Anniversary Forum

History's Freaks of Nature

John Soluri

"If the freaks could only unite." —Red Hot Chili Peppers
I FEAR FOR the future of environmental history. Distracted by jazzed-up journal covers and cozy conference venues, we are unaware of the risks posed by what we have become: an increasingly professionalized and disciplined subfield of history. While some of us may long for an opportunity to be a talking head on the History Channel, I suspect that the next revolution in history will not be televised (even on cable). Instead, to preserve the wildness of the field, I urge environmental historians to freak out!	1
Courtesy Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, U. S. News & World Report Collection, LC-U9-35046. Scholarship on environmentalism could expand to include the science, technology, labor, and culture of the workers for corporate and governmental institutions charged with measuring levels of pollution and determining their environmental and health effects. How did institutions decide how to define and measure "pollution" and what did employees think about their work and its meaning? A Woman Technician Tests Car Emissions, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1970s.
What is a freak? Merriam-Webster offers four principle definitions: A sudden and odd or seemingly pointless idea or turn of the mind; A whimsical quality or disposition (archaic); One that is markedly unusual or abnormal; An ardent enthusiast.	2
To judge by this evidence, 75 percent—a clear majority—of the meanings of "freak" are positive or at least neutral: freaks are creative, whimsical, and passionate. Still not ready to embrace freakdom? Consider this interesting fact: The etymology of "freak" is unknown. The absence of a traceable lineage makes it ripe for appropriation by people regardless of race, class, gender, or age. Of course, dictionary definitions ignore the fact that freakiness is fluid and best understood in relation to other socially constructed identities.	3
In the interest of fomenting a freaky future for environmental history, I offer the following provisional guidelines:	4
1. Freaks eschew the mainstream, but they are not abnormal: The pejorative use of "freak" is nasty because it seeks to impose a dualistic world of fixed margins and centers—it tries to push people out of society's bounds. This is very dangerous because nature is nothing but never-ending variation. We are all descended from mutants—we are all freaks of a historical nature.	. . .