05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature?

| Books | The Guardian

Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch

with nature?
Studies show that children are better at identifying Pokémon characters than real animals and plants.
Robert Macfarlane on his quest to reconnect young readers with the natural world

Robert Macfarlane
Saturday 30 September 2017 10.00 BST

I
n August 1913 the children’s writer Eleanor Farjeon visited the poet Edward Thomas and his
family at their home near the South Downs. On their first walk together, Thomas’s 11-year-
old daughter Bronwen realised that the city-dwelling Farjeon knew few of the names of the
wild flowers that flourished in the surrounding landscape. “My ignorance,” Farjeon recalled
later, “horrified her.”

Remedial work was promptly set. Bronwen gathered a hundred different flowers and plants,
taught Farjeon their names (“agrimony, mouse-eared-hawkweed, bird’s-foot trefoil … ”), and
the next day sat her down “to a neatly ruled examination paper, with the numbered specimens
laid out in precise order on the table”. Farjeon was given an hour to complete the test: “60 for a
Pass, 70 for Honours.” Her memory was sharp and she topped 90: “Bronwen was proud of me.”
Those flower names would later blossom in Farjeon’s books for children, which are twined
through with natural lore, notably her chalkland fairy fable, Elsie Piddock Skips in Her Sleep
(1937) and her Martin Pippin stories.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 1/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

Nearly a century later, Cambridge researchers seeking to “quantify children’s knowledge of

nature” surveyed a cohort of four- to 11-year-old children in Britain. The researchers made a
set of 100 picture cards, each showing a common species of British plant or wildlife, including
adder, bluebell, heron, otter, puffin and wren. They also made a set of 100 picture cards, each
showing a “common species” of Pokémon character, including Arbok, Beedrill, Hitmonchan,
Omanyte, Psyduck and Wigglytuff.

The children were then shown a sample of cards from the two sets, and asked to identify the
species for each card. The results were striking. Children aged eight and over were
“substantially better” at identifying Pokémon “species” than “organisms such as oak trees or
badgers”: around 80% accuracy for Pokémon, but less than 50% for real species. For weasel
read Weedle, for badger read Bulbasaur – and this was before the launch of Pokémon Go.

The researchers published their paper in Science. Their conclusions were unusually forthright
– and tinged by hope and worry. “Young children clearly have tremendous capacity for learning
about creatures (whether natural or manmade),” they wrote, but they are presently “more
inspired by synthetic subjects” than by “living creatures”. They pointed to evidence linking
“loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it”. We need, the paper
concluded, “to re-establish children’s links with nature if we are to win over the hearts and
minds of the next generation”, for “we love what we know … What is the extinction of the
condor to a child who has never seen a wren”?

‘Where have these lost names gone?” Illustration: Jackie Morris,

2017

My first response on reading the “Pokémon paper”, as I have come to think of it, was dismay.
My second was a wish to write a book for children that might conjure with the magic of “living
creatures” rather than “synthetic subjects”. And my third was puzzlement. What had
happened to the names and knowledge of nearby nature in the lives and reading of British
children? Could they really have dwindled towards a vanishing point?

Subsequent research has confirmed the Pokémon paper’s broad findings. In a 2008 National
Trust survey, only a third of eight- to 11-year-olds could identify a magpie, though nine out of
10 could name a Dalek. A 2017 RSPB “Birdwatch” survey smartly shifted the focus, assessing
nature knowledge in parents rather than children. Of 2,000 adults, half couldn’t identify a
house sparrow, a quarter didn’t know a blue tit or a starling, and a fifth thought a red kite
wasn’t a bird – but nine out of 10 said they wanted children to learn about common British
wildlife. A 2017 Wildlife Trusts survey found a third of adults unable to identify a barn owl,
three-quarters unable to identify an ash tree – and two-thirds feeling that they had “lost touch
with nature”.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 2/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

The hunger is there but the knowledge is not. Where have these lost names gone, and does
their vanishing matter? If so, how might we invigorate what anthropologist Beth Povinelli calls
“a literacy of nature” in ourselves and our children? Was there ever a time when such a literacy
existed? We read the results of these surveys, perhaps, with a mixture of consternation and
insecurity. My own children can name a moorhen but not a collared dove, a blackbird but not a
starling. They know oak but not hawthorn, beech but not ash. They like to recall the time in a
wood when I confidently identified – from 10 yards away – a reddish object as a fly agaric
toadstool. On closer inspection it turned out to be a discarded slice of water melon (I blamed
my glasses). I know I would have hopelessly failed Bronwen’s flower test, despite living on
chalk myself and loving the chalkland flora.

