Boy. In this book Mckeever has a section titled "The Baseball and Accessories" which explains the importance of baseball at a young age for a child. This caught my eye because it is used to support Kimmel's concept of a child growing into a man through the sport of baseball. Both Mckeever and Kimmel mention and agree that baseball equips a young child to develop traits to be able to become successful. I t allows a child to communicate and relate with other kids who have the same interest in baseball which will enable him to become successful as he goes from childhood to manhood. I found this citation more interesting because the parallel claims Mckeever explains in his various short essays in the book. He lays the pathway in the idea of baseball not being a sport of violence but a sport in which each individual can help each other in a more manner and civilized way. It portrays the numerous traits baseball instills in those who participate. Kckeever mentions it as a "moral refinement" (101) because it teaches valuable lessons and aids young children to be successful and strong men when they grow older and this helps America grow too.
3. One citation that really helped Kimmel convey and grasp all these various ideas and concepts throughout his essay was from Alber J. Spalding's book America's National Game. This quote listed every aspect and corner Kimmel covers in the idea that baseball is not just a sport for pleasure but a social event in where many people can relate and build bonds. Baseball builds and creates the traits of determination and discipline in a young boy and any individual that participates. it also mentions how baseball plays a vital role in America's success as a nation creating this sense of "American spirit" (Spalding 4).
Three Citations -- Kimmel essay
1. Kimmel quotes Albert J. Spalding's book America's National Game when he talks about the values that baseball players embodied. Two things were interesting to me about this particular citation: First, that Spalding's book was written in 1911, so it shows that the values of baseball trace back to its birth and that the idea of it instilling morality on the American populace can be linked to its popularity. Second, many of the values in Spalding's quote contain the word "American" (e.g. "American Courage"). It is interesting that American courage seems to be differentiated from "normal" courage and that baseball is uniquely able to provide that former.
2. Kimmel quotes William McKeever's Training the Boy when he talks about how the playing of baseball is necessary in the development of a boy. This quote interested me because it shows how as early as 1913, sports had been an integral part of the American childhood and that this idea that Kimmel talks about seems to be the origin of the phenomenon of every parent these days signing their children up to play AYSO soccer or Little League baseball at some point in their lives -- no matter how incompetent they might be at sports or how competent they might be at other, non-athletic things.
3. (I think all the things Kimmel quotes are books so I just chose one of the books and read a review of it on Jstor rather than skimming the whole book...) Kimmel quotes Donald Mrozeck's book Sport and the American Mentality: 1880-1910 and says that although baseball was originally a sport of the elite -- like many other sports -- it soon became a game played by and watched by lower-class men as well. Mrozeck's book talks about the development of sports in general (not just baseball) in America at the end of the 19th century. Mrozeck argues that sports came about as a form of physical regeneration to counteract the degenerative nature of factory/industrial work. Americans approached their recreational activities with all the same values that they approached other things (like work). Eventually, sports, and physical activity in general, became such a big phenomenon that it even supplanted religion as a major form of catharsis. Additionally, sports could be undertaken by anyone, not just the ultra rich.
2. Kimmel quotes William McKeever's Training the Boy when he talks about how the playing of baseball is necessary in the development of a boy. This quote interested me because it shows how as early as 1913, sports had been an integral part of the American childhood and that this idea that Kimmel talks about seems to be the origin of the phenomenon of every parent these days signing their children up to play AYSO soccer or Little League baseball at some point in their lives -- no matter how incompetent they might be at sports or how competent they might be at other, non-athletic things.
3. (I think all the things Kimmel quotes are books so I just chose one of the books and read a review of it on Jstor rather than skimming the whole book...) Kimmel quotes Donald Mrozeck's book Sport and the American Mentality: 1880-1910 and says that although baseball was originally a sport of the elite -- like many other sports -- it soon became a game played by and watched by lower-class men as well. Mrozeck's book talks about the development of sports in general (not just baseball) in America at the end of the 19th century. Mrozeck argues that sports came about as a form of physical regeneration to counteract the degenerative nature of factory/industrial work. Americans approached their recreational activities with all the same values that they approached other things (like work). Eventually, sports, and physical activity in general, became such a big phenomenon that it even supplanted religion as a major form of catharsis. Additionally, sports could be undertaken by anyone, not just the ultra rich.
