The Hudson River School Response

The Hudson River School (1825-1880) was a school for artists who painted the wilderness of America and it was actually a government sponsored school. It was the first coherent school of American art and shaped the vision of American landscape. These were the first paintings that were attributed to America. These paintings were so important because they broadcasted the wilderness that America still had instead of Europe who had built up buildings all through their wilderness. Nobody believed that these paintings were real, the wilderness was too good to be true and in fact, the way the artists painted their scenes, it made people want to go to the places in the paintings because they looked so nice. Everyone who saw these paintings wanted to move west, they were an open gate for westward expansion.

            Thomas Cole- The Ox Bow (1836)

            I think the way that Cole portrayed nature in this painting is generally nice but he added in the rain clouds on the left side of the painting which made it look a little dark and scary, like the clouds are coming in to take over the happy scene on the right side of the picture. This connects with the HRS and their ideals because like I said, the right side of the picture looks happy and carefree so it looks live-able. Cole didn’t paint animals or any sense of danger except the weather but who sees that as a major threat?

            Asher Durand- Kindred Spirits (1849)

            In this picture, Durand portrays nature as an oasis. There is not a thing in this picture that gives me the feeling that there might be danger lurking in the woods. It doesn’t help that the men are in normal clothes of that time, not hunting and trapping clothes. This scene makes you think, wow, I could be out there too. It looks so nice, let’s go! This is the epitome of the ideals of the artists of the HRS because they painted the American landscape in an appealing way that made people want to visit that place.

Jasper Francis Cropsey- Autumn- On the Hudson River (1860)

            This picture is beautiful. Cropsey definitely painted this as an oasis as well. This picture is actually better than the last picture because it looks way more peaceful. With no people already there, it looks like something you could go to and have a great time at, make a nice home for yourself. There is no hint of danger. In fact you can’t even begin to imagine there could be danger there at all.  Once again, this definitely ties in with romanticizing the American west because they painted pictures that made everyone feel this way.  It made people want to move there, which they did.

            I connect the artists and paintings of the HRS to Polemic and Abbey’s shear love for the wildlife. Abbey loved his national park so much as he said here, “Could there be a more genuine testimonial to its beauty and integrity?” (pg. 386) I think that the artists tried to make everyone have that king of love for the wilderness by painting it in such a heavenly way. I think that they accomplished their goals since so many people wanted to move to these wild places after they viewed the art of the Hudson River School artists.

A Fable for Tomorrow

     A Fable for Tomorrow is about a town that at first is full of life and nature. There are farms everywhere with an abundance of animals on them. The hills were always green and there were always birds out, even in the winter. Then all of a sudden, things started to die, there was sickness throughout the town, the crops withered away, and the people could no longer hear the songs of the birds. This downfall was not due to witchcraft because it turns out the people had done this to themselves. Of course, this is something that the author, Rachel Carson, made up but she says, “Yet every one of these disasters has actually happened somewhere, and many real communities have already suffered a substantial number of them.” (pg. 371)

            Because I read her bio, I knew that one of the issues Rachel Carson focused on was DDT, a pesticide. I think Fable is about the pesticides but I also think it’s about something much bigger than that. I think she was trying to say that it will start with something like pesticides but then move into much bigger issues. For example, not recycling and polluting our planet will lead to not only small areas suffering but also larger areas, growing into the entire world that will suffer from our bad decisions. I think it’s funny that she lived so long ago and thought that we were killing our environment; I wonder what she would say now. I think she would be really appalled at the way we live life.

Reflect and Connect: Week 7

Connect:

Refelct:
     This week in class, we read and talked about an article called Polemic. The author, Edward Abby, rants about how we put roads through the natioanl parks attracting more motorized vehicles and how we should keep the vehicles out of the parks and use our bodies to get around them and see the parks instead. I agree with Abby because I have a personal connection that I can make to driving in a car through a national park.
    I have been to Yellow Stone three times and each time we drive through it to our destination but we never stop and get out of the car. I like the outdoors and I think it's pretty, but being stuck in a car for hours just driving by endless stretches of trees is really boring and that is not how I want to spend my "vacation". I would rather be out there, smelling the leaves and feeling the breeze and sun on my skin. I agree with Abby and say that you really have an experience in nature when you are in it. It's not the same thing to see it at a distance.

Polemic

Edward Abby grew up in Pennsylvania and wrote his own comic books as a kid. He served in the military after WWII and went to the University of New Mexico. He then wrote books about how much he loves the land.

