COMING FULL CIRCLE: PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

ABSTRACT

The role of physical geography (and its practitioners) in the affairs of the Association of American Geographers and in the development of American geography has been varied in both substance and influence during the past seventy-five years. Physical geography was at its strongest in the Association's first decade and has recently experienced a resurgence. American physical geographers have tended to be adherents of the so-called “man-land”tradition in geographical teaching and research, which position is supported herein: firstly, by a review and perspective of physical geography during this century; secondly, through an exposition of some geographical opportunities for the future; thirdly, by discussion of the breadth vs. depth question in geographic education; and, fourthly, by concluding comments on this century's closing circle of events past, present, and future in American geography.

Notes

1 It is traditional, I believe, that most Presidential Addresses have been subject to considerable re-writing and/or editing in the period between delivery and publication. This not only allows the writer to lay on a patina of erudition, but also provides an escape mechanism whereby such scholarly evils as use of vernacular and personal opinion may be excised. This undoubtedly leads to more learned articles; on the other hand, much of the flavor of the original delivery is lost. Because it was my fate to speak at the first AAG banquet in many years, an occasion abundant in nostalgia and honored by the longest head table in Association history, I have elected to hold this manuscript as close to the original as possible. Perhaps, then, some of the flavor of my part in those activities will be retained. The only changes are the addition of footnotes, elimination of the usual prefatory jokes and asides, and the inclusion of four pages of typed text which were held back in recognition of the post-banquet span of attention.

2 John Leighly, “John Muir's Image of the West,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 48 (1958), pp. 309 18; John R. Borchert, “The Dust Bowl in the 1970's,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 6 (1971), pp. 1 22; J. Ross Mackay, “The World of Underground Ice,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 62 (1972), pp. 1 22; and F. Kenneth Hare, “New Light from Labrador-Ungava,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 54 (1964), pp. 459 76.

3 Hare, op. cit., p. 459.

4 John C. Hudson, “A Diamond Anniversary,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 69 (1979), p. 1.

5 John C. Hudson, ed., “Seventy-five Years of American Geography,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 69 (1979), 185 pp.

6 The above figures are calculated from data in the Directory of the Association of American Geographers 1978 (Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1978) and J. R. Schwendeman, Sr., and J. R. Schwendeman, Jr., Eds. Directory of College Geography of the United States, Academic Year 1976–1977, Vol. 28 (1977), pp. 1–80.

7 This point must be reiterated. Neither the Annals, nor its various editors are the target. Undoubtedly editors over the years have each lamented on either the dearth of physical geography manuscripts or the quality of those they receive. Unhappily, this leads to selffulfilling prophecies whereby the publication of few physical geography articles leads to submission of fewer manuscripts, leading to … etc., etc. It is physical geography's Catch 22. The reality remains that the character of the Annals shades our perception of physical geography and vice versa. Because it is our Association's premier publication, it cannot escape attention when one considers the relative roles of physical geography and human geography.

8 The so-called dangers of pluralism affect all of geography, not just the physical component. They should not be discounted, but I personally find these dangers overstated. Pluralism need not lead to fragmentation if specialists operate within the geographic perspective. Mikesell's exposition of the “unity in our diversity” is eminently sensible (Marvin Mikesell, “Current Status” in the Special Opening Session of the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Philadelphia, April 22, 1979). It is amazing, however, how geographers can find so many wheels within wheels. The pluralism issue appears even within subspecialties. See, for example, Karl W. Butzer, “Pluralism in Geomorphology,”Proceedings, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 5 (1973), pp. 39 43.

9 John Leighly, “What Has Happened to Physical Geography?,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 45 (1955), pp. 309 18.

10 Harlan H. Barrows, “Geography as Human Ecology,”Annals, Vol. 14 (1924), pp. 1 16. This article must surely be the most cited of all AAG Presidential Addresses. By using human ecology as a unifying theme, Barrows hoped to distinguish geography from other disciplines. He saw humans operating against a backdrop of so-called natural environment but he felt geographers need only describe that environment and not study it in explanatory terms. He advocated, consequently, that climatology, biogeography, and physiography be dropped from the discipline.

11 Melvin G. Marcus, “Introductory Physical Geography in the College Curriculum,”Introductory Geography: Viewpoints and Themes, Commission on College Geography Publication No. 5 (Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1967), p. 5.

