"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

In Aldo Leopold's essay "On a Monument to the Pigeon" he effectively uses pathos to pull at the readers hearts and make them realize that the extinction of the passenger pigeon was because of mankind. He does this by reminiscing in the past and vividly describing, in a poetic way, how these pigeons moved about. He ultimately coerces the reader into understanding how mankind is responsible for the passenger pigeons extinction. He further emphasizes this by explaining how “man is only a fellow-voyager with other creatures in the Odyssey of evolution, and that his captaincy of the adventuring ship conveys the power, but not necessarily the right, to discard at will among the crew.”  This quote shows how mankind could coexist with other species but instead chooses take advantage of everything around them just to further benefit themselves. After reading this essay, I personally feel guilt towards the extinction of these birds and believe that we, as humans, have a responsibility to care and protect the environment and do everything in our power to ensure that no plant or animal species will ever go extinct.  

"On a Monument to the Pigeon

In Leopold's article On a Monument to the Pigeon, I noticed how the author effectively uses Pathos to describe the extinction of the passenger pigeon. In the opening paragraphs he uses powerful imagery to describe how an "on rushing phalanx of victorious birds" went from thriving to "living forever by not living at all". I feel as though he chooses this imagery to evoke a sense of guilt in the audience since at the time this essay was written there were still people who were alive to see the birds. In regards to the question of how much hunting is too much, I believe that any hunting that threatens the sustainability of a population is too much. For example, passenger pigeons at one time flew in flocks of close to one million birds, yet they were hunted in such great numbers that the population could not keep up and they were hunted to extinction. I particularly find the authors description of animal/human relation ship interesting. He states that "Men are only fellow voyagers with other creatures in the odyssey of evolution" yet for some reason humans have taken it upon themselves to be dominant over other species and determine their outcome. For modern readers I feel as though this essay will not have the original intended  effect, but will still send a message that it is wrong for humanity to directly determine the fate of other species.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

In Aldo Leopold’s “On a Monument to the Pigeon” he uses very poetic sounding words and pathos to show his audience the beauty the pigeon had and the sadness we should feel for the loss of it. Throughout the essay he personifies the pigeon, to make the audience relate to it more. He also compares it to the rest of nature, making the pigeon seem beautiful. He describes the pigeon by saying, “The pigeon is no mere bird, he was a biological storm.” This description shows how greatly Leopold thought of the pigeon. It shows that he believed the pigeon was strong and beautiful. In the end of the essay, Leopold writes that maybe we as humans should live like the pigeon did. He says that “the pigeon lived by his desire…” and to find his desires “required only the free sky, and the will to ply his wings.” The picture that this paints in my head is a beautiful free bird, minding nothing but his own business. Leopold believes that we should live like the pigeons did, and go after our own desires, and if we have the “will to ply our wings” we will have no problem finding what we desire.

“On a Monument of a Pigeon”

One major rhetorical term crossed my mind the whole time I read “On a Monument of a Pigeon” and that was ‘pathos.’ It’s everywhere! Hardly any neutral terms were used in describing the extinction of the passenger pigeon; instead the neutral terms were replaces with words and phrases like “they [the passenger pigeon] will feel no kiss of sun” and “the death of a species.” Throughout the article, author Aldo Leopold uses terms specified for his opinion on the extinction of the passenger pigeon and how upset he is about it. Leopold talks about how the monument built for the pigeon is a monument that ‘symbolizes our sorrow’ for the passing of this bird. In a direct response to blog leader Andee’s question – “…how much hunting is too much?” – regarding the fact that hunting is what caused this bird to go from the endangered species list to the extinct, I think ‘too much hunting’ is hunting until said animal is on the endangered species list and hunters still hunt. Too much hunting would consist of an ‘addiction’ sort of situation, meaning that people would hunt regardless of knowing the risks, like an addict might do with drugs or something of that nature. I personally enjoy Leopold’s passion for the subject of this bird, it’s comforting to know that the passenger pigeon isn’t just gone from the world, but it subtly remembered by people everyday.

