This page was created by Alison Morgan.
Article Summary by Stephen T.
The essay immediately begins with a quote from Margret Atwood describing how her home country of Canada had a unique “shape of its own” when it comes to nature writing. This sets the stage from the rest of the essay because Haig-Browns writing is very distinct. The author then moves on into talking about Roderick Haig-Brown’s history and the way in which he writes. Brown was born in England in 1908 and spent his childhood doing odd jobs, fishing, hunting, and learning to write. He then moved to the Pacific-Northwest of Canada in 1926 where he continued to work as a logger, fisherman, and trapper. He continued to write and considered himself as a writer who happened to fish instead of a fisherman who happened to write. This distinction is very important because someone who is a fisherman first will only be concerned with the physical patterns of the river or the fish. Someone like Haig-Brown who is a writer first can closely observe nature, but can also go through periods of deep personal reflection. Love also characterizes Brown’s writing as “natural science, history, sport, and literature”. This furthers Love’s argument that the work of Haig-Brown should be read and studied because Haig-Brown is someone who grew up being active in nature. He fully understands that to be in nature is to be active within it. It should also be noted that this action is not one of harm, but of enjoyment. This comes from understanding where you are and having a sense of what is going on around you so that you can be a part of that eternal motion which is nature.
From here, Love moves into a section where he references other writers work such as Sherman Paul’s For the Love of the World, Dana Phillips, and Michael Pollan among others. These citations help to paint a picture of some of the major issues that modern nature writing has. These issues include; not challenging dualism, "bad faith”, indifference to nature, and not knowing how to act in nature. Love goes through each one and describes how Haig-Brown excels in all of these categories that most others struggle with. This furthers Love’s argument because Haig-Browns embodies “thinking and doing, interconnection and balance, craft and creativity”. This sentiment is also one of hope because with Canadian nature writing being “a rare encounter”, works with such a grasp on the dualistic nature of our environment, like Haig-Brown’s, are truly something to appreciate.
Glen A. Love argues that we should not be concerned with the labels and how we categorize literature because it limits the experience you can have when you read something similar to Haig-Brown’s work. Whether it be from Canada or the United States or Morocco, writings with a balance of observation and reflection should just be read for the enhancement of one’s own education and interest. Often times students and adults read material so that they get some answer they can repeat to the class or the board room, but what the author is really asking is can we read something like the works of Haig-Brown and simply gain a new perspective or understanding from it.
Love, G. A. "Roderick Haig-brown Angling and the Craft of Nature Writing in North America." Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment 5.1 (1998): 1-11. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.