I found that most of the reading that came from this time period has been rather heavily romanticized. Most of the "use" of the Adirondacks at this point to non-residents had been as a rejuvenating place, one that both inspires and awes. I'm primarily thinking of Adirondack Murray's dramatic adventures and "health benefits" here, alongside a slew of similar pieces on Wilderness Writing. (Murray is also claimed as being the father of the Outdoor Movement, interesting side note) Emerson's writings and publications enter an objectively different realm, but one that still shares a thematic similarity to adventure writing, in terms of the Adirondacks having a profound and unique experience for a sort of ethereal reason. Thus, these readings can have an effect on a reader, but largely only if that reader can inhabit the same mindset as the writer. If not, the writing loses its effect.
Colvin's report offers us a completely different side of general public writing on the Adirondacks. While he does engage in a little bit of romantic tendencies, the majority of his writing is centered around facts, precedent and scientific theory. After reading Colvin's report, I can see why there was such an imperative to create a park. The report clearly backs up the claim that the Adirondacks region and those affected by it's waters and timber production will be threatened should no protective measures be taken. It treats the region as a down-to-earth, realistic place, which is very important, especially when considering the ultimate goal: mobilizing the legislators.
No comments:
Post a Comment