Article Contentsp. 5p. 6Issue Table of ContentsEnvironmental Review: ER, Vol. 8, No. 1, Special Issue: Women and Environmental History (Spring, 1984), pp. 1-112Front Matter [pp. 1-4]Women and the Environment: Editor's Introduction [pp. 4-5]Women and Environment: Subsistence Paradigms 1850-1950 [pp. 7-22]Approaches to the Study of Women and Landscape [pp. 23-33]Heroines of Nature: Four Women Respond to the American Landscape [pp. 34-56]Women of the Progressive Conservation Movement: 1900-1916 [pp. 57-85]Women and Their Environments: A Bibliography for Research and Teaching [pp. 86-94]ReviewsReview: untitled [pp. 95-97]Review: untitled [pp. 97-98]Review: untitled [pp. 99-103]Environmental History Newsletter [pp. 104-109]Back Matter [pp. 110-112]!"#$%&'%(&)*$&+%,-."%#$%)/&+(-)".01&2%)."(34)-"%53)*".617/&8'."9:%&;$.4*'%)<"3.4$/&+%,-."%#$%)'9&=$,-$>/&+=?&@"9A&B?&C"A&D?&<E$4-'9&2113$/&!"#$%&'%(&+%,-."%#$%)'9F-1)".:&6<E.-%G?&DHBI7?&EEA&IJKL3M9-1*$(&M:/&N".$1)&F-1)".:&<"4-$):&'%(&5#$.-4'%&<"4-$):&O".&+%,-."%#$%)'9&F-1)".:<)'M9$&P=Q/&http://www.jstor.org/stable/3984517544$11$(/&DBRSTRUSDS&UV/IKYour use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fhs.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected] History Society and American Society for Environmental History are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Environmental Review: ER.http://www.jstor.orgWomen and the Environment Editor's Introduction This special issue of Environmental Review on women and en- vironmental history addresses several theoretical issues that have emerged in recent discussions of the interrelations between women and the environment. 1. What are the theoretical and historical relationships between women and nature, men and culture? Are these relationships universal throughout human culture or are they limited spatially and temporally to Western culture and its articulations? How should the critical question formulated by Sherry Ortner, "Is female to male as nature is to culture?" be answered? (Michelle Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere, eds., Woman, Culture, and Society, Stanford University Press, 1974, pp. 67-87). 2. Does women's perception of the environment differ from men's? What are the cultural and historical influences that constitute the percep- tual glasses that frame the female response? 3. How has the cultural division between culture and nature in Western society reinforced the perception that women are natural caretakers of the environment as a home for humankind? What has been the political response of both women and men to this dichotomy? The four essays in this special issue address these questions from several disciplinary and theoretical perspectives. Sandra Marburg in "Women and Environment: Subsistence Paradigms, 1850-1950," argues that the identification of women with the environment is not a universal condition but rather the result of two different conceptual paradigms that have changed over time. Late nineteenth and early twentieth century scholars who looked at women's role in extracting subsistence from the environment described their roles in substantial detail using an ethnographic paradigm of the interdependence between the sexes that sup- ported the identification of women with nature in non-Western societies. In a different way the same identification was incorporated into the economic paradigm that men support women that emerged in the middle decades of the twentieth century. Here women's role in subsistence pro- duction was rendered almost invisible through the use of passive voice descriptions and resulted in considerable erosion of knowledge concern- ing their real contributions. She offers suggestions for the further study of women and the environment based on emerging female-oriented typologies. The issue of women's perception of the environment is addressed in the papers of Jance Monk and Vera Norwood. Monk's paper "Approaches to the Study of Women and Landscape," reviews scholarship on human responses to the landscape, arguing that most interpretations have either ignored female perception or masked it by assuming that "the culture" of a society represents women's response as well as men's. Sources for research in the area of women's responses to the landscape include women's diaries, literature, art, and novels as well as scholarship in the related fields of women and nature, women and the environment, and women and space. Particularly rich in potential are the sources on women's perception of the American West and the westward movement. 5Vera Norwood's contribution, "Heroines of Nature: Four Women Respond to the American Landscape," examines and compares the response of four women writers to four different environments from the late nineteenth century to the present: Isabella Bird's mountains, Mary Austin's deserts, Rachel Carson's oceans, and Annie Dillard's creek. Rather than showing that women are defenders of nature or, conversely, mere reflections of a male dominated culture, she looks at their ambivalent feelings about the environments in which they immersed themselves. While defying cultural norms by seeking out and writing about wild nature, they neither totally accepted nor rejected it, thus challenging the women/nature identification. Yet women's ambivalence differs from men's ambivalence in that nature for these female writers is recognized and accepted for its action on humans, rather than perceived as an entity to be acted on, challenged, or overcome. My own