rhetoric of gateway loop trail

8/2/2019 Rhetoric of Gateway Loop Trail

1/16

Gateway Loop Trail: Rhetoric of Tight Places and Open Spaces

Ethan M. Riley

COM-698: Environmental Rhetoric

Dec. 12, 2011

Running head: GATEWAY LOOP TRAIL: RHETORIC OF TIGHT PLACES, OPEN SPACES 1


2/16

Gateway Loop Trail: Rhetoric of Tight Places and Open Spaces

Nature is not something you go to; you experience it ... slowly. You take nature as it

comes, and at the gradual pace and in the poetry it decides to reveal itself with--the coos and

song of birds, the lengthening of shadows in midday, the pastel hues that hang over the desert at

dusk. In nature, some rhetoric is quiescent; they are the ones that articulate at a whisper and

require investments of time and silence to hear them. Other rhetoric cannot be ignored because it

is intertwined with the hustle and hum of everyday life. This essay analyzes an example of the

quiescent type--the Gateway Loop Trail in the McDowell Sonoran Preserve.

The McDowell Sonoran Preserve spans 17,000 acres and includes the McDowell

Mountains, a range called mountains of discovery because of its unique geological features,

and the Marcus Landslide (City of Scottsdale, 2011). Formally created in October 1994,

management of the McDowell Sonoran Preserve is financed (e.g., facilities maintenance and

land purchases) with tax revenues. The McDowell Sonoran Preserve Commission oversees the

Preserve and provides input on land acquisitions, while the nonprofit McDowell Sonoran

Conservancy supports the preservation efforts of the City of Scottsdale through public education

and volunteerism (City of Scottsdale).

The Gateway Access Area, 18333 N. Thompson Peak Pkwy, in Scottsdale is one of three

formal entry points (e.g., the Sunrise Access Area and the Lost Dog Wash Access Area) to the

McDowell Sonoran Preserve. The Gateway Access Area (also called the Gateway to the

McDowell Preserve and hereafter referred to as Gateway) is the largest and features various

amenities, including restrooms, shaded armadas, interpretive displays, drinking fountains for

RHETORIC OF TIGHT PLACES, OPEN SPACES 2


3/16

hikers and pets, an outdoor amphitheater, and the wheelchair-accessible Bajada Nature Trail (.5

mile). Recreationists can also enter the Preserve from the WestWorld, Quartz, Ringtail, and 136th

Street trailheads (City of Scottsdale, 2011). The access areas and trailheads are designed to fade

into the surroundings and fit unobtrusively into the existing landscape (City of Scottsdale,

2010).

The Gateway Loop Trail

From Gateway, hikers can access numerous trails of varying lengths and relative

difficulties, including the Gateway Loop Trail (hereafter called the Gateway Loop), a 3.6 mile

hike of moderate difficulty with an elevation change of 625 feet (City of Scottsdale Preservation

Division, 2010). The Gateway Loop is defined by the City of Scottsdale as a Preserve Primary

Trail, meaning its aim is to provide safe and enjoyable trail recreation opportunities within

preserved open space areas of the city, while having a minimum impact on the surround

environment (City of Scottsdale, 2010, section 8-3.001). Preserve trails are design according to

formalized guidelines established by the City of Scottsdale and published in the Design

Standards and Policies Manual. Every trail is drawn, built, and maintained so as to protect the

integrity of the land to the greatest extent possible (City of Scottsdale Preservation Division,

2005, p. 26). Native plants and sensitive wildlife habitat influence trail design. Trails are drawn

to have avoid disturbance of and have a minimum effect (City of Scottsdale, section 8-3.101)

on 18 varieties of plants, including saguaro and barrel cacti, mesquite, and ocotillo, and to avoid

fragile areas inhabited by desert wildlife.

This essay examines the design and construction of the Gateway Loop as a paradigm of

rhetoric of display, which, according to Lawrence Prelli (2006), entails the process of selecting

RHETORIC OF TIGHT PLACES, OPEN SPACES


4/16

which arguments to reveal and which to conceal in the invention of rhetoric. Preserve primary

trails (City of Scottsdale, 2010, section 8-3.001) are examples of rhetoric of display in that they

depict preferred truths and marginalize others. Displays, observes Prelli, take a variety of

epideictic sometimes conventional forms; they can be concrete like a globe or ambiguous like a

protest.

