C. D. Ollier's 'Evolutionary Geomorphology of Australia
Discussion
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8962743 |
|---|---|
| Authors | C R Twidale (0009-0003-9679-7922, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1981 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 251-251 |
| Publication date | 1981-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-2754 • E-ISSN: 1475-5661 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.2307/622139 |
| OpenAlex | W2328000795 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 5 |
Oilier urges that most of the models and concepts commonly used in the analysis and interpretation of landscapes have little application in the Australian context. Instead, it is suggested, the answers are to be found in the responses of continents to changing tectonic activities and varying global locations. Plate tectonics gives another important dimension to geomorphological interpretation but at another, more immediate, level recourse must still perforce be had to the ideas that have on the whole served to illuminate the Australian and other landscapes. This is not to suggest either that all is already fully understood, or that Down Under does not have its peculiarities, but there is surely no reason to discard concepts that have on the whole proved useful. All that is necessary is that they be applied critically and varied according to cases-which may or may not ultimately reflect the drifting of continents and plates. THE main thrust of Ollier's (1979) recent article, as I read it, is that in his view the concepts or models commonly used in the analysis and interpretation of landscapes 'have limited application and importance' in reaching an understanding of the Australian scenery. Cyclic models, dynamic equilibrium, climatic geomorphology, process studies, uniformitarianismall are rejected as largely inadequate in face of the antiquity of the antipodean landscape. Instead we are told that the solution lies in something called evolutionary geomorphology, the development of continents in response to changing tectonic activities and varying global locations. What is not explained is what different processes, both exogene and endogene, have in the past determined the shaping of the land surface. Whatever the ultimate causes of uplift or subsidence or lateral movement; of climatic changes resulting from changes in latitude, longitude, shape and altitude of continents; of sea-level changes-the effects are surely the same, and we must perforce resort to empiricism, comparison, pure reason and controlled imagination in order to interpret the forms we see. Plate tectonics allows interpretation and argument back one stage further toward ultimate causes. This is laudable but it does not alter the immediate picture. And it is essential to take the evidence step by step, for what is considered sound speculation today will, one hopes, have been superseded half a century on. Plate tectonics offers the best global geological strategy now, but other notions will undoubtedly gain favour next century. Thus Sbar and Sykes (1973) reasonably relate certain minor forms developed in crystalline rocks to plate dislocations, but the interpretation of the forms as associated with the release of compressive stress (Twidale and Sved, 1978; see also Coates, 1964; Jennings, 1978; Denham, Alexander and Worotnicki, 1978) stands, regardless of ultimate causes. Ollier dismisses climatic geomorphology and process studies but really does not believe what he writes. Perhaps unwittingly, he partly admits as much when (p. 538) he mentions 'new Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S. 6, 251-5 (1981) Printed in Great Britain This content downloaded from 157.55.39.225 on Thu, 08 Jun 2017 18:03:37 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Earth science · Geography · Geomorphology · Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies · Evolution and Paleontology Studies · Geology · Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
| Highly cited | No |
|---|