For a decade or so now I have been fascinated by the relationships of naming, knowing and
nature, writing a book on the subject called Landmarks in 2015. In the past few years I have
become especially interested by these questions as they bear on contemporary childhood – and
how they feature in what we uneasily call “children’s literature”, but which I prefer to think of
as “literature read by children”, in a wish to avoid limiting or patronising the powers of that
extraordinary, diverse body of work.

I am unconvinced that children need names to need nature. The last chapter of Landmarks was
entitled “Childish”. There, inspired by the work of an early years specialist called Deb
Wilenski, I wrote about the “fantastical travelling” of a class of four- and five-year-old children
in Hinchingbrooke Country Park, north Cambridgeshire. Each Monday for three months they
explored the park, mapping it through their stories and drawings. I was fascinated by how the
children wove words, images and actions together in their inhabitation of this modest
landscape (bounded by a dual carriageway and a hospital car park). Given the chance, children
will new-mint stories for nature and coin gleaming names for it. Given the chance, they will
meet the living world eagerly with their bodies and minds, touching and eating and dreaming
it: no Linnaeus necessary.

‘The otter-spell slipped into my skull while I was walking over the
Cairngorms.’ Photograph: Jackie Morris, 2017

But I also believe that names matter, and that the ways we address the natural world can
actively form our imaginative and ethical relations with it. As George Monbiot wrote recently,
calling for a “new language” to vivify conservation, “words possess a remarkable power to
shape our perceptions”. Without names to give it detail, the natural world can quickly blur into
a generalised wash of green – a disposable backdrop or wallpaper. The right names, well used,
can act as portals – “hollowings”, in Robert Holdstock’s term – into the more-than-human
world of bird, animal, tree and insect. Good names open on to mystery, grow knowledge and
summon wonder. And wonder is an essential survival skill for the Anthropocene.

Clearly the lack of natural literacy – especially of nearby nature – is involved with the major
structural changes that have occurred in the experience of minority-world childhood. Online
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 3/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

culture has boomed and screen time has soared. In Britain, the “roaming range” (the area
within which children are permitted to play unsupervised) has shrunk by more than 90% in 40
years. Traffic growth, the pressures of school work, parental fears and the decrease of available
green space have all helped close down wild play and the knowledge it brings. “The children
out in the woods, out in the fields,” said Chris Packham in 2012, “enjoying nature on their own
– they’re extinct”. Meanwhile, childhood wellbeing declines, with obesity rates rising and
mental health dipping. The headline of a 2016 report (sponsored, notably, by Persil) was that
British children “spend less time outdoors than prisoners”: climbing walls, not trees.

Such buttonholing headlines disguise a complex picture, though. Access to nature is hugely
unevenly distributed across the population, with class, income and ethnicity playing strong
determining roles. Within “nature deficit” discourse, “tech” is too often simplistically opposed
to “nature”, though it can act as accomplice rather than antagonist, and a lost golden age of
barefoot childhood is too often presumed. Shocking headlines also occlude the hopeful signs
and good work that are, to me at least, presently visible in Britain and beyond.

In his influential book Last Child in the Woods, Richard Louv suggests that both adults and
children have increasingly come to “regard nature as something to watch, to consume, to wear:
to ignore”. Inevitably, such a shift – if it is a shift, rather than a new edition of an old problem –
has consequences for imaginative territories as well as real ones. As children “abandon the
sandlots and creekbeds, the alleys and woodlands”, asks Michael Chabon in his essay “The
Wilderness of Childhood”, “what will become of the world of stories, of literature itself?”

