What do you think?
Rate this book
Lapham's Quarterly: Book of Nature
Forests, oceans, and deserts are all touched by the human footprint when the urban jungle meets the natural world.
Among the contributors: Charles Darwin, John Steinbeck, Rachel Carson, William Wordsworth, Jack London, John Muir, Jamaica Kincaid, Jules Verne, Theodore Roosevelt, Bill McKibben, Simon Winchester, Al Gore, Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Among the contributors: Charles Darwin, John Steinbeck, Rachel Carson, William Wordsworth, Jack London, John Muir, Jamaica Kincaid, Jules Verne, Theodore Roosevelt, Bill McKibben, Simon Winchester, Al Gore, Ralph Waldo Emerson.
224 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 2008
1 person is currently reading
33 people want to read
About the author
Lewis H. Lapham
181 books134 followersLewis Henry Lapham was the editor of Harper's Magazine from 1976 until 1981, and again from 1983 until 2006. He is the founder and current editor of Lapham's Quarterly, featuring a wide range of famous authors devoted to a single topic in each issue. Lapham has also written numerous books on politics and current affairs.
Lapham's Quarterly
http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/
Lapham's Quarterly
http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 22, 2014
You can find links to my numerous blog posts on Book of Nature here: http://fairplay740.wordpress.com/2014... .
L.Q. describes itself much better than I:
“Lapham’s Quarterly is a journal of literature and history, edited by Lewis Lapham. Four times a year we collect fiction, non-fiction, poems, and essays from over four thousand years of recorded time, all gathered around a single theme.”
My standard L.Q. comments apply:
1. ‘Lapham’s Quarterly is the finest publication I read.’
2. ‘In L.Q. I am exposed to great minds without having to read the complete works of each.’
What authors are in this issue? Chief Luther Standing Bear, Plinys the Younger and Elder, John Muir, Immanuel Kant (ugh), Jack London, Al Gore (double ugh, but it is about Nature and who knows more about the settled science of climate change, nee’ global warming), Beowulf, Hitler (triple ugh, he was just in Spring 2014: Revolutions), Aldous Huxley, Theodore Roosevelt, Yeats, Shakespeare, Herodotus, Emerson, Whitman, Hawthorne, to name a few. Should be seventy-five or so total.
The two-page graphic near the beginning of this issue was especially noteworthy. ‘Clearing the Inventory’, map by Jonathan Corum. It’s about how man is using and using up some of the world’s resources. It deserves attention. A reproduction can be seen here. Mr. Corum’s fine work can be perused here.
Lewis Lapham’s preamble this issue is particularly good. That means I personally like it more than many others. It’s titled ‘Messages In A Bottle’. As usual it starts with a quote:
“To me the converging objects of the universe perpetually flow, All are written to me, and I must get what the writing means.”
—Walt Whitman (p. 13)
[I must get what the writing means.—JH]
“Whitman had in mind the writing in the book of nature—whether encoded in a cloud, engraved on a leaf, or printed on the page—the messages in a bottle washed ashore from the shipwreck of what was once a distant star. The tone of urgency in the poet’s voice is well met with the ever more frequent reports of anomaly in the biosphere…”
“The media upgrade the bulletins to terror alerts…” (p. 13)
There he goes. Always pursuing/blaming the media. This from the former editor of Harpers Magazine. Lest I digress, what I like about this preamble is his assertion, logic, insight, clear observation, IMO, that we humans ARE NATURE.
We are not, as some would have you believe, some alien virus or nature malformation spawned to destroy the planet. Man’s innovation and ‘man-made’ creations are as much a part of the planet and universe as water, grass, and sky.
He notes that some of this issue’s extracts will argue whether or not nature is here to serve man. I look forward to those arguments. IMO nature is to be used by man. To what extent, “ay, there’s the rub”. (Hamlet.)
If there is a common theme in this issue’s last section (Terra Incognito) and final essays aside from incognito and ‘we don’t know what’s going on’ it is that Man doesn’t have a common consensus about Nature and doesn’t know what he wants to do with it.
Ms. Dillard quotes the Quran: “Allah asks, “The heaven and the earth and all in between, thinkest thou I made them in jest?”” (p. 154) (Emphasis not mine. -JH)
Good point IMO even without a religious aspect. Do we think our beautiful world and universe is some kind of cosmic joke? It’s extremely well done if it is.
If you are more inclined to side with Werner Erhard (not in this issue), to loosely paraphrase: “Life is empty and meaningless and for me that is exciting. You can create anything you want out it.”, aren’t you also inclined to make something of it and not tear it apart?
Perhaps Alexander von Humboldt (Wiki) nails the love/hate relationship with Nature: “Impressions change with the varying movements of the mind, and we are led by a happy illusion to believe that we receive from the external world that with which we have ourselves invested it.” (p. 173)
…Or E. O. Wilson (Wiki): “Now to the very heart of wonder: because species diversity was created prior to humanity, and because we evolved within it, we have never fathomed its limits. … Nature is to be mastered, but (we hope) never completely. A quiet passion burns, not for total control but for the sensation of constant advance.” (p. 177)
Something tells me the debate will continue for awhile. What will Man’s nature do to the rest of Nature? Shirley it is suicide to come to an end such as Rapa Nui or Mesa Verde. Will you and I have any idea by the end of our lives? I trust our nature and Nature will coexist longer than that.
