WAYS OF NATURE 



own lives. Unless they beget some human emotion 

 in me, the emotion of the beautiful, the sublime. 



or appeal to my sense of the fit, the permanent, 



unless what you learn in the fields and the woods 

 corresponds in some way with what I know of my 

 fellows, I shall not long be deeply interested in it. 

 I do not want the animals humanized in any other 

 sense. They all have human traits and ways; let 

 those be brought out their mirth, their joy, their 

 curiosity, their cunning, their thrift, their rela 

 tions, their wars, their loves and all the springs 

 of their actions laid bare as far as possible; but I do 

 not expect my natural history to back up the Ten 

 Commandments, or to be an illustration of the value 

 of training-schools and kindergartens, or to afford 

 a commentary upon the vanity of human wishes. 

 Humanize your facts to the extent of making them 

 interesting, if you have the art to do it, but leave 

 the dog a dog, and the straddle-bug a straddle-bug. 



Interpretation is a favorite word with some re 

 cent nature writers. It is claimed for the literary 

 naturalist that he interprets natural history. The 

 ways and doings of the wild creatures are exagger 

 ated and misread under the plea of interpretation. 

 Now, if by interpretation we mean an answer to 

 the question, &quot; What does this mean ? &quot; or, &quot; What 

 is the exact truth about it ? &quot; then there is but one 

 interpretation of nature, and that is the scientific. 

 What is the meaning of the fossils in the rocks ? or 

 196 



