Re-envisioning the Toxic Sublime: National Park Wilderness Landscapes at the Anthropocene

References

• Allen, J. 1992. Horizons of the sublime: The invention of the romantic west. Journal of Historical Geography 18 (1):27–40. doi: 10.1016/0305-7488(92)90274-D.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balayannis, A. 2019. Routine exposures: Reimaging the visual politics of hazardous sites. GeoHumanities 5 (2):572–90. doi: 10.1080/2373566X.2019.1624189.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, J. 2016. The forgotten history of those iconic national park posters. Popular Mechanics, August 25. Accessed November 23, 2019. https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/outdoors/a22536/national-parks-posters/.
   Google Scholar
• Briwa, R., and N. Bergmann. 2020. Picturing the national parks through postcards at the National Park Service Centennial. FOCUS on Geography 63. doi: 10.21690/foge/2020.63.1f.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, D. R. 2014. Fire lookouts of Glacier National Park. Charleston, SC: Arcadia.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, J., and J. Wolch. 2009. Nature, race, and parks: Past research and future directions for geographic research. Progress in Human Geography 33 (6):743–65. doi: 10.1177/0309132509103156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castree, N. 2014. The Anthropocene and geography 1: The back story. Geography Compass 8 (7):436–49. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12141.
   Google Scholar
• Cosgrove, D. 1994. Contested global visions: One-world, whole-Earth, and the Apollo space photographs. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84 (2):270–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1994.tb01738.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronon, W. 1995. The trouble with wilderness; or, getting back to the wrong nature. In Uncommon ground: Rethinking the human place in nature, ed. W. Cronon, 69–90. New York: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, T. 2018. Toxic space and time: Slow violence, necropolitics, and petrochemical pollution. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 108 (6):1537–53. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2018.1470924.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, J. 2019. Black faces, black spaces: Rethinking African American underrepresentation in wildland spaces and outdoor recreation. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 2 (1):89–109. doi: 10.1177/2514848618817480.
   Google Scholar
• Demos, T. 2017. Against the Anthropocene: Visual culture and the environment today. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeNoon, C. 1987. Posters of the WPA. Los Angeles: Wheatley.
   Google Scholar
• DiFrancesco, D., and N. Young. 2011. Seeing climate change: The visual construction of global warming in Canadian national print media. Cultural Geographies 18 (4):517–36. doi: 10.1177/1474474010382072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dilsaver, L. 2009. Research perspectives on national parks. Geographical Review 99 (2):268–78. doi: 10.1111/j.1931-0846.2009.tb00430.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dilsaver, L. 2014. Preserving lands for future generations: The U.S. experience. In North American odyssey: Historical geographies for the twenty-first century, ed. C. Colten and G. Buckley, 177–93. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Dunaway, F. 2005. Natural visions: The power of images in American environmental reform. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunaway, F. 2018. Reconsidering the sublime: Images and imaginative geographies in American environmental history. In The American environment revisited: Environmental historical geographies of the United States, ed. G. Buckley and Y. Youngs, 277–94. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Gatlin, J. 2015. Toxic sublimity and the crisis of human perception: Rethinking aesthetic, documentary, and political appeals in contemporary wasteland photography. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment 22 (4):717–41. doi: 10.1093/isle/isv032.
   Google Scholar
• Hanson, S. 2004. Who are “we?” An important question for geography’s future. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 94 (4):715–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann, V. 2019. Rural ruins in America’s climate change story: Photojournalism, perception, and agency in Shishmaref, Alaska. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 109 (3):857–74. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2018.1525272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson, B. 2019. The Shadow of Progress and the cultural markers of the Anthropocene. Environmental History 24 (1):158–72. doi: 10.1093/envhis/emy123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, C. 2018. The toxic sublime: Landscape photography and data visualization. Theory, Culture & Society 35 (3):121–47. doi: 10.1177/0263276417745671.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorimer, J. 2017. The Anthropo-scene: A guide for the perplexed. Social Studies of Science 47 (1):117–42. doi: 10.1177/0306312716671039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackay, M. 1998. Singularity and the sublime in Australian landscape representation. Literature & Aesthetics 8:113–27.
