A Land Remembered Character Analysis

Photo by A Land Remembered: http://alandremembered.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ALandRememberedWeb.jpeg

Tobias MacIvey is the head of the MacIvey family. This family started off as being a poor family living in Florida, but then became wealthy and well-known for their real estate. Tobias is a 30 year old man who moves his family to Florida from Georgia before the beginning of the civil war. During his journeys, he becomes friends with Seminole Indians and a slave on the run. He seems to be a very caring and giving man in this book who has a lot of integrity. He relates a lot to the natural world and the environment in many ways. He builds a new house and rounds up cattle which are apart of the environment and takes care of them until he wants to sell them. During the book he becomes apart of the wilderness and he makes it an obligation to preserve it and the cattle. He probably did not even realize what he was doing was preserving the environment and nature. I think that he felt a sense of place more at the new house he built then the old house. When the old house burned down, it was a chance for him to start over and give his family a better life. Since he spent so much time taking care of the cattle and his home in the wilderness, I felt that he really loved it and felt a deep connection to it. This book goes on 3 generations of this family, so it depicts their struggles with the wilderness, so the next generation will know of this family will know of the strength and courage of their family and this will also inspire them to be great just like them. I personally feel that he left a legacy of courage and generosity. I picked this character because I felt he had traits that both I had and some other traits that I want to have. I am a caring and loving person and I felt because of that, I could relate to him.   

Opinions on EndGame by Michael Grunwald

I felt that the excerpt was pretty bland and boring. It did talk about the history of the Everglades and how the year 2000 was a very important year for it, but besides that it did not keep my interest. I do not know if it had to do with my exhaustion with the Everglades or the fact that I am 'Evergladed' out. It probably was because I read Marjory Douglas' The Nature of the Everglades already and in her excerpt, she stated everything there was to know about the Everglades. I did feel that when he wrote this, it was specifically written for people who are well-educated with the Everglades. "Senator Chafee had promised to hold a field hearing on the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan at the Naples conference, and Senator Smith agreed to respect his late predecessor's wishes." (Grunwald 79) I had absolutely no idea what he was talking about.

Photo by Nature: http://www.nature.org/cs/groups/webcontent/@web/@florida/documents/media/everglades.jpg

 In Marjory's reading, I found that she wrote it in such a beautiful way as if you were reading a book. While it was also a long excerpt, she was able to keep my attention. I have never been to the Everglades, but Marjory wrote so you can picture yourself there.  A lot of the terms that Grunwald used were not universal and by that I mean, not everyone would be able to understand his writing. The first section had a lot to do with the restoration, but besides that he completely lost me. Another example of this would be when he stated, "Defoor set up a meeting between Audubon activists and sugar growers at Paul Tudor Jones's estateon the Keys, and both sides agreed over stone crabs to support the governor's funding bill." (Endgame 80) I understand that this was kind of a history lesson, but no one said history had to be boring. His style of writing is not good in my opinion and a keeps throwing all these different people at us without really telling us who they are or their significance.

Photo by Cakex: http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/project/photos/Everglades_swamp.JPG

  As the new millennium dawned, the Everglades was not yet saved." (Grunwald 103) Maybe if he led with this sentence, the reading would have been more interesting, but I highly doubt it. If you want people to care about what you are writing, then you at least need to make the reading interesting or write it in a way that people have no other choice to care. While I am not all about the environment, Marjory made me want to be. You kind of fell in love with it because she was in love with it. This was the most  important lesson that I learned in Journalism and it has helped me to write very successful pieces. When you write, it is like an open canvas for a painter. You can spin what you write anyway you'd like and it can sound pretty interesting.

Response to The Nature of the Everglades by Marjory Stoneman Douglas

Photo by Captain Rich Smith: http://www.captainrichsmith.com/files/image/Everglades%20Fishing%20Backcountry.jpg

"There are no other Everglades in the World." (Douglas 104) Just by the opening of the excerpt, you can see the amount of appreciation and love Marjory has for the Everglades. She even goes as far as saying there is no other place in this world as beautiful as the Everglades. She then dives in to telling the history of the Everglades. I thought it was interesting that people thought of it as a fantasy or something that really was not there for the mere fact that they did not know what to call it. They did not know how to name something that contained many different forms of nature. When you look at it, it does kind of look like a beautiful fantasy. It is as if it is too beautiful to be real.

