Comparison Essay: Wallace Stegner and Edward Abbey.
Introduction
The purpose of this analysis is to compare, contrast, define, and explain Wallace Stegner’s essay “Coda: Wilderness Letter” and Edward Abbey’s essay “The Great American Desert”. The following paragraphs will present detailed information on both essays and draw conclusions. The analysis starts with a discussion of “Coda: Wilderness Letter”.
Coda: Wilderness Letter
Stegner suggests that the wilderness is an important part of American society and should not be destroyed. He points out that Americans are not being humanitarian about the environment they live in if they choose to deplete natural resources until nothing is left. Stegner further mentions that natural resources keep the environment alive. Therefore, if those resources are gone, so is society’s opportunity for a better tomorrow (Finch & Elder 1990, Coda: Wilderness Letter”).
Remarkably, Stegner did not hold back in his convictions about Americans. In fact, Finch and Elder (1990) emphasized Stegner’s beliefs when they wrote:
Something will have gone out of us as a people if we ever let the remaining wilderness be destroyed. If we permit the last virgin forests to be turned into comic books and plastic cigarette cases, or if we drive the few remaining members of wild species into zoos or to extinction. If we pollute the last clean air and dirty the last clean streams, and push our paved roads through the last of the silence. This way, Americans will never again be free in their country from noise, exhausts, stinks of human and automotive waste. (“Coda: Wilderness Letter”, 564)
Stegner’s viewpoints explain how Americans can lose their culture by destroying their surroundings. He further points out that in doing so, America will no longer have separation from the rest of the world. Stegner’s essay suggests that Americans are becoming too reliant on technology (Finch & Elder 1990, Coda: Wilderness Letter”).
Due to this factor, natural resources are being used at rapid rates. For example, the wood from trees is used to make paper, plastic, and other items. However, every tree that is chopped down brings us one step closer to driving animals out of their homes and into extinction or zoos. Additionally, all the extra energy and fuel used for electricity, cars, homes, and technology pollutes the environment and causes global warming which kills nature. This is why Stegner desired for nature to be preserved.
Finch and Elder (1990) made known Stegner’s views in an essay where they pointed out that preserving wilderness coincides with the well-being of humanity (Coda: Wilderness Letter”).
In this context, Stegner refers to the first civilizations that hunted, planted, and gathered food from the land and water. The passage also alludes to the first American colonies that began developing what is now known as the United States. Earlier generations cherished nature and coexisted with it; however, later generations found more innovative ways to utilize land, sea, and air. As a result of these advancements in technology, more advanced technologies were created and continue to be developed. Activist groups, environmentalists, and conservationists are spreading awareness about attempts to preserve nature and wildlife. Stegner’s essay is an aggressive attempt to persuade Americans not to destroy their environment.
The Great American Desert.
On the other hand, Abbey’s essay The Great American Desert” sends a message that while nature is beautiful, it can also create a painful experience. Abbey takes the approach of a person falling in love with nature. Despite this love, Abbey is very strong-minded in getting others to see that the desert can be the final resting place of all those who explore it (Finch & Elder 1990, “The Great American Desert”).
In fact, Abbey’s feelings were expressed in Finch and Elder’s (1990) book: In my next incarnation, my bones will remain bleaching nicely in a stone gulch under the rim of some faraway plateau… An unrequited and excessive love, inhuman no doubt but painful anyhow, especially when I see my desert under attack” (“The Great American Desert”, 685). Abbey aimed to inform explorers and nature lovers about the many dangers that exist in the desert. These include too much sun exposure, poisonous snakes and insects bites, as well as limited drinking water – all of which can be life-threatening issues (Finch & Elder 1990, “The Great American Desert”).
Abbey’s essay discusses the challenges of loving and exploring the desert (Finch & Elder 1990, The Great American Desert”). One danger is excessive exposure to heat, which can cause skin cancer as well as rashes, blotches, and even death. Bites from poisonous snakes and insects can result in infections, fevers, and other serious health issues. Additionally, a lack of drinking water can lead to dehydration, weakness, hallucinations, and other medical concerns.