   Google Scholar
• Malm, M. 2000. On the technique of the sublime. Comparative Literature 52 (1):1–10. doi: 10.2307/1771516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPhee, J. 1980. Basin and range. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Menga, F., and D. Davies. 2019. Apocalypse yesterday: Posthumanism and comics in the Anthropocene. ENE: Nature and Space 1–25. doi: 10.1177/2514848619883468.
   Google Scholar
• Mirzoeff, N. 2014. Visualizing the Anthropocene. Public Culture 26 (2):213–32. doi: 10.1215/08992363-2392039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, J., ed. 2016. Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, history, and the crisis of capitalism. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, R. 2001. Wilderness and the American mind. 4th ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. doi: 10.1086/ahr/73.5.1612.
   Google Scholar
• Nye, D. 1995. American technological sublime. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi: 10.1086/ahr/101.2.550.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, S. 2013. Image matters: Climate change imagery in U.S., UK, and Australian newspapers. Geoforum 49:10–19. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.04.030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, S., M. Boykoff, S. Niemeyer, and S. Day. 2013. On the use of imagery for climate change engagement. Global Environmental Change 23 (2):413–21. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.11.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, S., and S. Nicholson-Cole. 2009. “Fear won’t do it”: Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication 30 (3):355–79. doi: 10.1177/1075547008329201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, S. J., and N. Smith. 2014. Climate change and visual imagery. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 5 (1):73–87. doi: 10.1002/wcc.249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeples, J. 2011. Toxic sublime: Imaging contaminated landscapes. Environmental Communication 5 (4):373–92. doi: 10.1080/17524032.2011.616516.
   Google Scholar
• Pillen, C. 2008. See America: WPA posters and the mapping of a New Deal democracy. The Journal of American Culture 31 (1):49–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1542-734X.2008.00663.x.
   Google Scholar
• Ranger Doug’s Enterprises. 2019. Home page. Accessed November 23, 2019. https://www.rangerdoug.com.
   Google Scholar
• Ray, S. 2016. Environmental justice, vital materiality, and the toxic sublime in Edward Burtynsky’s Manufactured Landscapes. GeoHumanities 2 (1):203–19. doi: 10.1080/2373566X.2016.1167615.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. 2016. Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. 4th ed. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Runte, A. 2010. National parks: The American experience. 4th ed. Lanham, MD: Taylor Trade.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, V. 2001. The physiological sublime: Burke’s critique of reason. Journal of the History of Ideas 62 (2):265–79. doi: 10.2307/3654358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, J., and J. Ryan, eds. 2003. Picturing place: Photography and the geographical imagination. London: I. B. Tauris.
   Google Scholar
• Steffen, W., J. Grinevald, P. Crutzen, and J. McNeill. 2011. The Anthropocene: Conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions: Series A. Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences 369 (1938):842–67. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2010.0327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, J., and S. Sultana. 2013. Why do so few minority people visit national parks? Visitation and the accessibility of “America’s best idea.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 (3):437–64. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2012.689240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, P. 2012. Darwin, Concepción, and the geological sublime. Science in Context 25 (1):49–71. doi: 10.1017/S0269889711000299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, R. 2020. America’s public lands: From Yellowstone to Smokey Bear and beyond. 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Wyckoff, W., and L. Dilsaver. 1997. Promotional imagery of Glacier National Park. Geographical Review 87 (1):1–26. doi: 10.2307/215655.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youngs, Y. 2012. Editing nature in Grand Canyon National Park postcards. Geographical Review 102 (4):486–509. doi: 10.1111/j.1931-0846.2012.00171.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youngs, Y., 2018. Wild, unpredictable, and dangerous: A historical geography of hazards and risks in U.S. national parks. In The American environment revisited: Environmental historical geographies of the United States, ed. G. Buckley and Y. Youngs, 59–80. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Yusoff, K., and J. Gabrys. 2011. Climate change and the imagination. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2 (4):516–34. doi: 10.1002/wcc.117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziegler, S., and D. Kaplan. 2019. Forum on the Anthropocene. Geographical Review 109 (2):249–51. doi: 10.1111/gere.12336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar