Critical Analysis Of Jack Turner

& # 8217 ; s The Abstract Wi Essay, Research Paper

Jack Turner s The Abstract Wild is a complex statement that discusses many issues andultimately defends the natural state in all of its signifiers. He opens the novel with a narrative narrative about atime when he explored the Maze in Utah and stumbled across ancient pictographs. Turner tellsthis narrative to depict what a truly wild and direct experience is. The thoughts of the aura, thaumaturgy, and abandon that places contain is introduced in this narrative. Turner had a spiritualconnection with the pictographs because of the power, beauty, and awe that they created withinhim upon their first cryptic contact. Turner ruined this direct experience by takingphotographs of the pictographs and speaking about them to several people. His 2nd visit to thepictographs was highly different- he had removed the wild connexion with the ancient muraland himself by publicising and speaking about them. This is Turner s chief point within the firstchapter. He believes that when we take a wild topographic point and exposure it, talk about it, publicize it, do maps of it, and topographic point it in a national park that we ruin the thaumaturgy, the aura, and the wildnessof that topographic point. Nature magazines, exposure, and movies all contribute to the remotion of our wildexperience with nature. It is the difference between sing the Grand Canyon after you haveseen it on Television and read about it in magazines, or ne’er holding heard of the topographic point and stumblingacross it on your ain during a hiking. Unfortunately, about every wild experience betweennature and the populace has been ruined by the media. Through Turner s narrative he begins to explainthe thought of the wild and its importance and necessity of human interaction with the natural state. The 2nd chapter contains two major thoughts. The first is Turner s defence andexplanation of the rightness of choler. Turner thinks that society wrongly taught thepeople to quash and fear their emotions. Turner finds cardinal emotions to be necessary to oursurvival, every bit good as the endurance of the natural state. He explains that choler occurs when we defendsomething we love or something we feel is sacred. He reminds us to care for our choler and usage itto fuel rebellion. Turner criticizes the cowardliness of modern conservationists in the followingpassage: The bravery and opposition shown by the Navajos at Big Mountain, by Polish workers, by inkinesss in South Africa, and, most inordinately, by Chinese pupils in Tiananmen Squaremakes much of the environmental protest in America seem shallow and uneffective incomparison ( 21 ) . Possibly if we knew and loved wild nature we could decently support andpreserve it. Possibly if we felt an intimate connexion with wild nature we would respond to thedamming of a river or the colza of an ancient wood as we would to person ravishing our kids. The 2nd major thought is Turner s statement of how modern adult male is far removed from wildnature. He describes how different nature is today compared with the mid-nineteenth centurynature of Thoreau and Muir. Government Torahs and organisations have badly degraded thewild nature. They seek to continue and take jobs within the wilderness ; nevertheless, theyonly take the natural state from nature. Zoos and national Parkss are hapless replacements for authenticwild nature. Government Torahs and organisations, such as national Parkss and the Forest Service, usage anthropocentric thoughts to pull off the wilderness. They use surveillance and control everyaspect of ecosystems, and therefore taking the procedure of wild nature from these ecosystems bymaking them dependent on human care. National Forests were created for worlds forrecreation and resource use. They are literally a concern, and merely seek to preservenature based on anthropocentric demands instead than geocentric demands. Turner claims that true wildnature does non be within national woods because they are invariably being tampered with andaltered by worlds. Wild nature, nevertheless, still exists in more distant wilderness countries. The 3rd chapter Turner returns to more narrative authorship and explains his regard andlove for mountain king of beastss. He expresses a relationship with mountain king of beastss similar to that of DougPeacock and his experience with Grizzly Bears. In chapter four, Economic Nature, Turner explains how John Locke and Adam Smithshaped the thoughts of our economic system and how that has affected society s perceptual experience of nature. Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, and Adams decided the early destiny of the American wildernessthrough Christian and Enlightenment moralss. They divided the land into a grid and sold it tomen. The land became the private belongings of work forces, who farmed and extracted resources as theypleased. Turner remarks on how linguistic communication has added to ecological ignorance. The Americanlanguage is based on thoughts of economic system, and as ecological jobs arise people use economicterms to depict nature. Therefore, ecological jobs are non decently cover with or evenunderstood because they are viewed and discussed in footings of economic system. The economic system viewsnature anthropocentrically. The resources of the land are to be used for the purpose ofimproving engineering and economic system. This job of linguistic communication is the ground why biologicalscientists and shallow ecologists fail to see the reply to ecological jobs. Turner raises thequestion that if ecological jobs are technology-based, so how could engineering solveecological jobs? Harmonizing to Turner, this is a job of linguistic communication and perceptual experience, andeventually transforms into a job of ethical motives and values. Another job with viewingthings economically is that everything must be commensurate. Economically, everything has avalue in money. There is a major job with sing a wood as 1000000s of dollars. Whenyou look at a wood as money you are wholly blind to its true importance as an ecosystem. The wild and the sacred of the wood is lost. The debasement of wild nature is a direct consequence ofour linguistic communication and economic perceptual experiences of the universe. Of class, the first measure toward findingsolutions to ecological jobs would be altering our linguistic communication. Turner offers the solutionthat if we refuse these three moves- the abstraction of things into resources, theircommensurability in translatable units, and the pick of money as the value of the units- andeconomic theory is useless ( 64 ) . The saving of the wild nature requires a deepergeocentric position of the universe. Chapter five delves into the Turner s cognition and experience of the white pelican. Small is known about these ancient birds because they avoid human contact. Turner is intriguedby their behaviour. He observes the white pelicans as basking their hazardous high dive flights. Hemakes the connexion between the curious behaviour of the white pelican and the nature of wildanimals. He inquiries their love for surging as a logical pick for enjoyment. Within thischapter Turner besides raises another large issue. He discusses the influence worlds have on wildanimals when they try to analyze them, and he explains some of the damaging effects that occurupon human intervention and control of wild animate beings and their home grounds. Turner seeks a higher, more idealistic, attack to larning about wild animate beings. He believes that if we sit softly intheir home ground they will come to us ( 71 ) . Turner displays an wild connexion, apprehension, andrespect for the white pelican. He thinks that the behaviour of the white pelican is another insightinto the thought of the natural state. The chief thought of chapter six is that one of the chief roots of the modern environmentalcrisis is the error of wilderness for abandon. It was Henry David Thoreau who was firstmistaken. Thoreau was an American innovator of the natural state. His most celebrated quotation mark is InWildness is the saving of the World. Unfortunately, that quotation mark is now severelymisconceived ; for we have replaced Wildness with wilderness. The word Wildness has negativeconnotations in today s society. Thoreau was depicting Wildness as a good virtuousness connectedwith freedom. Thoreau looked pass the jobs of wilderness and ecosystems. He wasn tconcerned with deforestation or biodiversity. Thoreau went deeper and found the root of theproblem was in Wildness. That was where the battle was. Thoreau s chief battle was thepreservation of wild and to transmigrate that virtuousness into humanity. Turner claims that ourwilderness is non really wild, and he gives four grounds for this. His first ground is that wildernessareas are excessively little. He believes that for a individual to truly see the natural state they need tospend a twosome of hebdomads populating out in nature. Unfortunately, most of our wilderness countries aretoo little. His 2nd ground is that wilderness countries lack wild marauders. Visitors to thesewilderness countries are ne’er threatened or even in the presence of marauders, and Turner thinks thatthe remotion of marauders from these countries is a bad thought. The marauders add a particular andnecessary dimension to the experience of the natural state. When adult male is in the presence of marauders herealizes that he has become portion of the web of life. Man experiences the natural state when he realizesthat he is a repast to a mountain king of beasts or bear. Bing a portion of the nutrient concatenation, or at least thepossibility is an of import portion of sing the natural state. Turner s 3rd ground is that thegovernment has tamed the natural state for recreational intents. This is done by puting marks, buildingtrails, and doing maps. All of these make a mediated experience for the adventurer and stealsthe abandon from there experience with nature. Returning to Turner s experience with thepictographs in chapter one, all of these marks and maps combine to take the factor of surprisefrom a wilderness country. An adventurer will ne’er see the natural state of detecting a waterfallor any surprise that nature has to offer because marks and maps ruin the experience. His fourthreason that our wilderness is non wild is that we made Torahs that allow our wilderness to beartificially controlled and managed. This is really unfortunate. Ecosystems are invariably beingaltered, marauders moved, and wildfires suppressed. Wild nature is independent and repair its ownproblems. Man s intervention is easy doing wilderness dependant of unreal influence.