Monday, March 23, 2009
3 Citations (Cronon)
1. Cronon uses William Wordsworth’s autobiographical poem "The Prelude" to illustrate the previous definition of wilderness. This poem exemplifies terror in the face of the divine sense of nature. Cronin uses this poem to trace the changing definitions of wilderness over time in order to eventually set up the current ideology of wilderness, and then critique it.
2. Cronon uses journalist Bill McKibben’s book "The End of Nature" as a tool: he introduces it merely to criticize it, and thus furthers his own argument. McKibben, an environmentalist focused very much on global warming, published his work "The End of Nature" in 1989. This book is often argued to be one of the first books available to the general audience about climate change. In this book, McKibben argues that humans will eventually kill nature because the human and the natural cannot coexist. In a passage discussing the greenhouse effect at another point in the book, McKibben writes, “We have built a greenhouse, a human creation where there once bloomed a sweet and wild garden” (78). McKibben thus argues that human impact directly contrasts this “sweet and wild garden”, or ‘true nature’. This idea of ‘true nature’, which separates the human and non-human and essentially makes nature the ‘other’, is the very argument Cronon critiques. Cronon argues that nature should not be viewed as this pristine “sweet and wild garden”, something that should not be touched by human activity. Instead, his main argument is that humans are just as much a part of nature as this garden, and our ideology which separates ourselves from nature is inherently limiting. Through the use of McKibben’s portrayal of nature as an ‘other’, Cronon reveals how this can only be the case if we view nature as solely nature if it kept pristine. He therefore argues that the natural is inherently part of human life, and not as separate as our current Western ideology argues.
3. Cronon uses historian and environmentalist Wallace Stegner’s exploration of wilderness in order to help convey his final message that we need to acknowledge that we are a part of nature and then decide what impact we should have on it. Stegner writes that “we are the most dangerous species of life on the planet”, meaning we as humans have a large responsibility because we can impact our environment so significantly. Cronon essentially uses this to feed into his argument that we need to find the appropriate balance between our human creation and the nature that lives within us.
2. Cronon uses journalist Bill McKibben’s book "The End of Nature" as a tool: he introduces it merely to criticize it, and thus furthers his own argument. McKibben, an environmentalist focused very much on global warming, published his work "The End of Nature" in 1989. This book is often argued to be one of the first books available to the general audience about climate change. In this book, McKibben argues that humans will eventually kill nature because the human and the natural cannot coexist. In a passage discussing the greenhouse effect at another point in the book, McKibben writes, “We have built a greenhouse, a human creation where there once bloomed a sweet and wild garden” (78). McKibben thus argues that human impact directly contrasts this “sweet and wild garden”, or ‘true nature’. This idea of ‘true nature’, which separates the human and non-human and essentially makes nature the ‘other’, is the very argument Cronon critiques. Cronon argues that nature should not be viewed as this pristine “sweet and wild garden”, something that should not be touched by human activity. Instead, his main argument is that humans are just as much a part of nature as this garden, and our ideology which separates ourselves from nature is inherently limiting. Through the use of McKibben’s portrayal of nature as an ‘other’, Cronon reveals how this can only be the case if we view nature as solely nature if it kept pristine. He therefore argues that the natural is inherently part of human life, and not as separate as our current Western ideology argues.
3. Cronon uses historian and environmentalist Wallace Stegner’s exploration of wilderness in order to help convey his final message that we need to acknowledge that we are a part of nature and then decide what impact we should have on it. Stegner writes that “we are the most dangerous species of life on the planet”, meaning we as humans have a large responsibility because we can impact our environment so significantly. Cronon essentially uses this to feed into his argument that we need to find the appropriate balance between our human creation and the nature that lives within us.
Three Citations for Robbins
1. Robbins' cites Antonio Gramsci's idea of the "national-popular". In Robbins' own words, this is "an imperfect and historically determined version of common sense...that links the thoughts and feelings of ordinary people to the fate of others in a larger collectivity" (86). Robbins says that the only way for an international antiglobalization movement to emerge is for there to be a moment of consciousness experienced by an ethically-aware consumer. Robbins therefore proposes "the international-popular" (86). This is interesting because it means getting consumers involved in events that are physically and mentally extremely far removed from themselves, so inciting interest is extremely difficult, however necessary for the international antiglobalization movement.
