A lovely, transformative book about a lovely, transformative place.
Red: Passion and Patience in the Desert, by Terry Tempest Williams, was my go-to book on a recent road trip to Arches, Canyonlands, Capitol Reef and Zion parks (sadly, we didn’t have time for Bryce Canyon). It was an amazing trip to some of the most breathtaking wild places in the country, and the book was the perfect companion. For the sake of full disclosure, I planned on re-reading Desert Solitaire (Abbey) but was put off by some of the evolving critical research into his racist and sexist views. Williams has all the love and reverence for the wild, quiet places — most notably, the desert landscapes of Utah — without any of the extra baggage, and she’s a far more lyrical writer, a style that suits the haunting desert landscape.
A poet, Williams brings an especially powerful, effective approach in her writing about the transformative power of the desert landscape and why we need to do more to protect these beautiful places from development and the metal claws of the resource-extraction industries. She blends personal experience, stories, poems, selections from other authors and even media coverage to present a well-rounded view of the red-rock wilderness, the people and animals who live there and the ever-encroaching threats. And she presents a larger view of why wilderness and solitude are so important.
It was immensely satisfying to sprawl out in a hotel bed, legs tired from hiking the Fisher Towers trail, drinking a beer and reading about her observations and inspirations while she hiked the very same trail.
Two things kept the book from being a five-star read. The first is simply its age. Red was first published in 2001 and reading about the potential horrors of a pro-industry (or mixed use) conservative administration featuring then-Interior Secretary James Watt fell a little flat given the current crisis circumstances of 2020. That’s no fault of the author, of course, but makes her hopeful attitude about the future ring hollow. Little could Williams predict that environmental regulation under the current administration would make Watt look downright green.
The second criticism is more nuanced. The conservation ethic the author espouses, and in fact most conservationists call for, is steeped in the privilege of wealth. The ability to cultivate a sense of solitude in some of America’s most lovely wild places requires the kind of privilege that simply doesn’t exist for many — most even. And, in her case, picking up and moving to the desert and getting to know the place so intimately is not only impractical, it would be disastrous for wild places if everyone did that.
And as we learned on “free park day” when we happened to arrive in Zion National Park, the era of having quiet, contemplative time alone in these beautiful places simply no longer exists. There were thousands of visitors lined up, and hundreds waiting for each shuttle bus (and this was during the pandemic, so no international visitors were present). And while that number dipped some as the week progressed, finding a place to sit alone and quietly think about the transformative effects of the desert landscape was, simply, impossible.
The desire to experience nature is what threatens nature. The challenge of conservation is that seeking the experiences we value — awe and peace and serenity and stillness — comes at a steep price: more people in the parks. There are simply too many of us, and all too interested in a wilderness experience, for wilderness to long survive, at least as Williams knows it.
The author seeks, admirably, to cultivate an appreciation for nature based on eroticism (separate, of course, from sexuality). But even that requires sharing space with the places we cherish — no matter the appreciation, the “partner” is the same for all of us. I can’t help but think a more appropriate appreciation of nature requires cultivating an inner appreciation for the existence of wilderness, not just the experience of being in the wilderness, and certainly not the selfie-driven desire to merely document our temporary place in it.
It’s challenging, of course, but anything short of this — as our population soars — will replace the potential of a lived experience in wild places with simply getting in line with a stream of other visitors so we can check the box for “took selfie at the famous place.”
Williams writes, “When we are in our urban skin, what we know is largely translated through television, radio, billboards newspapers, magazines, and the Internet, fast paced conversations we catch on the run. We maneuver our way through a maze of shimmering surfaces, concrete, glass, and asphalt. Speed is our adaption to an abstract life.”
My experience in Arches and Zion is that even the desert can’t quiet people into leaving that pace behind. The only thing that changed for the throngs of people was the setting. At first, we were a little irritated, but on deeper thought, made our peace with it. Why shouldn’t people want to see and experience these amazing places, even if only quickly and from a moving car? Thinking they exist for a handful of people to have, in essence, a spiritual moment, creates only aggravation and conflict.
I left the park thinking that what we really should focus on is cultivating an appreciation of quiet contemplation, of the magic of life, at ALL times, and one that — hopefully — will drive us to cherish and more thoughtfully sustain all of the environments we live in, including wilderness. It’s certainly easier in the wilderness, but we must be able to access this peace and quiet, this thoughtful life, no matter our surroundings. Perhaps with just an occasional visit to the “real” thing.
Looking at the current dumpster fire of 2020, my hopes are not high. But reading authors such as Williams reminds me that there is a better way, that doesn’t exist only in Utah, national parks or the wilderness. It exists inside each of us.