In the opening chapters of Rambunctious Garden Emma Marris introduced us to the general idea of nature that is held by most and how it has come to be this great paradox. Firstly Marris delves into the idea of the “pristine wilderness”(3), explaining the generalized concept of natural world that is the essence of life untouched or not manipulated by humans.
The appreciation of nature has been one that cherished the earth’s still truly wild habitats in comparison to the great landscapes that have been resurfaced by humans. However, Marris throws away this ideal of nature blatantly stating that all of earth’s habitats in one way or another have been affected by human presence on earth. Thus, when appreciating nature we must not only look to the vast tracts of wild life to satisfy our desire to connect with plant/ animal life we can also find joy in acknowledging natures presence in our more urban areas such as city parks and community gardens, even the plots of grass on the sidewalk. Marris emphasizes the point that there is life around us even if it is not as grand as what we picture in our minds.
After highlighting the inaccuracies we use to define nature, Marris then goes further to prove how paradoxical such ideals are by addressing the efforts of conservation with the use of often-unobtainable baselines as a goal. As a case study, Marris references the Hawaiian Military Reservation that she visited in 2009. Hawaii has more non-native plant and animal species than not. This is due to western influence and takeover throughout its history. Scientists used a tract of land at the reservation to determine whether native species would be able to thrive again if non-natives were removed. However, this attempt proved disappointing. With slow if any regrowth, this 5-year experiment proved that such attempts to return an ecosystem back to a baseline before certain human influences are done in vain.
With this Marris brings up a split view of nature. Certain ecologists believe that nature is only true wilderness if it has not been tampered with. However, others believe that nature should be seen as all natural things in an ecosystem- whether they were originally there or not. There is also the ultimate paradox that supports this second view. In order to return nature to its previous state- before human alteration- humans must alter the nature that exists. And so, whether constructed or not, the land will have still been manipulated by humans.
I find Emma Marris’ points to be very interesting and logical in her argument against the idea of pristine wilderness. I personally try to connect with nature wherever it may be. This is not to say I don’t also believe in the concept of the great out doors- pristine and far away. Growing up in the city, where vast landscapes are scarce it is easier to follow Marris’ concept. I think her points are valid because the changes that have been made to the earth are so drastic that even if we were able to recreate a past life in the history of the earths ecology it would not be authentic or without much human manipulation.
