A Companion to the city: The Environment of the City...or the Urbanization of Nature

For my presentation, I had to read a chapter from A companion to the City and after reading it, I couldn’t help but think about Garret’s Romantic Natures class last spring. We spent an entire quarter looking at the different conceptions of nature in literature. When the quarter first started, I thought I had a pretty good idea of nature. I thought that nature is the natural environment that surrounds us, right? But, maybe it’s not. We talked about how for some individuals, nature is something that is outside of our socially constructed environment—something outside of the city, but where would that be? Is there a part of the natural environment that has not been influenced by society? I’m not so sure. I used to think of nature as being far removed from my city life. And, in all honesty, I never really gave it much thought. But, now I think the relationship between nature and society is much more complex.  

Will admit though that the more we discussed the different notions of nature, the less I knew what it was. I used to think that the trees and the plans located outside my window were apart of nature, but now I’m not so sure. I don’t even know if they belong there (apparently their roots are negatively impacting our pipe lines). The hiking trails behind my building seemed to lead to the natural environment, but then again, as I walk through the hills, I see public trash bins everywhere and man-made trails that are supposed to direct me toward a “nature” walk…before this class I never questioned the trails or the plants in my surrounding area, but now I do. If I’m asked to describe what nature looks like, I wouldn’t be able give a clear answer. What I enjoyed about this chapter is that it continues the discussion about nature and its relationship with society, specifically its relationship with the city. It automatically takes for granted that the natural environment and the city are interconnected in more ways than we might have imagined. The chapter examines the importance of paying attention to the ways in which nature and the city intersect with one another and it looks at how this intersection can then affect different societal issues. So, I guess the question is not necessarily where does nature end and society beings, but rather to consider “how to construct a city that is sensitive to these myriad connections and turn the city into one of the pivotal arenas where class, gender, and ethnic issues combine with ecological and environmental questions” (Swyngedouw Kaika 577).

Thinking About Nature's Metropolis, The Pit

Cronon’s “Nature’s Metropolis” had a hard time getting me to care about anything it was saying, until I started to remember some of Norris’ “The Pit.” I read the novel about a year ago, so please forgive any inaccuracies. But “the pit,” in the novel refers to the commercial exchange site, essentially the “floor” of something like the Wall Street Exchange. The novel’s protagonist eventually goes mad with the fever of financial speculation. What makes the Chicago pit interesting (or at least not another Charlie Sheen movie), is the nature of the market at the time. Exchanges, at least in my limited understanding of them, trade mostly in capital. In “The Pit” the suits trade actual physical quantities of grain (or was it corn?). In manipulating the market price they hold back large quantities, so their capital holdings can actually be directly wiped out by weather. It was like a game of Hot Potato, but with grain, or was it corn? Some sort of starch, either way the guy left holding the goods was the loser. Even a good season could wipe a banker out as the market drove the value of his little pantry into the single digits. Suddenly (well, three-quarters in) Cronon actually helps out with understanding the rules of the game back in Norris’ wheat pit. The interconnectedness of various “hinterlands” and marketplaces created considerable competition for the product: A good day for farmers. The metropolis “promoted the communities in its hinterland as much as they promoted it.” But really, competition between different marketplaces was the source of the economic booms. Enter Cronon’s description of central-place-theory: Cities, as market-centers, became rivals. Frankly, this all very dry, and almost matter-of-fact, but it would be useful for a second look at Norris’ book. During my first read the choice of location, Chicago, seemed almost incidental. It’s a little easier to understand now in terms of its centrality to the capitalist frontiers, the sort of commercial tentacles creeping out over the continent. The city there writing its abstract, mathematical formulas of value over basic sources of sustinence. In that way it ties back to Mumford’s talk on the paleotechnic dominance of medieval systems, how the influx of capital ruined the old ways, and how the cities acted as centers of exploitation. I think I need to revisit Mumford as well. It would be also interesting to take a course on the American city of the nineteenth century. So much of the power of Norris’ and Cronon’s visions of Chicago derives from the vast material wealth of the newly-tapped resources of the American continent, as well as the limitations in transportation technology that kept those resources just close enough to speculate on, but far enough out of reach to immediately plunder. In my own mental map of the American city, there is always that endless mass of wilderness surrounding, which is almost comforting, and this contrasts distinctly to the trapped feeling I get when Dickens takes me to London, as if I can not unknow that I am on an island, and that this misery is inescapable as Alcatraz.