Displays are manifested theoretically through the verbally generated image in speeches

and literature. Displays appear rhetorically in sketches, paintings, maps, statistical graphs,

photographs, and television and film images. Displays are manifested rhetorically in the

homes we inhabit and in the many places we visitmuseum and exhibitions, memorials

and statuary, parks and cemeteries, casinos and theme parks, neighborhood street corners

and stores. Displays are manifested rhetorically in the demonstration of scientific

finding, of a political grievance, or a preferred identity. In whatever manifestation,

displays also anticipate a responding audience whose expectations might be satisfied or

frustrated, their values and interests affirmed, neglected, or challenged. (cited in

Herrick, 2009, p. 270)

Nominal literature was found on the rhetoric of display aside from Prellis text; consequently,

studies concerned with the related concept of visual rhetoric were also consulted. Select works

from Vivan (2011), Dyehouse (2011), Foss (1982) were surveyed for insights into the use of

displays (e.g., visuals) to create a particular reality or world, the meaning of which emerges

only through interaction between the artist [or trail designer] and the viewer [or hiker] (Foss, p.

55). Dyehouses survey of displays at American Museum of Natural History reinforces the need

for collaboration between archivist and patron, introduces the term patterning, and observes



5/16

that science popularization is understood as simplifying (or vulgarizing) scientists more

complex forms of discourse (p. 330). The practice of befouling science and nature is applicable

to the subsequent argument. Additionally, case studies of Disneylands Frontierland by

Francaviglia (1999) and Steiner (1998) served as archetypes for my rhetorical reading of

Gateway Loop. Specifically, the authors treatment of Frontierland as architectural

packaging (Steiner) and stylized allegory (Francaviglia) proved applicable to the study of the

Gateway Loop and its depiction of the Sonoran landscape and the nature--culture dialectic.



6/16

The Gateway Loop is a bifurcated rhetoric. The dominant rhetoric (orrhetoric of open

space) satisfies our anthropocentric arrogance and desire for control of empty (a word

synonymous with idleness and meaninglessness in our post-industrial revolution vernacular)

spaces through the inclusion of a scenic point near the Gateway Loop summit (the trails

highest elevation is 3,212 feet). The marginalized rhetoric of tight spaces is one of context,

perspective, and micro and meso realities. The ineffable details that make technology intuitive,

ideas relevant, and inspire Daniel-Booneing (Leopold, 1949, p. 177) are examples of rhetoric

of tight spaces in so much as they are incongruous with governing, wholistic rhetoric(s). Society

prefers encyclopedic depictions, displays, and designs that reflect Ciceros idea of a broadly

educated (Herrick, 2009, p. 108) rhetor and present communication trends (consider how

modern technologies sired a communication zeitgeist that values acronyms, abbreviations, and

shorthand). Ironically, despite a societal fixation with precision and detail, we live in a

widescreen culture of generalizations.

Scenic Points: Rhetoric of Open Spaces

Hikers encounter many inspirational views along the Gateway Loop, but the signature

vista is that of Scottsdale and Phoenix as seen from an appointed scenic point near the

Gateway Saddle. Like the spectacle of Frontierland, the view from Gateway Saddle is a crafted

sequence of camera shots: long, establishing views; medium shots; and close-ups (Steiner,

1998, p. 11). The sprawling city below strikes bystanders with a strange visual effect. Strange

in that the audience is confronted with a panoptic vision of American Expansion (Francaviglia,

1999, p. 165) couched in a voyeuristic visual of the Phoenix Metro Area. People look at nature as

an external phenomenon, yet theyll splurge to surround themselves in a faux feeling of



7/16

wilderness. People mortgage lake-front property, hire landscapers, lease SUVs, and live in low-

light communities that package nature as a series of memorable physical or scenic features into

which human activity was placed (Francaviglia, p. 165). Nature is something we want just close

enough to see, hear, and leverage (e.g., raise property values).