Photo by National Parks: http://rkd-cdn.nationalparks.org/sites/default/files/styles/park_page_image/public/everglades.jpg?itok=TEklBxAw

"So it is with the Everglades, which have that quality of long existence in their own nature." (Douglas 107) Douglas compares the Everglades to wholeness. When you think of it, they are. It was here long before humans came about and has been here for a long time. I am sure it has changed over time and looks different then how it used to look, but it is still whole. This adds to their beauty because it is an aged beauty. Just by looking at it, you get a sense of piece and tranquility. It has not been harmed by human hands and it sits quietly. The Everglades represent all nature because it contains a body of water, grass, and rocks, along with different species. It makes me think if we all preserved our environment, would it look this beautiful?


"Small or great jungles, they loom out of the brownness of the saw grass in humped solid shapes, like green whales and gray-green hangars and domes and green clouds on the horizon." (Douglas 128) When reading this excerpt, I felt like I was reading a book. There was so much detail and I was able to picture everything she was saying as if I was actually there. She used a lot of metaphors and imagery to show her love for the Everglades. It also shows why we should continue to conserve the Everglades. She is almost convincing the readers the best way she knows how as if to say 'Hello don't you see how beautiful this is?' Some people might think she was a little too descriptive instead of being more direct with it. She is so passionate about what she is telling is, that she thinks to break it down into 3 different sections, the grass, the rock, and the water.  

My Response to The Land Ethic (Excerpt from A Sand County Almanac) by Aldo Leopold

"This sounds simple: do we not already sing our love for and obligation to the land of the free and the home of the brave? Yes, but just what and whom do we love?" (Leopold 60) These questions really do make me think. I sing the national anthem with my country, but what is it that I love about my country so much. What is it that we all love about the country so much? After this question, he then uses a sarcastic tone and asks how can we love this planet so much if we are constantly hurting it.


Photo by.geograph.org.uk:http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/66/53/2665372_5526b37e.jpg  

We litter and we are constantly polluting our country, so we cannot possibly like it that much. Not only are we polluting our environment, but those beautiful animals that we also claim to love so much. How many of us actually take care of our environment or have actually contributed to it. Not many of us, but we sure do love our country. I do not think we love it that much. It just takes one person to take a stance and then others will follow, but what if we all took a stance. I do not think that people realize that if everyone contributed a little in the world, that actually means the whole world contributed and the whole world will become a much better place to live in.

Photo by Staticflickr.com:http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6118/6330286346_08642775ac_o.jpg

"The usual answer to this dilemma is 'more conservation education.'" (Leopold 63) Now that I have discussed how we should be helping the environment we love so much, I know that is impossible if we are not educated on it. How are we going to show something love that we know little about. If everyone was more educated on simple ways to help the environment and what actually happens to the environment when we do not do certain things, then I strongly feel we would be more proactive in doing so. We do not all realize that we are actually killing the environment and there will be no more environment if we continue. I am just as guilty of doing this as others, but I have made some changes over the years.

"We have no land ethic yet." (Leopold 65) He says this as if he has hope that we change and actually show love for our environment in action and not just by words. We are co-existing with the land, but do not seem to see the value of it and how much is contributes to our present and past developments. All of these had to do with the environment in some way. We are not educating everyone on this, so the value of it depreciates day by day. The environment has become the least of our worries and we continue to hurt it. Although, do not ever think that we will not say how much we love it. That is something that we will continue to do even though we are lying.  

 

 

My Response to Richard Louv's Nature-Deficit Disorder and the Restorative Environment

In the second paragraph of Louv's essay he talks about the decrease in Physical Education (P.E.) classes in school. I find this to be a huge problem that is only adding to the obesity of kids. I understand that children need to work harder in school and acquire higher test scores, but how about maybe extending school hours and adding just a class for standardized test practice. I remember when I went Beverly Hills High School in California, P.E. was a big deal. You had to run everday and we had fitness tests you had to pass throughout the semester. At the end of the semester, that is when you would have the big fitness test. We had 2 different instructors a semester, We played basketball, did weight training, swam in our olympic sized pool, did track, and danced. At the time, I did think this was  way too much work, but I was always fit and healthy so it definitely benefited me.

