A Romantic Perspective on the Adirondacks

As humans, we have a primal desire to domesticate things and exert our control. That’s why Murray writes about his senseless conquest of the loon, shooting it if only to show that he can, and why Murray recounts his experience “running the rapids,” as a display of how he can manage and control even the most chaotic in nature. This brings up the irony pointed out by Schneider, as he interprets Cole's Course of Empire:

“The irony is obvious; it is a grand achievement to conquer wilderness and build a civilization, perhaps the greatest achievement human beings can muster. But those who remain closest to the land are always the stronger. The arc of civilization leads inevitably to corruption and defeat (Schneider 166).”

According to Schneider and other romantics, someone like Murray falls victim to the fallacy that to succeed means to conquer. In reality, success comes with understanding that you need not conquer the land, but rather be a servant of the land. Those close to the wilderness, like the traditional Adirondack tour guides, were stronger in mind for knowing that they were meant to be servants of the land, not owners. This brings up another great quote from Joel T. Headley, writing about his view from the top of Mount Marcy:

“God appears to have wrought in these old mountains with His highest power, and designed to leave a symbol of His omnipotence. Man is nothing here, his very shouts die on his lips (Schneider 163).”

Being in the Adirondacks and close to wilderness gives one an appreciation for how powerful nature really is. It can lead you to adopt the romantic worldview – that prosperity comes with understanding your subservience in nature, that the world does not revolve around the human species. Only then can you be in perpetual awe of the land before you and see meaning in the mountains.

Selfish or Selfless

In this past reading Schneider includes comments from Kirschenbaum, an architectural preservationist, about the development and value of the Adirondack camps. He introduces a nostalgic view of the Adirondack history and tradition embodied by these structures as well as the concept of continuity. The Lichfield castle exemplified his point perfectly in terms of a fierce attachment to what you grew up with. They invest so many resources into preserving things "the way they remember them..." (280). Even the green water bottle sitting on my desk from the Lichfield Estate reads "Avoiding progress for more than 120 years." I find these concepts of continuity and nostalgia to be a bit contradictory. There can be value in these concepts/feelings as they provide a means for strengthening social bonds but in the case of the Adirondacks they seem to cloud logic and warp motivation. Most if not all humans reminisce and often feel the need to preserve things as they once were and it seems that the families, who own camps, writing letters about the preservation of the park and resisting of development are being more selfish than selfless. At one point or another any group of settlers whether it be the fur traders or vacationers had an impact and changed the face of the park. Obviously trying to avoid further development is not a terrible idea but many who argue for the cause are guilty of perpetuating the same development they are condemning. In this sense breaking the cycle of development in favor of preservation is very difficult if not impossible. I am still grappling with the value of the Adirondack camps in terms of heritage and hope to discuss this and possibly the symbol of Poetry in Motion in class.

The wealthy in the Adirondacks

 While reading chapters 21-23 in Schneider’s book I was really surprised at the number of wealthy people that were attracted to the Adirondacks, and who decided to build great camps there.  I can understand traveling to the Adirondacks to relax in the wilderness by escaping the ‘evils’ and dirtiness of the city but it seems kind of strange to me to bring all of your luxuries and expensive amenities with you.  I thought the whole point of getting back to nature was to get away from all of the distractions of your usual modern amenities.

When I think about the visiting or experiencing wilderness, I think about hiking in a public place, camping in tent, and being low maintenance.  These millionaires obviously had different ideas; they viewed wilderness as something they could buy and enjoy while still enjoying all of the luxuries they have in the city.  They probably would never even imagine going to the Adirondacks if it meant that they had to tough it and be uncomfortable.  This has made me reflect on how people from different social backgrounds experience wilderness in different ways and that there is no correct way to experience wilderness. Both wealthy and poor can both obtain the same benefits and happiness from being in nature.

