As important as race and gender are to place, we cannot forget about the component of history. The way that places change through time and the formation of places from space is regrettably overlooked. While reading “Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England,” for my American Environmental History class, I was introduced to the beautiful but long gone reality of pre-Colonial (easing into early Colonial) North America. William Cronon, the books author speaks of the Natives of modern New England, and how they functioned and interacted with the environment around them prior to the arrival of the Europeans. He split them into two groups: those from the North, like Maine and New Hampshire, and those from the South, like Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. He described the different ways that the Northern and Southern New England Natives built shelter, found food, and interacted with one another. The Northern Natives tended to depend more on fish, mussels, and migratory birds to sustain their health, and often moved frequently, never staying in one place for long. Much of their society relied on men. They were experts on turning space into place, even if only for a short time, because they had to survive. On the contrary, Southern Natives depended more on agriculture like corn and squash, which was supported by women, and gravitated towards staying put, so that they could see to their crops. To me, they were specialists in perfecting the idea of place; that is, of making a true home.  |
| A colonist settlement |
You could also talk about the difference between the Native and Colonists, and their perceptions of place. Natives saw the area around them as more communal and flowing, while the Colonists were more individual. The Colonists saw the world through the fences they built, and had pride in the structures they assembled. The way they viewed the physical land differed as well. Native gardens didn’t have the same rows and structure that the Colonial gardens did. They had multiple crops within the same space, and they all grew together, in a twisted and wild knot of food. Colonists not only saw crops as food, but as commodities, and largely viewed agriculture within a market system. This is all has to do with viewing place through a cultural lens.
To me, this relates to the article “Place: A Short Introduction” by Tim Cresswell, as he speaks of the Lower East Side of Manhattan, and how it went through a transformation throughout its life course, and continues to be different places for different people. The Natives transformed the spaces in which they travelled to into a place; into a home. And today, New England is very divergent area from what it once was, but everywhere connects back to the all places it used to be, and it will maintain its modification until the end of its time.
References
Cresswell, Tim. “Place: A Short Introduction.” 2004, pp. 1–12.
Cronon, William. Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. Hill and Wang, 2003.
Solid interdisciplinary connection, Alexis!
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned in your post, you argue that natives had a knack for perfecting place. I wonder how this plays out in homemaking, or the convergence of the imagined, the material, and the social (Whitson, 2017). How did they make meaning of their place? How did their place foster meaning? Indeed, the crop organization varied from the colonist and the natives, highlighting values of meticulousness and efficiency respectively. Yet, I wonder how physical structures and arrangements of houses, as well as items within, contributed to native’s ideal home. Basically, your concrete examples sparked my curiosity of their larger implications.
Additionally, to further complicate the ordinary, varying representations of home shown by the colonists and natives might foster different perspectives of “homelessness.” Cresswell argues, “Thinking of the world as rooted and bounded is reflected in language and social practice” (p.110). The colonists might view the Northern natives’ transience as lacking place, while they could perceive the colonists’ settlements as inflexible due to an ever-changing environment. This intricacy increases with Manifest Destiny propelling westward expansion, eventually causing indigenous populations to be relocated to reservations. Often travel conditions fostered sickness and even death, causing individuals to reside in a liminal space; they were out of place not only by being forced to leave, but also while getting from point A to point B. With an emphasis on place, citizenship seemed fleeting due to a lack of property. Such marginality contrasts with that refugees, as shown by Archambault (2012), considering settlement as turning point for a series of events. Even though both parties are displaced, those seeking asylum lacked agency by depending on public support.
--Amie
References
Archambault, J. (2012). 'It can be good there too': home and continuity in refugee children's narratives of settlement. Children's Geographies, 35-48.
Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A Short Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 109-117.
Whitson, R (2017). “Spaces of Cultures and Identity Production: Home, Consumption, and the Media” in A. Oberhauser, J. Fluri, R. Whitson, & S. Mollett, Feminist Spaces: Gender and Geography in a Global Context (pp. 48-75). New York: Routledge.