2. Dana Frank's novel Buy American: The Untold Story of Economic Nationalism is cited by Robbins because it provides the example of an American consumer who is upset that she cannot buy any goods that were made in the USA, therefore American workers were losing their jobs. This interests me because of the nationalism and anti-foreign sentiments that are paired with it. As Robbins says, these feelings usually lead to action, but of a counter-productive nationalist kind, like destroying Toyotas or lobbying Congress not to do trade with China. I guess my interest is rather a critique, as in, why do people think like that? Why are they so misguided?
3. Naomi Klein's book No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies is about how brands have turned corporate and stomped on people in their path. Her main claims include that brands went from being "friendly faces" to "selling lifestyles". The marketing of the brand name became more important than the quality of the product itself. Also, brands like Wal-Mart and Starbucks give consumers virtually no choice when they take over prices or regions. Her other claim is that the jobs moved to foreign countries where there are different working conditions and usually fewer labor laws causes a lack of manufacturing jobs in the USA, which makes an influx of jobs to the service sector. Klein then goes into detail about various movements aimed at putting an end to sweatshop labor. These claims are made by using various multi-national companies as examples, and citing their influence on consumers and the economy. Its relation to "The Sweatshop Sublime" is in its main argument, that sweatshop labor is bad and alternatives must be found. This book was interesting to me because it provides concrete examples, like Starbucks, Wal-Mart, Nike, that manipulate consumers and labor laws through globalization. In addition it talks about how brands target younger and younger audiences every year through ad campaigns that sell "lifestyles", and I've noticed how I'm a victim to that!
THREE CITATION ASSIGNMENT
1. In the very first paragraph, Cronon cites a statement made by Henry David Thoreau. It seems the reference is a rather important one. For one, it appears at the very beginning of the essay "The Trouble With Wilderness." This is one of the first pieces of information Cronon presents to his reader, so he must see it as important. Secondly, Cronon cites Thoreau on multiple other occasions throughout the paper (for example on p.85 and p.89 as well). Cronon takes a lot of time and though in refuting Thoreau's statement that "'In Wildness is the preservation of the World.'" Rather, in Cronon's opinion, wilderness is itself a human creation, not at all distinct or separate from the human world.
2. Cronon also cites lines written by William Wordsworth in his autobiographical poem The Prelude describing his ascent of the Alps and his travels across the Simplon pass. The fact that Cronon takes the space to directly quote eighteen lines from Wordsworth shows the importance he believes the lines have in showing the emotion evoked from a sublime landscape. According to Cronon, what Wordsworth describes is "nothing less than a religious experience" (89).
3. However, it seems the development of Cronon's own thesis is most influenced by the words of Earth First! founder Dave Foreman. Cronon explores the "problematic consequences" that arise from Foreman's vision of wilderness as the "ultimate hunter-gatherer alternative to civilization" in order to develop his own theory on the coexistence of the "human" and the "nonhuman" (101). Cronon finds fault in Foreman's emphasis on preserving wilderness, emphasizing issues that affect the native diversity as opposed to issues that affect humans more directly, for Cronon develops this concept of "a middle ground" which incorporates the dualism of wilderness, both the "human" and "nonhuman" aspects together (103).
In his essay "Rewilding North America," Dave Foreman explores the challenge to protect what he refers to as an "enduring resource of wilderness." He recognizes protected areas such as national parks, wilderness areas and national wildlife refuges as being the best way to "safeguard species and habitat." The main purpose of essay is to present "both a vision and a strategy to reconnect, restore, and rewild Four Continental MegaLinkages that will tie North America ecosystems together for wide-ranging species and ecological processes, and to accommodate climate change." The article provides historical facts and interpretations of how humans have caused extinctions and what must now be done to prevent more extinctions from happening in the future, of how we as humans can be more effective in restoring and preserving the diversity of life. However, Cronon finds fault in Foreman's idea of native diversity and the human world as being entirely separate from one another. As Cronon states, "it makes wilderness the locus for an epic struggle between malign civilization and benign nature, compared with which all other social, political, and moral concerns seem trivial" (101). By exploring the "problematic consequences" that develop from this vision, a vision viewing the relationship between the "human" and "nonhuman" world of wilderness as a dichotomous one, Cronon is able to develop and articulate his own vision, what he defines as "a middle ground" (103).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)