Member-only story
On nature
Lately I have become interested in the variety of conceptions of nature. When I think of nature, two different kinds of images come to mind. On the one hand, there are the images in the news that show us plastic filled oceans, burning forests, and severe storms. On the other hand, there are all the social media pictures of sunsets, sandy beaches, and flowers. One type of image shows something that we destroy and something we should be afraid of. The other type of image presents something soothing, pretty, decorative.
In June 2019, I was invited to speak the annual conference of ASLE, Association for the Study of Literature and Environment, at UC Davis, California. I heard an interesting talk by Ursula K. Heise on Planet of Cities: Multispecies Environments and Narrative Futures. Nature seems to adapt with the development of urban planning.
In the 17th Century, cities were seen as the opposite of nature. Nature had to feed the inhabitants the city; it was seen as the antipode of the city. Nature was contained outside the city gates.
In the 18/19th Century, Romantic conceptions of nature came on the scene. Romantics promoted nature as truthful and soothing while city inhabitants began to miss nature. Urban planners reacted and integrated parks and gardens into the urban layout. Nature became a controlled part of the city, designed for human entertainment and recreation.
