I chose to walk through a southern area of Lincoln Park near the zoo, by the nature museum. I chose this area because I’m familiar with it, but also because I enjoy it. There are paths and a pond and a playground. I don’t think that I really noticed anything differently, but taking the walk after having the Kuo and Muir readings fresh in my mind made it interesting.
The two writings were so different because of how each of the authors was looking at nature. While Muir’s writings were heartfelt and almost poetic, Kuo’s-while obviously advocating the importance of nature and greenery-was scientific. I found my walk to be more similar to Kuo’s writings because even though nature is all around, one can’t help but be aware of the concrete paths and buildings around. While this park seems to be urban ecology at its finest, one does not get the same euphorial sense of nature that they may get in a different setting.
Because nature affects us everyday, I don’t think that the walk really changed the way I look at it. I like to think that I am a very aware person and a socially conscious person, so I do see what nature offers us and try to appreciate that every day. It seems like a silly, “tree-hugger” way of thinking but, I know that it is important to respect our resources and value nature in order to ensure its livelihood fir the future. And although the area that I walked through may have been constructed, it is nonetheless, an urban natural habitat, home to many different species.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Chicago neighborhoods do seem to teem with species diversity! Perhaps the urban areas are nothing but models of that euphoric sense of nature that more closely resembles Muir's experience...
ReplyDelete