It is important to distinguish the scenic point along the Gateway Loop as a human

invention that favors a objective reading of the Sonoran Preserve, the wildland-urban interface

(WUI), and our hegemonic control over the environment. The scenic point makes the same

rhetorical impression as does a raised desk. People raise their desks in a passive-aggressive move

to make themselves feel powerful. Likewise, placing the scenic point at or near the high point of

the trail not only provides the best views of the valley, but foments feelings of authority. There is

a psychology behind capturing and holding the high ground. Annexing the high ground is

important to the suasory effect of the Gateway Loop; moreover, it is recognized by the City of

Scottsdale (2010) as a paramount design factor.



8/16

Visual qualities are important to trail users, [sic] therefore trails should be designed to

blend with the surrounding environment. Views from the trail to the surrounding

environment should also be considered. Trial users enjoy changes in scenery, thus

increasing demand for loop trails and trail networks that allow the user to return to the

starting point without traveling the same trail twice. (section 8-3.101)

Presumably, the site of the scenic point was chosen with visual rhetoric in mind. The view is

impressive, but also articulates the ongoing tension between nature and culture. The boundary

divorcing environment from civilization is sandwiched between the wildness of the Sonoran

Preserve in the foreground, and the bustle of progress, which occupies the background and

extends into the horizon. Whereas foreground images should have the most detail, the audiences

eye is drawn to the horizon. Nature, the WUI, and their consubstantial rhetorics are summarily

scaled (or reduced) to replicas more satisfying than the real thing, [where] perfectly predictable

adventures [and futures] supply a sense of mastery and reassurance (Steiner, 1998, p. 11).

The view from Gateway Saddle is beautiful despite its amorphous presentation of the

WUI. The scenic point is comparable to the window analogy made by George Wald and included

in Silent Spring. [A] very narrow window through which at a distance one can see only a crack

of light, wrote Wald of his research into the visual pigments of the eye. As one comes closer

the view grows wider and wider, until finally through this same narrow window one is looking at

the universe (cited in Carson, 1962, p. 199). The view from the scenic point is claustrophobic in

spite of its panoptic breadth. One cannot see nature or experience wildness from this elevated

roost, because nature is in the details. It is the artistry of a spiders web, the intricate beading of a

Gila Monster, and the erosional whitewashing of sandstone by water, wind, and time. These



9/16

incongruities (i.e., the narrow fits and tight spaces) are most often ignored in favor of

commoditized perversions of nature cropped for postcards and picturesque backdrops for Jeep

commercials (Meister, 1997).

Whereas the Gateway Loops mostly fails to depict fractalized nature (a nature of perfect

imperfections), it can be interpreted as a threshold to discovering natures incongruities. Taken at

face value, views from Gateway Saddle trivialize nature as scenery, a term that demeans nature

to a setting and marginalizes its quintessence. But the scenic point can also be read as an

invitation to transform abstract concepts and flat images into lived experience (Steiner, 1998,

p. 6) and discover the meticulous architecture and tight places of the Sonoran desert.

Trail Design: Rhetoric of Tight Places

Leopold (1949) wrote inA Sand County Almanac that there was no more wilderness; no

places of wildness spared by mans anthropocentrism. Despite peoples best efforts to engineer

wilderness in preservation of recreation, science, and/or habitat, there is always the tarnish of

artificiality. Wilderness is a resource which can shrink but not grow, writes Leopold. Invasion

can be arrested or modified but the creation of a new wilderness in the full sense of the word

is impossible (p. 200). It is the charge of trail designers, stewards, and hikers to achieve

presence and discover refuges of wildness--the unnamed and oft unseen topographies such as

the tight places, narrow crevices, recessed nooks, and snug alcoves that scale (or reduce) a space,

rouse a sense of presence, and force visitors into negotiations over the micro- and meso-

meanings of place. Rachel Carson (1962) observed that natures real value is not a low-hanging

fruit to be read and effortlessly understood; rather, nature obliges audiences to seek personal

meaning.



10/16

Most of us walk unseeing through the world, unaware alike of its beauties, its wonders,

and the strange and sometimes terrible intensity of the lives that are being lived about

us. ... We see with understanding eye only if we have walked in the garden at night and

here and there with a flashlight have glimpsed the mantis stealthily creeping upon its

prey. Then we sense something of the drama of the hunter and the hunted. Then we begin

to feel something of that relentlessly pressing force by which nature controls her own.

