Literature and the Sea. Proceedings of a Conference Held at the Marine
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME r RD 149 996 SE 023 469 AUTHOR . Astto, Richard, Ed. TITLE Literature and the Seta. Proceedings of a Conference Held at the Marine Science Center, Newport, Oregon, Mai 8, 1976. INSTITUTION Oregon State Univ., Corvallis. SPONS AGENCY ;. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 45 (D0C)Rockville, Md: PUB DATE Dec 76° NOTE 106p.; Contains occasional light and broken type ; Document is the product of a course conducted under the Sea Grant College Program AVAILABLE FROM Sea Grant Communications, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 (Order No. ORESU-W-76-001; free) EDRS PRICE. MF$0.83 HC-$6.01'Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Conference Reports; Creative,Writing; *Higher Education; *Language Arts; Literary History;,Literaty Influences; Literary Mood; *Literature Appreciation; *Oceanology;°*Science Education ° IDENTIFIERS Oregon State University a ABSTRACT This document is a collection of eight papers' . presented at a conference held at the Marine Science Center,Newport, Oregon, May 8, 1976. The conference'concluded a courseoffered jointly by the School of Oceanography and theDepartmeneof English at Oregon State University. :Theconference-had two purposes: (1) focus on the relationship between literature and marinescience, and (2). establish a framework in which artists, humanistsand scientists could work together to determine the impact of the oceans onthe creative impulse of the writer as well as investigate how thewriter, has helped establish prevailing notions about the sea.Titles of presented papers include:(1) "'Andsome Is as 'Andsome Does"; (2) Since the Days of Aristotle; .(3) The Sea, the Marine Mystique, and the Challenge to the Scientific Paradigm;(4) Psyche and the Sea - The Waste Land Era'in"America; and (5) Seal RockII. (MR) 4) o *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by -EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************1.4************** U S OE PAU TMINT OF HEALTH F Lsku, AT ON & WELFARE NAIIONAI rNSiTUTE OF F DUCAION of F ..f r' F+FW ' It. TA NF I N v$4( l'HE (N'. A N TIT, FE ("4 Al I 11)44 PFA IF Literature and the Sea proceedings of a confer- ence held at the Marine Science Center A Newport, .Oregon May -8, 1976 Richard Astro, Editor . O OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM Publication no. 011ESU-W-76-001 DECEMBER 1976 3 Contributors, Editor Contents See page 59 for information about theeditor and the PAGE I, contributing authors... INTRODUCTION 3 Literature and the Sea: An Introduction Acknowledrent by Richard Astro The Oregon State University Sea Grant Colleget. -bLITERATURE AND THE SEA c Program is supported cooperatively bythe "'Andsome Is as 'Andsome Does" National Oceanic and.Atmospheric Administration, 7 by John Seelye U.S. Department of Commerce, by the Stateof. /'Oregon, and by participating local governments 13 -Neither Tea Nor Comfortable Advice: .' and private industry. The Elements in Literature -by John Clark Pratt ea The OSU Sea Grant College Program attempts to foster dis- cussion of important marine issues by publdshing reports; THE SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE sometimes dealing with controversial material. A balanced 19 Since the Days of Ay:stone presentation is always attempted. When specific views are presented, they are those of the authors, not of the Sea by Joel Hedgpeth Grant College Program, which does not take stands on issues, 25 The Sea, the,Marine Mystique, and he 4 Challenge to the Scientific Paradigm by John D. Isaacs THE SEA AND TFE INDIVIDUAL WRITER 31c Psyche and the Sea: The Waste Land 'Era in Amerina by Joseph DeFalco 39 The Conceptual Metaphor Ordering Publications by Robert Zoellner Copies of this and other Sea Grant publicptions are ANGLES OF VISION available, from: 45 Angles of Vision:Or as We Say at Sea, Sea Grant Communications Shots for a Fix Oregon State University by William Appleman Williams Corvallis, OR 97331 Seal Rock II Please include author, title andpublication number. Some 51 publications carry a charge to help defray printing expenses, by John Haislip The charge, if any, appears after the publicationsnumber: 59 CONTRIBUTORS Please make checks payable to OregonState'University. 0 4 -5 Oa. BY RICHARD ASTRO In the beginning I had reservations. True, the idea was exciting and mace good 0 academic sense. We would design a course ,and conference entitled "Literature and thqSea" and thereby establish a frame- Literature and theSea. work within which artists, humanists, and scientists could work together to determine the impact that the world's, anintroduction oceans have had,on the creative pulse of the writer as well as 4nvesti- . gate how the writer has helped to shape prevailing notions about the sea. The course would be jointly offered by thie School of Oceanography and the Depart- mentof English at Oregon State Uni- versity and would conclude with con- ference where a diverse group ofspeak- ers would talk specifically about how individual writers use the sea as a ; source of plot, myth and symbol. The N : -71)- .7)r"; A ' - conference would also focus on the more At ..