Edith Cowan University Edith Cowan University

Research Online Research Online

ECU Publications 2011

1-1-2011

Anthoethnography: Emerging Research into the Culture of Flora, Anthoethnography: Emerging Research into the Culture of Flora,

Aesthetic Experience of Plants, and the Wildflower Tourism of the Aesthetic Experience of Plants, and the Wildflower Tourism of the

Future Future

John C. Ryan Edith Cowan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2011

Part of the Philosophy Commons, Plant Biology Commons, and the Tourism Commons

Ryan, J. C. (2011). Anthoethnography: Emerging research into the culture of flora, aesthetic experience of plants, and the wildflower tourism of the future. New Scholar, 1(1), 28-40. Available here This Journal Article is posted at Research Online. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2011/496

28

INTRODUCTIONTOANTHOETHNOGRAPHYWe were travelling up north and uptowards the north and around theMurchison River area, and I came acrossall these tiny little orchids about tencentimetres high. They were in a mass,justamassofthem…forsomereasontheyjust grabbed me and I thought ‘wow,theseareamazing!’

—Wildflower enthusiast Lyn Alcock,Spring2009,recallingherfirstsightingoforchids.

As agents of healing, purveyors ofornamentation, symbols of inspiration,inciters of attraction, and repositories ofbeauty,flowersholdspecialrolesinhumansocieties worldwide (for example, seeGoody).Engineeredintohybridsandraisedin greenhouses, cultivated flowers haveparticularaffinitieswithpeopleascommonmembers of domesticated spheres. Forexample, in seventeenth‐century Holland,the over‐zealous love of flowers galvanisedthe social and economic furore over tulipflowers and bulbs known as ‘tulipmania’(Goldgar 7). In contrast, wild‐growingflowers invoke the non‐cultivated naturalworld. By governing their own biologicalstabilities, wildflowers can appeal to usthrough their undomesticated beauty andecologicalresilience.

The ‘culture of flowers’ points to theintricate aesthetic, spiritual, artistic,mercantile, economic, symbolic, materialand therapeutic relationships betweenhuman societies and wild‐growing orcultivated flowers. In its general sense, thephrase indicates an interface between thebroad categories of nature and culture,people and landscapes, flowers andappreciators (see Giblett 1‐23). Innineteenth‐century Europe, the ‘culte desfleurs’ invigorated a ‘new flower rhetoric’within French literature, highlighting theimportanceofflowerstoculturalexpression(Knight3).Indeed,thesocialanthropologistJackGoodyquestionswhetherthecultureofflowersportendsauniversal ‘interestinthenaturalworldthatinsomeformisfoundinall human societies’ or whether it is anaffinity with flowers specific to certaincultures(1).

Whereas empirical methods forstudying native plants are well establishedas botanical science, humanities‐based

Anthoethnography: Emerging Research into the Culture of

Flora, Aesthetic Experience of Plants,

and the Wildflower Tourism of the

Future

John Ryan Edith Cowan University

29

approaches for researching the culturalaspects surrounding wildflowers are lessdefined.Asanemergingareaofscholarshipbringingtheperspectivesofculturalstudiesto the study of the natural world,‘anthoethnography’ applies humanities‐basedapproachestoplantsandtheculturesofflora.Suchscholarshipisinneed.Despitetheincreaseinthescientificknowledgeandinternational awareness of the native floraof the Southwest ofWestern Australia, forexample, relatively little has beenresearched about commonplaceengagements between wildflowers andpeoplethroughouttheregion.So,whiletheclassificationof flora grows along specialistlines, theculturalpoeticsofwildflowers,aswell as native flora out‐of‐flower, remainundeveloped.

In the context of the Southwest, Itherefore propose the term‘anthoethnography’asanemergingconceptand methodology for researching thecomplex relationships between people andflora.ThemedievalGreekprefix‘antho’isalinguistic link between flowers, culture,historyandscience.Denotingacollectionofliterarypieces,theword‘anthology’literallymeans ‘flower gathering.’ Moreover, anobscure term, ‘anthography’ is theanatomical description of flowers, used inRussell Grimwade’s study of eucalyptflowers, An Anthography of the Eucalypts.Hence, anthoethnography is the use ofethnographic approaches, especially semi‐structured interviews and participantobservation, for producing accounts aboutthe embodied interactions andinterdependenciesbetweenhumanculturesand flowering plants. Applied to theSouthwest culture of flora, the approachaims to bring to light the diverse

intersections between settler, post‐colonialandcontemporarysocietiesandwildflowers.