Turner argues that touristry is destructive. Society wrongly views wilderness as a merriment topographic point forhuman diversion. We have become wilderness fun pigs. Worlds take an anthropocentric

viewtoward wilderness and only see it in terms of how much fun can I get out of this park; all thewhile, completely ignoring the human need for wild experience and intimate connection withnature. The result of our present perception is our emotional loss with wild nature. We havelost the understanding of how to connect with the wild within wilderness. Turner claims thatmost ecologists and conservationists turn to technology to help preserve the wilderness. Realistically, the solution lies in our past, our roots, not in the future of technology. The solutionlies within the knowledge of wild people, such as the native Americans whose cultures havebeen wiped out by American imperialism and western expansion. Turner does not find hope inthe solutions that deep ecologists have to offer either. He claims that there ideas are based onabstract philosophies of Spinoza and Whitehead that are too difficult for the public to understandand grasp. The solution must be more simple and natural than understanding complexphilosophies. Turner also doesn t believe that the effort of deep ecologists to change the idea ofthe world from a mechanical model to an organic model will convince the public. Turner writesthat reason will not make us respect and care for wild nature…Philosophical arguments,moralizing, aesthetics, political legislation, and abstract philosophies are notoriously incapableof compelling human behavior(88). Turner returns to his idea in the chapter two that we onlyexpress anger to violently defend something we love or feel is sacred. Ecological preservation isonly possible through a loving and intimate relationship between humans and wild nature. Ourlove of nature is supported by the art, literature, poetry, myth and lore of wild nature. It is thesethings that develop the language that our society so greatly lacks. Turner finds his solutionsmore from the ideas of Thoreau and Muir. He finds the preservation of the wild we mustestablish residency in the wilderness and gain knowledge of the wild. Only then might wedevelop the love of the wild that is necessary for its defense and preservation. In chapter seven, Turner discusses the importance of Doug Peacock. Turner commentson how unique Peacock s message about wildness is and how different it is from most natureliterature. Through Peacock s Grizzly Years and Faulkner s Big Two Hearted-River, Turnerdescribes the wild as a place of healing. He also explain some of the rituals, traditions, andexperiences that help restore the wild within humanity. Chapter eight offers more ideas on wildness and further discusses the defense of nature. Turner agrees with Thoreau and Gary Snyder that wildness is a quality, and it is closely linkedwith sacredness and autonomy. He continues to point out that modern civilization has recreatednature to meet the needs of the economy and society. We have created a wilderness hyperreality. Our wilderness areas are becoming more like theme parks. Turner explains that acreated environment is a neutered wild, and a wild to which we no longer live in vitalrelationship. Artificial influence on the wilderness is creating laboratories out of habitats. Hebelieves that conservationist and biodiversity theories are wrong in their principle. Again hefeels that the land should be left to fix and manage itself without human interference and control. Turner argues that the reason we impose human order on nonhuman orders is to gain prediction,control, and efficiency. Although Turner agrees that we cannot preserve wild habitats if theirinhabitants are not free, he does not believe that human existence within an ecosystem willdestroy its wildness. It is in essence human control that will destroy the wildness within anecosystem. Turner does not believe that the ideas of biodiversity or conservation biology willprovide solutions to the viability of wild nature and ecological problems because theirprescription calls for more control with ideas of resource management. In fact, he call theautonomy of the natural systems the skeleton in the closet of our conservation ethic(119). Turner finds that even radical environmentalists have faltered and are now beginning to agreewith biologists on solutions to ecological problems. He wisely notes that true change comesfrom alteration of structure, not the treatment of symptoms(115). According to Turner,scientific solutions only offer the latter type of treatment. Turner offers the leave it alone andlet nature sort it out method to achieve ecological preservation. He closes by offering hope thatWildness is still out there, and he encourages us to explore the Wild within ourselves. Although I agree with many of Turner s ideas in The Abstract Wild, I do believe thatsome of his ideas are in need of a logical critique. In chapter two and later in chapter six, Turnerbuilds up to the argument that maybe if we loved wild nature and lived intimately with it wemight be able to properly defend or preserve it. This is a full-proof argument. The key word inthat idea is love. Most people might think, Oh yeah, I love nature. In fact, I went