One answer to Chabon’s question might be found in the data sets provided by the annual 500
Words story competition, run by the BBC and Oxford University Press. This glorious story fest
is open to five- to 13-year-olds, and typically attracts more than 120,000 entries, supplying an
annual corpus of well over 50m words. Taken together, the stories offered remarkable insights
into the communal imagination and vocabulary of Britain’s children. Plots and characters can
be seen emerging and fading. It’s possible to drill down in the data to specific lexical choices,
tracking the rise and fall of single words.

‘Technology is miraculous, but – and – so too is the living world.’’

Illustration: Jackie Morris, 2017

In the 2017 stories, unsurprisingly, the word “Trump” starred, as well as a rich broth of
variants including Trumpelstiltskin (respect!) and Trumpedo. In 2015 the most frequent
characters were Wayne Rooney, Snow White, Adolf Hitler, Lionel Messi and Cinderella. “Oak”
was the commonest natural term that year, used encouragingly often (3,975 usages). Down at
the lower end, heading for disappearance, were “acorn” (293), “buttercup” (168), “blackbird”
(167) and “conker” (155). One of the two most popular plots was achieving sudden internet
fame after posting a YouTube video. As OUP noted when crowning “hashtag” as the 2015
Children’s Word of the Year, “new technology [is] increasingly at the centre of children’s lives”.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 4/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

Technology is miraculous, but – and – so too is the living world, including the everyday nature
with which we share our everyday lives. And this aspect of the world’s wonder seems presently
at the margins of many children’s experience, speech and stories.

Nature, naming and dreaming are all tangled together in perhaps the most famous childhood
reading scene in English literature. Jane Eyre is 10, and on the novel’s opening page she has
retreated to read on the “window seat”, screened off by a heavy red curtain from the rest of the
house. Seated cross-legged, she relishes the “double retirement” of her situation: behind a
curtain and within a book. The book is Bewick’s History of British Birds, in which Thomas
Bewick’s woodcuts of bird species are accompanied by name details and explanatory notes. As
Jane turns the pages, her mind is set wandering: “Each picture told a story; mysterious often to
my undeveloped understanding and imperfect feelings, yet ever profoundly interesting.” She
imagines herself northwards, up into the white wastes of the Arctic, borne there on the wings
of words and woodcut. “I feared,” she says wonderfully, “nothing but interruption.”

Looking back, I see that many of my own “window seat” books – the ones I read as a child
fearing only interruption – shared preoccupations with names and nature. I still owe my
(wobbly) knowledge of knapweed and sweet pea to Cicely Mary Barker’s Flower Fairies. Arthur
Ransome’s young citizen scientists in Coot Club inspired in me the wish, though not the
application, to become a teenage naturalist. I also devoured stories of survivalism, especially
BB’s Brendon Chase, in which three brothers live wild in an English forest for eight months,
making their camp in an ancient oak.

By far the most powerful books, though, were those in which nature mingled with the
supernatural. For me these included John Masefield’s The Box of Delights and The Midnight
Folk; TH White’s The Sword in the Stone; the novels of Alan Garner, especially The Weirdstone of
Brisingamen and The Owl Service; Ursula Le Guin’s Earthsea trilogy; Susan Cooper’s astonishing
The Dark Is Rising series; and Robert Holdstock’s Mythago Wood and Lavondyss. These novels
all took deep root in me as a child. Thirty-odd years on, they continue profoundly to shape my
fascinations as a writer with deep place and deep time, with wildness, power and the more-
than-human world.

‘Naming enables adventures into the mysterious life worlds of

different creature.’ Illustration: Jackie Morris, 2017

Questions of naming and nature return repeatedly in these books. On Le Guin’s archipelago of
Earthsea, magic requires knowing “true names” in the Old Speech, the language spoken by
dragons and gods. Early on the young wizard Ged realises that to name the natural world is to
gain aspects of its power:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 5/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

When he found that the wild falcons stooped down to him from the wind when he summoned
them by name, lighting with a thunder of wings on his wrist […] he hungered to know more such
names […] the name of the sparrowhawk and the osprey and the eagle.

Ged learns, though, that on Earthsea you must be careful of what you utter, because there
names bind and “cannot be unsaid”. Power has to be used in “balance”, the vital principle of
Earthsea’s thaumocracy.

In Cooper’s The Dark Is Rising (1973) – truly a title for our times – knowing the “real names” of
things is a form of defensive strength. Will Stanton, the novel’s boy hero, is saved from the
Dark’s first assault by standing on a path known truly as “Oldway Lane”, and because his
guardian, the magus Merriman, knows “the real name” of their foe. “The only way to disarm
one of the creatures of the Dark,” Merriman tells Will, “is to call him or her by his real name.”

And to Tallis – the mesmerising 13-year-old at the heart of Holdstock’s Lavondyss – what adults
dismissively call her “name game” is of utter importance. To find her way into the forest of
Ryhope that holds her lost brother, Tallis must intuit the “secret names” of each part of the
landscape around it: “She had not known, until now, that every field, every tree, every stream
had a secret name.” Her grandfather, on the eve of his death, writes Tallis an urgent letter. “The
naming of the land is important,” he tells her there, “it conceals and contains great truths. I
urge you to listen to the names when they whisper.”

All of these books practise magical acts of natural naming. Occasionally in them, naming is
taming: the enforced subjugation of a natural other. Mostly, though, naming enables
adventures into the mysterious life worlds of different creatures, even different kinds of
matter: Wart becoming trout and falcon in The Sword in the Stone, for instance, or Ged
becoming hawk in Earthsea, or Tallis slipping between epochs and species via the
“hollowings” she opens in Lavondyss – until at last she is absorbed into the sap and bark of the
old wildwood itself.

Such naming events – which embrace mystery rather than assert mastery – might remind us of
the contrasting meanings of our verb “to identify”. In its taxonomic sense, it means “to
recognise as belonging to a particular category or kind”. Used thus, it is a verb that holds
subject and object in hierarchical distance. The verb has a transformative sense, though, where
“to identify” is “to feel oneself to be, or to become, closely associated with or part of an other”
(OED). This is the identification of which John Keats wrote in his letter to Benjamin Bailey of
1817: “If a sparrow come before my window, I take part in its existence and pick about the
gravel.”

Two years and a summer ago I began work with the artist Jackie Morris on a book called The
Lost Words: A Spell-Book, about the magic of naming and nature. When we began, we knew
only that we wanted to make a modern-day spell-book for the natural world – a book that
might go some small way towards conjuring back the words, names and species that were
being lost. We wanted to celebrate the “identifications” made possible by names that are, as
Observer columnist Henry Porter put it, part of “the plain euphonious vocabulary of the
natural world – and do not simply label an object but in some mysterious and beautiful way
become part of it”.

So Jackie and I chose 20 common names of 20 common species of creature and plant. Our
choices formed a crooked almost-A-to-Z, from acorn and adder through bluebell, conker and
kingfisher, to weasel, willow and wren. For each name I wrote a summoning spell, structured
as an acrostic, to be read aloud by child to grown-up, grown-up to child, or even grown-up to
grown-up. The act of reading out – of spell-speaking – was also an act of conjuring back.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 6/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

Because I am certainly not a poet, and do not want to be mistaken for thinking I am one, I
always imagined my texts as “spells” or “charms” rather than “poems”. I wrote them to be
spoken aloud, and often I wrote them by speaking them aloud – sounding them out while
walking or waiting, seeing if they would stick in my mind as chants before putting them down
on paper. The otter-spell slipped into my skull while I was walking over the Cairngorms with
my father. The willow-spell arrived on the towpath of the River Lea, tramping the
unglamorous bank-miles between Broxbourne and Tottenham Hale. The first line of the newt-
spell came while I was in the checkout queue at Sainsbury’s.

