180
cultural construction of wilderness is clearly visible in our case of the Šumava Mts.,
and ongoing conflicts of its management as well.
Adalbert Stifter in the novel Der Hochwald (1841), Hvozd in Czech/Deep Forest
(Stifter 2003), Karel Klostermann in the novel V ráji šumavském (1893)/In Šumava
Mts. Paradise (Klostermann 1999), describe places in the deep forest called “slatě”
in Czech, or bogs. These are swamplands at high altitude in the Šumava Mts., and
are nowadays the core zone of the National Park, strictly protected and accessible
only by using a raised wooden walkway without touching any of the bog moss and
other vegetation in order to protect the rich biodiversity. Bogs represent islands of
life diversity in natural spruce deep forests for the management of the National
Park. For the novelists mentioned above, bogs are places described like “desert”,
“death”, “the dark”, “lifeless place”, and are full of awe and fear.
The dualism of culture and nature remains throughout time. It is visible on the
monumental work of Czech painter, novelist, graphical designer and mystical artist
Josef Váchal (1884–1969), who was fascinated by the wilderness of the Šumava
Mts. In his monumental original book (20 kg weight!) from 1931, Šumava dying
and romantic (Váchal 2008, in Czech) there is a romantic concept of the sublime as
well as the concept of challenges to strong individualism, known from the US historical frontiers. These great artists and many others built the cultural construction
of Šumava Mts. wilderness as something similar to other wilderness cultural constructions in the world.
The power of social constructivism is that externalization and objectivation are
moments in a continuing dialectical process, confirmed by everyday behaviour, language and institutions. Those externalities such as the cultural construct of Šumava
Mts. become internalities in terms of the sharing of the cultural consciousness “what
does the wilderness of Šumava Mts. mean?” In the social world, “society is a human
product. Society is an objective reality. Man is a social product” (Berger and
Luckmann 1966). In these three sentences is the core of understanding the social
construction of our human world, the cultural construction of wilderness included.
There is nothing objective in terms of a scientific approach to wilderness and in this
term the critics are right (Crist 2004). On the other hand, this construction is of an
objective cultural environment and sharing experiences with wilderness, which cannot be omitted.
The new lesson from the Šumava Mts. cultural construction of wilderness consists in the way in which the construct could be misused. There are the strong individual interests of politicians, developers and local municipalities to profit from the
externalities connected with the Šumava wilderness, disregarding any barriers, even
in spite of the law of protecting national parks. This selfish battle for individual
economic profit uses the cultural construct of the Šumava Mts. wilderness in many
ways. There is the underlying fact that the wilderness construct is based on a more
or less public sharing of a picture of the Šumava Mts. as a deep forest, with majestic
spruces, green open pastures, small villages located in harmony with nature and
people with experience and wisdom of heroic frontiers. The historical and social
reality is another construct, apart from the environmental reality of bark beetle
which rapidly dry and destroy non-indigenous even-aged stands.
E. Cudlínová et al.
cultural construction of wilderness is clearly visible in our case of the Šumava Mts.,
and ongoing conflicts of its management as well.
Adalbert Stifter in the novel Der Hochwald (1841), Hvozd in Czech/Deep Forest
(Stifter 2003), Karel Klostermann in the novel V ráji šumavském (1893)/In Šumava
Mts. Paradise (Klostermann 1999), describe places in the deep forest called “slatě”
in Czech, or bogs. These are swamplands at high altitude in the Šumava Mts., and
are nowadays the core zone of the National Park, strictly protected and accessible
only by using a raised wooden walkway without touching any of the bog moss and
other vegetation in order to protect the rich biodiversity. Bogs represent islands of
life diversity in natural spruce deep forests for the management of the National
Park. For the novelists mentioned above, bogs are places described like “desert”,
“death”, “the dark”, “lifeless place”, and are full of awe and fear.
The dualism of culture and nature remains throughout time. It is visible on the
monumental work of Czech painter, novelist, graphical designer and mystical artist
Josef Váchal (1884–1969), who was fascinated by the wilderness of the Šumava
Mts. In his monumental original book (20 kg weight!) from 1931, Šumava dying
and romantic (Váchal 2008, in Czech) there is a romantic concept of the sublime as
well as the concept of challenges to strong individualism, known from the US historical frontiers. These great artists and many others built the cultural construction
of Šumava Mts. wilderness as something similar to other wilderness cultural constructions in the world.
The power of social constructivism is that externalization and objectivation are
moments in a continuing dialectical process, confirmed by everyday behaviour, language and institutions. Those externalities such as the cultural construct of Šumava
Mts. become internalities in terms of the sharing of the cultural consciousness “what
does the wilderness of Šumava Mts. mean?” In the social world, “society is a human
product. Society is an objective reality. Man is a social product” (Berger and
Luckmann 1966). In these three sentences is the core of understanding the social
construction of our human world, the cultural construction of wilderness included.
There is nothing objective in terms of a scientific approach to wilderness and in this
term the critics are right (Crist 2004). On the other hand, this construction is of an
objective cultural environment and sharing experiences with wilderness, which cannot be omitted.
The new lesson from the Šumava Mts. cultural construction of wilderness consists in the way in which the construct could be misused. There are the strong individual interests of politicians, developers and local municipalities to profit from the
externalities connected with the Šumava wilderness, disregarding any barriers, even
in spite of the law of protecting national parks. This selfish battle for individual
economic profit uses the cultural construct of the Šumava Mts. wilderness in many
ways. There is the underlying fact that the wilderness construct is based on a more
or less public sharing of a picture of the Šumava Mts. as a deep forest, with majestic
spruces, green open pastures, small villages located in harmony with nature and
people with experience and wisdom of heroic frontiers. The historical and social
reality is another construct, apart from the environmental reality of bark beetle
which rapidly dry and destroy non-indigenous even-aged stands.
E. Cudlínová et al.