On a monument to the Pigeon

In this Poetically worded Essay, Aldo Leopald discusses the extinction of the pigeon species and honors their life while also condemning the people that have caused their disappearance entirely. In his writing, he also makes the reader think about what we gained overall from hunting these birds in which to the point where they are no longer a living species but a thought or a picture in a museum or wildlife center.One of Leopald's purposes of the essay is to make the reader think " Are we stepping over our boundaries and over hunting certain species?" or " What is even the purpose of killing an animal after we have the necessities to live from it"?

From this article I know that these questions popped into my head. It seems now that humans just hunt for fun ad kill them with no purpose which is a waste. We sacrifice animals like the passenger pigeon just for our own enjoyment which is a cruel thing to do. Most cultures unlike ours use the entire animal if they hunt it and actually need it in order to survive.Like Aldo Leopald, I do condemn such a thing as a shameful  and sadly horrific act because just on our own we wasted and killed off a harmless species for really no need except for entertainment.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

In Aldo Leopold’s “On a Monument to the Pigeon” he writes about the extinct passenger pigeon. He shares the effects of their disappearance and reasons for why that matters to humanity. Leopold’s use of a sad, grieving tone built pathos for himself and the article. He writes in a tone that makes his readers feel what the pigeons feel, sadness. He also uses lots of personification and builds the relationship between human and pigeon. 

I enjoyed how Leopold attempted to get his point across from this writing. He used very attention-grabbing sentences. There was multiple examples of imagery in each line. I liked how he included himself with his readers by saying, “we” and “us.” By doing this, it makes it seem like he’s not calling other humans out for the extinction of these pigeons but as if he knows its all of us as one. And that it’s all of us that will be able to save the lives of other species. 

The ending of this article made me feel sorrow for the pigeon as well as others who may be going in extinct. Although the article didn’t make me see what was so important about the animal because it’s an animal and i believe they are all important, I didn’t think much of it. After reading this article, I do hope that Leopold was able to send a message out to his other readers and hope for the best of other species.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon, by: Aldo Leopold"

I felt like the use of pathos was well done in this work and made me think about what it means for a species to become extinct. It is difficult to fully understand the ramifications of a species going extinct, but Leopold performed a great duty by so eloquently reminiscing about what the passenger pigeon was like. This allows the reader to think about what they may be missing with the species gone and helps guide one into thinking about other species that are on the brink of a similar fate. We now are starting to understand that, as leopold stated in this work, that we are just another creature that is evolving. Another ramification of a species going extinct is the possible effect on the other species in the eco-system. We are apart of a complex system and when you take out one we may not ever truly understand what long term effects that can have. 

After reading this article I found myself thinking about how humans impact the world. We are all on this journey together and I think that today people are starting to understand this more clearly. When we branch out our societies into other creatures domains it has a detrimental effect on many other living beings. I think that through conservation projects we have started to realize some of what we can do, but there is still much more to be done. I think in order to fully appreciate what our world has humans must take themselves off the pedestal that many of us are on and realize that what decisions we make effect many innocent lives.  It may also be in our best interest to keep all of the remaining species at good levels, because those species may lead to future cures for diseases. 

"On a Monument to the Pigeon" by Aldo Leopold

This article pays homage to a species of bird that was once so fruitful that they could cover they sky and block out the sun. In this article Leopold morns not only the death of one species but morns the extinction of all animals snuffed out by humanities greed and ignorance. Though this article does not address it the death of the last passenger pigeon, but I think it is worth mentioning; her name was Martha and she died when she was 26 after living her whole life in captivity. I think this showcases humanities greed in a different way. While humanity did hunt and decimate the population of passenger pigeon's they also kept some in captivity. The fact that they kept a few birds in captivity suggests that they kept the birds for their own personal enjoyment for as long as possible. Martha is currently stuffed and housed inside of the Smithsonian, showed off as a reminisce of a better time, but as Leopold says "Our grandfathers, who saw the glory of the fluttering hosts, were less well-housed, well-fed, well-clothed than we are." That time was not better then this time, nor is this time better then that; the difference is that now we have the knowledge to see the shortcomings for the future. Had our ancestors had the ability to recognize the destruction they were causing, it might have impacted the way they were consuming the precious resource. Leopold however hints that even knowledge might not have the ability to save species and the environment for demise, because people don't want to acknowledge it. 