Response to Sister Carrie

I apologize for the fragmented post that is mainly reader response, but that’s all I have right now. I enjoyed the excerpt from Dreiser’s Sister Carrie and found a few moments to be relatable despite a tremendous gap in our historical time frame…and despite the fact that I am not a naïve country girl who moved to find work in Chicago and then became a mistress.  More like a semi-naïve Colorado girl who moved to L.A. for who knows what and became an English grad student. I’m happy with how my narrative has worked out so far, but I’m not sure I can say the same for Carrie.

One of the first moments that I found interesting was the moment the narrator states “When a girl leaves home at eighteen, she does one of two things. Either she falls into saving hands and becomes better, or she rapidly assumes the cosmopolitan standard of virtue.” What I find interesting about this statement is the way it reflects a societal concern over women in public, and in particular, women working in the city, and also how this fear has not changed as much as I would hope. This narrative of the woman who loses her virtue in the city is still pervasive in certain populations (*ahem* my extended family in Texas). My parents’ move to Colorado was fairly heartbreaking for my entire extended Texas family, but when my brother and I both moved to L.A., many members of the family were devastated. Much of the concern did not regard my brother’s move (he moved to pursue a bright career in film) but instead was focused around the “wild child” of the family and her irrational decision to just pick up and move to Sin City. My mother kindly reminded them that Sin City was in fact Las Vegas, and no, my move was not any of their business.  Even now I think there remains a fear of women in the city and how the city corrupts the virtue of good wholesome girls. *sigh*

          Another moment that I found particularly interesting was the moment when Carrie becomes acutely aware of her clothing and the clothing of the people on the train. The narrator informs the reader “this line the individual at her elbow now marked for Carrie. She became conscious of an inequality. Her own plain blue dress, with its black cotton tape trimmings, now seemed to her shabby. She felt the worn state of her shoes.” Carrie becoming aware of her clothing reminded me of the Simmel article about the need to manifest individuality in the city and how the increase of brief interactions with the masses, and the decrease of deep and intimate relationships can cause a desire to project individuality through outward appearance (forgive the crude summary. I realize Simmel is much more eloquent).

           I am also interested in the way the gaze functions in this small excerpt. There’s something very intrusive about the stranger’s gaze. Douet tells Carrie “Remember, I’ll be looking till you find your sister.” He doesn’t tell her, “I’ll be looking after you” or something a bit more socially normal. He says, “I will be looking.” I am obviously trying to make some sort of connection with the flanuer and the objectifying male gaze but I can’t articulate some coherent line of thought yet.

There you have it. 

Thoughts on Dorian Gray

The Picture of Dorian Gray, what a complex novel. It truly embodies the artist as portrayed by Wilde. It is a once a novel that on the surface is ludicrous bordering on comical, with all its epigrams and melodrama. On the other hand it can be read as a “symbol” and wild warns “those who read the symbol do so at their peril.” In fact the preface sums up the themes of the novel in a way. The novel is the “surface “and “symbol” referred to in the preface and the materials used for its emplotment are vice and virtue. Its hard to tell form reading the novel alone whether or not Wilde was intentionally using the unconscious and the conscious theme, and whether that can be placed into dialogue with Freud and Lacan. I would have to look that up, though it would contradict Wilde’s idea of art for art’s sake alone. I get the impression that his art was to be valued and interpreted without his biographical information being involved.

            Another point of interest that I have yet to fully understand is the constant imagery of flowers and plants. One reason is that they create an unreal surrounding, as professor Garret explained that it was not possible for certain flowers to bloom in the same season.  The symbolism behind them is interesting; I would like to study it more closely, like why does he refer to herbaceous plants in some scenes and aromatic ones in others? Is there a Romantic aspect to the Garden, when it seems to restore his humanity after Sibyl’s death? Does that romantic contrast exist in the novel between the garden and the city as a corruptor? The other thing I wonder about is Basil’s name and the possible symbolism there, not to mention Sibyl. Moreover was Wilde intending to make these associations and does it matter? That is the beauty of Wilde’s writing, he is very much Lord Henry sparking our curiosity and stepping back to let figure out whatever meanings we wish to find in his art. Curiosity it a major driving force for Dorian Gray, the curiosity of life and the fear of realism. Always wanting to live vicariously but never truly. It is escapism at its best. The real is subverted and made unreal through romanticism and the unreal is relished as reality.

            I couldn’t help but think of the Flanneur and the Man of the Crowd while reading this novel. After being introduced to Harry Dorian seems to thrive on the crowd. He seeks it out more and more and his expression becomes more and more like that of the man of the crowd. Even the mirror like quality of the portrait is like the man looking through the glass or at himself. The other part about this intertextuality is that Dorian is an observer; he looks and extracts information but does not wish to reciprocate that exchange of information. He conceals the portrait at all costs. He is also more obviously the Flanneur then any other character in any other novel we have read this quarter. His gaze is another thing that must be studied in more depth, because he has two if we include the changing gaze of the portrait.

Sister Carrie and Echos of the Past

I have to say I really enjoyed the excerpts from Dreiser's Sister Carrie, and I have to say that I would have liked to read it if we had more time! (As a side note I found a free electronic copy so I know what I'll be doing during the break). Anyway, back to the book. It is interesting to see so many of the conventions of "city" novels being used in an American context. We are presented with the usual coming of age tale right off the bat. I always enjoy experiencing the first impression of a big city through the eyes of a character, it allows us to see what we often take for granted. Her train ride exposes her to so many sights and emotions, feelings that I am reminded of when I rode the Metro into CSULA for the first time. I guess that is what is enchanting about coming of age novels, they are able to refresh what has become common everyday practices for us. Anyway, we see Carrie's fear of the city, it's overwhelming nature that is simultaneously frightening and intoxicating. Sister Carrie reminded me so much of the Romantic plot found in Mary Barton. We are presented with a young girl that is enticed by the luxuries that a smooth talking young man can offer. Drouet IS young Mr. Carson, down to the casual attitude toward young women and his flaunting of money. Of course we cannot have a young Mr. Carson without the fatherly captain of industry, Mr. Hurstwood (Carson Sr.) These men are driven by fine things and appearances, and Chapter 5 reveals to us that they are all part of a hierarchy that they are all aware of. Each man has his place within society, and are careful to remain within their boundaries. We also see the factory girls presented as uncivilized and rough. It is interesting that Carrie makes so much fuss about their inappropriate behavior around the men in the factory, yet she is the one that crosses all the boundaries that are in place for a respectable young girl. Just like Mary Barton, Carrie is obsessed with material objects that lead her down a path of impropriety. However, unlike Mary who wanted to help make a better life for her father, Carrie is motivated only by her materialism. The moment Carrie enters the city she seems to lose her morals, and is willing to sell herself out for a nice coat and new shoes. Mary is also the flanuer, and just as we have seen, she is at one point questioned as a woman of the night. It seems like almost everything we have read up to this point in all found in this novel. Even the streets, though not as crowed as London, still have that feeling of being difficult to navigate, and while Dreiser makes mention of the room that is found in the city of Chicago we are presented with the cramped workshops. When Carrie enters into the workshop that is filled with boxes, and is cramped and dark, I was taken back to the London cities and factories of novels past. I found myself wondering if I was meant to like Carrie and feel sorry for her, or if I am supposed to condemn her actions and see this as a cautionary tale. As I was reading I found my self basically yelling at her for falling for Drouet's promises, I have seen this too many times to know that this cannot end well in the timeframe it was written. Anyway, it is difficult to say much more without reading more of the novel, but I will state again that this novel seems to encompass everything that we have read about in the past 11 weeks and is a shame we did not have time enough for it!

Sister Carrie

"Out for a little stroll, are you, this evening?"
Carrie looked at him in amazement, and then summoned sufficient
thought to reply: "Why, I don't know you," backing away as she did so.
"Oh, that don't matter," said the other affably.
She bandied no more words with him, but hurried away, reaching her
own door quite out of breath. There was something in the man's look
which frightened her.

Look at that a woman out for a walk and a creepy man approaches her.

I always loved Sister Carrie because it mirrored America's growth in economy and change from agricultural stories to the city. This is one of the first country girl in the big apple kind of tales and I find it fascinating how promiscuous Carrie, or any women, in a novel of its time is portrayed.

Dreiser shows us a different type of woman, i mean she's pretty out there . Carrie always reminded me of Daisy Miller. This short story was a cautionary tale. Women were not supposed to promiscuous and if they were, hey they died. But here we have Carrie succeeding in the end...well monetarily. But hey that's a huge step up from dying from "roman fever."

Dickens Stuff

I found this interesting, in case anyone else is writing on Bleak House. One of the things that struck me about the dialog, and even some of the action in the novel, was how stagey (theatrical) it was. I guess Dickens was an actor and major theater buff. They say he even wished, on his deathbed, that he had focused on the stage, and he designed his works to be performed. There's an interesting anecdote in there from one of his daughters, as well. She remembers being allowed to sit in his writing room once and says he would pace for hours, then rush over to a mirror and act out some dialog, then rush back to his writing desk. Good stuff.