How do both tourists and expertsperceive flowering plants? How iswildflower tourism marketed? What kindsof language are exercised to communicateexperiences of wildflowers? The Southwestcultureofflorawillbeadumbratedthrougha reading of the rhetoric of the springwildflower tourism season. Set within abroaderdiscussionofthehistoryandvaluesof regionalwildflower tourism, the readingof anthoethnographic interviews highlightsthe varieties of cultural intersections withnative plants, from distanced visualappreciation to proximal multi‐sensoryengagement. The interviewees rangethrough a spectrumof novices and expertswho provide insight into the Southwestcultureofflorathroughtheirexperiencesastourists or expertise as specialists.Respondents suggest potential directionsfor wildflower tourism towards proximalinteractions with plants in habitats(Bennett), concepts of botanicalconservation through scientificunderstanding (Tinker), and Aboriginalknowledges and spiritualities focussedtowards the long‐term wellbeing of nativeplantpopulations(Nannup).

Aesthetic experience of plants usuallymeans looking at flowers. In its regionalmanifestations,wildflowertourismtendstoemphasise the visual appreciationofplantsas affections of sight. Indeed, wildflowertourism may entail expectations of colour,form, scale and profusion focussed on thestatic appearance of flowers. However,participatory engagement with flora,exemplifiedby the eatingofplants asbushtucker, offers multi‐sensory modes ofappreciationthatbuildontheexperienceofseeing.Therefore, anthoethnographydraws

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

30

theoretically from the critique ofpictorialisation, which constructs thenatural world as a static two‐dimensionallandscape.

In the essay ‘The age of the worldpicture,’MartinHeidegger argues that ‘thefundamental event of modernity is theconquest of the world as picture’ (221).DavidLevin suggests thatHeidegger’s laterthinking responded to the centrality of‘vision‐generated discourse’ intrinsic to theemerging visual technologies of modernity(186). Echoing Heidegger, Jonathan Craryobserves the linkage between technologiesof sight and modernity’s production ofobjective knowledge of the world (25‐66).Through the lensof a camera, flowersmaybe apprehended objectively as a series ofimages. Owing to the contemporaryprofusion of image technologies, flowertourism tends to value visual appearances,ratherthanparticipatoryexperienceslinkedtodeeperunderstandingsofplantsasnodesin a larger ecological web. The pre‐eminenceofvisualaestheticsmaybeduetothe privileging of sight combined with theprotected statusof certainwildflowers thatprohibits human bodily encounter withplants in conservationareas.Consequently,cultural involvement with flora risksbecoming flattened to ‘the mediation ofpresence through images’ (Mules 2).However, through the critique of vision‐generated discourse at the core ofanthoethnography, the culture of flora inthe Southwest may be broadened tocomprise physical interactions with plantsthroughthemultiplesensesofsmell,touch,taste and hearing augmented by the senseof sight and visual technologies. Theguiding conceptual premise ofanthoethnography is that vision offers anarrowrangeforexperiencingflorathatcan

be complemented and broadened byparticipatory modes of interaction andAboriginalspiritualtraditionsofplants.

WHATISWILDFLOWERTOURISM?We try to take [wildflower tourism] thatstep furtherthan justsomethingthathasan aesthetic value, just that physicalimage on the mind, the “yeah it lookspretty.” We add the dimension of how[wildflowers] function, that’s verycomplex.

—Allan Tinker, proprietor of WesternFloraCaravanPark,Eneabba,W.A.Spring2009

Anthoethnography is one methodology forstudyingthecultureofflora.Thepurposeofwildflower tourism, as a culture of flowers,is the aesthetic appreciation of the visualbeauty of flowering plants. In contrast towildflower tourism, the term ‘botanicalappreciation’ comprises the enjoyment ofwholeplants,notjusttheirflowers,throughmultiplesensoryfacultiessuchassmellandtaste.Asabroadlyinclusiveandpopularisedcultureof flora,wildflower tourism invokesscenes of contemporary self‐drive orescorted bus tours into the bush toencounterfloweringplantsintheirhabitats.However,wildflowertourismalsocomprisesflower shows and festivals in which nativeplantsarepicked,transported,andarrangedfordisplayincommunityandvisitorcentres,churches, botanical gardens and othercultural epicentres. Indeed, these venuesoften serve as nerve centres for peripateticwildflower appreciators. As visuallymarketedandpracticed,aswellaslinkedtomotorised transport, wildflower tourismentailsaquestforthebloom:colours,forms,symmetries and morphological harmonies.People travel thousands of kilometres to

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?

31

WesternAustralia and other distant placestoseewildflowers,notnecessarily tosmell,taste,touch,hear,knowdeeplyorotherwiseengageinnon‐visual,orevenspiritual,ways.

Wildflower tourism occurs in such avariety of places worldwide as NamaquaNational Park in South Africa (Loubster,Mouton, and Nel), the town of Bohinj inSlovenia (‘5th International WildflowerFestival’) and the state of Florida in thesouthern United States (‘Introduction’). ALonely Planet guide to the United Statesreports on the centrality of wildflowerdriving circuits to the tourism of certainAmericanstates:‘toTexans,wildflowersarea way of life. Wildflower tourism is soentrenchedthatthehighwayvisitorcenterscan help you plan an entire trip aroundwatching them bloom’ (Lyon andNystrom594). Inastudyofnature‐basedtourism inthe Central Coast region of WesternAustralia including Lesueur National Park,Julianna Priskin notes that while ‘theflowering plant diversity of WesternAustralia is a tourismdrawcard’wildflowertourismrepresents‘anunresearchedformofnature‐basedtourism’intheregion(518).