Great Camps: Another Adirondack Paradox

        I have always found the moniker 'Great Camp' a little odd. In my mind, the word 'camp' is inextricably associated with tents, cooking on a camp stove, and waking up with the sun. As such, it seemed strange the huge compounds built by millionaires in the Adirondacks, such as Litchfield Castle, could also be called a 'camp.' A.L. Donaldson sums up this sentiment perfectly when he said "if ever an exact little word gradually went to seed and ran wild, not only in a wilderness of mountains, but in a wilderness of meanings, it is this one. If you have spent the night in a guide's tent, or a lean-to built of slabs and bark, you have lodged in a 'camp.' If you chance to know a millionaire, you may be housed in a cobblestone castle, tread on Persian rugs, bathe in a marble tub, and retire by electric light-and still your host my call his mountain home a 'camp'" (Schneider 242). After reading about the incredible luxury of William West Durant's Great Camps-Pine Knot, Uncas, and Sagamore (pictured below)- this juxtaposition of the word's definitions became even more striking.

         As if the expense of the compounds themselves wasn't striking enough, owners often had railroad lines built nearly to their camp's door! This presents another image at odds with my idea of a camp, one you set up after having trekked to the required location, carrying your supplies. The extreme permanency of these great camps belays that image. I suppose this duplicity presents another Adirondack paradox. The park was simultaneously host to both forms of 'camp.' If there is any intersection between the two, it is in their image as rustic places in which one could escape to the wilderness.

Present-Day Adirondack Guides

The reading for tomorrow's class emphasized the importance of guides in Adirondack history and early tourism, so I decided to do a little research and find out what role guides play in the present day park. As the beginning of Schneider suggests, most guides today are much more specialized in a specific sport than they were in the past. The NYSOGA (New York State Outdoor Guide Association) is definitely not the list of great hunters with class and strength that Murray gave us. Instead, NYSOGA features multiple specialized guides or groups of guides that all possess knowledge and experience in a specific outdoor sport. The "Guides by Activities" tab on the NYSOGA website lists 29 outdoor activities that a tourist can find a guide for (everything from back packing, to surf fishing, to youth groups). However, what struck me as the main difference between today's guides and those of the past is that there is a legal dictate on being a guide. In New York State, a hunting guide needs a hunting license and a guide license, a fishing guide needs a fishing license and a guide license. Additionally, every guide boat needs a licensed boat driver and a marine permit. Maybe it's just me, but all the technicalities and regulations leave me with a much less romantic conception of today's guide then those from the past. 

Homework Mash-up

This semester, I resumed my work with a psychology professor on his research. This break provided me with a larger amount of time to get ahead on this, so I have spent more time than usual coding autobiographical narratives that describe a stressful event in peoples’ lives. Upon coding dozens of these, I became curious as to how environmental writing would fit into this framework. For each fragment of the narratives, I am responsible for assigning it with a number based on what type of information it is. This allows the frequency of evaluative or interpretive information to be measured and compared across different types of participants. So in our atlas for example, would “factual” information actually fall under these subjective categories more often than not?

p. 245 – Is acid rain still a problem?

Yes it is. 3

Its effects are subtle, 3

but, as we are learning, 4

cumulative and persistent. 5

The Clean Air Act has decreased sulfate pollution 3

but has done very little to change nitrate pollution. 5

 Average lake and stream pHs have increased slightly, 5

But the rain is still very acid, 5

And our streams and lakes are still subject to the highly acid, 5

Nitrate-dominated episodes 5

That kill fish. 3

Many forest soils are acidified 3

And nutrient-depleted. 5

They will recover eventually, 5

But recovery may take hundreds of years 5

And may not begin 5

While there are continuing inputs of acid. 3

5 : 58.8%  non-5 : 41.2 %

I won’t get into the specifics of the coding, but basically the 5’s are given for evaluative/interpretive information. These might include dramatizations or hypothetical situations. As you can see from the passage above, a larger portion of the passage falls under this interpretive category than the other codings (which might include actions, background, or descriptions). Interestingly enough, it appears that even one of the more strictly fact-based texts we have been reading has a significantly persuasive voice. However, I don’t necessarily believe that this is a weakness. If anything, I’m relieved that environmental writing produced these results. If the text wasn’t written in a way that influenced its readers, no one would be compelled to do anything about the facts being presented to them.

