WS 3371 Fall 2007

I thought it worth noting that as mentioned in the book the settlers were not of ill-intent in producing such technologies as the steam engine, railroad, water-powered American factories, canals, and irrigation systems. They thought only of the "improvements" these inventions would bring about. They did not consider or anticipate the corruption that much later would be brought about by their misuse.

I think we find ourselves in a similar situation today. Trapped (if trapped is the right word?) in this belief that we are a part of an inevitable progression of technology. At some point will we have to chose one or the other- technology or nature?

If anything it is an interesting observation on how cultures choose to tell their stories. Perhaps I am desensitized because I am a part of this culture, but it seems natural to tell stories about the specific things that have caused progress, change, conflict, or liberation. A story can be told from many angles and maybe the most succinct angle was preferred which manifested itself as a technology based narrative. It seems Americans tend to focus on the underlying issue of many things and not necessarily on the whole spectrum of a topic. For example, I remember history class in high school that focused on the expansion of Americans to the west. The main focus was that the railroad provided a possible expansion. It did not focus on things such as land destruction, impact of the construction, reasons for the expansion, or anything that goes beyond the fact that the railroad itself was integral in enabling Americans to move west. Perhaps this is the simplest way to tell a story; focusing on the particular thing that caused the change as to exclude any subjectivity.

If anything it is an interesting observation on how cultures choose to tell their stories. Perhaps I am desensitized because I am a part of this culture, but it seems natural to tell stories about the specific things that have caused progress, change, conflict, or liberation. A story can be told from many angles and maybe the most succinct angle was preferred which manifested itself as a technology based narrative. It seems Americans tend to focus on the underlying issue of many things and not necessarily on the whole spectrum of a topic. For example, I remember history class in high school that focused on the expansion of Americans to the west. The main focus was that the railroad provided a possible expansion. It did not focus on things such as land destruction, impact of the construction, reasons for the expansion, or anything that goes beyond the fact that the railroad itself was integral in enabling Americans to move west. Perhaps this is the simplest way to tell a story; focusing on the particular thing that caused the change as to exclude any subjectivity.

Nye raises a good point towards the end of the first chapter. It seems that our society becomes so enthralled with the newest technological advancement that previous technologies, however revolutionary they may have been, become forgotten or obsolete. Upon looking back on the previous technologies we remember how things used to be before the "new” technology changed our lives. As Nye points out, inventions like the steam engine, the gasoline engine, and the telephone are all inventions that still employ their intended general concept, but are all viewed as prehistoric in relation to what we have at our disposal currently.

Sometimes I will hear people express how lost they would be without their cell phone or their car. Many times I wonder if things like this were said about each stage of technological advancement. I wonder if those who bought their first Ford Model A said things like this. Is our society advancing technology so fast that we are cannot wait for our current technologies to go out of style? Sometimes I think this is the case, as we are all subjected to a plethora of ads every day. We could always have something newer and better, or so we are told. To me, it would be interesting to do some more research and really get a feel for how our society’s mentality towards technology compares to those of past societies. I wonder if they would be laughing more at us now than we sometimes do when considering “old” technologies.

When it comes to transforming the environment, I believe that the ones doing the transformation are biased towards the benefits of say building a dam or a mill than the negative effects of their implementation in the environment. As Chapter 1 stated, the construction of dams changed the way of life not only for Americans but for wildlife. Fish couldn't migrate upstream and prevented some of them from spawning. Overall, there should have been more concern about the negative effects of such constructions than just visioning the positive effects of them.

I began to view the whole idea of second creation stories as a form of propaganda which seemed to be laid on heaviest before and after the actual implementation of the technology in question. The pre-prop story was as always directed at a group of ordinary people and never singled out some omnipotent supercharacter who battled the natural forces. Instead these individuals were taught to value their stuggle as it contributed to the success of the larger society. During these times the technologies were sold most effectively if they were appealing to the group as a whole while today it is all about the individual consumer.

The most disturbing part of the typical 2nd creation story is the post-prop. After the technology was in place, people would be taught to just accept it as an inevitable part of life, no matter how terrible the downsides to it were. At an even later time they could just pretend these negatives were non existent or just not important.

