Final Reading Place Blog

Essentially, my groups question was: What is nature to you, and how do you experience it? In our presentation, we read the stories of the three group members, all of whom have a different opinion on what nature means to them, and how they experience it. There is no right or wrong answer to this question, only perspective.

Ever since I can remember, I have been hunting and fishing out at my Dads farm. The first time I shot a gun was when I was five years old, and my first kill followed shortly after. The farm is out near Kensington Minnesota, just a thirty minute drive from Alexandria. The property itself is quiet rural, with a river, two new ponds and an abundance of wildlife ranging from waterfowl to larger mammals. For me, the farm is the definition of nature. What I have found in this project, and through conversations with my fellow classmates, is that my relationship to nature is not at all like theirs. To some, hunting and fishing is considered barbaric and unnecessary, they simply cannot understand the lifestyle. Therefore, to many, I am considered an enemy of nature. However, this could not be further from the truth. I do not live to pull the trigger, but I live in a way that respects and enhances the future of the nature I use. My stories have an underlying theme of respect for the nature. I consider this my greatest contribution to this final group project. So many people that I know fail to realize the admiration hunters like me really have for the natural world. Perhaps my stories will show them the true lifestyle behind my perception of nature.

 I read an article in the Star Tribune Newspaper about the surge in sales of ammunition and hunting licenses. What many people don’t understand is that the very animals that are being hunted are also being saved by the same hunters. Money from hunting licenses and the sale of ammunition goes directly to funding my kind of nature; expanding duck breeding grounds, planting trees for turkeys to roost in and deer to browse under and much more.  My second strongest connection to nature is through the purchase of items that fund wildlife conservation.

It’s pretty incredible how hunters like me, have brought species back from the brink of extinction. Wood ducks used to be so rare in the 1950’s that if one was killed, there would be a newspaper article on the entire story. Now, thanks to hunters who care about the future of nature like me, the species is almost as abundant as the mallard.

While some see my relationship with nature as barbaric or even evil, they simply do not understand the true connection I have with nature. If I were to close my eyes and think of nature, the river on my farm would appear, the deer, turkeys and pheasants would be right there as well. My view of nature is neither right nor wrong, it is just mine.

Overall, I would say my role in this project was one of a moderator, who collected all the ideas and sorted them into a plan. No annotations were done because it didn’t really fit our project.

One thing I would have changed would be to request that the instructions be clearer sooner.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/256843211.html

Arrogance Killed McCandless

Krakauer attempts to conclude that Mr. McCandless’ death was a result of ignorance rather than arrogance. However conclusive this article may be, I am not convinced that ignorance of the natural world was the final nail in the coffin of this twenty four year old young man. Krakauer compiles a summary of extensive research of Chris’s diet and final days on earth. It was originally hypothesized that Chris perished due to a lack of caloric consumption, as he struggled to live off of small animals and plants.

Wild-potato seeds was the majority of his diet. These seeds contain ODAP, which essentially results in irreversible paralysis of the body, beginning with the legs. According to Chris’s diary, these seeds made him too weak to gather food. What can be hypothesized from this new information on wild-potato is that Chris did not die due to a lack of food in the area, but rather his ability to move deteriorated so quickly that he could not gather the food.

I have trouble accepting that Mr. McCandless perished out of ignorance rather than arrogance as Krakauer theorized in his article. Obviously, Chris ignorantly consumed toxic plants which lead to his demise. However, his health was deteriorating prior to him consuming these seeds. To say that his death was simply a result of his lack of knowledge is untrue. He would not have gone hitchhiking to Alaska, also known as the “The Last Frontier”, because he thought he would die. This man was guided by a raging love of the unknown, and the thought of danger inspired him rather than deter him. I believe that based on this article and “Into the Wild”, Mr. McCandless’s mindset was one of complete arrogance and a lack of understanding of the real brutality of nature. He went ill prepared to face the true harshness of nature, because he was too arrogant. Sure, he may have been ignorant of the fact that a .22 caliber rifle may be as effective at killing a bear as politicians are good at coming up with real solutions. He may have been ignorant of many things, but he was aware of the danger, and decided to proceed with his adventure. His arrogance in believing that he could escape a grizzly bear by climbing the closest tree is just one of many examples of how out of touch with reality he appears. If I were to take one thing away from the tragic story of Chris McCandless in light of this new information, it would be that ignorance of arrogance is the real danger to humanity. 

Triptych

First Vine
Second Vine
Third Vine


I have often valued simplicity in life. Keeping things simple and relatable allows ideas to be better understood by the masses. When examining this assignment, I thought for a while about some fantastic and creative video ideas that would effectively categorize my relationship with nature. What I soon realized was that my philosophy of simplicity did not allow for too much creativity in a seven second video. I went with my gut instinct here, and decided to analyze three different relationships we humans have with nature. After much thought, three categories stuck out to me. Dependence, independence, and desire.