--7.-:,--.z.?..577;,;;;"7::"."-n. general theme of the relationship be- -; tween literature and marine science. Q .... The course and conference, were to be de.r. trial balloons for a comprehensive - 1.1 marine and maritime studies program at r: ; Oregon State in which humanists, scien- tists and technologists, would engage t. P - in an integrated examination of those values and attitudes that direct peoples' activities in and relating to the sea, including creative artists, scientists, and peoples whose exist- ences are linked diret.tly to the sea by the'ii use of marine reources. We proposed a "systems approach" to know- ledge in which real interchanges would take place as contrasting methods were brought to bear on similarly felt problems. Our approach was brie of whole- ne'ss. We rejected the narrow-minded view that one person's way is the only legitimate way of getting at the truth. We in academic life have always7preached wholeness and union. We have never be- lievpd that tHe'intellect works best in Q ......1111111M111, Y° both often work by trial and error; And so we proposed to move works of art are what Meyer calls pre- a vacuum. both reason and argue in basically through and'beyond specialistic ap- sentational. They are patterns and are t. the occasion "for experiences that are the,same way. t proaches,to knowledge whfeh we believe 4 areafragmentary, reductionist and divi- found.to be enjoyable, intilguing and Nevertheless, there is a critical dif- -sive, and4ractice what. we havealways )moving."A Oonk of art is not an'ob- ference between the ultimate goals of the ject for theoretical generalization. It preached_ humanist and those of the scientist.° For exists for aesthetic appreciation and , while the scientist is Concerned, above I had reservations. For though response. In our class and on our*con- Still, all, wish developing general, laws and fusing fuenceyrogeam there would be scien- our objective was the noble one of . theories which account for reldtionships' the many cultures, the fact isthat any tists theprizing dbout the sea. And discovered in the natural world, the hu- viable or enduring union depends upon. there would be poets reading from their manist attempts to understancrand.explain the recogt)ition that there are Inherent own and other peoples'-work about the how the patterns and processes peculiar differences between the arts, the sea. The subject wa's the same. Every- to a specific work are related 'to one And if we thing else would be different. sciences and the humanities. another and'to the aesthetic eXperience hoped that our artists and scientists they shape. In order words,,humaniSt would be able to talk with one am, hei criticism differs from science in that in any sort of meaningful fashion, that it is concerned with what unique, in- either group would be able to talkwitg 'deed idiosyncratic yziva particular humanists, and that the students 44 the (4144 6 tke 5eatiis poem, novel, sonata, r,painting. Like class and our conference audience would' and d ivera the scientist, tiie-humanist develops and be able to.make sense out of what might vay employs theiiiTand taxonomy. Unlike the S;' appear to be a chaotic assortmentof ap- scientist, .the humanist is concerned proaches and_ directions, we had to iden- different This chiefly with how one work is tify those crucial differences. Iis, in fact, this done, we felt we could move toward an from all others. crucial difference which in large mea- understanding of.the commonground sure accounts for the problemsscien- shared by everyone involved in the pro- Between the artist and the scientist tists have when trying to evaluate the gram, irrespective of academicdisci- there is the humanist-critic,' that indi- work of the humanist. For no matter how pline. yidual whose task it is to sdek out and define relatiOnsh4s presented in works systematic, how rigorous the scholarship of the humanist may be, the very nature . Definitionally,i we observed that of art and then to make clear how these of his study prohibits his arriving et science (as we normally conceive of it) relationships and connections are per- , the kind of final responses to observed theories and hypo- ceived by competent audiences. In a is the pursuit of phenomena which is the goal of the sciPp- theses which exhibit and explain rela- very crucial way, the humanist-criticis tist. I quote again from Leonard Meyer tionships among verified facts. That is, akin to the scientist. For although, as Meyer points out, "the phenomenato who.offprs a.brilliant summary of the the scientist attempts to develop theor- essential differences between what to, ies which explain recurring and orderly which thpy attend and which they analyze explaining the some may'seem comparable activities.