Photo By Wikipedia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Corta-Mato_Escolar_2008.jpg

If you make this mandatory for students and stress the importance, they will do the work. They might not want to, but they do not want to fail P.E. After a while, they will not mind doing the exercise. It is important that this starts when they are in elementary school. Kids love to play and have a good time. I have never heard a kid say that they do not want to play. This will keep them active and they will be a lot healthier, especially since they are not watching what they eat. This is  great way for them to burn off all those unwanted calories. What sense is there to study if you are overweight and lazy? This is what is going to happen and of course their test scores will decrease. If kids are running around and exercising, they will obtain way more energy and their test scores will probably be a lot higher since they have more energy to study.
In the "Resotrative Environment" section of the essay, it discusses how kids with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)feel more calm outside. They are not as stressed and act better after playing outside. This could be for many reasons. When you are a kid, there is so much to explore outside and so much you can do. You can builld something or even have a scavenger hunt.

Photo By Tnwildside: http://tnwildside.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NaHome_outdoor-play-13.jpg

Regardless, you will be totally occupied. Since one of the main problems with kids of ADD and ADHD is their ability to focus, playing outside might be the best therapy. They are focusing on playing without even realizing it. This can help them focus more in school and in other aspects of their lives. This can be a natural way to help improve their disorder without taking medication.
In the "Nature's Ridalin" secion, it discusses the benefits of nature to kids with these disorders. This might be a cure. No one knows for sure, but there are a lot of benefits of nature and these kids might even have a deep connection with it. It could even be a spiritual connection that some of us will never be able to understand. If we think about, the ADD or ADHD kid is the only one who can tell you how nature makes them feel.

Thoughts on David W. Orr's Love It or Lose It: The Coming Biophilia Revolution

I found David Orr to be heavily biased in his views of people and the environment. It seemed that he was trying to classiy everyone into a certain category when relating to biophobia, biophilia, and the environment in itself. However, he did make some valid points that we true and others that I would consider to be partially true. This is evident when he starts his essay talking about the filmaker Woody Allen. "Allen's aversion to nature, what can be called biophobia, is increasingly common among people     raised with television, Walkman radiso attached to their heads, and video games and living amidst shopping malls, freeways, and dense urban or suburban settings where nature is permitted tastefully, as decoration." (Orr 186)

Photo By Wikipedia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Annibale_Carracci_-_River_Landscape_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg

I feel this is a partially true statement. I am a victim of the materialistic world, but I love nature as well. I am a suburban and city kid who loves shopping and my electronic gadgets, but I also love going camping and bike riding. I am pretty sure there are other kids who are just the same. I am a tomboy at heart and love playing sports and being outside. It gives me a sense of peace and makes me feel like I am one with nature. According to Orr, my childhood should have made me one of those people who is scared of nature or uses it as decoration, but that is not at all true. I love long walks outside and hearing the trees ruffle up when the wind hits them and hearing the birds chirp; but you will also see me in the shopping mall buying a bunch of clothes I do not need or on my cell phone as if I am detached  from the world. I feel that it has a lot to do with the person and what they feel comfotable around and partially to do with where they grew up. Materialstic things do not neccessarily make you hate nature or not want to be around it. There are even many celebrities around the world who love nature and being outdoors even though they are very materialstic. You can be both.
I feel that he is 100 percent true when he states, "Biophilia is innate and a sign of menal and physical health." (Orr 187) I agree that people are a lot healthier when they are outside being active instead of sitting in the house all day. Some might not agree, but when you are playing in nature, you are exercising without even realizing it. Throughout my life, I have noticed that people who say they love the outdoors are always fit and healthy. I also feel that it is internally healthy for you to be outside. It is relaxing and you are more calm and at peace and not sitting in front of the tv for hours.

Photo by Kashmirin Focus: http://kashmirinfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/watching+television.jpg

What ends up happening, when you sit in front of the tv all day, is you start getting bored and then you start stuffing your face with all types of unhealthy foods. That is when the pounds sneak up on you. Nature is a good distraction from that because you are having fun and not sitting there in complete boredom.
"The attempt to encourage biophilia will not amount to much if we fail to decide to reshape these kinds of places so that we might become deeply rooted." (Orr 205) This is very true in many ways. People who did not grow up around nature are more likely to not have experienced nature. Not because they never wanted to, but simply for the mere fact that they were never given the oppurtunity to be around nature. If there were more programs or classes around schools that gave them this opportunity, they probably would find that they like it or even love it. There definitely can be a fear of the unknown, but hey, there is only one way to get over that fear right?