12 Leighly, op. cit., p. 309.

13 A few examples which directly or indirectly address the question include: Edward A. Ackerman, “Where Is the Research Frontier?,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 53 (1963), pp. 429 40; Frank Ahnert, “Some Reflections on the Place and Nature of Physical Geography in America,”The Professional Geographer, Vol. 14 (1962), pp. 1 7; B. J. Garnier, “A Program for Physical Geography,”The Professional Geographer, Vol. 15 (July, 1963), pp. 16 18; David H. Miller, “Geography, Physical and Unified,”The Professional Geographer, Vol. 27 (March, 1965), pp. 1 4; W. B. Morgan and R. P. Moss. “Geography and Ecology: The Concept of the Community and its Relationship to Environment,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 55 (1965), pp. 339 50; National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council, The Science of Geography (Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Geography, Earth Sciences Division, National Academy of Science—National Research Council Publication 1977), Washington, D. C.: National Academy of Science—National Research Council (1965); B. K. Stoddard, “Darwin's Impact on Geography,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 56 (1966), pp. 683 98; Eugene Van Cleef, “Geography as our Earth Science,”The Professional Geographer, Vol. 12 (November, 1960). pp. 8 11; M. Gordon Wolman, “Physical Geography in the Liberal Arts,”Geography in Undergraduate Liberal Education (Report of the Geography in Liberal Education, Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1965), pp. 48–54.

14 See, for example, F. Kenneth Hare, “Climatic and Zonal Division of the Boreal Forest Formations in Eastern Canada,”Geographical Review, Vol. 40 (1950), pp. 615 35 and The Westerlies,”Geographical Review, Vol. 50 (1960), pp. 345 67; David H. Miller, “Snow Cover and Climate in the Sierra Nevada, California,”University of California Publications in Geography No. 11 (Berkeley, California: University of California, 1955) and The Influence of Open Pine Forest on Daytime Temperature in the Sierra Nevada,”Geographical Review, Vol. 46 (1956), pp. 209 18; Arthur N. Strahler, “Hypsometric Analysis of Erosional Topography, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, Vol. 63 (1952), pp. 1117–42 and “Quantitative Analysis of Watershed Geomorphology,”Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol. 38 (1957), pp. 913 20; M. Gordon Wolman and Luna B. Leopold, “River Flood Plains: Some Observations on Their Formation,”Professional Paper 282-B, U.S. Geological Survey (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, 1957), and Luna B. Leopold, M. Gordon Wolman and John P. Miller, Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology (New York: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1964).

15 C. W. Thornthwaite, “The Task Ahead,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 51 (1961), pp. 345 56.

16 Nevin M. Fennenman, “The Circumference of Geography,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 9 (1919), pp. 3 11; Barrows, op. cit., pp. 1–14; and Carl O. Sauer, “Forward to Historical Geography,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 31 (1941), pp. 1 24.

17 In the course of homework for this address, with a group of graduate students at Arizona State University, I embarked upon a seminar into the history of physical geography in North America. Among other efforts, we set ourselves the task of reading each of the Presidential Addresses so that we might gain insights into the attitudes of our Association's leadership vis-à-vis physical geography. For their enthusiastic participation and stimulating interpretations, I would like to express my appreciation to: Harold Bulk, Kevin Flaherty, A. Donald Hyers, Gary Powell, Alex Pupacko, Keith Scoular, Georgia Shrauner, Peggy Winslow, Jeffrey Young, and Valeie Young. Collectors of geographical trivia may be interested to learn that our most successful evaluations were accomplished on a field weekend in Arizona's Oak Canyon/Sedona area. The eventual first-draft manuscript was written on extended field trips to the Palm Springs desert and Colorado's snowy San Juan Mountains, each an appropriate venue for the consideration of physical geography's history.

18 Someone else might interpret the data slightly differently, but I think my statistics generally stand up. Those presidents associated to a considerable degree with alpine and/or polar regions include, chronologically, Ralph Tarr, Lawrence Martin, Francois Mathes. Wallace Atwood, W. H. Hobbs, Griffith Taylor, F. Kenneth Hare, J. Ross Mackay, and Melvin Marcus.

19 G. K. Gilbert, “Earthquake Forecasts,”Science, Vol. 29 (1909), pp. 121 38. Gilbert claimed to have been “an advocate of the principle of scientific trespass.” On p. 122 he is revealed as one of the earlier authors of the “cross-fertilization” analogy so popular among geographers in the first quarter of the century. “The specialist who forever stays at home and digs and delves within his private encolosure has all the advantages of intensive cultivation—except one; and the thing he misses is cross-fertilization. Trespass is one of the ways of securing cross-fertilization for his own crops and of carrying cross-fertilization to the paddock he invades.”

20 Fenneman, in the quintessential cross-fertilization ploy, claimed that the geographer is, or should be, the great insect that carries pollen from field to field.” Fenneman, op. cit., p. 7.

