How does personification of animals and self-identification with them affect the way that scientists write about them on scientific expeditions?

For this essay, the question that I would like to research is “Why do humans personify and anthropomorphize non-human animals and objects, and what is the effect on humans’ interactions with those objects/animals and other humans?”

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

November 7, 2016

For today’s post, I read Appendix I: Biology – Notes by James Murray, Biologist of the Expedition, from Heart of the Antarctic. In it, Murray describes all of the organisms that they encounter on they expedition, as well as analyzing population and species distribution and various behaviors, especially towards the humans. Murray is consistently surprised by the variety of life that is present, even in one of the most hostile possible terrestrial environments.

One thing that I thought was interesting was Murray’s habit of anthropomorphizing all of the animals that he came across. He refers to penguins as “jolly fellows” many times over and continues to personify organisms throughout the passage. Is there some kind of benefit to humans in anthropomorphizing animals or objects? Why is personification (of animals, plants, objects, etc.) so widespread?

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

November 2, 2016

“The Therapeutic Effects of Singing in Neurological Disorders” looks at a variety of studies conducted on the use of singing to aid people with a variety of conditions that affect speech, including stuttering, Parkinson’s disease, aphasia caused by stroke, and autism. The article exhaustively reviews the effects of treatments involving singing on each condition, as well as the physiological and physical changes that occur in the brain when singing as opposed to speaking, and how these changes could potentially allow those with these disorders to speak and communicate clearly.

This connection between unusual brain activity and music is not novel. In my personal experience, it’s always easier to remember lyrics to songs than any other sequence of words, and I have often been told to use melodies to help myself remember information. I’m glad that this thinking has been applied to helping those with neurological disorders, and I wonder what else these methods could be applied to.

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

October 31, 2016

Whisper of the Wild Response

In her article “Whisper of the Wild,” Kim Tingley describes an expedition in Denali national park that she took part in to record the soundscapes of nature with no human intervention, and the scientific background for such an experiment. She recounts some of the findings from the newly christened field of “soundscape ecology”: that the noise that is constantly emitted by humans and human activities can change the course of natural selection and reduce reproductive fitness, in some cases. Regardless of where one is, sound follows; even in rooms specifically designed to be silent, you would be able to hear blood moving inside your body.

As a musician, this emphasis on the ubiquity of sound resonates with me. When setting up my recording equipment for the first time, I noticed that, even when the room is silent, there is sound being picked up by the microphone. Originally this annoyed me; I wanted each take to be as clean as possible. However, as I recorded in more places, I realized that each location had it’s own unique background sound, the presence of which was a kind of intangible watermark, framing the music I make in the context in which I made it.

Paul Weissfellner

Dr. Fenn

INTF 105-19: Science Writing

October 26, 2016

Land Divided, Coast United

In her article “Land Divided, Coast United,” Josie Glausiusz gives the reader a brief introduction to Gaza’s water and sewage crisis. She focuses on the struggles faced by the individuals responsible for maintaining the water and sewage treatment systems while also providing background about how the situation reached where it is today and factors that prevent it from improving. A blockade by Israeli forces prevents many materials, including those needed to repair and improve infrastructure and to treat sewage, from entering the Gaza strip because they could also be used by terrorists to launch attacks against Israel. One thing that really spoke to me was her repeated calls for cooperation between Israel and Gaza to fix these issues. Israel, historically, has been a global leader in purifying water and making it usable. For 5 months, I lived in a small community in the middle of the desert, about 50 km from the Gaza border, and saw the results of Israeli irrigation and water purification techniques: grass, trees, and acres of olive orchards, all irrigated by brackish water drawn from beneath the ground. Israeli-Gazan cooperation with regards to water would be a powerful thing, able to provide access to cleaner water and a higher standard of living to hundreds of thousands of people.

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

October 17, 2016

This article, entitled “Can the U.S. Really Get Astronauts to Mars by 2030?”, was published in response to an enormous announcement by the Obama administration: the United States is planning on launching human-staffed missions to mars by 2030. This article takes a unique approach, in that it is about science but does not focus that much on the science itself. Rather, the emphasis is on what is possible; it lays out a series of common questions about the proposed mission and answers them in a clear, concise way. The science of the mission itself is extremely complicated: the engineering behind the rockets, the life support systems, etc. are all far too complex for the average person to understand, so the article attempts to take this exciting news closer to home by making it relatable and bringing as many people in, regardless of their level of scientific literacy.

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

September 28, 2016

So What?

In my essay, I argue that the rock outside Onondaga hall brings wildness to college campuses in a way that brings the humans that encounter it into nature in a positive way. Some may claim that the rock isn’t wild at all, given its spot on an artificial college campus, and, therefore, does no more to bring nature to passersby than the buildings all around it. However, they are simply looking at it the wrong way. Were the rock merely a section of a much larger rock wall, or a part of a stunning view looking down into a canyon, the wildness present would be indisputable. The wildness doesn’t come from the scene as a whole; each of the constituent parts contributes to the total feeling. When the rock is removed from those situations, it still retains the wildness, and brings it here to this campus.

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

September 21, 2016

Wild Outside the Wilderness:

Cronon and the Rock Outside Onondaga Hall

In The Trouble With Wilderness, William Cronon describes the history of “wilderness,” and the process that it underwent from being perceived as godforsaken land to representing nature itself and national renewal. He denounces the negligence towards nature that the idea of some far off idealized “true nature” promotes. He implores the reader to recognize the beauty and value of nature wherever it can be found.

In light of this, Cronon would wholeheartedly support the presence of the rock outside Onondaga hall. When Cronon states that “there is nothing natural about the concept of wilderness,” (95) he is protesting against a paradigm of thinking about nature. The rock supports Cronon’s subversion of cultural and philosophical norms by blending the natural and the unnatural, but in a significantly different way than wilderness does. The rock, whether placed intentionally or not, has blurred boundaries; it is both wild, as an object created by natural processes, and constructed, as a part of the larger campus as a whole. Cronon implores us to appreciate nature wherever it can be found, not just in the wilderness (103). The rock’s presence on campus, in such a prominent location, brings each passerby into a world where the human and nonhuman, the natural and the constructed, can exist side by side.

Paul Weissfellner

Prof. Fenn

September 14, 2016

 We Have Never Been Modern

In the first chapter of his book, We Have Never Been Modern, Bruno Latour paints a picture of a society at odds with itself. In his analysis, modernity consists of two parallel, completely separate processes; that of hybridization, and that of purification. According to Latour, it is the separation between the two that is the marker of a modern society. However, in many ways, it is impossible to keep the two separate. “[purification] has made [hybridization] possible; the more we forbid ourselves to conceive of hybrids, the more possible their interbreeding becomes.” (12)

 Latour’s work touches on one of the most intense debates of the modern era: “what does it mean to be modern?” (8) The rock on the south side of campus addresses this question. It is natural, in that it was created by natural forces, and as such is pure and untouched. At the same time, it resides within the bounds of a human structure, that of the college campus, blending between natural and human simply by being.  The two processes pointed out by Latour, that must be kept separate for modernity to exist, coexist peacefully in it, turning his notion of modernity on its head.