Firstly, we are dependent on nature for food, water and shelter. Every animal on the planet needs those three basic things, and humans are not exempt from this. However modified our food, shelter or water becomes; we still need to have them all for survival. I concluded that a shot of some fruit (with a sticker on it), a glass of water, and an apartment building, do a good job of showing our absolute dependence on nature, in one form or another. This is a relatively simplistic, but accurate portrayal of the most basic relationship between mankind and nature.

Secondly, we humans attempt to be independent from nature. Buildings our constructed to shield us from the forces of nature, we take comfort in being separate from nature as we sit contently in our artificial civilization. I decided that a shot of my house would be a good example of a shield in which I live, to escape from nature. This should not be confused with shelter, as shelter can take many forms, and an apartment building is just one of infinite possibilities.

Thirdly, our desire to experience nature within the confines of our civilization is at times over whelming. We find some sort of indescribable relief when we escape from our cities and houses to a form of nature, like a park or a wilderness. I find it interesting that every time I open my window I feel some sense of relief. I like to open my window to get closer to nature, to feel the difference in air temperature, to hear the birds and other animals. We desire nature, within our civilization. 

Lowell's Reading Place Blog: With Gorilla Gone...

As a high school student who has spent many boring hours reading trivial books assigned to me in English courses, I was glad to read Daniel Quinn’s novel, Ishmael. Right from the start, I realized with absolute certainty that Quinn’s story of a young man and an extraordinary gorilla offered a much more philosophical reading experience than the numerous novels I have had the displeasure of reading throughout my years at St. Paul Academy (no offense to the English Department). What really sold me on the tale, and frankly kept me craving more of it, was the practicality of its ambiguous messages. Ishmael teaches a young man about societal concepts that we humans are so in tune with that we find ourselves completely oblivious to them. But the lessons themselves offer a hope for the future of our planet, our species, and other inhabitants of this chunk of space we like to call earth- if you can discern these foggy ideas. One intimidating theory that the Gorilla struggles to prove to the narrator is that of a global prison, in which nearly every human being is trapped.

            I find the metaphorical style in which Ishmael describes the destructive nature of mankind to be fascinating. I have learned that efficient prisons function well because inmates generally occupy themselves with something. This alleviates the tremendous boredom inmates’ face. Ishmael explains that the global prison we inhabit is very real, and all the while we are blissfully unaware of such an elaborate system, simply because we are occupied, in other words, not bored. What are we- you and I- so busy with that we don’t notice the metaphorical chains around our ankles and wrists? After reading Ishmael’s explanation, and after I gave it some thought, the answer was clear. Humans are occupied with conquering anything that stands in the way of our goals. As ambiguous as that sounds, it’s the god honest truth. We are so caught up in bigger and better, that we neglect the needs or goals of other people, species, and climate. One such example: farmers bulldoze wildlife breeding grounds so that they can potentially pocket another $10,000 dollars a year from the corn they can plant. We do irreversible damage to the world in which we depend on, claiming it is “inevitable human progress”. I guess, that’s just the way it has to be. Right?

          

  Genesis outlines the nature of man, as destructive, disobedient; in summary, all of our decisions are drunk with personal gain. Most of the world’s human population craves their own societal growth, regardless of harmful consequences to people, or the natural world. We accept that humans are inherently destructive (why?), and that we will never change. I tend to agree that the destructive nature of man is never going to change, regardless of whatever may result from our behavior.  I guess that would make sense, humans were born kicking and screaming, and will die in a similar manner.    

In regards to the message I should walk away with after completing Ishmael, I am still lost. For in time, perhaps, the answer shall be clear, but for now, it seems that with Gorilla gone, there will NOT be hope for man. 

I vividly remember the moment the IPhone 4 was released. This combination of glass, metal and computer chips become more coveted than the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were carved. Everyone was suddenly unreasonably jealous of the people that possessed the newest and greatest phone of all time. In reality, there was good reason to be jealous, the technology was pretty incredible. Even though I never had that phone, it affected me unlike any other piece of similar technology. All of a sudden, the phone was the talk of the school, the national news, and pretty soon the world.  But that was several years ago.

Around a year after the IPhone 4 was released, came the IPhone 4S. I don’t remember that release nearly as well. I am convinced I don’t recall its existence very well because I never had one, and the frequency of new products like Apple’s phones made the release unexciting for me. For those who bought it, the 4S represented a new beginning, or that’s what Apple wanted them to believe. In reality,  most people who purchased the new phone couldn’t tell you five things that made it better than the IPhone 4. Logically, it makes sense that the buyers were not attracted to the phone because it was so much better than anything else; they sought the attention that a new piece of technology brings. In other words, materialism.

I am not against materialism at all. In fact, I believe it is a great thing. The drive to have more of anything allows people to have ambitions. Everyone at St. Paul Academy is becoming educated to make money, and then spend it on whatever they so desire. Materialism has so many benefits for everyone, like offering many forms of employment, thus generating more drive for newer better objects.

In short, while I may not care about the future of Apple’s products, possibly like an IPhone 8, I do care about maintaining a materialistic consumer base.