To be continued… indefinitely.
L.Q. describes itself much better than I:
“Lapham’s Quarterly is a journal of literature and history, edited by Lewis Lapham. Four times a year we collect fiction, non-fiction, poems, and essays from over four thousand years of recorded time, all gathered around a single theme.”
My standard L.Q. comments apply:
1. ‘Lapham’s Quarterly is the finest publication I read.’
2. ‘In L.Q. I am exposed to great minds without having to read the complete works of each.’
What authors are in this issue? Chief Luther Standing Bear, Plinys the Younger and Elder, John Muir, Immanuel Kant (ugh), Jack London, Al Gore (double ugh, but it is about Nature and who knows more about the settled science of climate change, nee’ global warming), Beowulf, Hitler (triple ugh, he was just in Spring 2014: Revolutions), Aldous Huxley, Theodore Roosevelt, Yeats, Shakespeare, Herodotus, Emerson, Whitman, Hawthorne, to name a few. Should be seventy-five or so total.
The two-page graphic near the beginning of this issue was especially noteworthy. ‘Clearing the Inventory’, map by Jonathan Corum. It’s about how man is using and using up some of the world’s resources. It deserves attention. A reproduction can be seen here. Mr. Corum’s fine work can be perused here.
Lewis Lapham’s preamble this issue is particularly good. That means I personally like it more than many others. It’s titled ‘Messages In A Bottle’. As usual it starts with a quote:
“To me the converging objects of the universe perpetually flow, All are written to me, and I must get what the writing means.”
—Walt Whitman (p. 13)
[I must get what the writing means.—JH]
“Whitman had in mind the writing in the book of nature—whether encoded in a cloud, engraved on a leaf, or printed on the page—the messages in a bottle washed ashore from the shipwreck of what was once a distant star. The tone of urgency in the poet’s voice is well met with the ever more frequent reports of anomaly in the biosphere…”
“The media upgrade the bulletins to terror alerts…” (p. 13)
There he goes. Always pursuing/blaming the media. This from the former editor of Harpers Magazine. Lest I digress, what I like about this preamble is his assertion, logic, insight, clear observation, IMO, that we humans ARE NATURE.
We are not, as some would have you believe, some alien virus or nature malformation spawned to destroy the planet. Man’s innovation and ‘man-made’ creations are as much a part of the planet and universe as water, grass, and sky.
He notes that some of this issue’s extracts will argue whether or not nature is here to serve man. I look forward to those arguments. IMO nature is to be used by man. To what extent, “ay, there’s the rub”. (Hamlet.)
If there is a common theme in this issue’s last section (Terra Incognito) and final essays aside from incognito and ‘we don’t know what’s going on’ it is that Man doesn’t have a common consensus about Nature and doesn’t know what he wants to do with it.
Ms. Dillard quotes the Quran: “Allah asks, “The heaven and the earth and all in between, thinkest thou I made them in jest?”” (p. 154) (Emphasis not mine. -JH)
Good point IMO even without a religious aspect. Do we think our beautiful world and universe is some kind of cosmic joke? It’s extremely well done if it is.
If you are more inclined to side with Werner Erhard (not in this issue), to loosely paraphrase: “Life is empty and meaningless and for me that is exciting. You can create anything you want out it.”, aren’t you also inclined to make something of it and not tear it apart?
Perhaps Alexander von Humboldt (Wiki) nails the love/hate relationship with Nature: “Impressions change with the varying movements of the mind, and we are led by a happy illusion to believe that we receive from the external world that with which we have ourselves invested it.” (p. 173)
…Or E. O. Wilson (Wiki): “Now to the very heart of wonder: because species diversity was created prior to humanity, and because we evolved within it, we have never fathomed its limits. … Nature is to be mastered, but (we hope) never completely. A quiet passion burns, not for total control but for the sensation of constant advance.” (p. 177)
Something tells me the debate will continue for awhile. What will Man’s nature do to the rest of Nature? Shirley it is suicide to come to an end such as Rapa Nui or Mesa Verde. Will you and I have any idea by the end of our lives? I trust our nature and Nature will coexist longer than that.
To be continued… indefinitely.
July 28, 2013
I like Lapham's Quarterlies—each issue throughly explorers one topic in short excerpts from any book ever written. Among the contributors of "Book of Nature" are: Henry David Thoreau, Charles Darwin, John Steinbeck, Emily Dickinson, the Bible, Theodore Roosevelt. It's been a long time since I read most of the book which makes it hard to rate.
February 10, 2017
I didn't like this as much as some of the other Lapham's Quarterlies I've read. I can't really put my finger on why though. I think it might be some combination of too much nonfiction, and too many excerpts that seemed to drive exactly the same point home. Or maybe I just don't care about reading about nature (vs. being in nature). Perhaps it's early, and they were still figuring out the format.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews