Rhetoric 3371 Questions

Chapter 7 described this strong ideology that Americans toward the development of new technologies in the 19th century. I believe Nye explains it best when stating “god made it for us to use, manipulate, and create new”. This refers to Mother Nature and “god’s favors” that have been essentially given to us. Nye goes on to state that the mountains serve as a barrier, and they are “god’s plan for national expansion.” The main objective of creating canals and steam boats was to create local prosperity by creating links to the international market, whereas the rail road’s purpose was to build cities and create a westward passage. In Europe, the train still connects heavily populated centers, and as someone mentioned in class, I believe this is why the passenger train is still prevalent in the Europe. I think the main reason why passenger trains have become extinct to some extent in the US is because of the interstate system we have. It’s much faster to drive, than to take a train. What are some technologies still prevalent in “1st world” countries that the US has veered away from? Are there some technologies other countries have that we have not adopted yet?

The creation of the railroad was more then just another form of transportation, it proved to be a way to distribute social and economic growth to regions that were not independent to the needs of the river ways. When I think of the concept of railroads what comes to mind is a great tool to transport heavy objects at a fast rate, however the ability it had to move throughout mountain ranges and essentially through any terrain, as well as into multiples of cities dotted all over the map, increased its value for the growth of America. Most cites from the early settlement of this country were placed next to oceans or rivers. Take Minneapolis and Saint Paul for example, everything in our cities were imported and exported through the use of the Mississippi river. In the early days of settlement the idea of importing goods to another region without the location being near a river hardly seemed plausible. The train however aided in thriving autonomous cities far from waterways. It is intrusting to think that some were skeptical about the addition of the train. In every era there are those who fear change and in all cases it is a gamble if it is for the better or the worse. In this case the train was a major benefit and not only added jobs for Americans, but helped to create a steadily growing economy. Another fascinating aspect is that the railway from Boston to Springfield was built mainly off of city funding, almost all from Boston capital. It shows the drive for independence as the nation was growing. In this day and age it would be rare to see a roadway, railway or any means of transportation between multiple states evolve without the help or funding of the government and almost exclusive funding from one city.

The growth and effect of the railroad on America’s physical, social and economic landscape was extraordinary. Nye states that “many western cities saw themselves as the future centers of national commerce and culture.” Omaha, with its railroad connections, saw “spectacular growth” and expected to become a major city. As the railroad decline began in 1916, how great was the effect? I’m sure it was minimized by the use of the automobile and the expansion of roadways, but I wonder how much those roadways followed the original paths and growth created by railways which would have continued their original influences. Omaha, for example, did not become a Chicago, but it is still a large city. What other factors helped determine which cities thrived and which failed? After reading this chapter, I would like to read about the businessmen who profited from the railroad and how they used their accumulated wealth and power in various cities. I wonder if this had any influence on where the eventual growth occurred.

on page 153 nye sums up the rhetoric of the time around railroad and canal construciton as " A railroad or a canal thus became an extension of divine will exercised through man." The religous and spirtitual connotations in this statement tell us a lot about how the builders felt about themselves and their place in the world. These men felt totally righteous in thier decision making. they were in their minds i think gods. Religion once again became a justification for actions. it amazes me how logic and method can be used to discover the laws of nature to harness them, but when it comes time to apply them we use presuppostions and hooey like "divine right" to justufy uses. Now i am not condeming the rail road and other technologies as such, but i think the sloppiness of the thinking in applying them is apparent today. What today do we use this kind of rhetoric for? Things like genetic research comes to mind although in this case religion is often used to stop the creation. we have a creation story that can't fit any more new technologies and another must be written.
This idea of mans actions as "creations stories" really affects the interpretation of it by the individual. Spirituality is a very individual thing and the telling of the american creation story in that sense shows a very interesting perspective of how people interpret their actions and the actions of the collective they consider themselves a part of. fascinating stuff really.

America as Second Creation:

In sections of chapter seven, the differences between railways and water transportation are discussed. It was interesting to read how the different types of transportation served different causes. While canals and steamboats seemed to be used mainly for semi-local transportation of goods to stimulate the economy of small towns, railways, in addition to economic stimulation, were used as expansive means. Also, this chapter brought up how much cheaper and less affected by the environment railways were. The change of seasons would have enormous effects on canals and waterways of colder climates. Cost was another issue which seemed to favor railways. Building canals at that time cost about twice as much as railways. Another issue which proved to be a problem with water transportation was steep inclines or declines where locks would need to be used. All in all, railways seemed to be the better choice.

At the end of the chapter, Nye writes, "Frederick Jackson Turner argued that the United States had developed in an orderly sequence. He compared the continent to a vast page to be read from west to east..." (p. 172). Yet the history of the US is hardly an account of a well-organized sequence of events. It seems that all this talk of fulfilling our manifest destiny (ordained by our creator, no less) was just a rationalization for the chaos that actually ensued as a result of the building of the railroad system. It was a story fed to the public in order to motivate them to participate in the movement across the frontier. But why do we still cling to this version of history? Because it's easier to tell and to understand? Because it makes us feel better about our country, more patriotic even? Personally, I find Nye's descriptions of "convulsive growth" and "mania" much more interesting, and much more telling of the way our society interacts with new technologies. We develop technology in a much more haphazard way than we'd like to think.

Speaking of haphazard, the descriptions Nye gave of the of towns fading in and out of existence made me think of the dot com boom and how the same type of enthusiasm displayed by the pioneers of the 1800's must have driven these twentieth century entrepreneurs. Specifically, the phrase attributed to Albert Richardson seems to draw a nice parallel between the two social outbursts: "It was not a swindle, but a mania." Is this kind of exuberance purely economically driven? Or is there something about new technology that is inherently exciting?

In the latter half of chapter 7, I found it interesting how settlement differed in the Middle States versus the West. Railroads served as the foundation for undeveloped cities in the West, whereas, in the Middle States, the towns and their needs caused railroads to enter the picture. It is fascinating how this technology transformed American life socially and economically. Leo Marx stated, “Nothing of this visible landscape ---- is capable of standing up the forces of which the railroad is a symbol.” To think that there were over 250,000 miles of track by 1916 is mind boggling because now railroads are not as essential. What technologies today do you think will become unwarranted for within the next twenty years?

It is interesting to look back and attempt to determine why events unfolded the way they did. Europeans have done many things throughout history because of the three G’s: Guns God and Glory. We considered it our saintly and civic duty to bring our technological and theological know-how to the new, primitive landscape and its people. I especially thought the painting “Across the Continent” was very truthful. On the right side are the Native Americans covered in a plume of coal smoke; on the left side are the settlers with their many children and horse drawn carriage. Separating the two, and rendering the Native Americans powerless to do anything, is the Railroad, the technology of the new settlers that was unstoppable in its conquest for the West. In 1835 when addressing the concerns of the ability for the lands new people to divert trade from its ‘natural locations,’ Edward Everett said, “There are two kinds of natural channels – one sort made directly by the hand which made the world; the other, constructed by man, in the intelligent exercise of the powers which his Creator has given him.” The settlers could care less because they were guided by the highest power, God. They were not responsible for destruction of nature or human life. Their responsibility, it seemed, had been divinely lifted from their shoulders.

In this reading I was really surprized by the amount of initiative that everyone had for the railways. I didn't see anyone sign of descent by a single quote that Nye used. Everyone thought that the railways were the answer to this quest in "manifest destiny." I thought the debate of whether it was natural to "improve" nature was interesting because the people recognized they were changing this landscape. When did the term "wilderness" go from a word with negative connotations to positive connotations? Have we taken this idea of manifest destiny too far?

The second half of this chapter definitely emphasizes the idea of second creation. “The argument that the landscape contained latent within it the rudiments of a grand design, which it was man’s destiny to carry out…” By this idea, man was to take the landscape and sculpt it to God’s desire. Religion is a very strong motivator in the lives of almost all people, and thus a justification of technological change played a huge role in the resculpting of earth to fit our needs and desires. Railways were the stepping stone to changing the world to fit our transportation needs. Today, everything is sculpted around transportation. Movement of people and goods is essential to the lives we lead. The biggest cities are all a product of shipping lanes whether it be by water, railway or truck.

I found it really interesting in the readings that throughout history people believed that it was at the will of God that they perfect civilization and their surroundings. They were not destroying nature but as Nye puts it, awakening nature, completing nature’s “latent… grand design.” I also found it interesting that instead of connecting cities together, the railroad built them. Currier and Ives picture titled “Across the Continent” was used to represent time, which I thought was interesting. New communities with a railroad represented the present time and empty land was ahead of the tracks was waiting to be developed in its future. Besides those two points I found it particularly interested that they also used the Native Americans along side of the railroad. This symbolized with the smoke from the train blowing over them that we were blocking their view of the land, and Nye puts it, their future. I’m curious on what impact we had on the Native Americans of the time? Also how they adapted to these changes landscape changes?

After reading Chapter 7, it was noticeable how much people relied on the new technologies. The railroads and canals were able to provide jobs for many people. Eventually, people mostly settled near railroads and canals because then they were able to get everything they needed. Even in these early days some people were aware of how beneficial technological expolorations can be.

However, many people weren't happy. Like mentioned above, the native americans didn't take kindly, and neither did some farmers whose cattle roamed across the tracks. Even after there was the new technology, mother nature got in its way, just as it does now.

