October 2, 2008
The Future of Our Wilderness
In his speech “Why Wilderness?”, Roderick Frazier Nash uses his power of persuasion, knowledge, and personal belief to convey how essential our wilderness is. He is trying to accomplish two things; persuading the reader that wilderness is important enough to put forth an effort into preserving it, and present to the (already pro-wilderness) audience how he believes they should do so. By contrasting the past and present of our wilderness and what we have and haven’t done to keep it, Nash suggests that we are not currently on the correct path. Nash does an excellent job of proving to the reader and the audience that change is in order without bombarding them with negativity.
The primary claim that Nash is trying to give across is that change is necessary in order to preserve wilderness because “It will either be consciously and deliberately preserved by policy and law or it will vanish.” (75) Nash makes the assumption that as of now, with no direct action being taken, wilderness is disappearing. Nash suggests our current generations, as he redefines as the new frontiersmen, need to take immediate action regarding the preservation of wilderness. He uses the antithesis strategy with the reader and the audience, displaying to them that they must preserve wilderness or it will be gone. Nash builds pathos describing the current technique of emotional defending a start, but not enough to yield results. He goes on to analyze that different parks, animals, and well-known areas of wilderness are being defended and supported without actual reasoning. This strikes some logical thought in the reader and the audience, forcing them to acknowledge they eye opening question Nash possesses, “Why save a place like the Grand Canyon, why keep it wild?” (76) After gaining the reader and audiences interest, Nash goes on to explain why change is needed now more than ever. Nash claims that future pioneering should emphasize...
Cited: Nash, Roderick Frazier. Why Wilderness? Reading the Environment: Norton, 1994
Please join StudyMode to read the full document