This is an insightful lesson about Moran’s role in transforming Yellowstone’s cultural landscape. Undoubtedly, his painting introduced the stunning Yellowstone landscape to the American public. As you note, the painting caused a stir at its 1872 unveiling just weeks after Congress made Yellowstone a national park. Congress subsequently purchased it for an outlandish price, and made it the first landscape painting to be displayed in the Capitol. Prints of Moran’s masterpiece also became a ubiquitous fixture in schoolrooms across America.
Often overlooked, though, are the larger contexts of transforming the cultural landscape of Yellowstone. As I argue in my new book, Sacred Wonderland: The History of Religion in Yellowstone, the park was a product of Manifest Destiny. The legislation designating Yellowstone as a national park domesticated a previously “wild” territory as parkland, making it an extension of the civilized regions of the nation. In the logic of Manifest Destiny, parks were evidence of the nation’s fulfillment of the Christian duty to bring civilization to the entire continent.
Moran’s painting played a crucial role in this cultural transformation of Yellowstone. I’m not alone in noticing the relation between the two small figures in the lower portion of the painting. According to art historians who have studied the painting, they are the geologist Ferdinand Hayden and an unidentified Native American. Hayden gestures toward the brightly lit canyon while the Indian is facing toward the darkness away from the canyon, but his head is turned back toward the geologist’s gesture. As cultural geographer Gareth John notes, Moran’s positioning of these two figures symbolizes the imperialist relationship of US explorers and Native Americans, “as if the latter were conceding the territory in its pristine natural condition to the former.”
We tend to forget, or willfully suppress, the fact that Yellowstone and virtually all places in North America had cultural meanings long before Europeans and their descendants arrived. Other people had generations of investment in those lands. Certainly, the paintings of Moran, Albert Bierstadt, and others created a new cultural landscape for the people of the United States, but they also were displacing indigenous cultural meanings for those same landscapes. Moran purposely displays that displacement in this most famous of his works.
Well said! It's hard enough to realize that what we're "seeing" in a landscape is shaped by our culture -- much less that other cultures have other lenses. And congrats on "Sacred Wonderland." I've been hearing about it, and wanting to check it out, for a while now. Thanks for speaking up.
If I have the story right, people lined up and paid to view this painting before Congress purchased it. What a different experience than how easily you can post it or how easily I can find the image if I want to see it. Of course, there was the intermediate step of print media; I have this image in books, and it takes very little effort to find it there. But at what point does the quality (I was about to say 'nature') of the experience of viewing this become something totally different than Moran's?
Also, you and I have seen this in person many times. Is the image the same after each trip? Is it the same for someone who has never seen it except as an image? And how does the fact that I could easily pull up a video of the falls in motion affect my perception of this image? Babbling, I know, but thinking about how technological change and cultural evolution affect our perception of and behavior in the natural world.
One function of paintings in the old days was to present people with colors they couldn't otherwise see. Before computers, TVs, postcards, or easily dyed cloth, you might not ever experience the colors Moran saw in Yellowstone. People lined up like they would to see a celebrity. Moran was capturing nature for the culture of his time -- and today's culture seeks something far different from that same source.
Yet Moran’s work still speaks to us (or am I naive?), while I have serious doubts about the long-term value of the National Geographic video of the falls that I have on the shelf.
To me, this is the value of being good at your craft. Moran benefitted from Yellowstone -- but he was also a great artist. Subsequent artworks about Yellowstone in many formats have been made by people with lesser talents. (And yes, that likely includes my own writings! :) )
This is an insightful lesson about Moran’s role in transforming Yellowstone’s cultural landscape. Undoubtedly, his painting introduced the stunning Yellowstone landscape to the American public. As you note, the painting caused a stir at its 1872 unveiling just weeks after Congress made Yellowstone a national park. Congress subsequently purchased it for an outlandish price, and made it the first landscape painting to be displayed in the Capitol. Prints of Moran’s masterpiece also became a ubiquitous fixture in schoolrooms across America.
Often overlooked, though, are the larger contexts of transforming the cultural landscape of Yellowstone. As I argue in my new book, Sacred Wonderland: The History of Religion in Yellowstone, the park was a product of Manifest Destiny. The legislation designating Yellowstone as a national park domesticated a previously “wild” territory as parkland, making it an extension of the civilized regions of the nation. In the logic of Manifest Destiny, parks were evidence of the nation’s fulfillment of the Christian duty to bring civilization to the entire continent.
Moran’s painting played a crucial role in this cultural transformation of Yellowstone. I’m not alone in noticing the relation between the two small figures in the lower portion of the painting. According to art historians who have studied the painting, they are the geologist Ferdinand Hayden and an unidentified Native American. Hayden gestures toward the brightly lit canyon while the Indian is facing toward the darkness away from the canyon, but his head is turned back toward the geologist’s gesture. As cultural geographer Gareth John notes, Moran’s positioning of these two figures symbolizes the imperialist relationship of US explorers and Native Americans, “as if the latter were conceding the territory in its pristine natural condition to the former.”
We tend to forget, or willfully suppress, the fact that Yellowstone and virtually all places in North America had cultural meanings long before Europeans and their descendants arrived. Other people had generations of investment in those lands. Certainly, the paintings of Moran, Albert Bierstadt, and others created a new cultural landscape for the people of the United States, but they also were displacing indigenous cultural meanings for those same landscapes. Moran purposely displays that displacement in this most famous of his works.
Well said! It's hard enough to realize that what we're "seeing" in a landscape is shaped by our culture -- much less that other cultures have other lenses. And congrats on "Sacred Wonderland." I've been hearing about it, and wanting to check it out, for a while now. Thanks for speaking up.
Good work!
If I have the story right, people lined up and paid to view this painting before Congress purchased it. What a different experience than how easily you can post it or how easily I can find the image if I want to see it. Of course, there was the intermediate step of print media; I have this image in books, and it takes very little effort to find it there. But at what point does the quality (I was about to say 'nature') of the experience of viewing this become something totally different than Moran's?
Also, you and I have seen this in person many times. Is the image the same after each trip? Is it the same for someone who has never seen it except as an image? And how does the fact that I could easily pull up a video of the falls in motion affect my perception of this image? Babbling, I know, but thinking about how technological change and cultural evolution affect our perception of and behavior in the natural world.
One function of paintings in the old days was to present people with colors they couldn't otherwise see. Before computers, TVs, postcards, or easily dyed cloth, you might not ever experience the colors Moran saw in Yellowstone. People lined up like they would to see a celebrity. Moran was capturing nature for the culture of his time -- and today's culture seeks something far different from that same source.
Yet Moran’s work still speaks to us (or am I naive?), while I have serious doubts about the long-term value of the National Geographic video of the falls that I have on the shelf.
To me, this is the value of being good at your craft. Moran benefitted from Yellowstone -- but he was also a great artist. Subsequent artworks about Yellowstone in many formats have been made by people with lesser talents. (And yes, that likely includes my own writings! :) )
Love this essay. I especially like how you ended it "...a story of humans expressing their culture--including the culture of honoring nature. "