‘As nature thins, so does our memory of it.’ Illustration: Jackie

Morris, 2017

I sent each drafted naming-spell to Jackie with the same accompanying note: “To be read
aloud.” I needed Jackie to test them for what Seamus Heaney called language’s “palp and heft”
– its thickening by rhyme and texturing by rhythm. I wanted to write spells that, even if they
were not fully understood by their readers, might (Heaney again) “weave a gauze of sound”
around them.

Young children meet language sensuously as well as semantically. They embrace what Francis
Spufford in The Child that Books Built calls the “gloriously embedded” aspects of language: “Its
texture, its timbre, its grain, its music.” These are also the aspects that have always been
central to spells and incantations – for such utterances originated in oral cultures where
gestures and speech, rather than the written word, were executive.

In many of the spells I found myself writing about shape-shifting: the “partaking of existence”
of which Keats spoke, and at which children are such natural geniuses. Thus the last line of the
“otter-spell”:

Run to the riverbank, otter-dreamer, slip your skin and change your matter, pour your outer being
into otter – and enter now as otter without falter into water.

Elsewhere I tried, futilely, to catch at what Hopkins called the “thisness” of each creature; the
swiftness of wren-flight in the first line of the “wren-spell”, for instance:

When wren whirrs from stone to furze the air around her slows, for wren is quick so quick she
blurs the air through which she flows.

Nature isn’t always wondrous. Often it’s absurd, violent or vile. Ravens rip the eyeballs out of
living sheep stranded in snowdrifts. Skuas half-drown gannets and then eat their vomit. I
wanted to allow certain species their brutality or comedy – and others their unsettling, alien
otherness. In the “willow-spell”, human voices beg to be taught to speak willow:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 7/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

Willow, when the wind blows so your branches billow, will you whisper while we listen so we learn
what words your long leaves loosen?

But the willows soundly reject their entreaties:

We will never whisper to you, listeners, and even if you learn to utter alder, elder, poplar, aspen,
you will never know a word of willow – for we are willow and you are not.

While I wrote, Jackie painted. I had the easy job: 20 spells to cast. Jackie had hundreds of
paintings to create. She painted for a year and a half, working seven-day weeks for most of the
final six months. For each name she first painted its absence or lostness. Then – on the facing
page of my spell – came the conjured-back creature or plant in the form of an “icon”, set
against a shimmering background of gold leaf. Finally, she painted a double-page spread
showing each species back in the landscape of which it was intricately part: wren whirring
through furze, acorns in an owl-haunted oak-wood.

‘This is what nature must best be to children: something “alive,

powerful and sentient”.’ Illustration: Jackie Morris, 2017

The absences were hardest. How to paint what isn’t there? Jackie drew the empty silhouette of
a wren in 18 pen strokes, miraculously catching its teleport-quickness, its jaunty-jenny pose.
She painted a blue ripple under willow leaves where a kingfisher should have broken a stream’s
surface; a single heron feather rocking down through air. On these “absence” pages, too, Jackie
hid single letters that – when sought and found by children – would spell out the lost word. So
the book grew and grew and grew – until it was 128 pages long and a foot-and-a-half high: a
proper grimoire.

We should be unsurprised that nature’s names are vanishing from children’s mouths and
minds’ eyes, for nature itself is vanishing. We are presently living through the sixth great
extinction – a speed and scale of planetary biodiversity loss not seen since the Cretaceous. At a
local level, this expresses itself in what Michael McCarthy memorably calls “the great
thinning”. The 2016 State of Nature report found Britain to be “among the most nature-
depleted countries in the world”, with 53% of British species in decline – among them barn
owls, newts, sparrows and starlings.

As nature thins, so does our memory of it. Shifting baseline syndrome flattens out the losses;
each generation grows into ease with its new normal for nature. The grim end-point of this
thinning is foreseen in Cormac McCarthy’s The Road, where common names survive but the
common species to which they refer are all extinct. Names in that novel are spoken hopelessly,
shaken like rattles filled with ash.