As a form of tourism which takesvisitors into botanic habitats, wildflowertourism crosses into nature‐based tourism,ageneralcategoryincludingaction‐orientedadventure tourism and conservation‐minded ecotourism. Nature‐based tourismis ‘primarily concerned with the directenjoyment of some relatively undisturbedphenomenon of nature’ (Priskin 501).Whereas adventure tourists arecharacterised by their interest in activitieslikefour‐wheelmotoring,ecotouristsaimtoexperiencethenaturalworldasawholeandto learn about its conservation (Blamey 5‐22). Ralf Buckley, Catherine Pickering andDavid Weaver observe that, in Australian

snowcountry, ‘wildflower appreciationandother forms of ecotourism tend to occur inthesummer’(9,emphasisadded).However,the assertion that wildflower tourism isautomaticallya formofecotourismmaybeerroneous. Although wildflower tourismcrosses into adventure and ecotourism, itsparametersarelargelynotclarified.

Demographically, wildflower touriststend to be mostly ‘older empty nesters’(Western Australian Tourism Commission8). According to the same study,‘wildflower enthusiasts’ are focussed onseeing different species of wildflowers,whereas ‘nature lovers’ are moreindependent, interactive, and inclinedtowards a diverse range of natural andcultural attractions. Hence, wildflowertourists are not intrinsically interested inbotanical conservation. For example, therecreational harvesting of wildflowers hashad a troubled relationship with theappreciation of native plants. In 1926 arequestfortheprotectionoffloraandfaunawithin national parks was rejected by theWest Australian Department of Lands andSurveytodefendtheinterestsofwildflowergatherers: ‘the primary inducement forpeople to go into reserves...is to gather thewildflowers with the object of adorningtheir homes and taking part in thewildflowershows’(qtd.inHallandPage56).

‘BREATHOFTHEBUSH’:THEHISTORYOFWILDFLOWERTOURISMINTHESOUTHWEST

Since colonial settlement, WesternAustralia has been recognised by plantenthusiastsworldwideforthediversityofitsflowering species.Nearly half of Australia’stwenty‐fivethousandfloweringplantsoccur

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

32

in Western Australia, with the Southwestregion containing about 9000 species,three‐quarters of which are endemic(Hopper 270). Botanical science continuesto identify new species at an unusual rate,includingeucalyptssuchastheRockMallee[Eucalyptus petrensis] within the outerreachesofmetropolitanPerth(Hopper261).Throughout the region, the profusion ofspecies, combined with the particularadaptive ecologies of the flora, has givenrise to a richness andvarietyof colour andform that allures prospective visitors.Botanically‐minded visitors to the regionoften commenton the tenacity andbeautyoftheflora,enduringextremeconditionsofdrynessandheat:‘travellingacrossthemostbarren area, suddenly you come across aStuart Pea [sic] growing out of this redsoil…you just can’t believe that’s come outof this red dust’ (Western AustralianTourismCommission17).

The appreciation of wildflowers isevident in writings from the early years ofsettlement. Spring walks to Mount Eliza,the present‐day site of Kings Park, wereimportanttothesociallifeofcolonialPerthresidents. In the spring of 1856, SophiaPhillips, the daughter of Surveyor GeneralJohn Septimus Roe, reported the ‘bushlovely with flowers’ on a trip to Toodyay(qtd. in Summers 4). In his diary keptbetween 1877 and 1884, Alfred JamesHillman wrote of wildflower jaunts toMount Eliza during the spring (419).However,Hillmancommentedthatmanyofthe wildflowers lacked a smell: ‘they canscarcelybesaidtowastetheirsweetnessonthedesert air as they are for themostpartscentless’ (424). Moreover, describing hervisit to Western Australia in the latenineteenth century, May Viviennewitnessed an explosion of spring

wildflowers and saw not only beautifulforms,buteconomicpotential:‘Asthetrainsped past the idea struck me that theseflowers—lovely immortelles, white, pink,andyellow,growingincountlessmillions—couldbeturnedtogoodaccount’(28).

