Gallery Editors' Note

摘要

Most, if not all, environmental historians are familiar with the work of George Inness. Many of us use his paintings, such as his well-known The Lackawanna Valley (1855), in our lectures because Inness captures, so vividly, the tension during the mid-nineteenth century between a fading agrarianism and the rise of industry. In this month's Gallery essay, Steven Stoll brings a fresh perspective to Inness's work through his analysis of the artist's later paintings, including Short Cut, Watchung Station, New Jersey (1883). Stoll argues against interpreting these images as either a nostalgic call for a return to an agrarian past or an ambivalent assessment of changing times. Rather, he asserts that Inness is taking a political stand by portraying the real-life conditions of rural people on the cusp of losing their household economy to industrial forces. Stoll revises common assumptions about Inness's work by interpreting visual elements of the paintings within the context of the artist's outspoken political support for the rights of the rural poor, as advocated by Henry George. After reading Stoll's Gallery essay, many of us may have to go back, take a new look, and revise our own lectures on the Hudson River School.