“Reconnect with nature” is the mantra for fixing this awful decline – as if we could just plug
the toaster back into its socket and get right on back to lightly browning bread. We load the
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 8/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

cant-word “connection” with responsibility, but rarely examine what it means philosophically
or practically. An exception to this is the RSPB’s 2013 Connecting with Nature report, based on
a three-year research project. Sensibly, the report recognised “nature deficit” as a complex
problem, strongly inflected by socioeconomic and cultural factors. Dismayingly, it found only
one in five British children to be “positively connected to nature”. Hopefully, it emphasised
“nature connection” as not only a “conservation” issue, but also one closely involved with
education, physical health, emotional wellbeing and future attainment: what’s good for nature
is also good for the child.

Nature deficit needs structural and political fixes. Hearteningly, hundreds of organisations –
from Earth Force Education to the John Muir award and the Forest Schools Network – are
striving to close the gap between childhood and nature, including working with schools to get
more children learning outdoors, regularly. Most of these organisations specifically aim to help
children at risk of social exclusion, or who are otherwise unlikely to reach green places. A
proportion of proceeds from each copy of The Lost Words is being given to one such
organisation, Action For Conservation – a young charity with the mission of empowering
young people to take action on behalf of the natural world.

Nature deficit also needs cultural and creative responses. We are “blessed with a wealth of
nature and a wealth of language,” concluded Monbiot in his essay on natural naming, “[so] let
us bring them together and use one to defend the other.” Just so – and in the work of increasing
numbers of contemporary writers for children, nature and language tangle wonderfully. I think
here, among many others, of SF Said’s Varjak Paw books, Terry Pratchett’s Tiffany Aching
novels (where natural knowledge is both praised and parodied), Michelle Paver’s Chronicles of
Ancient Darkness series, Katherine Rundell’s The Wolf Wilder and The Explorers, the novels of
Abi Elphinstone and Cressida Cowell, and Piers Torday’s The Dark Wild and The Last Wild. We
need all the wildness we can get in the books that our children read, and more. Will it do any
good? Only its readers can tell us that.

In her classic study of children’s literature, Boys and Girls Forever, Alison Lurie recalls moving
from the city to the country and becoming aware of the “impenetrable thicket of blackberry
briars and skunk cabbage” beyond the garden fence. “No longer a rationalist,” Lurie
remembered:

I began to believe in what my storybooks said. Suddenly I saw the landscape as full of mystery and
possibility – as essentially alive. For me, and I think for most children who have really known it …
nature seemed both powerful and sentient.

This, it seems to me, is what nature must best be to children: something “alive, powerful and
sentient”, rather than something that can be, in Richard Louv’s terms, “watched, consumed,
ignored”. The difference is akin to that between anthropomorphism and animism: in the first,
we convert the more-than-human world into an image of ourselves; in the second, we lean a
little into its complexity and mystery.

The bird which became the guiding, gilding spirit of The Lost Words is the goldfinch.
Goldfinches flit across its cover and gleam from its pages. They are present in part as a sign of
hope, for those bright birds represent a rare conservation success story in Britain, their
numbers having surged by almost 50% over the past 10 years. They are there, too, because the
collective noun for goldfinch is a “charm” – a word which also means “the chanting or
recitation of a verse supposed to possess magic power” and “the blended singing of many
birds, or children”.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 9/10
05/10/2017 Badger or Bulbasaur - have children lost touch with nature? | Books | The Guardian

The Lost Words is published by Hamish Hamilton on 5 October. To order a copy for £17 (RRP
•

£20) go to bookshop.theguardian.com or call 0330 333 6846. Free UK p&p over £10, online
orders only. Phone orders min p&p of £1.99.

Since you’re here …

… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian than ever but
advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations,
we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can. So you can
see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism
takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our
perspective matters – because it might well be your perspective, too.

I appreciate there not being a paywall: it is more democratic for the media to be available for all
and not a commodity to be purchased by a few. I’m happy to make a contribution so others
with less means still have access to information. Thomasine F-R.
If everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to support it, our future would be
much more secure.

Become a supporter
Make a contribution
Topics
Robert Macfarlane
Teen books
Wildlife
Children and teenagers
Children
features

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/30/robert-macfarlane-lost-words-children-nature 10/10