Keeper of the Wild: The Life of Ernest Oberholtzer

Rating:
Summary: The Boundary Waters cannot be taken for granted!
Review: A very well and VERY meticulously researched book on Ernest Oberholtzer. If it weren't for Ober, the Boundary Water Canoe Area of Minnesota and the Quetico region of Ontario would not exist as we know of them today. Joe Paddock has gone through an incredible amount of Ober's papers and interviewed many many people for this book. His hard work is obvious.

The book is essentially written by Ober himself. Paddock put all of Ober's words in a logical manner in print.

I found myself rooting for Ober throughout the book. Whether if it was while paddling in freezing conditions in Hudson Bay, or while battling with the stubborn politicians. At the end of the book, I had tears in my eyes. . . who would carry on the Ober tradition???

Rating:
Summary: The Boundary Waters cannot be taken for granted!
Review: A very well and VERY meticulously researched book on Ernest Oberholtzer. If it weren't for Ober, the Boundary Water Canoe Area of Minnesota and the Quetico region of Ontario would not exist as we know of them today. Joe Paddock has gone through an incredible amount of Ober's papers and interviewed many many people for this book. His hard work is obvious.

The book is essentially written by Ober himself. Paddock put all of Ober's words in a logical manner in print.

I found myself rooting for Ober throughout the book. Whether if it was while paddling in freezing conditions in Hudson Bay, or while battling with the stubborn politicians. At the end of the book, I had tears in my eyes. . . who would carry on the Ober tradition???

Rating:
Summary: An attempt to rewrite history...
Review: I was born and grew up on Rainy Lake, a few miles distant from Ernest Oberholtzer's island. (I've modified my original review, in order to respond to some of the criticisms of Edith Rylander, a poet and environmental activist from California.)

This book is an agenda-driven effort to remove the warts and character flaws in the personal life of Ernest Carl Oberholtzer, one of eight political and environmental activists involved in the founding of The Wilderness Society (TWS) in 1935. This book should have been privately published by the current officers of TWS. They might be excused for attempting to promote a politically-correct and socially-correct biography about one of The Wilderness Society's most controversial founders. Unfortunately, the manuscript was accepted by the Minnesota Historical Society Press, who must now assume some responsibility for this uneven collection of facts and fantasy...

Joe Paddock's account of the Oberholtzer/Magee canoe trip to Hudson Bay in 1912 mirrors an earlier account by R. Newell Searle, published in a 1972 volume entitled "Saving Quetico-Superior". Both Searle and Paddock overlooked a collection of Indian language tapes, which had languished untranslated in the Oberholtzer Foundation records. The information on these recently translated tapes will certainly challenge the assumptions of earlier investigators, ie, that Oberholtzer could speak the Ojibwe language and had been initiated into the Midewiwin (Grand Medicine Society).

I am not concerned that "Joe Paddock interviewed a number of Oberholtzer's friends..." I am concerned that author Paddock "incorporated their insights into this biography" without substantiating the validity of their observations.

To paraphrase one of Ms. Rylander's pronouncements: "In a first writing of important history, it's particularly important to get that history right." I certainly agree...

If you're looking for an objective biography of Ernest Carl Oberholtzer, this book will not satisfy your needs...

Rating:
Summary: An attempt to rewrite history...
Review: I was born and grew up on Rainy Lake, a few miles distant from Ernest Oberholtzer's island. (I've modified my original review, in order to respond to some of the criticisms of Edith Rylander, a poet and environmental activist from California.)

This book is an agenda-driven effort to remove the warts and character flaws in the personal life of Ernest Carl Oberholtzer, one of eight political and environmental activists involved in the founding of The Wilderness Society (TWS) in 1935. This book should have been privately published by the current officers of TWS. They might be excused for attempting to promote a politically-correct and socially-correct biography about one of The Wilderness Society's most controversial founders. Unfortunately, the manuscript was accepted by the Minnesota Historical Society Press, who must now assume some responsibility for this uneven collection of facts and fantasy...

Joe Paddock's account of the Oberholtzer/Magee canoe trip to Hudson Bay in 1912 mirrors an earlier account by R. Newell Searle, published in a 1972 volume entitled "Saving Quetico-Superior". Both Searle and Paddock overlooked a collection of Indian language tapes, which had languished untranslated in the Oberholtzer Foundation records. The information on these recently translated tapes will certainly challenge the assumptions of earlier investigators, ie, that Oberholtzer could speak the Ojibwe language and had been initiated into the Midewiwin (Grand Medicine Society).

I am not concerned that "Joe Paddock interviewed a number of Oberholtzer's friends..." I am concerned that author Paddock "incorporated their insights into this biography" without substantiating the validity of their observations.

To paraphrase one of Ms. Rylander's pronouncements: "In a first writing of important history, it's particularly important to get that history right." I certainly agree...

If you're looking for an objective biography of Ernest Carl Oberholtzer, this book will not satisfy your needs...