            The general argument made by Edward Abby in his work Polemic: Industrial Tourism and the National Parks is that we should leave nature how it is. More specifically, Abby suggests that we should have parks that no motor vehicles can enter. He writes, “Get out of your motorized vehicle, get on your horse, mule, bicycle or feet, and come on in. Enjoy yourselves. This here park is for people.” (pg. 390) In this passage, Abby is saying that no matter how we decide to travel through a park, it shouldn’t be in a car. In conclusion, it is Abby’s belief that we should leave parks how they originally were and leave the cars out of it.

           
          In my view, Abby is right because we have turned parks into a sit in your car and travel

through it kind of thing were we really should be out experiencing it. For example, I have been to

Yellow Stone three times and I hated it each time because we just drove through it. I don’t think

spending hours in the car looking at miles of trees is a vacation. It was stupid and I’d rather be out

exploring than in the car. Although Abby might object that Yellow Stone is beautiful enough to look

at it from the car, I maintain that there is no where pretty enough to visit three times and not get

out of the car. Therefore, I conclude that we do need to get out of our cars and experience the

parks in their natural state like they were meant to be experienced.

Reflect and Connect: Week 6

Connect:

Reflect:
Above is a picture of my brother, Jake, with his first elk. My dad with a fish and his halibut, and my brother's first deer.
In class we were talking about hunting and how many of us do it and how many of us eat exotic meat. I don't hunt myself but obviously my brother does and my dad is an avid fisherman. I used to fish all of the time and I thought it was really fun and I like the feeling of catching something all on my own. I also liked that I was a catch and release kind of girl, which benefited both me and the fish. As I got older, I no longer liked fishing. I think it's boring all for a catch and release deal. I don't oppose hunting or fishing but I think you should do either for more than sport. You should use as much of the animal you can so that you don't waste anything. Your catch should be more than just a trophy on the wall. Jake has been on the deer hunt and the elk hunt. He got his first deer this year as well and he sends his catches into a meat plant to get them turned into hamburger, sausage, steaks, jerkey, and salami. I don't know how much of the animal that they use but I feel that we get a lot of meat back so I feel that it's ok that Jake is a hunter. Also, him and my dad have been to Alaska to fish for halibut and salmon and they alsways come back with a lot of fish. This is where I think we waste a lot of animal. We always have so much fish in our freezer and we don't eat it often. I don't even like fish! We give it away a lot so that's good. My entire point is that you should hunt an animal if you need to and take as much as you can from it because that is the way of the food chain and also you shouldn't hunt just for sport.

Wildlife in American Culture

Aldo Leopold is considered the father of wildlife ecology, growing up in Iowa and receiving a Master of Forestry from Yale University. He spent 19 years in the US forest service working in Wisconsin. He was then appointed Professor of Game Management in the Agricultural Economics Department at the University of Wisconsin.

            The general argument made by Aldo Leopold is that natural experiences are good for us. More specifically, Leopold suggests that we need reminders of our origins and dependency on the land. He writes, “First, there is a value in any experience, which reminds us of our distinctive national origins and evolution… Second, there is value in which reminds us of our dependency on the soil-plant-animal-man food chain. Third, the conquest of nature by machine has led to much unnecessary destruction of our resources.” (pg. 372) In this passage Leopold is suggesting that we need to go back to our original roots of living in nature for value and also, we are using up resources. In conclusion, it is Leopold’s belief that we need to be more in touch with nature.

            In my view, Leopold is right because I think being out in nature is nice and I think it has some calming effects but also makes you feel… more primal than you are. For example, I go camping a lot and I like when I can make a fire on my own without help from any other people or chemicals. I feel really accomplished and I feel like I could survive in the wilderness if I wanted to. In reality I probably couldn’t but it feels that way when you accomplish something in nature. Although Leopold might object that conquering nature in the sense of doing something on your own isn’t what he meant, I maintain that it still feels like I could go kill a deer with my bare hands if I needed to. Therefore, I conclude that we need to be more in touch with nature.

Reflect and Connect: Week 5

Connect:

Reflect:
We discussed Walden in class and we were talking about happiness and what it is and there was a debate on success equaling happiness or happiness equaling success. In my opinion, happiness is success. I feel this way because I can make a personal connection with "success is happiness". I come from a family where if you ask for something, you will get it. In my experience, I want something really bad and I ask for it, I then receive it, but then as time wears on, I no longer feel the need to play with or use my new toy. Over time the novelty of it wears off and I stop paying attention to it after a week maybe. The new object made me happy for a period of time, not for the rest of my life. It didn't better me as a person. I don't even use the new object again, it's just nice to say I have it. Having all of these things in my life makes me no happier. I am happiest with my friends, doing things that make me feel like I have a purpose. Objects don't do that for me. I have another connection I can make with objects because of a close friend. The same thing happens to her. She wants something really bad to the point where she thinks she NEEDS it so she buys it and then about a week later she stops using it and I never see or hear about it again. There are more important things in life than a fancy house or car. Happiness is success.