David E. Nye puts forward some interesting observations about the development of our continent. He seems to take a snapshot in time and then explains the common narrative in the lives of the people that were involved. The modern technologies of the time are presented as the "vehicle" or driving force of their quest to settle the land.

I found his observation that narratives are rewritten after a technology becomes obsolete to be very interesting. In Nye's words, "A technology once celebrated as the source of American prosperity is now described as quaint."

This made me think of the paddle boats that at one time, were the only means for transporting cargo and people to the undeveloped parts of our nation.

Before steam boats came about, people had to use their own muscles to make their way up the numerous rivers that flow across our continents. They had to row, paddle and tow their boats and cargo upstream to their destinations.

I'm certain that the steam boats were a much welcomed technology at the time. But now, they are seen as a nostalgic reminder of the past. They are now used to give tourists short rides and their owners rent them out for parties and weddings.

I in fact recently got married on a paddle boat last year. It was fun and I'm grateful that they are still around, but the modern day use for those beautiful boats is a far cry from their original purpose.

As Americans we are in love with our technologies and, we are extremely proud of what our technologies have enabled us to do. In the stories about our technologies Americans tend to glorify these new technologies, it is almost like propaganda these stories are written to convince people that this new technology is the right direction to go or to scare people about the new technologies. I think that these stories would not affective Americans today. Often you hear Americans speaking about their technologies, today the love affair with technology is not written it is incorporated in our everyday conversations. I often hear people say I could not live with out my cell phone but in all reality we all did live with out cell phone and we could all go back to living without our cell phones.

Reading America As A Second Creation will allow me to see first hand where we've come as a society. From simply reading the introduction and first chapter, I see that technology today may not be of as much value as the technologies of that time. The chapters that are forthcoming will allow us to see how revolutionary these technologies were. Overall, I think about trains, cars, film, etc. and how pivotal these technologies have been to society. Weigh those to something like high speed internet and text message and you may find yourself appreciating the train and car more. I just think this book will unveil how things use to be and will help us evaluate if we've gotten too out of hand with our approach to new technology.

I think an interesting point that Nye makes is that the earlier technologies have influenced and created many of the later technologies. Also, the fact that Nye makes in this first chapter is that the older technologies, while they have historic value and significance, are viewed as nothing compared to what has been created today (when in fact, many of those devices have somehow influenced another important technology and so on and so on). Also, Nye stated that much of the previous technological advancements were made by people to create a lifestyle of ease and prosperity. I think the same can be seen in every era with (most) technological items. These technologies are a way for the others to understand what was important for people at that time, and what drove these people to create and want the things they do... makes me wonder what people are going to say about this generation and the technologies we are using.

Something that I found really interesting the chapter one of the reading was how nineteenth-century Americans viewed technological developments and the taming of a nature to be a normal and inevitable development. Specifically, Nye mentions how rivers were just waiting to be dammed, prairie to be farmed, the woods to be cut down, etc. I can’t help but laugh at the sense of entitlement Americans then felt, and probably still feel, about the land. It seems just because we’re smart enough to develop technology such as railways and irrigation we assume these pieces of technology are meant to be used all over the place. It reminds me a lot of another class I took with Capper in which we discussed Genesis and whether humans were given dominion over the land or whether they were given stewardship. I guess the nineteenth-century Americans took the literal dominion definition as it seems to justify how they felt about expansion into the west.

Reading this chapter reminds me of my grandfather and his stories of the past. I can remember him telling me how hard work around the farm use to be when he was my age. He would then proceed to tell me how fascinated he is with new technologies that have replaced old ones, making work much simplier than before. While I do enjoy the technologies we are surrounded with today, I often ask myself what is it these technologies are truly progressing us towards?
I find it very interesting to know that the first settlers in America viewed the rapid progress and disapperance of the natural landscape as being ment to be or natural. However, I also find it very interesting that today we have Natural Parks and land set aside to maintain nature in a way. Has society finally realized that there needs to be some control over this so called progress? Or are we simply kidding ourselves? Will there ever be an end to this progress in society?

Reading this chapter reminds me of my grandfather and his stories of the past. I can remember him telling me how hard work around the farm use to be when he was my age. He would then proceed to tell me how fascinated he is with new technologies that have replaced old ones, making work much simpler than before. While I do enjoy the technologies we are surrounded with today, I often ask myself what is it these technologies are truly progressing us towards?
I find it very interesting to know that the first settlers in America viewed the rapid progress and disappearance of the natural landscape as being meant to be or natural. However, I also find it very interesting that today we have Natural Parks and land set aside to maintain nature in a way. Has society finally realized that there needs to be some control over this so called progress? Or are we simply kidding ourselves? Will there ever be an end to this progress in society?

after reading the intro and the chapter, i found two things that interested me the most. "By applying new technologies to the physical world we are creating a new society." Says in the Introduction part. our current society are formed base on the consistantly changing of technology innovations. Everyday are live become easier because of things we created. We are no longer live in the society that we need to ride horses to across the country but taking the flights. In my personal experience, I think the statement well explained the role of technology in current society.
Another statement that i like in the chapter one "Technologies are elements of the dialogue about how the world is structured." From time to time our technologies are constantly changing. Look back in the history of time see how our techonology innovations have great impact on our society. There are always one big invention that leads our society into the next stage. Example such as steam train and light bulbs. These technologies innovation are what we call as elements that constructing our world. Without these technology, our current world will still be darkness at night, carrying goods with horses across the country.

I think it will be interesting to read stories about people's views at the time as major technology such as dams and railroads are starting to emerge. In my mind, I think a transition from horses to trains has a much greater impact verses today's technology innovations such as HD televison. I found it very interesting to see that some 19th century Americans beieved technology was was meant to "complete the design laten within nature". It makes me wonder the amount of impact technology had on nature since it was introduced and whether nature was really meant for humans and technology at all.

As I read this book I noticed a lot of similarities between what was happening then and what is happening today. There are many sides to each story. Many times the only story that carries on through time is the prevailing side. This doesn't mean that it is always the 'right' side.

This really shows how differently cultures view technology and nature. As history shows, it always seems that the culture which values nature over technologies doesn't end up on top. Does this mean that improved technology helps society as a whole? Or is it just our fascination and desire for something new? For whatever reason, so far technology has been an important part of American culture.

I found it really interesting that Nye would look at the advances of technology and the white Americans as a creation story. It is a lens that I don't think I have ever heard anybody explore this issue through. It is, in fact all about creation and how it is all (the technology used and the stories told about it) all about creation and what follows.
Another thing I found interesting was in the first chapter. It was the idea that the white Americans were completing the natural world. i just wonder where an idea like this could come from, because even through simple observation humans can see that nature is a very self sufficient and self regulating system.

After reading the introduction and chapter 1 of the book, I came to the conclusion that there are several ways to perceive America as a second creation. Early American settlers viewed all the technological advances as great accomplishments that would benefit all. However, they didn’t look at the costs associated with building canals, railroads, dams, cars, or other technologies. Early settlers didn’t think about the implications for the landscape or even the native, indigenous people; they viewed the technological improvements as natural. The Black Elk Speaks example proves how technological advancements have social costs. As the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. Today, whenever a new technology comes along, some group is always blowing the horn and saying, “Wait!” It seems like new, modern technology (like cloning or stem cells) is scrutinized so much that the general population doesn’t know what to think about it and is spilt on the issue. Today, more people are looking to the future and trying to figure out if certain technologies will actually be beneficial, perhaps this could lead to America as a 3rd creation??

