The Snapshot pictures got me to thinking, if nature in itself was a form of art to be appreciated. Personally, I think the way nature seeps into the city is a form of art. In Patricia's photograph of the Cathedral and of the statue that resided in such place, there existed a sense of nature's presence. Perhaps I sensed it in the water filling the fountain or in the trees that played a role in the background. The point is that without such a context of nature, I believed the photograph would not have been as beautiful, or for that matter the statue in itself. In this instance, nature plays the role of illuminating the statue by working alongside to make it striking to previously blinded street walkers. It is with the help of nature that individuals even notice the statue, for nature is part of its beauty.

Furthermore, the art of nature could be understood through Jerrica's photograph of Bryan Park. I think simply the way the trees were assembled and divided was a form to be noticed and appraised.  The walking paths for people caused the park to have a horizontal division as well as a vertical division. This in turn meant the trees were kind of fixed in squares plot of land. Hence, the shape in which nature was present in the city was different than it would be in the suburbs. The trees were perfectly distanced apart and all about the same height. In essence, it is as if humanity is trying to perfect even more, what is already innately perfect. Yet such actions are not to be looked down upon because they represent an integration of Earth and humanity, a bond to be treasured and hopefully to proceed.