Launch Post

In "The Future of the Environmental Essay," Lauret Savoy argues that the environmental essay has been confined within too narrow a set of parameters. Not only does the definition of "environment" need to be expanded to include places other than those traditionally explored in this type of writing, but the voices of a more diverse range of writers also need to be brought into the genre. As Savoy puts it, environmental writing has featured "too few voices and storied lives of people not of Euro-American descent." On one level, Savoy asserts that it is important that these writers are able to express their stories to audiences because their experiences often "point to deeply embedded conflicts in this nation" that need to be acknowledged and discussed.

Savoy also seems to be arguing, however, that these writers' experiences often speak to environmental concerns in ways that may be new and/or unexpected to readers who are generally accustomed to encountering environmental writing that falls within the narrow parameters that Savoy references. The experiences of marginalized groups, she suggests, often interact with environmental issues in ways that are overlooked. An example she gives is that of African American abolitionists who wrote and spoke against the use of tobacco in cotton fields. These writers' experiences of and perspective on slavery were tied to their concern over this issue. Furthermore, the same "[d]eeply rooted values and economic norms" that shape how our nation interacts with and, in many cases, exploits the natural environment are also linked to other issues, such as "sanctioned violence for power and profit… class conflict… [and] the exclusion of peoples of color in a still deeply radicalized America." Savoy argues that bringing a wider range of voices and topics into the genre of the environmental essay is important because it will help us to understand these issues more accurately and to engage in conversation about them. Doing so will be a step toward "acknowledging and honoring difference as enriching and, at the same time finding, across divisions, common interest, and common humanity."

In "The View from Point Sublime," Savoy shares her personal experience of visiting the Grand Canyon. After briefly discussing how Point Sublime and the Grand Canyon in general were historically written about and consequentially perceived, Savoy describes her own response to Point Sublime. She notes, also, how this response differed from how Kant details the emotional experience of viewing something "sublime."

How do you see the ideas that Savoy puts forth in "The Future of the Environmental Essay" coming into play in "The View from Point Sublime?" Why are the differences between Savoy's perspective and experience and what Kant describes significant, and what does each say about humanity's relationship with the natural world? Do you see other connections between the two articles?