Once I finished reading the intro and chapter 1, I was left with a view of how much technology really has moved forward, as well as how we were completely blind to the effects we were having on the environment. But then I went into my biochemistry lecture and we discussed the mechanisms which chromosomes use to rearrange and move different sequences (which was ultimately about evolution). What I'm leading to is that, just like life on this planet, technology is constantly evolving and we are rearranging elements and trying new combinations of very small components to see if it will bring about something better. We are continually making improvements, and hopefully in time we will find ways to fix anything that we have wrecked along the way.
We are living in a symbiotic nature with technology, and without humans in existence it is hard to imagine any form of technology that would have ever been invented. There are some who believe that humans are done evolving, however, is our evolution not through us but through the technology that we produce? (Sorry to anyone who doesn't believe in evolution)

I really liked how Nye drew the comparison between older inventions and their influence on later inventions and technologies. Why is it that we consider certain things to be out of date or prehistoric, but if they had never been created we may not have some of the technologies we do today. If the telephone had never been created we would not have the cellular phone today. If the steam engine and gas engines had not been created we would not have cars, or airplanes and our modes of transportation would be significantly different from what they are today. I wonder how different our way of life would be without these amazing inventions. It would be so drastically different from what we are used to that it is hard to imagine exactly how life would be. It also makes me wonder why it is that people are so quick to call these older technologies prehistoric or ancient. I wonder what will be the next advancement that we will consider ancient and how soon it will be replaced by something new?

The first chapter of "America as Second Creation," describes the different narrations of the technological advances of the ninteenth century in America. The most interesting note seemed to be the fact that most Americans of the ninteenth century believed in the simple concept that the natural world was incompelete and awaited fulfillment through human intervention. This clearly states that to most Americans, the ideal lifestyle would be the one that is the most convinient and abundant. So based on this argument people should feel happier as we continue to progress technologically. But as the instructor mentioned, less people are happy these days than they were in decades and centuries agoe. Also, the different narrations of the events that occured in the ninteenth century only represent the individual's, or a limited group of people. In any society there is always a group that opposes the situation and one that appreciates it. There's no right or wrong. Throughout the human history there has been different events that people of acted on their own self interest which has caused others pain and agony. That is the human nature: to act on their own self-interest.

The first chapter describes second-creation stories and the counter narratives. The early second-creation stories acted like an advertisement, like to inspire more of the same action in people. The counter narratives describe Native Americans being forced to move and natural landscapes being severly altered. Why did the second-creation stories have so much more power than the counter narratives? Today I do not think that such technological advances could exist with such obvious costs.

The most interesting thing that Nye said was how older technologies that were great innovations at the time have now become ancient and are used to amuse us. I say amuse, meaning how they are now tourist attractions and futile technology. There is no comparing the efficiency and speed brought by an air plane than a steam boat.

It's kind of amazing if you think of how far we have come in technological innovations. Not touching on the negative side of it, but if the steamboat (a huge technology innovation of the past) is nothing but a museum exhibit, what is going to be next. Will something as big as the Internet eventually be at the level of how we now view the steamboat?

When reading Nye's text, I found it interesting how he began his first chapter with an analysis of historical technology. By titling it "Narrating the Assimilation of Nature," he made a bold statement right away. He is making the assumption that Americans, as a historically technology hungry society, have taken nature as their own. While much of this is true, pointing to such phenomenon as pollution, global warming, and urban sprawl, I believe the fault in his argument lies in his assumed intentions of the American people, especially during pioneering times. Although I agree with his that the white settlers did not respect the land as did Native Americans, I believe what drove these people was a desire for discovery and expansion of society rather than the conquering of nature. After all, people who committed their lives to the spreading of settlements during this time had to have a respect for nature just to survive without the modern conveniences we live with today.

The only other fault I find in starting this book with a view of nature v. technology is that Nye is using technology as mainly an encroachment upon nature. He fails to (at least in this section) speak to the change in the function of technology from industrialization times to the present. Now, technology serves much more of a communication and informational function, while before it was for industrial, expansion, and travel purposes.

I find it interesting how our culture regards technology in today’s time. The new technologies of old that were cutting edge in the past have been set aside. When new technology comes out now, such as new phones and newer faster computers, we hail it as huge innovations and great things, but when old technologies come out with great innovations it is barely noticed. From example, the railroad industry came out with a locomotive that is extremely efficient and barely takes any fuel and doesn’t pollute very much compared to the current locomotives. This innovation is a huge boost for the railroad industry and a great innovation; however, it barely got noticed. When we are looking at technological growth, trying to find great innovations, are we missing any improvements that we don't look at on a regular basis?