Why wouldn’t God have created the world for people to play with? It seems like in creating a world for people to exist in, and in being all knowing and all seeing and all of everything, He might have considered putting valleys in mountains to ease in their crossing. I don’t think he intended for us to abuse nature, and destroy entire ecosystems, but I don’t think people were intended to sit in the Garden of Eden for all of eternity. I also think that in giving us intelligent free thinking minds He meant for us to use that intelligence and explore the world He created (although as a Christian, I’d prefer the rest of the world to have a more biblical respect for the rest of creation).

In Chapter 7 in mentions that why should we not improve our lifes or the places we live by building and expanding by means of technology? If we weren't meant to do that why would god give us the wisdom/power to do so. I agree with this opinion to some extent, but when does it become overdoing it? Are we overdoing it already by the harm we have already caused nature and the atmosphere?
Most of the chapter is about railway travels, and I just wanted to know why America did not continue with this method of transportation as Europe has. Europe uses train travel a lot from city to city and country to country and it is quite convenient. Why did America stop? I know a while ago Minneapolis had street cars (old version of lightrails) around the city and into neighboring cities, but they were torn down because of the advancement in cars and perhaps by a conspiracy involving big oil and auto companies. And now Minneapolis is trying to reinstate this means of public transportation. Why did we stop in the first place? Is it because of oil and Auto companies or was it just the advancement of society?

The creation of the railroad opened many more doors than I thought there ever was. Today, we think of railroads as a way of transporting freight and even passengers in rare areas. It really displays the vast possibilities there are when new transportation technologies are developed. Towns apparently formed themselves around railroad stations because of its accessibilities to other towns and the ability to bring goods to the town. When reading this chapter it reminded me of McDonald’s restaurants. I was once told that almost all highway exits lead to a McDonald’s; in most cases I have witnessed this to be true. With the expansion of highways and the factors of supply and demand it was viewed as cost effective to build a McDonald’s on most highway exits. Comparing this idea to the past, railroads were built as a means of supply and demand as well. Wherever there was a railroad built there was always a chance that a new town would form.

I wasn’t aware that the railroad system was so much more than just another mode of transportation. It made expansion possible. It made a connected life possible at great distances. I also didn’t realize the speed at which the rails were built. The description on page 160 delivered a good image:

“We found the workmen, with the regularity of machinery, dropping each rail in its place, spiking it down and seizing another. Behind them, the locomotive, before the tie layers; beyond these, the graders; and still further, in the mountain recesses, the engineers.”

The west seemed like the talk of the town for everyone. Everyone seemed very excited, and kept talking about “a friend of a friend” or “their uncle” who made a fortune on selling land out west. The west was the new thing. However, not knowing what lay ahead, many decided to move west. What were their motives to go west? Did they seek a new life? Were they after more money? Also, it was mentioned that the American railroads were much less expensive to produce than the European railroads. Why were they less expensive, yet more successful than Europe?

Trains are so loud, I would know because I live right next to one - I fell asleep while reading this chapter and the damn train woke me up.

I found it crazy that the 19th century Americans were just throwin' up towns like nothing because of the new trains. They didn't much care where the towns were, as long as they were advancing westward. This seems a little haphazard, kind of like that time when Frankenstein created a monster because he wasn't thinking of the consequences. The consequence, of course, is that we have created a society with a voracious appetite for growth. Finally, it is becoming apparent that America needs to think of new ways to grow (not just spatially). This chapter illustrates America's naive beginnings with the concept of growth.

When railroads first started showing up in places in the United States that were uninhabited, people were witnessing a transformation like no other. New towns were popping up all along the railroads. The wilderness was now being torn down for more railroads to be built and thus more places inhabited. People could now live on the land west of the Mississippi and be within traveling distance of the great cities of the east. The westward movement was made possible by the railroad revolution and this was arguably the greatest thing America had experienced. The economy drastically changed and markets expanded because of transcontinental transportation.

The painting in this reading was especially moving. The plume of smoke rising over the indians while the carriage of european americans looked healthy and prosperous. It really gives an insight to the relentless drive for innovation by the settlers, and the devotion to not let anything stand in their way. Much of what they did they did out of richeous inhibition. They felt like laying railroad and paving their way across the land was their duty bestowed upon them by God. What was it that made people so convinced that what they were doing was right?

Similar to the last reading, this week’s reading really opened my eyes to the impact of the railroad on American history. It was cool to read about the power that the railroad possessed. For example, Emerson Hough said that “the railroad was not to depend upon the land, but the land upon the railroad.” Towns were developed and laid out in a certain way solely as a result of the railroad. However, I thought it was very interesting to see how the progression of time has changed our thoughts on the railroad as well. In the beginning on the east coast and in Europe railroads were used to “connect centers of population” but in the West they made the centers of population. The power of railroads was shown by their ability to enable people to see the mountain barrier not as a barrier at all, but as “part of God’s plan for national expansion.” Why don’t Americans think like that anymore? The power of railroads has decreased significantly since then. Now in some cities, Rochester for example, the railroads are despised by the town. Has the railroad finally met its match?

