What does “wilderness” truly mean? Is it the park in the middle of a city or the mountain towering over a vast national park? In the 1960s, the wilderness became seen as a place of freedom and expression, after the previous exploitation of the land during the colonization of the Americas. Wilderness is an integral part of American culture, to the extent that defining its role in our society was a central element of public consciousness and legislation throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The Environmental Movement of the 1960s and 1970s was a bipartisan movement that fought for the recognition of environmental value and conservation efforts. The Wilderness Act of 1964 marked a pivotal moment in the United States' history regarding the environmental movement. This act sectioned out national parks and protected wilderness areas across the country. In 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency was formed, followed by the Endangered Species Act of 1973. These three major pieces of legislation changed the country’s idea of wilderness. While they were huge steps in conservation in America and worldwide, they brought attention to the disadvantages of environmental preservation, particularly concerning the negative impact on people of color. Wilderness is an integral part of American culture as it provides a space for expression, however, the way that wilderness is defined must change to encompass a much broader definition of what constitutes nature for all Americans to appreciate it fully. 

Wilderness is often described as a place absent of civilization which acts as the epitome of American values. In Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild, he tells the journey of Chris McCandless fleeing from civilization through a series of journal entries and interviews. In this book, McCandless describes his reasons for leaving his old life behind. He recalls the freedom and solitude attained by being alone in the wilderness; “There is a pleasure in the pathless woods, there is a rapture on the lonely shore” (Krakauer). His reason for going into the wild is self-expression and the pursuit of happiness. By using the phrase “pathless woods” Chris states his version of the wilderness is untouched land. Thus, nature provides him with a sense of freedom, as he states “lonely shore”, implying he has the land all to himself. Additionally, his pursuit of happiness associated with nature is parallel to that mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence states this as a right of America, and in Chris’s case nature provided him with his American right. Therefore, nature is often seen as an integral part of identity and important to American society. 

Even today, national parks and other highly protected wilderness areas are thought to be the only pristine pieces of wilderness left in the United States. In William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness”, he recalls the common conception that society associates the frontier with American values/cultural tradition and the true landscape of America; “...easterners and European immigrants, in moving to the wild unsettled lands of the frontier, shed the trappings of civilization, rediscovered their primitive racial energies, reinvented direct democratic institutions, and thereby reinfused themselves with a vigor, an independence, and a creativity that were the source of American democracy and national character. Seen in this way, wild country became a place not just of religious redemption but of national renewal, the quintessential location for experiencing what it meant to be an American” (Cronon). In his article, Cronon addresses the significant increase in environmental support. He argues that this support does not necessarily come from the love of the environment itself, but the nationalism that the environment represents. Therefore, the environment is an important part of the character of Americans and the culture that Americans foster. 

Addressing a similar topic, in Carolyn Finney’s, “Black Faces, White Spaces”,  she attempts to redefine the relationship between African Americans and the wilderness. In her opening chapter, she states, “...Land is a man’s very own soul…Considered to be one of the most important pieces of legislation in American history, the Homestead Act, captured in this cinematic moment, highlights the European American struggle and desire to own land, a particular way of thinking that is embedded in our psyches that “truth” that land (and more specifically land ownership) is directly connected to what it means to be an American” (Finney 21). Finney argues that through American media and legislation, nature, or land, has become a key member of the definition of American citizenship. She goes as far as to quote a film that directly correlates a man’s worth with his land by using the phrase “land is a man’s very own soul”. Land has not only served as a piece of identity but also as a sign of status and a goal to obtain in life. 

 In recent history, the definition of wilderness has lacked the necessary inclusivity, by only deeming national parks and other largely undeveloped places as wilderness, for society to appreciate the benefits of nature fully. Once urbanization reached the western part of the United States, the government took control of the last pieces of wilderness and conserved as much wilderness as possible. Ever since Americans began colonizing North America, they exploited the land for their personal use. This relationship with the land still has influenced decision-making from the 1970s to the present day. To protect the wilderness to its fullest extent, Americans need to widen their definition of it to be more inclusive. William Cronon emphasizes this idea in his article. The trouble with wilderness is not nature itself, but society’s romanticized depiction of the land. Over time, Americans have contorted the wilderness to be a pristine version of the wild and faraway land to fill the standards of American identity. The wilderness is not only far away from national parks, but also can be nature inside of urban landscapes. By acknowledging the breadth of the wilderness, society can treat all nature with the same amount of respect as people do with national parks (Cronon). This respect is a key element in protecting all nature, no matter the location or the size. 

Finney further analyzes the problems with the definition of wilderness by recognizing the issues with inclusivity regarding groups of people. In her book, she mentions that the leaders of the environmental movement were all white, young males, which caused a lack of representation of other groups in the media. This lack of representation for people of color created a harsh, and unwelcoming environment for people of color in the wilderness. Scholars only focus on one side of history, isolating people of color’s relationship with nature. She specifically mentions the Wilderness Act and the Civil Rights Act. While these two pieces of legislation were written in the same year and share parallel structures, historians do not recognize the intersection between these legislative acts. Additionally, these two acts represent the disconnect between the two histories, one of white people and one of people of color. (Finney 40-41). Therefore, this isolation of minorities from the wilderness stems from the definition of the wilderness. Because the wilderness is defined as the epitome of American values and minorities have experienced a hostile environment in America during its creation, nature is often not a welcoming place. To increase the inclusivity of the wilderness, society needs to change how wilderness is defined. 

The definition of wilderness has shifted over the years from the epitome of American ideals to an isolated and unwelcoming place. These shift does not necessarily encapture the possible positive impacts of the environment, if our society changes how people view the wilderness. Additionally, people should not hold the wilderness up to a higher standard as nature is all around us. The United States should not only protect the beautiful national parks but also the city parks and trees lining the streets around us. Our definition of wilderness has caused our conservation efforts to be solely focused on the eye-catching beauties of the world when in reality, nature surrounds us every day. This mindset is preventing Americans from being able to appreciate nature for what it is. Additionally, to change the inclusivity of nature, society needs to recognize the mistakes of the past and understand the intersection of race in nature. By changing these two mindsets, Americans can appreciate wilderness fully and celebrate its position in American identity. 

Works Cited

Finney, Carolyn. Black Faces, White Spaces: Reimagining the Relationship of African Americans 

to the Great Outdoors. The University of North Carolina Press, 2014. 

Cronon, William. “The Trouble with Wilderness”. The Trouble with Wilderness: Or, 

Getting Back to the Wrong Nature, Forest History Society and American Society for Environmental History, June 20, 2013, faculty.washington.edu/timbillo/Readings%20and%20documents/Wilderness/Cronon%20The%20trouble%20with%20Wilderness.pdf, Accessed October 6, 2023.

Krakauer, Jon. Into the Wild. New York, Villard, 1996. 

Ruckelshaus, William D., “EPA Order 1110.2 -- Initial Organization of the EPA”. US EPA. 

Epa.gov. 1970. www.epa.gov/archive/epa/aboutepa/epa-order-11102-initial-organization-epa.html. Accessed 10 Apr. 2024.