mountainbiking in the Sierra last week. Unfortunately, this is not a statement that defends a powerfulemotion, such as love. Turner is correct in his argument that most people haven t experiencedand don t know wild nature. Nature is a place for humans to escape the confinements of thecity-life and indulge in recreational activities. It is not home. Humans don t feel a personal orloving connection with nature because they view it selfishly from an anthropocentric perception. Besides the selfish view of the recreational nature, most people carry with them Christian valuesand the ideas of Hamilton, Jefferson, Locke, and Smith that nature is property of man and aresource measured in economical terms. Thus, we may like nature, but we don t love nature. We don t treat nature like we treat our family and home, which brings us back to Turner s ideathat if we loved nature we could defend it with true passionate anger. Without thisunderstanding and personal connection with wild nature, humans will not be able to properlypreserve nature. I agree with his argument, but I don t think his solutions are realistic. Turner s solutionis for man to establish residency in wild nature, and gain knowledge and understanding of theland, the flora, and the fauna. Modern man should return to a primitive society and adopt theNative American way of life. Furthermore, it is the art, beauty, and myth of wild nature that willlead us back to wildness and our place in nature. His solution seems logical, but it is tooidealistic. Modern Western Civilization just simply will not succumb to these solutions underthe present control of the many facets of megatechnology. The vast majority of human mindsare controlled by corporations on a global scale that for economic purposes (or the love ofmoney) would prevent Turner s solution from becoming reality. Unfortunately, it seems thatonly a few enlightened individuals have the courage to commit to this way of life and understandthe wild. Logically, humans will only commit to major change once they are scared intosubmission, but only after the collapse of the environment. Turner is accurate in his claim that the solution of preserving the wild begins withlanguage. Language is the basis of how we express our ideas, morals, and values. Unfortunately, this is another area in which megatechnology has great control over. In yearspast, it was the courageous activity of counter-cultures, such as the Beats and the Hippies, thatstrayed from corporate and government control. These groups began to create their ownlanguage, form of communication, and perceptions of the world. Bound by similar goals andideas, these counter-cultures refused to conform to what was considered normality. They ignitedthe Civil Rights Movement and changed society. Although some were concerned withenvironmental issues, most of their battles were fought within the anthropocentric realm. Maybeour best fight to preserve wild nature lies in the hands of our youth. The environmental crisis isin need of a modern counter-culture. It needs a generation that could regain power throughautonomy, non-conformity, and a new language. Starting from where their predecessors ended,this new counter-culture would adopt a geocentric view and become the future of theenvironmental movement. Another major issue that Turner discusses is the effectiveness of different methods ofsolving ecological problems. I agree with Turner that conservation biology, biodiversity, andpreservation seem like short term answers to long term problems. These are science s quickremedies. At the root of this issue is the philosophical idea that if human technology and controlis ruining the environment then more human technology and control will not fix it. Trying tosolve ecological problems by artificial means will only add to the problem. No matter how youjustify it or disguise it, human technology and control of ecosystems disrupts the natural order inwhich the system operates. The environment was fine before we altered it with our pollutantsand behavior, so it will only begin to repair itself in the absence of human influence. This is alogical idea that MIT scientists can t seem to comprehend because they would rather indulge intheir playing God with nature. Turner believes that we should let nature sort it out. If we juststop conservation biology and the experiments in wilderness labs maybe nature can find its ownnatural way of returning to homeostasis. Whether or not I accept either solution boils down to the idea of the wild. The letnature sort it out solution is decaying fast. Philosopher and deep ecologist George Sessions,gave the environment twenty years before its collapse. The let nature sort it out solution isrunning out of time. At the same time, Turner can t predict the future of science and ecologicalresearch through the writings of Thoreau and Muir. There is always the undeniable, and yet,unpredictable possibility that science might produce an ecological cure based on chemicalcompounds. However, implementing chemical compounds into ecosystems and organismswon t preserve the wildness of an ecosystem. The possibility of a viable techno-wilderness isimaginable, but the wildness of the land, the flora, and the fauna will be lost forever and, I don tthink science can cure that.