Rating:
Summary: Getting history right
Review: In KEEPER OF THE WILD, Joe Paddock tells the story of an early environmental activist.
When he was a very young man, Ernest Oberholtzer decided that wilderness as wilderness was valuable, and worthy of preservation. Not wilderness as property, not wilderness as real estate, not wilderness as storehouse of natural resources, not even wilderness as scenery and fishing hole. Wilderness as wilderness.
This belief in the primal importance of wilderness at both the physical and the spiritual level is not a political agenda, though political agendas of various kinds can be derived from it. Oberholtzer devoted a very long lifetime to the defense and protection of wilderness. This in itself would certainly make him a controversial figure, to those who did not and do not share his philosophical conviction.
In a review posted to this website, Robert Martin speaks of "rewriting history". But, as a first biography of this major figure in the environmental movement, KEEPER OF THE WILD is a first writing of important history. It's therefore particularly important to get that history right.
Contrary to Mr. Martin's assertion, Joe Paddock does talk at length about Oberholtzer's sexual orientation. If Martin has other evidence (as opposed to conjecture) he should make it public.
Martin also speaks of "the complete absence of any information on Oberholtzer's politics and those of his supporters." In fact the better part of four chapters of KEEPER OF THE WILD chronicle Oberholtzer's many-year-long battle for the preservation of the Quetico-Superior watershed, activities which eventually led to the establishment of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Voyageurs National Park in the United States, and Quetico-Provincial Park in Canada. If active lobbying for wilderness protection over a period of thirty-plus years does not constitute politics, I don't know what does.
Mr. Martin's suggestion that "the Oberholtzer papers...had been organized and prepared for this review by Oberholtzer's friends at the Oberholtzer Foundation" posits a spoon-feeding of material to Mr. Paddock which simply never took place. The bulk of the Oberholtzer papers have been under the control of the Minnesota Historical Society for a number of years, where they are accessible to other researchers and the general public. To find the material on which KEEPER OF THE WILD is largely based, Paddock spent five years in those archives, sifting through tens of thousands of letters and other documents.
Mr. Martin criticizes KEEPER OF THE WILD for not being "the history of the early environmental movement in northern Minnesota", ignoring the fact that KEEPER is a biography, not a general history, like Newell Searle's excellent SAVING QUETICO-SUPERIOR: A LAND SET APART. Any book deserves to be read on its own terms. A book which says "the Life of" on its front cover will certainly be as much concerned with the personal and private as with the political.
Mr. Martin seems offended that Joe Paddock interviewed a number of Oberholtzer's friends and incorporated their insights into this biography. But any biographer will naturally proceed first from available documents left by his subject (letters, memoirs, interviews) and then proceed to interview those who knew the man longest. Ernest Oberholtzer has been dead since 1977. If those who knew him best remember him with affection, admiration, and respect, is this not an index of character?
Casual readers may be startled to encounter this level of disagreement over the life and accomplishments of one man. If they wish to find out what all the shouting's over, I recommend they read KEEPER OF THE WILD: THE LIFE OF ERNEST OBERHOLTZER, by Joe Paddock.

Rating:
Summary: Getting history right
Review: In KEEPER OF THE WILD, Joe Paddock tells the story of an early environmental activist.
When he was a very young man, Ernest Oberholtzer decided that wilderness as wilderness was valuable, and worthy of preservation. Not wilderness as property, not wilderness as real estate, not wilderness as storehouse of natural resources, not even wilderness as scenery and fishing hole. Wilderness as wilderness.
This belief in the primal importance of wilderness at both the physical and the spiritual level is not a political agenda, though political agendas of various kinds can be derived from it. Oberholtzer devoted a very long lifetime to the defense and protection of wilderness. This in itself would certainly make him a controversial figure, to those who did not and do not share his philosophical conviction.
In a review posted to this website, Robert Martin speaks of "rewriting history". But, as a first biography of this major figure in the environmental movement, KEEPER OF THE WILD is a first writing of important history. It's therefore particularly important to get that history right.
Contrary to Mr. Martin's assertion, Joe Paddock does talk at length about Oberholtzer's sexual orientation. If Martin has other evidence (as opposed to conjecture) he should make it public.
Martin also speaks of "the complete absence of any information on Oberholtzer's politics and those of his supporters." In fact the better part of four chapters of KEEPER OF THE WILD chronicle Oberholtzer's many-year-long battle for the preservation of the Quetico-Superior watershed, activities which eventually led to the establishment of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Voyageurs National Park in the United States, and Quetico-Provincial Park in Canada. If active lobbying for wilderness protection over a period of thirty-plus years does not constitute politics, I don't know what does.
Mr. Martin's suggestion that "the Oberholtzer papers...had been organized and prepared for this review by Oberholtzer's friends at the Oberholtzer Foundation" posits a spoon-feeding of material to Mr. Paddock which simply never took place. The bulk of the Oberholtzer papers have been under the control of the Minnesota Historical Society for a number of years, where they are accessible to other researchers and the general public. To find the material on which KEEPER OF THE WILD is largely based, Paddock spent five years in those archives, sifting through tens of thousands of letters and other documents.
Mr. Martin criticizes KEEPER OF THE WILD for not being "the history of the early environmental movement in northern Minnesota", ignoring the fact that KEEPER is a biography, not a general history, like Newell Searle's excellent SAVING QUETICO-SUPERIOR: A LAND SET APART. Any book deserves to be read on its own terms. A book which says "the Life of" on its front cover will certainly be as much concerned with the personal and private as with the political.
Mr. Martin seems offended that Joe Paddock interviewed a number of Oberholtzer's friends and incorporated their insights into this biography. But any biographer will naturally proceed first from available documents left by his subject (letters, memoirs, interviews) and then proceed to interview those who knew the man longest. Ernest Oberholtzer has been dead since 1977. If those who knew him best remember him with affection, admiration, and respect, is this not an index of character?
Casual readers may be startled to encounter this level of disagreement over the life and accomplishments of one man. If they wish to find out what all the shouting's over, I recommend they read KEEPER OF THE WILD: THE LIFE OF ERNEST OBERHOLTZER, by Joe Paddock.