Dirt: The Ecstatic Skin of the Earth - Entry 1

Quote: 

"THE TEXTBOOKS WILL TELL YOU that humus is "deeply altered, black organic matter" lying in the top layer of the soil. But I only grasped what humus is about when my friend Pamela Morton showed me a picture of it.

Pamela spends parts of her summers in boreal Canada and has long been fascinated with the forest floor, where bits of blackening twigs, needles, bark, and the carcasses of small creatures decay. Humus is this organic part of the soil, the final residue of those matted leaves and cold bodies, intercalated, lapped, melding, losing their distinctions, dry on top but inside turning the shades of brown and black that we associate with rain-wet wood or a man's study. The deeper you go, the blacker it gets, and the fewer of the bits survive intact. A few inches down, it is pure black acrid matter having a texture like a cross between cotton candy and damp sawdust. This is the stuff from which all life on the land is born."

Chapter: Humus (p. 14) Dirt: The Ecstatic Skin of the Earth by William Bryant Logan

Background:

Before I began reading this book, I looked at the first blog post assignment so that I knew what to think about as I read the book. Afterwords, I put the book reading on pause temporarily so that I may find out more about the author seeing as how this blog post is about his credibility and background.

According to his website, William Bryant Logan is a "certified arborist", the "president of Urban Arborists, Inc., a Brooklyn-based tree company", has won many awards that show feats of masterful writing in environmental subjects, and has other minor achievements. These achievements are impressive and show that Logan is probably capable of writing environmental information in an understandable and entertaining way. If nothing else, it shows that someone was impressed enough to give him an award and make three documentaries for his three books.

To back up his award, this quote shows very well that he is a good author that successfully captivates his audience and immerses them into the environmental world. In his first sentence, he credits his source of information for the chapter, Pamela Morton. He even goes out of his way to give a background on the Pamela. This is an excellent way to show sources which make the author's information seem more creditable as well as bring the author closer to the reader's level which in my opinion makes the book sound more personal as if a friend was giving the reader the information.

As for the information he relays, he uses many adjectives and metaphors which compare what may be unknown or complex terms to average every day objects in order to help people understand concepts in a painless and entertaining manner.

But does he have the authority or experience to speak about this issue?

Well, he isn't a scientist, but he definitely knows some and he credits them with the information which he displays in his writing. He is also a good author as shown in his writing and various awards. I would say he definitely has the experience and authority to speak about this issue. He definitely explains the scientific concepts better than most scientists would have.

What might bias Logan's argument?

I don't think anything would bias Logan's argument that heavily other than the information he has received from other scientists. He has looked to many scientists for the information that he puts in his book and is likely very excited about the topic of dirt if he is willing to make a book about it even though he is not an expert in the field. Therefore, it would not be unreasonable to assume that he would take in some information without question. This might possible cause some bias in his writing, but the large amount of information sources which he is pulling from for his writing would spread out and thin out the overall bias of his book.