“The Trouble with Wilderness: Or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature” by William Cronon: Summary and Critique

1. Wilderness as a Cultural Construct

• Cronon argues that the idea of wilderness is not an untouched, pristine space but a human creation.
• “Far from being the one place on earth that stands apart from humanity, it is quite profoundly a human creation—indeed, the creation of very particular human cultures at very particular moments in human history.”
• Wilderness is shaped by romanticism and frontier nostalgia, and reflects values that distance humans from nature.

2. Wilderness as a Reflection of Human Desires

• Cronon explains how the concept of wilderness serves as a mirror of human desires, where we project our longings for a purer, untouched world.
• “We too easily imagine that what we behold is Nature when in fact we see the reflection of our own unexamined longings and desires.”
• Wilderness is often seen as the antidote to human civilization, but this perspective obscures its cultural roots.

3. Wilderness and the Frontier Myth

• The essay highlights how wilderness became central to the American frontier myth, symbolizing freedom, rugged individualism, and national identity.
• “Wild country became a place not just of religious redemption but of national renewal, the quintessential location for experiencing what it meant to be an American.”
• The notion of the “vanishing frontier” motivated efforts to preserve wilderness as a monument to America’s past.

4. The Romantic Sublime and Wilderness

• Cronon traces the influence of the sublime in transforming wilderness into a sacred space, where vast landscapes invoke feelings of awe and spiritual reverence.
• “The sublime landscape was where one had more chance than elsewhere to glimpse the face of God.”
• This cultural heritage, inherited from romanticism, still influences how modern environmentalism values wilderness spaces.

5. Wilderness as a Space for the Elite

• Wilderness, historically, became a place for elite recreation, with wealthy urbanites using wilderness as a retreat from the industrial world, while ignoring its role as a lived and worked landscape for indigenous peoples and rural communities.
• “Celebrating wilderness has been an activity mainly for well-to-do city folks. Country people generally know far too much about working the land to regard unworked land as their ideal.”
• This social and economic dimension of wilderness reinforces its status as a space removed from ordinary human life.

6. The Problem of Wilderness Dualism

• Cronon critiques the dualism that separates wilderness from human civilization, where humans are seen as external to nature.
• “Wilderness embodies a dualistic vision in which the human is entirely outside the natural.”
• This way of thinking, Cronon argues, hinders a sustainable and ethical relationship between humans and the environment because it idealizes wilderness as untouched and denigrates human-altered landscapes.

7. Wilderness and Environmentalism’s Blind Spots

• The essay warns that by focusing too much on wilderness, environmentalism overlooks more immediate environmental issues that affect human communities, such as urban pollution or agricultural sustainability.
• “If we set too high a stock on wilderness, too many other corners of the earth become less than natural and too many other people become less than human.”
• Cronon encourages environmentalists to shift from a wilderness-focused ethic to one that integrates humans into nature responsibly.

8. Wilderness as an Escape from Responsibility

• Wilderness often serves as an escape from the human-made world and its consequences, allowing people to evade the responsibilities of managing the environment they live in.
• “The dream of an unworked natural landscape is very much the fantasy of people who have never themselves had to work the land to make a living.”
• Cronon argues for a more holistic view of nature that includes human interaction and responsible stewardship, rather than idealizing a wilderness that excludes people.

9. Wilderness and Indigenous Displacement

• Wilderness preservation, Cronon notes, often comes at the cost of indigenous peoples, who are displaced to create “uninhabited” parks and reserves.
• “The myth of wilderness as ‘virgin,’ uninhabited land had always been especially cruel when seen from the perspective of the Indians who had once called that land home.”
• This removal of native peoples is a reminder of the constructed nature of wilderness as a concept tied to colonial histories.

10. Moving Beyond Wilderness: A New Environmental Ethic

• Cronon calls for an environmental ethic that values all landscapes, not just wilderness, and integrates human and nonhuman worlds.
• “We need an environmental ethic that will tell us as much about using nature as about not using it.”
• He advocates for a “middle ground” where humans and nature coexist in sustainable harmony, without idealizing wilderness as the only authentic form of nature.

1. Ecocriticism

• Contribution: Cronon’s essay challenges traditional ecocritical views of nature by deconstructing the concept of wilderness. He argues that wilderness is not an untouched, pure entity but a cultural and historical construct. This shifts the focus in ecocriticism from idealizing nature as a separate realm to understanding human-nature relationships in more complex, integrated ways.
• Reference: “Far from being the one place on earth that stands apart from humanity, it is quite profoundly a human creation—indeed, the creation of very particular human cultures at very particular moments in human history.”
• Impact: This challenges the tendency in ecocriticism to romanticize wilderness as a pure, ideal form of nature and calls for a more nuanced understanding of how humans and nature coexist.

2. Postmodernism and Deconstruction

• Contribution: Cronon deconstructs the binary opposition between nature and civilization, revealing how these categories are intertwined and culturally produced rather than natural or timeless. By doing so, he applies postmodernist thought to environmental discourse, questioning essentialist views of nature.
• Reference: “Wilderness embodies a dualistic vision in which the human is entirely outside the natural.”
• Impact: This deconstructive approach aligns with postmodern theories that question absolute categories, showing that the separation of wilderness from humanity is a cultural illusion rather than an inherent truth.

3. Deconstruction

• Contribution: The essay explores the cultural construction of wilderness, showing how it reflects historical moments, national identity, and social class dynamics. Cronon’s analysis of how wilderness has been shaped by cultural values, particularly the American frontier myth, contributes to cultural studies by linking environmental ideals with larger social and historical forces.
• Reference: “Wild country became a place not just of religious redemption but of national renewal, the quintessential location for experiencing what it meant to be an American.”
• Impact: This situates the idea of wilderness within broader cultural narratives, showing how environmental ideals are embedded in national myths and social hierarchies.