In the late nineteenth and earlytwentieth century, technologicaldevelopments afforded greater visualavenues for appreciating the bush. WestAustralians embraced rail and auto travelbecause of the distances between locales,and these new forms of transportaugmented opportunities for wildflowerappreciation through visual speculation.The late 1800s and early 1900smarked theemergence of flower tours by train,departing metropolitan Perth for outlyingareas like Gingin and Wongan Hills.‘Wildflower trains’ became desirable formsof tourism, providing regular excursions tothe bush from urban areas and promotingthe Western Australian countryside as an‘Arcadian idyll’ (Summers 5). During thisperiod, Emily Pelloe made the followingobservation:

special “flower trains”are run.Theseandtheusualweek‐endandholidaytrainsarealways packed with city folk eager toexplore the bush and gather the lovelyflowers. Glen Forrest (late Smith’s Mill),Darlington, Gooseberry Hill, Kalamunda,andSerpentineareall favouritehauntsoftheflower‐seekers.(29)

However, the trains also brought bothcountry dwellers and wildflowers into cityenvirons for wildflower shows. During thelate nineteenth century, the PerthWildflowerShowwasthecentralwildflowerevent,servingasaplenumforthecollectivebotanical diversity of the state. Traintransport galvanised the gathering ofspecies from remote areas. A note in The

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?

33

West Australian from September 1893commentsonspecialexcursionratesofferedby the Railway Department to ‘enablecountry residents to see the floralexhibitions which are to be open, and tospend a few days of the most charmingseasonof theyear in thecapitalandat theseaside’ (4). An August 1899 issue of thesame paper explains that the committee ofthe September wildflower show in Perthhoped that flowers ‘will be sent from allparts of the colony to them to make theshowas representativeaspossible’ (4).Therailways transported native plants to Perthcommittee members at no cost, and thetrains became related inseparably to earlymodesof flower touring.Hence, inthe latecolonial history of Western Australia, themode of detached viewership afforded bytrain travel influenced the perception ofnativeplantsasstaticelementsofthevisuallandscape through which new forms oftransport shuttled burgeoning settlerpopulations.

During colonial years, flower showsandother formsof tourismconflictedwithvalues of biodiversity conservation,especially when the picking of wildflowerswasheldasanacceptableformofembodiedappreciation. By the late 1890s, discussionsabout the fate of Western Australian floracommenced amidst pressures exerted bywildflower collectors on plant populations.By the 1920s, Pelloe extolled the virtues ofSouthwestwildflowersas the ‘breathof thebush’ but decried their despoliation at thehandofpickers:

Flowers should ever be regarded assomething too beautiful and precious tobewasted…inthecitytheybringabreathofthebushandrecallhappymemoriestomanyatiredheart,inthehometheyaddadaintycharmtotherooms,andasagifttothesickarealwayswelcomed.(16)

The 1912 Native Flora Protection Actwas implemented to protect flora fromdestruction by excursionist pickers, aswellas commercial exploitation from flowerdecorators (Summers 5‐8). Moreover, the1935 Native Protection Act increased theschedule of native species protected fromcollection (Summers 8‐11). Local legislationalso began to take place along populartouring routes. For example, MundaringWeir Road between Mundaring andKalamunda was constructed as a touristloop through forested land and became apopularwildflowerdrive.Accordingtolocalhistorian Graeme Rundle, early floraprotection legislation in the Hills areaoutside of Perth was prompted bycommunityconcernsabouttherecreationalpicking of wildflowers (personalcommunication 12 August 2010). Furtheralong,in1953,GovernmentBotanistCharlesGardnerreporteda rareendemicMountainBell,onlyknowntoexistonthesummitofCoyanarup Peak in the Stirling Ranges, atthe KalgoorlieWildflower Show (Summers12).Hence, aesthetic appreciationof visibleforms and the procurement of wildflowersbegan to put demands on biodiversityconservation.

During the 1960s, due largely to thepersonal interest of Premier David Brand,the tourism industry promoted WesternAustralia with auto license plates bearingthe slogan ‘TheWildflower State’ (Rundle,personal communication 12 August 2010).Presently, the Southwestwildflower seasonis internationally renowned. The WesternAustralian Tourism Commission studyidentifies the state as the best destinationfor flowers in Australia and among thepremierdestinationsforwildflowertourismworldwide. In one of the few publishedreports on Western Australian wildflower

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

34

tourism, the suggestion for increasing the‘motivational appeal’ of the annualWildflower Holiday Guide is to ‘focusmoreon larger photos of expansive, scenic andexperiential wildflower imagery’ (5).Imageryasamarketingtoolisbasedontheenticement of visual stimulation or theprospect of having an aesthetic experiencebasedon sight.The core value structureofwildflower tourism, as it is marketed incontemporaryterms,isvisual.Thereforetheexperienceof tourists tends towards seeingflowersandgatheringimages.Toreturntoapertinent phrase by Warwick Mules,wildflower imagery is ‘the mediation ofpresencethroughimages’ (2).Thepresencemediatedbytheimagesisoflivingplantsintheir multi‐sensory habitats and in theircomplexityofrelationstootherlifeforms.