21 Lawrence Martin, “The Michigan–Wisconsin Boundary Case in the Supreme Court of the United States, 1923–26,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 20 (1930), pp. 105 63.

22 All of these addresses appear in the Annals, Association of American Geographers: Albert Perry Bingham, “Problems of Geographic Influence,” Vol. 5 (1915), pp. 3–25; Richard E. Dodge, “Some Problems in Geographic Education with Special Reference to Secondary Schools,” Vol. 6 (1916), pp. 3–18; Charles R. Dryer, “Genetic Geography,” Vol. 10 (1920), pp. 3–16; Ellsworth Huntington, “Geography and Natural Selection: A Preliminary Study of the Origin and Development of Racial Character,” Vol. (1924), pp. 1–16; Curtis F. Marbut, “The Rise, Decline, and Revival of Malthusianism in Relation to Geography and the Character of Soils,” Vol. 15 (1925), pp. 1–29; Douglas W. Johnson, “The Geographic Prospect,” Vol. 19 (1929), pp. 167–231; Wallace W. Atwood, “The Increasing Significance of Geographic Conditions in the Growth of Nation States,” Vol. 25 (1935), pp. 1–16; William Herbert Hobbs, “The Progress of Discovery and Exploration within the Arctic Region,” Vol. 27 (1937), pp. 1–22; Hugh H. Bennett, “Adjustment of Agriculture to Its Environment,” Vol. 33 (1943), pp. 163–95; Glenn T. Trewartha, “A Case for Population Geography,” Vol. 43 (1953), pp. 71–97; Hare, op. cit., pp. 459–76; Borchert, op. cit., pp. 1–22.

23 United States Code, National Climate Program Act of 1978, Public Law 95–367, 92 Stat. 601. Section 9 of the National Climate Program Act authorizes appropriations not to exceed $50,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1979, and not to exceed $65,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1980. Additionally $10,000,000 is authorized for grants in each of the fiscal years ending September 30, 1979, and September 30, 1980, respectively. To date, no funds have actually been appropriated.

24 Fenneman, op. cit., pp. 3–12.

25 Pattison's Comments were reported in Howard G. Roepke. “Applied Geography; Should We, Must We, Can We?,”Geographical Review, Vol. 67 (1977), pp. 481 82.

26 Michigan State University held one of the first conferences on applied geography. This has been reported in ibid. and Harold A. Winters and Marjorie K. Winters, eds., Applications of Geographic Research (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Geography, 1977). The first annual applied geography conference was held in Binghamton, New York in May of 1978. A second conference is planned for September, 1979, again in Binghamton. Papers from the first conference have been published in John W. Frazier and Bart J. Epstein, eds., Applied Geography Conference, Vol. 1 (Binghamton, New York: State University of New York, Binghamton, Department of Geography, 1978) and “Special Issue: Themes in Applied Geography,”Geographical Survey, Vol. 7 (October, 1978), pp. 1–40. A special issue of Geographical Survey on Applied Physical Geography is forthcoming for October, 1979. Interest in Applied Geography has been reflected in several recent issues of The Professional Geographer. These include Daniel P. Beard, “Professional Problems of Non-Academic Geographers,” Vol. 28 (1976), pp. 127–31; James D. Harrison and Robert D. Larsen, “Geography and Planning: The Need for an Applied Interface,” Vol. 30 (1978), pp. 1–2; Melvin G. Marcus, “The Association of American Geographers: Planning for the Future,” Vol. 30 (1978), pp. 113–22; John W. Frazier, “On the Emergence of an Applied Geography,” Vol. 30 (1978), pp. 233–37; and G. S. Dunbar, “What Was Applied Geography?,” Vol. 30 (1978), pp. 238–39.

27 See, for example, various in-house documents of the Long Range Planning Committee, Association of American Geographers, 1977–1978 and Minutes, Council Meeting, Hyatt-Regency Hotel, New Orleans, 8–9 April 1978,”AAG Newsletter, Vol. 13 (June–July 1978), pp. 9 17.

28 The terms “ecology” and “environment” have been rather battered over the years, but nothing compares to the corruption of these words that accompanied the so-called environmental movement of the late 1960's and early 1970's. While the causes may have been worthy, it is distressing to find, for example, that anti-litter campaigns and bottle recycling became substitute definitions for ecology or environmental planning.

29 Preston E. James and Clarence F. Jones, eds., American Geography: Inventory and Prospect (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1954).

30 W. M. Davis, “The Opportunity for the Association of American Geographers,”Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, Vol. 37 (1905), pp. 84 86.

31 Davis, op. cit., footnote 30, p. 85.

32 Preston E. James, “On the Origin and Persistence of Error in Geography,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 57 (1967), p. 20.