(Carson, 1962, p. 249)

The original Frontierland design accentuated tight places through a process of selective

compression (Francaviglia, 1999), a modeling technique in which the character of a large object

(e.g., Earth), event (e.g., the Battle of Gettysburg), or idea (e.g., Manifest Destiny) is reduced in

size and inconsequential details omitted to accommodate an available space, primed audience,



11/16

or preferred interpretation. Frontierland was designed to aggrandize icons and symbols that

would instruct individuals how to view places and the people who occupy (or should occupy)

them (Francaviglia, pp. 169-170). Globes, cycloramas, memorials, and the Gateway Loop are

examples of selective compression in that they articulate a sort of sedated familiarity. In fact, the

City of Scottsdale observes that Loop trails ... provide the comfort of knowing that the trail will

return to the starting point, thus reducing the change of anyone becoming lost (City of

Scottsdale, 2010).

People are fear being lost, apprehensive of getting lost in something, and panicky about

losing track of time. This is the reason the foreground and the tight places in actual nature,

semiotic meaning, and rhetorical discourse are often overlooked and sometimes avoided.

Dyehouse (2011) observes that the Evolution of the Horse display at the American Museum of

History exhibits a sophistication that differs from that attained by forms of visual inscription

typically employed by scientists (p. 300), thereby implying that most popular science is a

dilution of scientific discourse; the Gateway Loop rates somewhere between simple and

sophisticated. The scenic point panders to the oh, by the way spectator. The views are

picturesque but passive, intimidating the onlooker into a monotone reading of nature that

emphasizes mans hegemony over nature. Conversely, the entirety of the 3.6 loop trail acts as an

arbiter between nature and the hiker that requires renegotiating meanings. Unlike the scenic

point, the trail is not a fixed point but a string of moments and cycloramic vistas that change with

every movement. Gateway Loop grants immediate and intimate access to the tight spaces of

nature. Loop hikers are within investigative reach of desert flora, fauna, and architectural

curiosities. Moreover, the inquisitive hiker does not chance getting lost because a variety of



12/16

natures incongruities hug the trail along every bend, drop, and incline. The Gateway Loop

performs as reified tour talk from Glacier National Park (Carbaugh & Rudnick, 2006) in that

the trail, more so than the scenic point, tiptoes the multiple senses of a place between sellable

objectives and entertainment, offering accurate information, coherent tales, and multiple

perspectives (p. 182). Our interpretation of nature is influenced by the design to the Gateway

Loop design (i.e., protection from disorientation), yet the ratio of trail to nature is

disproportionate enough to accommodate all projected meanings.

Conclusion

I have heard it said that seeing is believing. The only problem is that what we see is often

the belief of marketers, architects, programmers, and government. The Gateway Loop is a

bifurcated rhetoric demonstrative of mans contradictory search for hegemonic order and a kind

of rhetorical catharsis achieved through relational symmetry (nature and culture) and presence of

being. Presence is a principal antecedent to change, and a salient issue in much of the

environmental rhetoric read for this course; in particular, that of Carson (1962) and Leopold

(1949). Presence is realized by inclusive and exclusive means in the design of the Gateway

Loop. The scenic point--an appointed spot of visual distinction--is superficial, serving more as

consignment rhetoric than a heuristic lure. Hikers become bystanders, who are neither expected,

required, nor invited to participate in the invention of meaning. The meaning of the view is

decided for hikers in this canned reading of the Sonoran Preserve. The same human desire for

order and facilitated use is reflected in the City of Scottsdales trail design (City of Scottsdale

Preservation Division, 2009). Trail users tend to favor the easiest, most obvious route. If the



13/16

designated trail is not the easiest and most obvious, trail users will begin to create new,

unauthorized trails (City of Scottsdale, 2010). This is rhetoric of open spaces.

Rhetoric of tight places--as the name might imply--is communicated in appeals of

moderate to difficult difficulty that require patience and participation. The Gateway Loop dips,

elevates, and snakes through an unspoiled habitat where every contour primes the hiker for the

next scene. The trail is an architectural tour of a conceptualized landscape depicted as a

constructed setting taken for granted like circumambient air we breathe (Steiner, 1998, p. 8).