Visual affordance from the distance oftrains and cars, as well as from behindimage‐making instruments, can create anobjective spacebetweenpeople andplants,reinforcing dualisms between the naturalworld and the culturalworld.TheTourismCommissionstudy furtherstates thatmanytravellers ‘often cited previous visuallystunningexperiencesastheirmotivatorsforthinking about taking another wildflowerholiday’andoneparticipantdescribedwithespecially strong emotion the sight of a‘carpet of flowers’ engulfing a group ofvisitors (15). The carpet of expansiveeverlastings is a high expectation of mostrespondents,whouselanguagelike‘variety,colour,andvastexpanses’aswellas ‘carpetofcolour’and‘perfectlyformed’todescribethe wildflowers (Western AustralianTourismCommission 16). According to therespondents, the primary reasons given forthe popularity of Southwest wildflowertourism are pictorial and include thevastnessof‘untouched’flowersasfarasthe

eye can see, colour varieties, and contrastsof colours against ‘barren’ backdrops(WesternAustralianTourismCommission).Onerespondentsuggeststhatmore ‘bright,colourful, scenic shots with scope andmagnitude’ be added to improve theWildflower Holiday Guide (WesternAustralianTourismCommission39).

ANTHOETHNOGRAPHYINPRACTICE:FROMWILDFLOWERTOURISMTOBOTANICALAPPRECIATION

Beyond wildflower tourism, botanicalappreciation suggests engagementwith thewhole plant (bark, leaves, fruits and seeds)throughout the year, not only during theheight of flowering, and through varioussense faculties. Pelloe comments that ‘allover Western Australia the display ofwildflowers is especially extensive in thespringtime, but the bush always holdssomething to interest the collector’ (15). Incontemporary conservation language, acollector is an appreciator; hence the bushoffers something to appreciate at all timesofyear.However,unlikescientificcollectorsof the colonial era for whom objectiveknowledge was a priority, contemporaryappreciators are free to draw from aspectrum of appreciative modes includingbodily experiences through the practice ofeatingwildplants(seeClarke81‐90).

Due to their ecological adaptations,especially the general smallness of theirfoliage and flowers, Southwest plantsrequire forms of proximal appreciation tocomplement visual spectatorship. Again,Pelloeencouragestheflower‐seekerto:

turn your back on the view. Otherwise,you will spend a lot of time gazing outover that wide expanse of country with

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?

35

the ocean gleaming in the distance, andpossiblymissmanyofthefloraltreasuresatyourfeet.(29)

Similarly, Priskin observes that ‘wildflowerappreciation requires walking in closeproximity to plants, as numerous speciesrequireonetobelessthanonemetreawayforclearobservation’(518).Indeed,RHobbsand Angus Hopkins argue that wildflowertourism has the potential to promotebiodiversity conservation, threatened byhabitatloss,nativefloraclearing,andover‐harvesting(93‐114).However,theembodiedelements of wildflower appreciation, toincludefloraasawholeratherthanflowersin isolation, require development in theregion in order to achieve the long‐termbenefitssuggestedbyHobbsandHopkins.

Figure 1 (top) the orchid effect andFigure 2 (bottom) the everlasting effect(photosbytheauthor)

In historical and contemporarycontexts, the aesthetic values ofwildflowertourismhavebeenpresentedtoindicateitsvisual inclinations. Anthoethnographyoffers the potential to highlight newdirections for wildflower tourism towardsembodiedbotanical appreciation.Thisnewconcept and methodology of researchingthecultureoffloraintheSouthwestaimstoreveal perceptual attitudes towardsflowering plants during the springwildflower season, including visualappreciation, embodied participation andobjective values. To begin with, interviewsconducted in the field with proprietors oftourism venues reveal two pre‐eminentmodes of viewing Southwest wildflowersand flowering landscapes in general. Idescribe these two distinct modes ofperceiving plants as the ‘orchid effect’ andthe ‘everlasting effect.’ The orchid effectrequires proximal perception and thewillingness to get close to the bush bybending down and physically interactingwith plants. In contrast, the everlastingeffect promotes detached visualappreciation(Ryan545‐546;Figures1and2).

Merle Bennett, local botanist andcoordinatoroftheRavensthorpeWildflowerShow near Esperance, suggests that theeverlasting effect isunrepresentativeof thecharacter of the southern Southwestlandscape:

You sometimes see mass flowering ofLeptospermums orsomethingof that sort[like]Kunzeasatthesideoftheroad.Buton the whole, you don’t get these greatmassesofonething flowering.Youdo inscatteredareasbutnottothesameextentastheeverlastingsupnorth.(4)

Although the everlasting effect is themost panoramic, the orchid effect holdsmore biodiversity and requires proximity

