Although Scott Russell Sanders and Gene Logsdon were taught lessons about life by completely different beings, the two writers write with similar aspects. In the essay, “Buckeye”, Scott Russell Sanders uses his experiences and lessons that he learned to describe his opinion of nature. His purpose resides in his fathers’ memory and the importance of the natural world. As for Gene Logsdon and his essay, “Lessons The Crick Taught Me,” he uses the “crick” from his childhood to explain his love and his connection with nature. Both authors are concerned with issues that such as where the source of primary learning comes from and the education with which they were raised. Scott Russell Sanders and Gene Logsdon value the natural world as a dominant
…show more content…
Sanders believed that although his academic education was relevant, he does not think that it provided as much insight as nature. For example, when he visited the area in which he was raised as an adult, he saw a hawk that reminded him of his father. Not only did this hawk remind him of his father, but he knew for a fact that it was his father in bird form. He says, “[m]y education may well be right; yet nothing I heard in school, nothing I’ve read, no lesson reached by logic has ever convinced me as utterly or stirred me as deeply as did that red-tailed hawk” (Sanders 7). Sanders has respect for the academic education that he received, but he does not think that it could ever make the same impact on a person like nature can. Feeling his father’s presence through a bird proves to him that nature is more powerful than any type of schooling. Logsdon does not discuss academics like Sanders, but he does make it clear that nature, especially the crick, was more impactful during his learning experiences than other things. He asserts, “[n]o toy when I was a child nor substitute for a toy as a man, not even my beloved ball diamond, entertained me nearly as much or as long as The Crick” (Logsdon 99). Logsdon realized that there were many aspects to learning
Sanders believed that although his academic education was relevant, he does not think that it provided as much insight as nature. For example, when he visited the area in which he was raised as an adult, he saw a hawk that reminded him of his father. Not only did this hawk remind him of his father, but he knew for a fact that it was his father in bird form. He says, “[m]y education may well be right; yet nothing I heard in school, nothing I’ve read, no lesson reached by logic has ever convinced me as utterly or stirred me as deeply as did that red-tailed hawk” (Sanders 7). Sanders has respect for the academic education that he received, but he does not think that it could ever make the same impact on a person like nature can. Feeling his father’s presence through a bird proves to him that nature is more powerful than any type of schooling. Logsdon does not discuss academics like Sanders, but he does make it clear that nature, especially the crick, was more impactful during his learning experiences than other things. He asserts, “[n]o toy when I was a child nor substitute for a toy as a man, not even my beloved ball diamond, entertained me nearly as much or as long as The Crick” (Logsdon 99). Logsdon realized that there were many aspects to learning