The part of this reading that caught my attention was when Nye mentioned that many 19th century Americans viewed nature as incomplete. I still get this feeling from people. Our society continues to drastically change the natural environment beyond recognition with little or no thought of the consequences. I recently watched a documentary about development for a class of mine, and when interviewing a car dealership owner he said that they took an empty field and made it look "better". They built a Ford dealership, and around it went restaurants and fueling stations. To this man it changed the "incomplete" natural field into something useful. While many people know that the natural environment is important, they still are happy about a new shopping mall in town or a newer and "better" restaurant to eat at. When will it be enough?

When a new technology comes into the market, people only see what service or luxury it can bring them. Most don’t think about how it can alter their way of life or if it can harm nature. This is kind of how the settlers felt about the new technologies like the railroad and irrigation. Probably no one person thought the railroad would alter how they viewed the land but were excited for the speed of travel.

We are in a society that thrives on technological advances and we are sometimes questioning how far to go. We travel by plane and helicopter—what is next? Everyone owns their private jets? It seems that technological advances are growing at an exponential rate and inventions are coming to market faster than the last one. Our grandparents talk about what a big deal it was to take a family car ride besides going to church. Now students are road tripping and driving hundreds of miles without even thinking twice.

The introduction and first chapter of America as a Second Nation got me thinking. My grandfather loved native american lore, stories, pictures, etc. and told me a lot about them. He would sew bead bags following the symbology and traditions of the native american style, he just didn't use the same tools or materials. At any rate, my point is that i have heard lots of the lore of native americans, and when i read what seemed to be Nye's idea of the equivalent lore for the pilgrim americans, i had to stop and think. Technology as the foundation of american heritage... quite an interesting thought. We didn't start here, we came here to escape a very strict government (and, you know, to start colonies and whatnot). We have no roots here, except the developments we experienced along the way. With that, we continued conquering the new world until we had no more land to conquer, and our history was won but for the technology we used to achieve it.

I can be seen that as technology advances the landscape changes. Back in the 1800s when settlers were beginning to venture west the landscape changed drastically in 50 years. Forests were cut and prairies were plowed. The landscape is still changing today though, whether we really notice it or not. As technology continues to advance the landscape continues to be affected. It doesn’t seem as drastic as the first settlers’ changes but it may very well be. Fields that were established in the early nineteenth century as agricultural lands are now being encroached by growing cities and housing developments. The little modified nature that is left continues to be domesticated as the need for space flows over the city limit boundaries.
Yet, not all change is in the direction of worsening nature. Many programs are now using technology to their advantage and giving back to the nature that was changed so quickly. New wetlands are being created and new forests being planted. Better understanding of the environment is leading to sustainable technology. Technology is working on improving natural environments back to the way they where and so they can be used many times over.

I found one of Nye's comments very interesting. "Americans constructed technological foundation stories primarly to explain their place in the New World, not to understand the technologies. Maybe he is right, maybe that is why American is such a technological country. I am sure way back then everybody wanted the newest in carraige equipment, just as today we want the newest and coolest cell phone. There can be a lot of social value in technology. I remember how cool the first person in high school was that got the wheely shoes. (Now that I am older that sounds so dumb) Also, think about an adult example. Like a guy who has the best plasma TV, all the guys will come over to watch the game. That seems so weird how we sometimes get technology not for the actual technologic function it has.

It comes as no surprise to me that civilizations tend to skew the historical record in their favor, be it represented in this instance as the progression and technological dominance of the Europeans or the dismantling and eradication of the native peoples and their land. Both “narrative” and “counter-narrative” accounts are based on someone’s construal of truth, but finding an impartial interpretation is something that perhaps cannot happen until a sufficient amount of time has passed before no single man’s interest undermines such truth. Nye’s book, I believe, will testify to this fact. The challenge for him, then, is to filter what should be filtered and retain what should be retained, because one must be sure that he or she is not basing his or her interpretation of reality on fallacy.