The desert is a real biome, but our comprehension of the desert topography is constructed, in part

through naming (Carbaugh & Rudnick, 2006). The features, process, and displays that we know

too much or too little about are marginalized as incongruities (or subterfuges against the

dominant meaning or rhetoric). As an example of rhetoric of display, the trail favors sustainable

interpretations of the Sonoran Preserve that link a vivid narrative about the region to a design

that could sustain the story line (Francaviglia, 1999, p. 163).

Future research might consider scenic views from other WUI trails. What do inverse (or

introspective) views like that found from Gateway Saddle imply about mans relation to nature?

Furthermore, can the concepts fundamental to tight places and open spaces be applied to other

rhetorical displays and suasory artifacts. What similarities are there between the Gateway Loop

and, for example, the Gettysburg Cyclorama or observatories? How do these texts reify presence,

and articulate the tension between distance, space, and place? How does the rhetorical and

physical size of the Gettysburg Cyclorama, the vastness of space, the structure of a honeycomb,

or the ergonomic contour of an iPhone affect the audience? Rhetorical studies of architecture,



14/16

user experience design, and display could answer some of these questions, and engender exciting

new ones.



15/16

References

Carbaugh, D., & Rudnick, L. (2006). Which place, which story? Cultural discourses at the border

of the Blackfeet Reservation and Glacier National Park. Great Plains Quarterly, 26,

167-184.

Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring(Fortieth Anniversary Edition). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin

Company.

City of Scottsdale. (2010). Streetscapes, parks & trails. InDesign standards & policies manual.

Scottsdale, AZ: City of Scottsdale.

City of Scottsdale. (2011). Scottsdales McDowell Sonoran Preserve [Webpage]. Retrieved from

http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/preserve

City ofScottsdale Preservation Division. (2005).Bell Pass and Bell Loop trail construction

technical specifications (Invitation for bid #06PB059). Scottsdale, AZ: City of Scottsdale.

City of Scottsdale Preservation Division. (2009). Trails of the McDowell Sonoran Preserve.

Retrieved from http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve

+Trail+Map.pdf

City of Scottsdale Preservation Division. (2010). Scottsdales McDowell Sonoran Preserve trails

[Brochure]. Scottsdale, AZ: City of Scottsdale.

Dyehouse, J. (2011). A textbook case revisited: Visual rhetoric and series patterning in the

American Museum of Natural Historys horse evolution displays. Technical

Communication Quarterly, 20(3), 327-346.

http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/preservehttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/Public+Website/preserve/Preserve+Trail+Map.pdfhttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/preservehttp://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/preserve


16/16

Foss, S.K. (1982). Rhetoric and the visual image: A resource unit. Communication Education,

31, 55-66.

Francaviglia, R. (1999). Walt Disneys Frontierland as an allegorical map of the American West.

Western Historical Quarterly, 30, 155-182.

Hike Arizona (2008, January). Coming down the loop from the saddle [Photograph]. Gateway

Loop TrailMcDowells, AZ. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/vd5SXf

Leopold, A. (1949).A Sand County Almanac And SketchesHere and There (Special

Commemorative Edition). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Herrick, J. A. (2009). The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction (Fourth Edition).

Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Meister, M. (1997). Sustainable development in visual imagery: Rhetorical function in the Jeep

Cherokee. Communication Quarterly, 45(3), 223-234.

Steiner, M. (1998). Frontierland as Tomorrowland: Walt Disney and the architectural packaging

of the mythic West.Montana, 48(1), 2-17.

Take a Hike Arizona (2010, April). Gateway Loop trail[Photograph]. McDowell Mountain

Hikes-Half Day. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/udfwFp

Vivian, B. (2011). A review of:Rhetorics of Display,by Lawrence J. Prelli.Rhetoric Society

Quarterly, 41(1), 89-93.

http://bit.ly/udfwFphttp://bit.ly/vd5SXfhttp://bit.ly/udfwFphttp://bit.ly/udfwFphttp://bit.ly/vd5SXfhttp://bit.ly/vd5SXf

rhetoric of gateway loop trail

Documents