4. Marxist Criticism

• Contribution: Cronon’s critique of wilderness as a space for elite recreation and leisure highlights the class dynamics involved in the creation and preservation of wilderness. He shows how wilderness often excludes the laboring classes and indigenous peoples, reflecting the alienation and class divisions central to Marxist thought.
• Reference: “Celebrating wilderness has been an activity mainly for well-to-do city folks. Country people generally know far too much about working the land to regard unworked land as their ideal.”
• Impact: By focusing on the economic and social contexts of wilderness preservation, Cronon’s essay contributes to a Marxist critique of environmentalism, emphasizing the ways in which class and labor intersect with environmental values.

5. Postcolonial Theory

• Contribution: Cronon’s examination of how indigenous peoples were displaced to create “uninhabited” wilderness spaces contributes to postcolonial theory by showing how wilderness preservation is tied to colonial practices of erasure and displacement. He critiques the romantic notion of wilderness as “virgin land,” which ignores the presence of indigenous populations.
• Reference: “The myth of wilderness as ‘virgin,’ uninhabited land had always been especially cruel when seen from the perspective of the Indians who had once called that land home.”
• Impact: This aligns with postcolonial critiques of how colonial powers erased indigenous histories and cultures in the name of progress or preservation, positioning wilderness preservation as part of a larger colonial legacy.

6. Critical Theory of Nature and Environment

• Contribution: Cronon’s critique of the wilderness ideal as an escape from responsibility contributes to the critical theory of nature, which questions human domination over the natural world. He urges for a more ethical and responsible relationship with nature that integrates human beings rather than separates them from it.
• Reference: “The dream of an unworked natural landscape is very much the fantasy of people who have never themselves had to work the land to make a living.”
• Impact: This critique encourages a rethinking of human-nature relationships that go beyond the simplistic wilderness/civilization binary, contributing to a more holistic and responsible environmental ethic.

7. Gender and Wilderness

• Contribution: Cronon’s analysis touches upon how the wilderness ideal is tied to masculinity, particularly through its association with the rugged individualism of the American frontier. This connection between wilderness and masculine ideals contributes to gender studies by showing how wilderness has been historically constructed as a male domain.
• Reference: “The mythic frontier individualist was almost always masculine in gender: here, in the wilderness, a man could be a real man, the rugged individual he was meant to be.”
• Impact: This reveals how the wilderness ideal reinforces traditional gender roles, positioning it as a space for masculine self-realization, and invites a feminist critique of how wilderness has been gendered in cultural narratives.

8. Environmental Ethics

• Contribution: Cronon argues for an environmental ethic that moves beyond the romanticization of wilderness and instead focuses on how humans can live responsibly within nature. He critiques the view that wilderness is the only “authentic” nature, advocating for an ethic that values all types of landscapes.
• Reference: “We need an environmental ethic that will tell us as much about using nature as about not using it.”
• Impact: Cronon’s work reshapes discussions in environmental ethics by promoting a more integrated and less dualistic relationship between humans and nature, where responsible use is just as important as preservation.

1. Oversimplification of Environmentalism

• Some critics argue that Cronon oversimplifies the motivations and goals of environmentalists by suggesting that their views on wilderness are uniformly romantic and idealized. Environmentalism is a broad movement with diverse perspectives on nature and conservation.

2. Undermining Conservation Efforts

• By critiquing the idea of wilderness as a cultural construct, Cronon risks undermining efforts to protect natural areas. His argument could be seen as providing ammunition for those who oppose conservation, as it questions the very concept of preserving wilderness for its intrinsic value.

3. Ignoring the Practical Importance of Wilderness

• Cronon’s focus on the cultural construction of wilderness might be seen as neglecting the practical ecological importance of preserving large tracts of wilderness. Critics may argue that wilderness areas play a crucial role in biodiversity and ecosystem services, which are vital for environmental sustainability regardless of their cultural framing.

4. Cultural Relativism

• Some critics may view Cronon’s argument as excessively relativistic, implying that since wilderness is a cultural construct, it lacks objective value. This could lead to a dismissal of wilderness protection as a subjective or arbitrary goal, which may weaken efforts to safeguard natural spaces.

5. Downplaying Aesthetic and Spiritual Values of Wilderness

• Cronon’s critique of the romanticization of wilderness might be seen as downplaying the legitimate aesthetic and spiritual values that people derive from wild spaces. For many, wilderness offers a sense of peace, beauty, and connection to something larger than themselves, which are significant aspects of the human experience.

6. Overemphasis on Human-Nature Integration

• Critics might argue that Cronon’s call for integrating human activity into natural landscapes overlooks the importance of maintaining areas where human impact is minimal. While sustainability is important, some argue that certain ecosystems require minimal human interaction to function properly and that wilderness areas should remain protected from human intervention.

7. Risk of Anthropocentrism

• Cronon’s argument could be interpreted as anthropocentric, as it focuses on how humans culturally construct wilderness and emphasizes the need for humans to take responsibility for nature. Some critics might argue that this viewpoint continues to center human concerns and may neglect the intrinsic rights or value of nonhuman species and ecosystems.

8. Limited Applicability to Global Environmental Issues

• Cronon’s analysis is primarily focused on the American concept of wilderness, which may limit its applicability to global environmental issues. Critics may point out that his argument is less relevant to countries where wilderness and natural landscapes are framed differently, and where the historical and cultural context differs significantly from that of the United States.

9. Idealizing the “Middle Ground”

• Some may argue that Cronon’s advocacy for a “middle ground” between human use and wilderness preservation is overly idealistic and difficult to achieve in practice. Balancing human needs with environmental protection is complex, and critics may question whether this middle ground can be realistically implemented without significant trade-offs or conflicts.