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

36

between vegetative and human bodiesduring appreciative moments. Even at theapexofflowering,FitzgeraldRiverNationalPark outside of Ravensthorpe, perceivedfrom a car, may appear drab green anduninviting.Theeverlastingeffectcomprisespanoramic visualism and encouragesdisembodied viewership. It evokes theoriesof the imperial gaze of colonial explorersdescribedbyPaulCarter(xx‐xxii)andotherpost‐colonial scholars. Carter argues,however, that the imperial gaze of theexplorer is ‘phenomenological in nature. Itisgrounded, that is, inhis recognitionthathe,theobserver,doesnotgazeontheworldasthroughawindow,butratherinhabitsit’(82). Unlike Carter’s concept ofphenomenological observation, theaesthetic gaze of the everlasting effectimplies no inhabitation of a habitat. Itsupports adetachedmodeof spectatorshiprather than the bodily immersion ofIndigenous peoples’ being in country. Incontrasttotheeverlastingeffect,theorchideffectmakes appreciation possible throughcuriosity, attention and close physicalengagement, diminishing the orderingpowersofvisualobjectificationby invokingthe participatory senses. A comprehensiveform of appreciation would shift betweeneverlastingandorchidmodesofperception:from seeing and gazing to feeling andtastingtheland.

Anthoethnographic enquiry furtherelucidates some of the dynamics betweenobjectivescienceandappreciationofplantsthrough visual and embodied modes. TheLesueur‐Eneabba area north of Perthcomprises particularly rich heathlandenvironments (Hopkins, Keighery, andMarchant).Althoughthespeciesdiversityofthe area results in year‐round blossoming,flowering ismostprolificduring the spring

months August andOctober (Priskin 504).IntheviewofAllanTinker,tourleaderandproprietorofWesternFloraCaravanParkinEneabba, the effects of using scientificunderstanding to broaden surface‐orientedvisualaestheticjudgementsareenduring:

Myopinion is that if peopleknowa littlebitmore about the reality of the systemaround them, they’ll have a little morerespect.And itpaysoff.Wehavea lotofpeople who come back who started offjustgoingtolookattheprettywildflowersand come back a couple years later andsay “I saw one of those over the road. Iused to dump my rubbish over there.Now, we don’t do that anymore becausewe know there are things there.” So itdoeshaveanimpression.(1)

For Tinker, the visual perception of plantsentails limitedappreciationofthescientificimportance of flora. At Western FloraCaravan Park, botanical knowledgeunderscores the appearance of wildflowersas pretty or attractive. Tinker goes on toclaim that engagement, as either visualaesthetics or participatory appreciation,interferes with the attainment of soundscientific comprehension of the role offloweringplantsinecologicalsystems:

Our human appreciation is eitheraesthetic or edible. It’s the aestheticbeautyorwhetheritcanbeconsumed.Sothat’sthemajorhumanperceptionof theplant. And so we forget that the onlyreasonaplanthasa flower is for itsownreproduction.(6‐7)

Instead of sight‐based or embodiedrelationships, Tinker uses a Westernscientificepistemologytoinstil invisitorsaconservation ethos towards wildflowers.Althoughhe formerly included informationin his presentations to tourists about thepalatability of certain species, such as theedible tubers of orchids, Tinker now

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?

37

describes himself as ‘far more cautious…Iveryseldomtalkabouttheediblesideoftheplant communities’ (6). He largely limitsdiscussions to technical information aboutthe adaptations of plants in order topromote theirconservation in theLesueur‐Eneabbaarea.

Rather than setting up a binaryoppositionbetweenvisionandembodiment,participatory engagements based in bodilyinteraction can work dynamically withobjective knowledges towardscomprehensive forms of appreciation. Inconjunctionwith technicalunderstandings,Aboriginal spiritualities and materialrelationships to plants prompt directionsfor regional botanical appreciation. AsdescribedbyNyoongar/InjabarndielderDr.Noel Nannup, Aboriginal conceptions offlora are broader than the wildflower itselfand encompass traditions between peopleandplants.Theaestheticexperienceoffloracan be deepened through educatingwildflower tourists about Aboriginalunderstandingsoffloraasfoods,medicines,fibres,andtotems, rather thanvisual itemsalone:

If you look at [a plant] aesthetically, it’sverypleasing.Butifyoucanaddthatnewdimension to it or add a dimension to itwhere you talk about the use of it as aplantyoucouldmakestringoutof,howitwaspoisonousorhowyouuseditasfoodor medicine or whatever, then suddenlythere’sawholedifferentthing.(4)

Nannupsuggeststheconservationofnativeplants, but in different terms to Tinker.Whereas botanical science instils aconservation ethic for Tinker, theAboriginal spiritual relationships presentedby Nannup foster a concern for the long‐term wellbeing of plants and peoplethroughtheconceptoftotems:

You’re also bringing in Aboriginalspirituality which is connected to [theappreciation of plants] because theseplantswe’re talkingabout are all totems.Intheoldwaytheyweresomeone’splant.(4)

Through a framework of spirituality andphysical interaction linked to culturalheritage,Nannupencouragesthedeepeningof theappreciationofwildflowersas linkedto the health of people. His statementspromote the interconnectedness betweenplants,habitatsandpeople,ratherthantheisolationof imagesas theaestheticoutputsofwildflowertourism:

