Homeworks writing service

A review of the 1952 book silent spring

About the Exhibition Silent Spring, an international best seller Silent Spring was quickly available in Europe and across the world.

Abridged selections also appeared on the pages of popular periodicals.

Dozens of reviews appeared in every major Western European nation as well as in communist Hungary and Yugoslavia. Where did the birds go? It even changed the language. Swedes reacted so strongly to Silent Spring in part because of an uproar caused by a recent series of newspaper articles and ornithological society publications about deaths of birds from treated seed-grain.

Nils Dahlbeck wearing the hat was a well-known pioneer in Swedish radio and television. Although Carson never mentioned mercury, the issues merged and provoked a huge public outcry. Conferences and meetings on pesticides convened even before release of the Swedish edition in The national media, including Dahlbeck on the radio, gave Silent Spring a great deal of publicity.

Moving quickly, the government responded to both pesticides and mercury. InSweden became the first nation to establish a comprehensive environmental regulatory agency, the Environmental Protection Board. The following year, it also became the first to pass comprehensive environmental protection legislation, the Environmental Protection Law.

When investigations in showed DDT from wind and rain significantly augmented the amount used by farmers and ended up even in human milk, Sweden was the first country to act broadly against persistent pesticides. It was also helpful that Swedish political culture was open to new social issues and had a pragmatic, managerial approach to problems that made a quick response possible. Finland took note a review of the 1952 book silent spring the lively debates in the US and neighboring Sweden.

Soon Finns were debating Silent Spring themselves. Nevertheless, Finnish response was muted because Finnish farmers had been slow to adopt chemicals. The House of Lords debates Son of the famous polar explorer Ernest Shackleton and famous in his own right for his work in conservation, Lord Edward Shackleton wrote the preface to the British edition of Silent Spring and participated on 20 March in a historic five-hour debate on the book in the House of Lords.

The British edition of Silent Spring came out in February On 20 March, at the instigation of Lord Shackleton, who wrote the preface to the British edition, the House of Lords discussed it for over five hours in an unprecedented debate over a single book. However, the British government had for a decade already been dealing a review of the 1952 book silent spring the problems Carson disclosed, and in any case farmers did not rely as much on chemicals as their American counterparts.

Government pesticide policy was already a decade old, provoked by the deaths of eight farm workers from weed killer. A problem had arisen in when seed-grain treated with aldrin and dieldrin killed thousands of game birds.

People worried not only about the birds but about a review of the 1952 book silent spring risks of eating surviving game.

Although the chemical industry played down the issue, the Nature Conservancy established the now-famous Monks Wood Experimental Station to study the problem. In a change in method, from dusting the seed to soaking it, intensified both bird deaths and negative publicity.

With reason, then, the British government regarded the pesticide problem as under control. Officials found several chemicals marketed by Shell—aldrin, dieldrin, and heptachlor—of particular concern, since they appeared in human fat, although at lower levels than in the United States. Tests found residues in mutton fat, beef, and butter.

Extensive debates among various government advisory committees and officials convinced Soames to take a conservative view. Organo-pesticides like DDT were then gradually phased out. In response to various legal ramifications and worry over the secrecy of the regulatory process, the government put this voluntary system on a statutory basis with the Food and Environment Protection Act of and the Control of Pesticides Regulations of All this was accomplished with much less rancor and industry defensiveness than in the United States and with less public debate than either there or Sweden.

Silver veils and hidden dangers The popular Dutch weekly Elseviers Weekblad serialized selections of Silent Spring over several issues.

Elseviers was the only periodical to commission its own illustrations, which were strikingly dramatic and even lurid. In the Netherlands, Silent Spring made less of an impression on the public than it did on scientists and government officials, and it angered the chemical industry. Carson had it translated and published in America. Despite the attention-grabbing illustrations of the Dutch edition that accompanied the excerpts published in Elseviers Weekblad, Silent Spring had a much more muted impact in the Netherlands and most of Europe than in the United States.

He reported to Carson that the chemical industry had put great pressure on him that stopped when the Kennedy committee issued its report. A review of the 1952 book silent spring resigned in and wrote his own book, Zilveren sluiers en verborgen gevaren: Chemical pesticides that threaten life], in which he took Dutch bureaucrats severely to task for their footdragging.

