It was in the Guardian Weekly. As I said - perhaps 96 or97.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Steven Bissell
> Sent: Sunday, 6 August 2000 02:17
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Budiansky on "The Cult of the Wild
>
>
>
> If anyone has this review, I'd like to see it. I read Schama's "Landscape
> and Memory" and have a hard time with the idea that it is
> "anti-environmental." I sure like to see the review if anyone can recall
> where/when/who about it.
> sb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Chris Perley
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 7:05 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Budiansky on "The Cult of the Wild
>
>
> Maria Stella wrote
>
> >
> > This is a reply to Chris Purley that i have just read after a
> > long storage time
> > in my mailbox:
> >
> > > Actually I do recall a particularly vitriolic review of Simon
> > > Schama's Landscape and Memory when it first appeared (though I
> > thought it
> > > uncontrovercial when I read it).
> >
> > Hi Chris, I have this book but not read it yet. What was the
> > critique and why?
> >
> [snip]
>
> CP: it was a few years back, but - if my memory serves me well (I am now
> officially middle-aged - SOB!) the essential problem the reviewer had was
> that humans were so integral to "nature", that any form of disassociation
> between "natural" and "artificial" was a best "a problem". Schama - I
> think - looks at the environmental history of European "nature" to
> illustrate just how completely intertwined society was with it.
>
> The reviewer seems to treat this as a form of (perhaps
> "anti-environmental")
> heresy. Though I don't remember him using the words. It would be about
> 1996 or 97.
>
> Chris P
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|