And as [Aboriginal people] looked after[their totems], they had to knoweverythingthatispossibletoknowaboutthat plant. That’s what a totem is. Youknow[thetotem]intimately.Soyouknowthe relationship it has with other plants,animals,birds,evenwhatpollinatesit.(4)

Intimacybetweenpeopleandplantsresultsfrom knowledge of ecological connectionsand the participation of appreciators inliving habitats. Hence spirituality,embodiment and ecological knowledge aredialogic rather than in conflict. WhereasTinker exclusively encourages the meta‐narrative of science, Nannup holds thatmulti‐layered experience of flora occursthrough a sense of connectivity betweenbodies.The surfacequalitiesofwildflowerssuch as colour and form are networked tothebroader environmentof the flower andtohumancultural legacies.Nannup’ssensefor comprehensive botanical appreciationoffers a glimpse of the potential directionsfor wildflower tourism as it is presentlypracticedintheregion.

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

38

CONCLUSION

How does anthoethnography contribute tothe development of understandings ofaesthetic experiences of wild plants andwildflower tourism? As exemplified by thequintessentially aesthetic industry ofwildflower tourism, the culture of florarepresents diverse engagements betweenpeople and plants. Such complexengagements offer further avenues forresearch. The critical methodology ofanthoethnography has been one suchapproach to circumscribing the values,practicesandrhetoricofwildflowertourism.Interviews have revealed perceptualphenomena such as the orchid andeverlasting effects as two counterpoisedexamples of the differences between visualaestheticvaluesoccurringintheregion.Forappreciators such as Tinker, botanicalscience substantiates visual experience byshowingthefunctionalroleofplantswithinhabitats.However,thetaxonomiceyeisnottheonlyjudgeofthevalueandsignificanceof flowering plants. As underscored byNannup, Aboriginal perspectives offercomplexculturalmodesofengagementandrichdirectionsforwildflowertourismbasedinbodilyexperience.

An anthoethnographic approachproduces accounts of the spectrum ofhuman perceptions of wildflowers in ordertoprofferpotentialdirectionsforwildflowertourism of the future. Through aparticipatory aesthetics of flora incontemporary Australian landscapes,appreciative interactions with plants willoccur not only through visual values, butalsothroughthesmell,taste,sound,orfeelof plants and how one moves throughcommunities of flora. Scientific knowledgecan amplify visual and embodied modes.However,asananthoethnographiclenshas

shown,wildflowertourismintheSouthwestis weighted towards visual experience.Indeed, the history and contemporarypractices of wildflower tourism encodeocular values that can posit a separationbetween post‐colonial cultures and nativeflora. A promising direction is towardsparticipatory relationships beyond theaestheticisation of the surface qualities offloraandbeyondthe‘conquestoftheworldas picture’ (Heidegger 221). In an era ofrapid species loss, wildflower tourism willincreasingly embrace concepts ofconservation, Aboriginal knowledges andthe recognition of spiritual heritages, andthe appreciation of plants beyond theirvisual impact. The expression of humansensory capacities for plants joined to anethos of botanical conservation, drawingfrom scientific thought, can better ensurethe longevity of flowers through theevolution of the culture of flora in theregion.

NS

John Ryan is in his final year of his PhDdissertation in the School ofCommunications and Arts at Edith CowanUniversity in Perth. Titled Plants, Peopleand Place: Cultural Botany and theSouthwest Australian Flora, his doctoralproject has examined a diverse range ofculturalandliteraryresourcespertainingtothe diverse flora of the Southwest ofWesternAustralia.Someofhisdissertationchapters have been published in thejournals Australian Humanities Review(2009),Continuum (2010), andNature and

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?

39

Culture (2011 forthcoming). He also hasrecentlypublishedapoetrychapbookcalledKatoomba Incantation (2011). His researchinterests include ecocriticism, arts‐basedmethods of research into ecology, and thehistoryofbotany.

WORKSCITED‘5th International Wildflower Festival.’TurizemBohinj.2010.Web.13Aug.2010.

Alcock, Lyn. Personal Interview. 8September2009.

Bennett, Merle. Personal Interview. 13September2009.

Blamey,R.K. ‘PrinciplesofEcotourism.’TheEncyclopedia of Ecotourism. Ed. DavidWeaver. New York: CABI Publishing, 2001.5‐22.Print.

Buckley, Ralf, Catherine Pickering, andDavid Weaver. Nature‐Based Tourism,Environment, and Land Management.Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing, 2003.Print.

Carter, Paul. The Road to Botany Bay: AnExploration of Landscape and History.Minneapolis,MN:UofMinnesotaP,2010.

Clarke, Philip. Aboriginal Plant Collectors:Botanists and Australian Aboriginal Peoplein the Nineteenth Century. Dural DeliveryCentre, NSW: Rosenberg Publishing, 2008.Print.