Leopold himself was one of the hunters, in his book The Sand County Almanac he talks about how he used to hunger for the destruction of the wolves because it would mean more deer for him. Then on a mountain in Montana he killed a wolf and watched the green fire die in its eyes and he realized that by killing the wolf he was killing the mountain. This is the same thing that happened with the passenger pigeon. People ate them at a staggering rate which when combined with deforestation caused them to be wiped out, which caused a backlash in every other part of the ecosystem that it was apart of. This brings us back to Andee's post where she questioned the necessity of meat.  Is it worth the environmental impact that is causes? We now have the ability to live without meat, and each person has to self identify if they want to eat it or not. Personally I do not consume meat, which saves the same amount of energy as driving a smart car for 2 years. This is a choice we all must make, do we learn for the passenger pigeons demise or do we continue to rocket toward environmental catastrophe.             

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

            In the article “On a Monument to the Pigeon” Aldo Leopold uses a strong word choice to inform the reader of the extinction of the Passenger Pigeon.  Although, this article didn’t persuade me as much as previous articles did, it was effective in building sorrow for the extinction of the animal.  The rhetor used many appeals to pathos, through the usage of diction and syntax.  He would end sentences with “but the feathered lightning is no more,” or even begin with “but no pigeons will pass.”  These strong phrases are effective because what came before it.  The author would build the image of beautiful nature that occurs around the audience, but then after informs them that the pigeon will no longer will be part of it.  It leaves the reader feeling sorrow and that they are missing out on one of nature’s beauties, even if prior to reading the article the reader has never heard of the animal or did not care about seeing the bird.  The writer also uses imagery to capture the beauty of the bird and its environment it lived in.

            I think the article was less effective for me, personally, because I felt that the whole time they were building up how remarkable this bird was, but I never really understood what the bird did that was so heroic.  I understand that animals can be magnificent for the fact that they are animals and that they can be beautiful.  But I felt like they were building up this bird for like a big revealing and its significance and I never truly reached it.  One reason that the article may not have affected me as much is because I may not have been the audience they intended for the piece.  I feel if I had a little more on the background of the bird I would have been more affected by it.  However, in the end, it did build my sorrow for the animal; for the sake that an extinction of an animals that was cause by humans is upsetting and that many will never see it’s true beauty.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

This essay was very interesting to read because this essay focuses on a monument in the state of Wisconsin. Anytime I read a piece of work that involves my home state I always get a feeling of pride in my gut. However, after reading Leopold's essay I felt a pit in my stomach start to grow. Leopold started his essay with the statement that the Passenger Pigeon species is extinct. He then bashes the newly erected monument by exclaiming that the monument symbolizes our sorrow. I couldn't help but ponder this statement. It made think about monuments as a whole. What do they represent? Do they honor or shame? In this case I agree with Leopold that the Passenger Pigeon monument is meant to shame. Leopold blames the extinction  on man but he does it with grace. Leopold turns to the Passenger Pigeon itself by talking about the freedom and elegance of the bird. He then says that the Passenger Pigeon will live on forever by not living at all. I thought that was a very powerful statement. It really makes the reader think about life as a whole. Leopold then goes on to talk about Darwin and his theory of evolution. I think that this was a smart mover rhetorically. To use Darwin is brining science and history together. Later in the essay Leopold talks about how tourists will see the monument and read the bronze plaque. But their thoughts, like the bronze pigeon, will have no wings. This was a very powerful moment in the essay. Leopold explains that the public will never know of the full truth of the passenger pigeon. Leopold ends the essay by talking about the resources that have come and gone and reappear over the years. He says that he wishes for man to ply our wings. This ends the essay with a call to man to step up. I loved the way he ended the essay.

Things that I noticed during the essay that made it unique was the word choice and tone. I thought Leopold placed an almost romantic tone when describing the passenger pigeons and there freedom. The word choice and phrasing used creates a beautiful picture of the pigeons and that is a very powerful rhetorical tool.