Much ado/what to do about global warming

In class last Wednesday, we had a heated discussion about global warming (sorry, yes, that pun was intended...). 

As Janelle pointed out, our conversation became sort of nihilistic and depressing toward the end. It began to feel like there was absolutely nothing to be done about climate change—that it will happen and our world will simply fade away with the glaciers. Now, this might be the reality—I can't see the future and I have to admit that it is possible that the human race will take a huge hit due to global warming. However, there are solutions! And that's at least a little reassuring. 

We discussed a couple topics that might have been new to some people… or at the very least, they were fuzzy to me personally. These topics including policies that could reduce carbon emissions, such as a carbon cap and trade program and/or a carbon tax. Meg mentioned and explained both of these in her presentation, but for anyone who needs a quick recap, here you go (pun not intended):

In general, both programs are market-based policies that seek to manage carbon emissions economically, rather than socially (appealing to people’s moral codes/ethics, and all that).

These programs “put a price on carbon” so that it is in a company’s interest to reduce their emissions. Also, you might find this slightly reassuring: although the US federal government has not yet enforced a national policy, several states have already implemented regional programs.

Carbon Cap & Trade:

In short, there would be a national limit to carbon emissions. Individual firms/corporations would be allowed a certain amount of carbon emissions (and potentially other gas limits such as a NO₂ and SO₂, both of which contribute to acid rain). Firms that effectively limit their emissions could sell their excess allowance to other firms. Thus, carbon emissions would become a commodity. The policy has worked in other countries. The EU has had a cap and trade system since 2005!

Carbon Tax

For carbon taxation, rather than specifying the amount of carbon that firms can collectively emit, it specifies the price via tax. With a cap and trade program, the price of carbon emissions would vary depending on how challenging it is for firms to keep emissions in check. With a tax, the price would be set and all firms would pay the same amount per unit of emitted gas. 

For anyone who cares to read more about these two policies/who might be interested in a nice compare/contrast, here’s a a good link

Also, some EASY ways for you to help reduce your own carbon footprint:

Disclaimer: yes, it can feel silly to take shorter showers when mega-corporations in distant countries appear to be the real carbon culprits, but a penny saved is a penny earned… or something like that.

à Think about your food! According to the EPA, an estimated 13% of US carbon emissions result from the production and transport of food. Moral of the story: buy local (harkening back to one of our first class themes). Also, try to eat less red meat and dairy.

à Reuse and recycle! Who hasn’t heard of this before? But in all seriousness, 29% of US carbon emissions result from the “extraction of goods” (which basically means the extraction of raw materials and the subsequent manufacture of consumer goods, such as the paper cups we have in commons). For the love of the Adirondacks, invest in a thermos/mug/Nalgene, and use it!

à Turn off the lights! Electricity is not as a clean a resource as you think, because much of our electricity results from burning coal, which emits a colossal amount of CO₂.

à Take the stairs! It saves electricity and you tone your quads #DoubleWin.

à Yes! An excuse to do less laundry! Laundry machines use a lot of energy, so only use them when you’ve got full loads. Also, use the “Colors” cycle, because the water isn’t quite as hot.

à Take shorter showers with colder water. Similar to the laundry dilemma, heating water takes a lot of energy. Also, fun fact: cold water is better for your hair.

Interested in other ways to improve your carbon footprint? Read this this and this!

Anyway… I intended to talk less about carbon emissions and more about today’s reading (Adirondack camps and railroads), but alas, I got carried away. My main thoughts on the reading, however, is that Adirondack vacation culture appears to be very polarized by wealth, and has themes of elitism and racial/ethnic/economic discrimination that might continue today. Does anyone with a little more contemporary Adirondack knowledge know if this trend is still prominent today? Feel free to comment below/enlighten me.