In the article "Telling Stories about Ecology", William Cronon commnents on the history of "the Plains' States" (included by Joel Garreau mostly in the "Breadbasket" region, but also in "the empty quarter"), zooming in the episode of "the Dust Bowl" in the 1930s and arguing that such a history can be told in basically two different plotlines: the progressive and the tragic. Answer to either:
- How do these plots differ in terms of protagonists, opponents, human-environment relations, and progress?
- What other environmntal-geographic-human interactions have we studied in this class that can be said to have two plots, and what are the consequences of following either?
In "Telling Stories about Ecology," William Cronon explains that the Dust Bowl can be told through two different ideas: progressive and tragic. In the progressive one, the heroes are settlers and scientists who tame the land, with nature as the opponent. Human-environment relations are about control and improvement, and progress is seen as positive and achievable. In the tragic plot, humans are the ones who caused the damage by ignoring nature’s limits. Nature is the victim, and progress leads to destruction this why these two plots shape how we understand environmental problems and what solutions we think are best.
ReplyDeleteIn the article Telling Stories About Ecology, William Cronon explains that people tell the story of the Dust Bowl in different ways. He says the story can be told as either a progressive plot or a tragic plot.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, in the progressive plot, people are the heroes because they fight nature and win. Cronon writes, “For Bonnifield, the dust storms of the 1930s were mainly a natural disaster. (…) Their success in that struggle was a triumph of individual and community spirit, nature made a mess, and human beings cleaned it up.” This means nature is the enemy, like the dry land and dust storms. Moreover, the farmers work hard and use machines to grow crops, and over time, they build towns and change the land.
Secondly, in the tragic plot, the story is very different because people are not heroes they cause the disaster. Cronon says, “Worster’s version differs dramatically. (…) The story of the Dust Bowl is less about the failures of nature than about the failures of human beings to accommodate themselves to nature.” This means nature suffers because of human actions. Indeed, the farmers used the land in the wrong way. They didn’t understand how dry and fragile it was and Their farming caused the soil to blow away.
So, the progressive plot says humans are strong and smart and the tragic plot says humans made big mistakes.
In William Cronon’s text “Telling Stories about Ecology”, he refers to two books on the same event: the long drought that affected the Great Plains during the 1930’s. Despite discussing the same event, both books offer a different plot and conclusion.
ReplyDeleteIn one of the books, Paul Bonnifield’s The Dust Bowl, the drought is simply a natural disaster. Nature is also used to prove the resourcefulness of Humans: nature makes a mess and “humans beings cleaned it up.” (page 251). However, in Donald Worster’s book Dust Bowl, nature is not at fault. The real tragedy here was the inability of humans to “accommodate themselves to nature” (page 251).
These two books represent how the same event can express itself in completely different narratives. Creating a narrative for historical events is important, as Cronon expresses “When we choose a plot to order our environmental histories, we give them a unity…” (page 252). In doing this, nature is no longer the main subject. Instead, Human values begin to guide the narrative.
Paul Bonnifield’s book focuses on progress and struggles against a harsh environment. It celebrates people’s resourcefulness and will to overcome the challenges caused by nature: “The landscape was difficult but ultimately benign for people who could learn to thrive upon it.” (page 255) On the other hand, Donald Worster admitted that “… the refusal to recognize natural limits is one of the defining characteristics of a capitalist ethos and economy.” (page 255). The dust storms, in his narrative, serve to symbolize the alienation between Humans and nature.
Matilde Ribeiro
The document highlights key differences between two types of narratives regarding protagonists, opponents, human-environment relations, and concepts of progress. In progressive narratives, protagonists are often heroes—like pioneers or inventors—who represent human ingenuity as they transform nature into productive spaces. Here, nature acts as a challenging opponent, encouraging technological advancement, as shown by Webb's depiction of the Great Plains.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, declensionist narratives present protagonists as cautionary figures, reflecting humanity's collective hubris and the harmful effects of capitalism on the environment. In these stories, human systems become the main adversaries, disrupting ecological balance and ignoring natural limits.
While progressive narratives celebrate human control over nature and view it as a resource to be exploited, declensionist narratives point out humanity's failure to coexist with the environment, emphasizing the fragile nature of ecosystems. Progress is seen as a upward journey toward a better world in progressive tales, often ending in thriving landscapes. In contrast, declensionist narratives depict progress as a downward path leading to wastelands, symbolizing the consequences of unsustainable practices. Ultimately, progressive narratives celebrate human achievements, while declensionist narratives warn against the dangers of ignoring ecological limits.
In William Cronon’s article two narratives about the Dust Bowl are presented: the progressive (by Bonnifield) and the tragic (by Worster). In the first one the protagonists are farmers: they are strong, brave, resilient people, struggling against a natural disaster. Their opponent is nature, but thanks to perseverance and community spirit, they succeed. In the terms of human-environment relations, people are victims of natural disasters, but they are able to overcome all the consequences of it. So this is the progress: when people overcome the crisis, it becomes the story of victory and revival.
ReplyDeleteIn the tragic narrative the main protagonists are not individual heroes but culture in general, and especially capitalist agriculture. So the opponent in this case is not nature but the human system itself, based on greed and exploitation. If we have a look at human environmental relations, there also will be a difference: people here are not victims but active agents of destruction. And we cannot see any progress here: the catastrophe itself is a result of “the progress”: the Dust Bowl happened not by coincidence, but because people have been systematically destroying the ecosystem for having short-term benefits.
In the article "Telling Stories about Ecology" by William Cronon two different plotlines, the progressive and the tragic, are presented. The protagonists of the progressive plot are mainly pioneer farmers, engineers, scientists and government officials, while in the vision of the tragic plot is considered to be nature itself. On the one hand, for the first classification, we can suppose that the opponents are the concept of wilderness, an unpredictable climate and scientific ignorance, whereas, on the other hand, blind humans to the the Great Plains ecosystem are to considered as "enemies". According to the progressive plot, the environment is perceived as a challenge to be tamed, adapted and made productive, while the tragic perspective believes that human intervention is arrogant and destructive and has interrupted an original natural balance. So, in conclusion, in terms of progress, the first current of thought leads to think at the human intervention as positive, since it brings to order and stability, while for the tragic perspective, progress is a means leading to destruction. According to the author, the way by which we see ecological history profoundly influences poeple's actions and consequent political choices.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, William Cronon describes two plotlines of the Dust Bowl era: 1. progressive, and 2. tragic. These plotlines are two major perspectives people have viewed the drought.
ReplyDeleteThe progressive view emphasizes nature as the enemy and humans as the conquerors. Humans are seen as the saviors in this plot and they are looked up to for their civilization efforts. In this case, nature is something that is simply in the way of human advancements.
The tragic view emphasizes humans as the enemy and nature as the victim (and punisher). This perspective describes how humans abusing and taking advantage of natural resources had a devastating environmental impact. Not only did this hurt the natural land, but it ended up hurting the people right back who agitated the land.
These two perspectives reminded me of another topic we discussed in class: Manifest Destiny. Where there were similar opposing views. One perspective glorified the “exploration”, and men were praised for conquering as far and wide into the west as possible. The other perspective explains how much damage the expansion did for the land, animals, and native people already living in the area. These ideas reminded me of the opposing tragic and progressive plots described in the text about the Dust Bowl.