“On a Monument to the Pigeon”

In Aldo Leopold’s article “On a Monument to the Pigeon”, he writes about the now extinct passenger pigeon as well as its relation to humanity.  Leopold uses a lot of personification in his article such as when he mentions that “only the oldest oaks will remember” as well as “only the hills will know.”  The reason these personifications were made was to convey that the passenger pigeon is gone and will not be seen again.  It does this by listing what will be around the longest.  The shortest living, the humans, who saw them before they went extinct will die first and with them, the memories of the bird.  It moves along to trees and then finally hills which will be around the longest and therefore eventually be the only ones left with the “memory” of this bird lost to the ages. 

Leopold then moves on to discuss our real reasons for erecting the statue of the passenger pigeon.  He states that our reasoning for making the statue was to, at least in part, push the blame away from ourselves, as the human race, as the ones who caused the extinction of the pigeon.  This would be in the sense that we created a statue for it, therefore we cared for it, therefore it shouldn’t or can’t have been our fault.  I feel this is accusatory and not necessarily always true as I never thought of it that way.  I always thought of it as a way of honoring the existence of the animal.  I do, however, think he is right in implying that we do not own up to this though, so I cannot say he is completely wrong. 

Leopold also mentions that the only pigeon left is the statue and it will remain in its place, unable to fly.  It then goes through a series of visually stimulating words that represent the passage of time throughout the years as the statue remains flightless.  This all indicates that Leopold is really sad about the loss of the passenger pigeon.  It is also shown that he was not only sad but passionate about the pigeon when he mentions how they were a “biological storm” and vividly describes the pigeon’s life in an extravagant way.  In the end, Leopold uses the pigeon’s way of life to metaphor how humans should be.  

"On a Monument to the Pigeon, by Aldo Leopold"

While reading this article I kept asking my self the same question after each paragraph, which was what if? What if we hadn't used passenger pigeons as a form of communication, what if the pigeons weren't killed off? Leopold invoked these type of questions because he made the article personal by constantly using the word we. I enjoyed how Leopold almost humanized the pigeons and made it feel like everyone should care that they are gone. It wasn't that Leopold tried to make the reader feel guilty; I believe he just wanted his audience to be aware about how and why the passenger pigeons became extinct. The main point was not to lay blame it was to show how the human race has taken advantage of their ability at the top of the food chain. In the end of the article it isn't about the blame, it is about honoring the passenger pigeons through this monument. 

The imagery that Leopold uses is what really makes the article effective. Through descriptive sentences and wording Leopold turns the article into something almost poetic. Like most poetry it takes a few times reading it over to fully grasp what he was trying to say. Because a lot of paragraphs had underlying meaning sometime it was hard to understand what the author was really trying to say. Even though I had to read some parts over again I realized that most of the article was about the greed humans have. Like Leopold said humans have been killing off species for decades without any remorse or regret for their actions. That is why Leopold wrote this article about the monument because he wants people to know that even though it may be too late for some animals, humans are finally realizing what their actions may cost other species. 

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

In "On a Monument to the Pigeon" by Aldo Leopold, the writer discusses the extinction of the Passenger Pigeon. Leopold talks about the effects of the disappearance of the pigeon, and gives us reasons why we should care about it. Leopold talks about our grandparents being the only ones who can remember the pigeons, but yet our grandfathers are the ones who killed them off. He discusses the rapid decrease of Passenger Pigeons in a short time. Leopold writes in a sad, sappy tone to try and gain the emotions of the reader. He also talks a lot about what could have been if the pigeons were still around. Leopold also focuses on Wisconsin since that is where the monument is located, but he also brings the attention to other states across the midwest. Leopold brings attention the topic of hunting. He tries to draw the line of how much hunting is too much and how much control should we have over the population. Leopold state that there was an ample population of the pigeons and that could be a reason for their extinction. He states that farmers and people did not pay much attention to the amount of pigeons killed because there was so many of them, but then before people knew it they were near extinction. I believe that hunting is definitely ok to help control the population because animals can die of starvation and things like that from a lack of resources, but I think there should be more of a restrictive limit on hunting so that numbers are more closely watched and do not have dramatic drops.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon"