Crary,Jonathan.TechniquesoftheObserver:OnVision andModernity in theNineteenthCentury.Cambridge,MA:MITP,1990.Print.

Giblett,Rod.LivingwiththeEarth:MasterytoMutuality.Cambridge:Salt,2004.Print.

Goldgar, Anne.Tulipmania:Money, Honor,and Knowledge in the Dutch Golden Age.Chicago,IL:UofChicagoP,2007.Print.

Goody, Jack. The Culture of Flowers.Cambridge,U.K.:CambridgeUP,1993.Print.

Grimwade, Russell.An Anthography of theEucalypts.Sydney:Angus&Robertson,1920.Print.

Hall, Collin, and Stephen Page. TheGeography of Tourism and Recreation:Environment, Place and Space. 3 ed. NewYork:Routledge,2006.Print.

Heidegger, Martin. ‘The age of the worldpicture.’The Heidegger Reader. Ed. GünterFigal.Trans.JeromeVeith.Bloomington,IN:IndianaUP,2009.207‐223.Print.

Hillman, Alfred.The Hillman Diaries 1877‐1884: The Personal Diaries of Alfred JamesHillman for 21 December 1877 to 24 April1884. Applecross,W.A.: F.V. Bentley, 1990.Print.

Hobbs, R, and Angus Hopkins. ‘FromFrontiers to Fragments: European Impacton Australia's Vegetation.’ Proceedings oftheEcologicalSocietyofAustralia16(1990):93‐114.Print.

Hopkins,Angus,GregKeighery,andNevilleMarchant. ‘Species‐Rich Uplands of South‐Western Australia.’ Proceedings of theEcologicalSocietyofAustralia16(1983):93‐114.Print.

Hopper, Stephen. ‘An AustralianPerspective on Plant Conservation BiologyPractice.’ Conservation Biology for the

RYAN|ANTHOETHNOGRAPHY

40

Coming Decade. Eds. Fiedler, Peggy andPeter Kareiva. 2 ed. New York: ChapmanHall,1998.255‐78.Print.

‘Introduction.’ Florida WildflowerFoundation.Web.25Feb.2011.

Knight,Philip.FlowerPoeticsinNineteenth‐Century France. Oxford, UK: Oxford UP,1986.Print.

Levin, David. ‘Decline and Fall:Ocularcentrism in Heidegger's Reading oftheHistoryofMetaphysics.’Modernity andthe Hegemony of Vision. Ed. David Levin.LosAngeles:UofCaliforniaP,1993.186‐217.Print.

Loubster, G, P Mouton, and J Nel. ‘TheEcotourism Potential of Herpetofauna inthe NamaquaNational Park, South Africa.’SouthAfricanJournalofWildlifeResearch311‐2(2001):13‐23.Print.

Lyon, James, and A Nystrom. USA. 2 ed.Melbourne: Lonely Planet Publications,2002.Print.

Mules, Warwick. ‘Contact Aesthetics andDigitalArts:AttheThresholdoftheEarth.’Fibreculture9(2006).Web.25Feb.2011.

Nannup, Noel. Personal Interview. 21 July2010.

Pelloe, Emily. Wildflowers of WesternAustralia. Melbourne: C.J. De Garis, 1921.Print.

Priskin, Julianna. ‘Characteristics andPerceptions of Coastal and WildflowerNature‐BasedTourists in theCentralCoastRegion of Western Australia.’ Journal ofSustainable Tourism 11 6 (2003): 499‐528.Print.

Ryan,John.‘TowardsaCorporealAestheticsof Plants: Ethnographies of EmbodiedAppreciation along the Wildflower Trail.’Continuum.244(2010):543‐557.Print.

Summers, Lise. ‘Wildflower Season: TheDevelopment of Native Flora ProtectionLegislation in Western Australia.’Environmental Exchanges: Studies inWestern Australian History. Eds. Gaynor,AndreaandJaneDavis.Vol.27,forthcoming.Print.

TheWestAustralian.‘NewsandNotes.’TheWestAustralian.Saturday2September1893.National Library ofAustralia.Web. 24Feb.2011.

TheWestAustralian.‘NewsandNotes.’TheWest Australian. Wednesday 30 August1899.NationalLibraryofAustralia.Web.24Feb.2011.

Tinker,Allan.PersonalInterview.29August2009.

Vivienne,May.TravelsinWesternAustralia:BeingaDescriptionoftheVariousCitiesandTowns,Goldfields,andAgriculturalDistrictsofThatState.London:WilliamHeinemann,1901.Print.

Western Australian Tourism Commission.Research into the Wildflower TourismIndustry: An Exploration of Consumer andIndustry Perceptions. Perth,W.A.:WesternAustralian Tourism Commission, 2003.Print.

NEWSCHOLAR|VOL.INO.I|NEW SCHOLARSHIP?