One thing that irked me about the reading for today was on pg. 155 where human expansion was compared to a “mighty river”. I don’t think that the way humans expanded and went through mountains can in any way be compared to the way a river cuts new paths. First this is because when a river does change paths, it is a very slow and relatively undestructive process; humans on the other hand did this rapidly, and with much destruction. Second, a river creates life for many different species; it has nutrients to nourish the land, as well as every living organism. The railroad however did create towns, had absolutely to positive effect on the land, or the many organisms that were dependant upon it.
I also found it rather ironic that the American people were compared to a mighty river, overflowing its banks and surging into a new region. To me this is the description of a flood, and to my understanding, floods are usually not seen as a very positive thing.

What I found most interesting about this piece of reading was the fact that the American people justified establishing transportation as God's second creation. I guess what I am confused about is why did people need to be justified when it came to bettering their communications, transportations, and way of life? I guess if you needed a justifcation (or not really a justification, but an explaination) the whole story about "God created man to better the soil and land" that kind of story would do it for you. I guess I knew the early colonists were very religious, but I also knew that they were very anxious to better their lives after Europe, it's interesting how they labeled their canals, steamboats, axes, mills, etc. as "a partnership between man and nature, ordained by the creator."

Like Mandi I also found interesting the justification of technology for progress. And to a cretain degree, I agree with it. We have the ability, given by God or whomever you may worship, to progress and improve our lives. We also have, however, the ability to sense when our own interests intrude and impinge on other life forms, and we sometimes choose to ignore that sense and continue to justify our actions. I think that Nye would agree with cautious progress.

A twist on the justifications Nye described wasnt't just that we have the God-given ability to expand and progress, but that we were to improve on nature and uncover an already rudimentary grand design (154) that existed below the rough landscape. This was a new one to me; I guess because we outused it at the turn of 1900.

I would find it very interesting to see the United States and how and where cities would be located if railroads were never invented. Just to think of how much the railroads impacted major cities such as Chicago. Would there be a Chicago without railroads? Were cities going to be big, or did the railroad help to make them big? I think railroads helped to shape America and build our cities as I think Nye agreed. Railroads made towns and cities accessible and the possibilities were endless. The railroad era was the start of a transportation revolution, and soon goods and people could be moved around the country. I have not witnessed a technology as influential as the railroad in my lifetime, but wonder if I will. I don’t think I could because the railroad was so dominating that it was in a league of its own. Sure my generation could create a new form of transportation, but we have so many forms to choose from these days it would just be another option. For the people who saw the birth of the railroad, it was revolutionary.

As I read chap 7 and it talked about how the trains into the west preceded the towns and caused inflation of land prices I thought how stupid that was. I know why it worked that way but can’t understand why it took so long before the public realized how stupid it was and slowed it down. The railroads were given land for free so they could build more lines. They in turn stripped the resources to build lines then sold the land to people out east often under false premises. It was obviously a lucrative business. Do you think it would have worked that way if communication at that time between the expanding frontier and the east hadn’t been primarily controlled by the railroad companies propaganda?

This reading just screamed "This land is here for you for the taking." Canals and rivers were considered "natural" channels of trade. Natural, in the sense, that they were part of the vast, "uninhabited" land of America. The leap from water to rail seems the pivotal turning point in the political and economical progression of America.

The comparison of "narrative" versus "counter-narrative" is significant here. American's viewed the land as there for the taking, as though it was created for the White Man to take.

The economic development that followed with the railroads showed how much synergy there was behind technology and advancement of the American Dream.

The Ilinois Central charter prohibiting cities along its routes turned railroads from a primary transportation tool to a trunk that would propser expanded reach as citizens learned to use the rail and nearby cities as distribution hubs. This, perhaps, was key to expanding American prospecting.

After reading Nye’s second half of chapter 7 the transformation from a wilderness landscape that was sustained by the Native Americans to an industrial landscape that uses technology to create a movement of expansion refined humans relationship of social interaction. Nye states, “human creations transform the landscape, which in the distance remains vague and unformed, whereas in the foreground a new has been impelled in life by the railroad.” The railroad was a success in providing a passage to the West, but was it practical? The railroad was more efficient and cost less then the canal. So, the development of technology is a solution to a more effective and efficient means of performing tasks? What about the consequences that we face everyday from technology? We use to technology to benefit us and to overcome obstacles, but do we as a society foresee the risk or dangers of the technology as well? Is there a consensus in technology performance or do we present a new technology before there is a resolution?