The way that Aldo Leopold uses poetic imagery and style of writing is effective. It not only personifies the pigeon, but compares it to nature in an eye catching manner. He says things such as, “The pigeon was no mere bird, he was a biological storm”, which bring the bird to life. Normally, we don’t think of animals as unique creatures in a sense of their attributes that don’t deal with reproduction or natural processes. We think of them as “just a bird” or “just a dog”, not as the “lighting that played between two biotic poles of intolerable intensity”. I also liked that Leopold said that “we who erect this monument are performing a dangerous act” because it brings up the point that we are all connected to the way that animals thrive or die. We may think we have no stakes in this pigeon’s extinction but the truth is that we all do. It is important to mourn these birds and to take their extinction seriously because if we don’t history is doomed to repeat itself. Each creature on this planet plays a role in the way that nature functions and the way that we live, a butterfly effect in a way. Even though we have these birds history and appearance in books, that is nothing like what it would be like if they were still around today. We are not able to learn more from them, we are not able to see how they interact with the world around them, because they are gone for good. So, one final thought that I have is what lengths would it take for more people to take extinction seriously?

Aldo Leopold’s “On a Monument to the Pigeon”

The essay begins immediately by stating that we are here to grieve the loss of the pigeons. In the second paragraph I thought there was a captivating comparison between nature and humans when it was mentioned that both man and the tree would remember the pigeon in their youth. I also thought it was interesting how Leopold draws attention humans mourning the loss of the pigeons juxtaposed to pigeons mourning the loss of humans. At this point in the essay it is not particularly clear to the reader why we should be mourning the loss of the pigeons. After the sixth paragraph the tone and purpose of the essay slightly changes from grief to informing and honoring.

            The idea of the plaque being placed is an interesting one. Leopold begins to make sure people are aware that is it humans fault that the bird has gone extinct in the first place. He also questions so what gives us the right to honor it. Leopold finds himself doubting the convictions of older generations to kill the bird because of the grief he has that it is now extinct.

            The line that I found most thought provoking in the essay was “Tourists will read this inscription, but their thoughts will have no wings.” I thought that this was a very true statement. How often do people hear a call to action on a social justice issue and they choose to be bystanders. People don’t like to face complicated things like doubt and grieving. So the pigeon will remain extinct and birds in the future may face a similar fate due to the lack of lessons learned and lack of action taken.

            I liked the ending to the essay. I thought it took away some of grieving and brought us to honoring the pigeon. The whole essay reminded me of a eulogy.

"On a Monument to the Pigeon" by Aldo Leopold

To answer Andee’s question about how Aldo Leopold uses different techniques in his “On Monument to the Pigeon” to convince his readers that passenger pigeons are important I think he personifies the passenger pigeon as well as the nature that surrounds it. For example he says, “But a few decades only the oldest oaks will remember, and at long last only the hills will know.” Sentences like this emphasize his grieving as well as his passion for the pigeons. He also uses words like “thunderous applause” and “kiss of the sun” to explain that we haven’t lost just another bird, we have lost a legendary bird and I think this sits well with the audience and setting of introducing this monument. Another one of Andee’s questions asks how much killing is acceptable even if it is keeping humans alive. I think the answer lies with in Leopold’s text when he talks about how our grandfathers “were less well-housed, well-fed, well-clothed than we are.” If we have people to remember the passenger pigeon then is it okay that they are extinct to keep people alive? Leopold talks about Darwin’s theory of evolution, but he doesn’t talk about survival of the fittest. Our ancestors were really just trying to survive and so we can’t blame them for that. And we won’t know if someday there will be another type of passenger pigeon that will evolve again. His passion really shows through when he says the passenger pigeon “ was the lightning that played between two biotic poles”, and “the fat of the land”, and “his own zest for living”. This does identify with readers who have ever lost a loved one because readers can feel that he is truly mourning.