Then in —67 Dutch scientists observed a catastrophic crash in raptor populations due to DDT and a die-off of terns due to pesticides.

After that, regulation became much more a review of the 1952 book silent spring, but the debate occurred mostly in the halls of academia and government. Among the Dutch public, environmentalists alone took real notice of Silent Spring. German periodicals reported on Silent Spring with an array of frightening headlines [We are all being slowly poisoned; The pollution of nature: Comments and articles appeared widely in newspapers, journals, magazines, and on the radio.

The publications of the environmental community, vegetarian groups, and disciples of anthroposophy a kind of spiritual organic farming movement took great interest, as did of course agricultural and chemical journals, for different reasons. Nature protection and environmental groups warmly praised the book.

As in the US, German chemical companies sought to reassure the public. While provoking discussion in the short run, Silent Spring appeared to make little longterm impression.

West Germans denied that German agriculture had any significant environmental problems. As elsewhere, agricultural and chemical interests played down or rejected the dangers that Rachel Carson exposed. The West German Bundestag did not pass a comprehensive environmental law until and environmentalism played a relatively small political role until the s. Not until did the German Council a review of the 1952 book silent spring Experts on Environmental Affairs address pesticide problems.

Carson had criticized blind faith in science and government, charged that greed led chemical corporations and their salesmen to promote overuse of their products, and described collusion between government, industry, and science in promotion of chemicals as a review of the 1952 book silent spring to other, less dangerous alternatives. In the s, anti-modernist, anti-American, and pro-environmental rhetoric was mainly the province of the political right.

Byhowever, right-wing anti-Americanism and anti-modernism were waning. The revolutionary events of washed much of the remaining Nazi taint from German environmentalism. German and other environmentalists rediscovered Silent Spring in the early s in part because its social and moral critique tallied with the anti-Vietnam-War movement and youthful cultural and social criticism.

Gruhl and Petra Kelly founded the German Green Party inbut the steady leftward drift of the Greens caused Gruhl to leave the party inonly to find conservative political environmentalism permanently marginalized. Even so, Silent Spring may have planted an environmental awareness in Germany that steadily grew. What distinguishes men from swine] Silent Spring has been a steady seller ever since and has never been out of print in German.

By German editions had sold overcopies. Before nature dies Headlines also capture the uproar that Silent Spring caused in France [The poisons crisis of the twentieth century; Silent spring or voice crying in the desert? A big hit in France, Silent Spring was in its third printing just six weeks after publication in May The French took notice for several reasons.

The publisher, Plon, very well respected. Heim had a review of the 1952 book silent spring in authored his own book of environmental warning, Destruction et protection de la nature.

The popular magazine Paris-Match published large extracts from the book, making the book and its thesis known to a broad audience. Eight programs on French radio discussed the book. Jean Dorst, a prominent figure in international nature protection organizations and professor and later director at the National Museum of Natural History, published Avant que nature meure [Before nature dies] in to great success.

As in America, leaders in government, agriculture, and the chemical industry worried about the effect of Silent Spring. Unlike their American colleagues, they had a ready answer.

For the moment, controversy was quieted. However, as the decade went on, the American debate over DDT along with worries that chemicals endangered the quality of French food inspired a growing stream of articles in the popular press, consumer and medical journals, and organic food magazines. The registration system remained the main line of defense against this growing criticism.

However, the system, a legacy of the Vichy Regime of World War II, was founded to eliminate fraudulent chemical preparations, not protect public health. The Ministry of Agriculture, which oversaw the registration system, subordinated public health to the needs of agriculture.

Toxicological concerns served only to safeguard a review of the 1952 book silent spring workers.

A review of the 1952 book silent spring

Finally, in the French government acknowledged public concern and reorganized the registration system to give greater weight to non-agricultural government ministries.

Nevertheless, agricultural pressure prevented any prohibition of existing chemicals and ensured the approval of more. It would not be fair, they said, to prohibit in France what was available to foreign competitors. Similar to the situation in the United States and elsewhere, the registration system remained a method to protect agricultural interests and chemical companies while giving the public the impression of safety and security and suppressing a potentially powerful political issue.

Previous Next Mark Stoll This refers only a review of the 1952 book silent spring the text and does not include any image rights. Please click on an image to view its individual rights status.

Read more about the Portal in English and in German.