Thus, Abbey wanted his readers to understand that the best way to survive was by not going to the desert. He also wanted vacationers and travelers to realize that the desert was not a popular spot for spending time with family. Finch and Elder (1990) expressed this sentiment in their passage, stating The Great American Desert is an awful place. People get hurt, get sick, [and] get lost… Even if you survive…you will have a miserable time.” They concluded that the desert is better suited for movies and God-intoxicated mystics rather than family recreation (“The Great American Desert”, 685).
Abbey sought to get right to the point in his essay, aiming for people to understand the ugly side of nature. This side can sweep a person away in a flood, cause them to stumble over debris, or even make them lose their mind. All of these things cause pain. That is why Abbey suggests staying at home and never succumbing to nature’s wrath (Finch & Elder 1990, “The Great American Desert”, 685).
In fact, Abbey goes on to name a number of canyons, holes, valleys, and rivers that can claim a person’s life in the blink of an eye. He talks about how the desert was not made to be a safe haven for human beings. Moreover, Abbey points out that activists, environmentalists, and conservationists who care about the deserts in the world have learned to love nature’s roughness (Finch & Elder 1990, “The Great American Desert”). These characteristics of the human heart are why people can rough it and survive. They press on when there seems to be nothing else to aim for and climb to the mountaintop.
There are both similarities and differences between the essays of Stegner and Abbey. Both authors write about the American West, but they have different perspectives. Stegner focuses on the beauty and fragility of the landscape, while Abbey is more critical of human impact on nature.
Significantly, there are many comparisons and contrasts in the writings of Stegner and Abbey. For example, both authors are concerned about protecting the environment and mention various actions that should be taken to achieve this goal. Stegner believed that by destroying nature, people were ultimately destroying themselves. Abbey urged people to be kind to the less attractive aspects of nature but also act wisely when exploring those areas (Finch & Elder 1990).
In addition, Stegner desired for people to realize that a healthy environment is one that will last for a long time. However, he also wanted people to understand that depleting natural resources can destroy the beauty of nature. Abbey’s message was that the desert existed before humans and cannot be destroyed. Nevertheless, he also wanted people to recognize that nature has the power to harm them (Finch & Elder 1990).
Furthermore, Stegner wrote with the idea in mind that everyone can make a difference. Abbey’s essay emphasized the fact that nature can make a difference, while Stegner’s essay pointed out that nature is the difference. In a sense, Abbey’s essay portrayed God as the difference (Finch & Elder 1990).
Stegner believed that natural resources exist to be put to good use, while Abbey argued that the extremities of the desert should not be utilized. Stegner emphasized that if Americans took better care of the environment, it could remain intact for years to come. On the other hand, Abbey believed that the nature of the desert is to serve as a death trap for anyone seeking shelter there (Finch & Elder 1990).
Conclusion.
The differences between Stegner’s and Abbey’s perceptions of the environment are compelling. On one side, Stegner desired for Americans to realize their ability to become one with nature. On the other hand, Abbey tried to steer people away from the hot desert lands. Stegner felt that the beauties of the environment, as well as a sustainable amount of natural resources, were disappearing.
However, the other author, Abbey, sought to display the evils that lurk in the desert while at the same time portraying it as a rough gem that holds value for someone. Stegner’s article dealt with wilderness, which is defined as an unsettled, uncultivated region left in its natural condition…” (“Wilderness,” 2007). However, Americans have not left it alone. Abbey’s article focused on the desert, which can be defined as “a wild, uncultivated and uninhabited region” (“Desert,” 2007). Yet people are trying to learn its secrets so that they can cultivate these lands. Is this possible? Consider Arizona and Colorado; despite their harsh climates (Phoenix) and altitudes (Denver), people have found ways to survive. Therefore, even rougher desert lands could be next.
References
Desert.” Answers.com. 2007. Retrieved May 24, 2007 from http://www.answers.com/desert.
Finch, Robert and Elder, John. The Norton Book of Nature Writing. W.W. Norton & Company, 1990.
Wilderness.” Answers.com, 2007. Accessed on May 24, 2007 from http://www.answers.com/wilderness.
