Interpreting The Eternal Value Of Wilderness Cultural Studies Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

- Interpreting the eternal value of wilderness will determine the lasting life of the land. The land interpretation must stand on the wheels of value rather than economic property and selfishness. The less knowledge humans have of the wild the more ignorance weakens the integrity of preserving it. People of all places of human development need the wilderness because it would be necessary to encourage the growth in the weakness of the city's heart and elasticize tension. There is the issue receiving one's own wilderness purpose and believing it can keep despite doubts from money.

Joy Williams and Peter Huber explore in summary the interpretation of values; together the wilderness is seen as worthy and contributable. Huber author of the essay, "How Cities Green the Planet" tells the reader a number of evidences of green activist fraud. By retelling the history of human aggregation and conglomeration into cities he explains the movement of farmers from their farms and population trends which are believed to decrease the amount of sprawl. Huber argues farms would cause the further population of cities. The essay entails an increase in innovations for work in the city from the outside periphery. This movement swaying that there is only a half story told by green activists of suburban sprawl from 90 million acres they claim. Huber argues these points boldly. Joy Williams also ascribed to understanding of the wilderness narrates the issues people are making headway on. Living in Florida where the land owned privately by her was waiting to sell. A buyer found her land and protected the investments and shared the love for the land. Formerly the privately owned land was being devaluated by extortion against her gender and against an acclaimed eccentric love for her land by realtors. Williams's refusing to be convinced of any error has her voice heard with clarity.

The essays of Joy Williams and Peter Huber have differing sense of environmental conscience. Huber arranges the details of environment without considering the cities' encroachment in a single location of remaining wilderness within itself. Williams unlike Huber describes experience living in Florida within the growing urban sprawl as encroaching upon something. Huber's essay does not entail the facts of environmental conscience which support protecting such a conscience. His essay strengthens wilderness quantity but not an understanding of it. Destroying farms and leaving the land to be taken back is not the pristine view it once was. The soil has been moved, the ground turned and threshed and the fences left. Huber believes having human population decreases into smaller vicinity like city allows the wilderness to somehow thrive. How can wilderness thrive being ripped up by four wheeling tourists and being reclaimed after being left from another human purpose? Like an aged old bench which has carved in it, "Man was here."

Thriving of nature depends upon the influence of life on its banks and to its shores. The land once used as sanctuary in human reservoirs is often the most beautiful and most marred by development. Williams, seeing development of metropolitan areas which consume the best, most interesting environments, was worth preserving and knew it was preferred before her. With the interest of new sprawls the danger was as city becoming "a concrete grave" where people like Huber settle down and bury wilderness as long as the civilization lasts. The wall stood to protect and sanctify the property Williams explores. "Ecosystem becomes land becomes parcel (Williams 97)." Like Leopold she has given thanks for the turtles which crawl into the shores of the beach. This adherence for pure nature comes closer to her own wilderness than Huber's suburbs. "The city, however, prefers to build with the three-dimensional resources steel and concrete (Huber 59)." An answer is not given to the question which is incentive for Huber, where does the third dimension come from? Ironically Williams's approach to protecting the Florida lagoon from development is the place where the third dimension of land use strikes innovation and admonishment. However the use of natural resources to the city does not destroy the trees and rare birds for a use that it is justifiable. In this sense Huber and Williams agree.

Wise and prudent as Huber is, communing in the wilderness is not entirely as Huber demonizes as he analyzes a curb of suburban progress with a "green activist ring." Instead of Huber's argument against leaving "the concrete jungle" and that "The city can't survive without its suburbs, which is where human capital finds refuge from the cities worst excesses and pathologies (Huber 62)." Humans can find refuge outside of the city, where communications are established. For example Moses led his people into the wilderness for an exodus from the city hubris and tyranny. It was important progress for the guidance of the people which were under the rule of a pharaoh and progress toward free religion. Huber claims intellectually that there is a point in human greed where a dense city is degrading but there is no inclusion to how it is built although the focus of the essay uses admirable words to make the city more desirable, Huber urges that no man would desire to go back into the rural country in a search of wealth, health and knowledge. For Huber does not say what will keep the city from being ignorant of the wilderness it relinquishes? What will make Williams have people hear her point of view? Or where will she find those people and how? The rapid growth of cities requires the unity of farmland and urbanization to cooperate and preserve the riches which he claims can spend more. The city cannot stand alone like Huber says, "And when all accounts are finally in, richer people invariably consume more of just about everything (Huber 60)." In comparison neither can one have the whole world and keep a sense of its usefulness for their "poorer cousins."

To preserve the environment is not exclusive to a hierarchy for the respect of any persons. Without using hierarchy the innovations men thousands of years ago brought back with them impartial ways to preserve life in the city. Moses and Jesus of Nazareth returned to bring back people with them multitudes exercising new laws and skills. They helped their poorer cousins by seeing promises which last longer than the doubts of money. Convincing a multitude of people with this flexibility also ensured the value of wilderness to many people without infringement from hierarchy, government and personal desires for generations of people who live in the wilderness and in the city. This merit of character kept the people with dignified conscience toward the wilderness. Likewise Williams draws conclusions with the private land by avoiding the devaluation of it.

Against the narrow space and commodity of owning private land, Huber mentions timely changes of economics and human resourcefulness. He speaks of using all the dimensions of the land to heal the wilderness and to commemorate the knowledge and grandeur of a healthy city. These innovations make the city strong indeed but it does not cohesively protect the wilderness; it only relocates people. Foiling Huber's technicality Williams outlasts the extortion of the realtor to sell. "With a lawyer I drew up a simple and enforceable document that realtors found so unnerving that they wouldn't show it right away to interested parties, preferring word wobble and expressions of good will (Williams 103)." The realtors doubted, why there was such a claim to the land's immediate health and beauty, and forthright wondered what was going on behind the wall. For her the wait paid off like the spectacle to them all. In contrast is the over-towering city the true desire for wealth and health? Deep mining and petroleum spills and deforesting are frequent disasters. Wars and famines brought to cities are taken with high demands with reluctance to dispose fools who teach youths not to provide. Knowledge of the wilderness is necessary to preventing these things, there are no taxes in it and no one can judge lightly of it to do evil.

Peter Huber argues the youths of farms actually go into the city and leave the farm and then it is the youths which see it crumble. The knowledge and wisdom of older generations reckoned to raising large families which understood blessing and cursing, is lost to young generations which heap an admonished culture of foolery. However the city grows wiser beyond tradition in preserving the wilderness as Huber says, using the concrete from the ground and the sand in its many dimensions but it does not solve the speedy anxiety reckoning a reproach with economics. Huber cannot entirely blame farmers for the loss of wilderness because of their large family's pursuit of economic problems and economic support. If it were not for the blindness of the market to environmental foolishness the city people would not profane its integrity and beauty. Some of the people in cities rather seek to destroy environmental conscience with a fear of wilderness devaluing it like Williams privately. There is no madness in going into the wilderness with strength and hope, with dignity. Rather in the wilderness people learn that there is sanctity, that they believe they receive what is their own. It is more madness to boil in a city like a frog which waits for riches for the coming of wars and famine generation upon generation, taxing and taxing. Science implemented with nature in the wilderness could not be more than what is least to observe for an important use of health taught in science classes. The bustle of cities make it invalid to believe you have received your own when people call others to war, tempt them, and steal from them.

It would be wiser to go into the wilderness, and even with the protection people have today, they do not need to be so fearful and ignorant. The knowledge of floods in deserts, the plants which you may or may not eat are known in purchasable books or can be learned from instructors. But these commodities are acquired in the wilderness, not another way. Wilderness goes beyond the commodities of culture, the commodities of intellectualism, but broadens the truth in its significance. People have for generations sought the inspiration of truth in it. Desert nomads, wise men, kingdoms, tribes, historians have all gone into it to seek what they could preserve, to bring back gifts of healing. It is too often these people are made light of for contempt with the vision being profaned, cowardly spat upon. Men like Theodore Roosevelt, who sought to envision the country as more than warlike but something clearer. These contributions do not make patronization of the wilderness but dignify the expression of the temple it is built to be. In this man learns that the wild is kept by nothing that he has but that it is trustworthy and wonderful. This adoption to wit allows people to see beyond politics and bloodlines, but is proven here and there, anywhere on Earth. With these interpretations will be the discontinuing of the torment of being lost in the wild, being lost from civilization and stranded alone as the survivor. From all this devaluing of private property and the contortion of wilderness into a curbed Huber's green city, these strafes still abound from highest man to lowest.

Words: 1,971