By: Shoshana Rybeck, Heather Shaw, Berkly Martell
Definition
The term ecocriticism can have a very simple definition, but when looked at more deeply is a lot harder to define. The simple definition is the study of the relationship between certain conceptions of nature, physical environment and literature. There are two defined movements in ecocriticism, referred to as the first and second waves. The first movement came about in the 1980’s in response to the radical environmental movements of the 1960’s in which a large amount of opinions and literature were produced. During this wave, the concept of nature as purely natural sciences and physical elements of the environment were embraced and viewed as a separate entity from human society. During this wave, the concept of nature as purely natural sciences and physical elements of the environment was embraced and viewed as a separate entity from human society. During this wave, the concept of nature as purely natural sciences and physical elements of the environment were embraced and viewed as a separate entity from human society. The second wave of the movement came about in the beginning of the twenty first century focusing more on redefining the concept of environment, as a composite of the physical elements, societal structures, cultural ideas, and human interactions associated with an area. The second wave recognizes the idea of nature not as a closed entity, as first wave ecocriticism do, but as a concept that includes structures other than just the physical environment. In works of ecocriticism certain ideas of environment and nature are combined with culture, the way that human culture and society affect the environment was really addressed. Ecocriticism is interdisciplinary and combines the works of writers, literary critics, natural scientists, historians and anthropologists. This way of thinking asks people to consider the way we as humans interact with certain concepts of environment and how we construct it.
Context
The term ecocriticism was coined by William Rueckert in 1978 in his essay “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism”, but the larger movement of ecocriticism was heavily influenced by Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring published in 1962. Carson’s work brought those involved in the environmental movements of the 1960’s and 70’s to examine the ecological elements of literature, ultimately leading to the concept of ecocriticism. The concept was then officially defined by Cheryll Glotfelty in 1996 as “ the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment” (Glotfelty 1996, xviii). Since its conception, ecocriticism has been divided into two waves, the first surfacing in the eighties and nineties and the second taking shape in the beginning of the twenty first century. The first wave is distinguished by the “emphasis on nature writing as an object of study and as a meaningful practice” (Buell 1995), exemplified in works such as The Country and the City by Raymond Williams and Silent Spring by Rachel Carson (Purdue Online Writing Lab, “Ecocriticism”, accessed 3/22/17 ). This era of ecocriticism was mainly influenced by what we call classic environmentalism, the idea that nature is more pure and separate from culture and society.
This initial movement of ecocriticism rooted in classic environmentalism, was soon followed by what is known as the second wave of ecocriticism. The second wave broke “down of some of the long-standing distinctions between the human and the non-human, questioning these very concepts” (Gerrard 2004, 5), and redefined “environment” to include urban areas and pure nature (Purdue Online Writing Lab, “Ecocriticism”, accessed 3/22/17 ). This second wave of ecocriticism has brought more social issues and their connection to the redefined “environment” to the forefront. This new way of defining the “environment” incorporates the idea of how human society and culture affect what we view as the physical environment. New ecocriticism can be seen in works such as Love Your Monsters by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus and represents ideas found in what we call contemporary environmentalism, the idea that nature is interconnected with culture and human society. Contemporary environmentalism recognizes nature as a hybrid of culture, society, and physical environment, a concept that second wave ecocriticism uses when discussing the role of nature in literature. The first movement of ecocriticism focused on nature as pure, ecological element, and the second era of ecocriticism uses the idea of nature as a hybrid of physical ecology and culture. Both waves of ecocriticism have been used as a platform for commenting on the role and inclusion of the physical environment and human culture in literature and scholarship.
The concept of ecocriticism is largely used by literature scholars, as it mainly deals with how certain concepts of nature are portrayed in literature, but has also been an active in social critiques. Ecocriticism works to integrate ecological, social, cultural, and economic thought, and can be seen through different regions of the world. However the idea is most widely supported in western literature and scholarly communities in this area, because the literature that ecocriticism examines often comes from the west. This concentration of ecocriticism in the western world, has been reason for its growing support, as its western presence has increased the movement’s publicity. However, the apparent western centricity of the movement has also been a point of contention. Opposition comes from critics who see elements of western environmentalism and ecocritical literary works to be a platform from more powerful nations to put pressures on less powerful ones that inherently keep them under political and economic control. The idea of ecocriticism may also create issues for the concept of biologism, as ecocriticism by definition works to blend lines between physical environment, pure biology, and human life and society (Wikipedia, Essentialism, accessed on 3/22/17).
Critique
The movement of ecocriticism invites deeper thoughts on the environment and its connection to human life. The concept opens up discussions on how physical elements of nature take shape in literature, and real lives, a conversation that is crucial when trying to make a community more aware of environmental matters. Garrard proves the point that “ecocriticism makes it possible to analyse critically the tropes brought into play in environmental debate, and, more tentatively, to predict which will have a desired effect on a specific audience at a given historical juncture” (Garrard 2004, 14) . This branch of literature helps to demonstrate the relationship that humans have with their physical environment and the many different lenses and opinions it encompasses. Ecocriticism is also used as a vehicle for scholars and authors to voice share their opinion and views on current environmental issues, which is becoming even more important with the increase in awareness of environmental issues. As our earth’s climate and general ecological health fails to see improvements, “the field of ecocriticism and the artistic texts it examines will likely become increasingly important during the coming decades. If this work manages to gain some traction in the realm of public policy and in the daily lifestyles of people in consumerist, polluting societies around the world, there is a slight chance we might avert, or at least slow down, the collapse of the ecosystems that we rely upon for our very lives.” (Slovic 227). This is a great example of how ecocriticism is being used to promote the idea of climate change and new regulations that promote. This idea is stated clearly by Slovic when he describes ecocriticism as something that “enables literary scholars and scholars in neighboring disciplines to assert the relevance of their work to many of the world’s most pressing contemporary issues” (Slovic 226). The interdisciplinary aspect of ecocriticism helps to incorporate different opinions and ideas creating deep connections between our society and the ideas of environment that are expressed in the first and second waves of the movement. .
Resistance to ecocriticism initially came to be because the movement was new and had not been previously contested. Slovic explains the ecocriticism was disputed because “the theoretical apparatus of ecocriticism appeared less elaborate and sophisticated than that of other branches of contemporary humanities scholarship, and at other times because of an innate uncertainty about the social/political aims of Western environmentalism” (Slovic 225). Slovic explains that some people were against ecocriticism just because it was not as developed as other environmental movements while others were against it because they were suspicious of how western countries plan to use ecocriticism and activism in environmental issues. They argue that some of the more powerful countries, most of which being western, would use environmentalism to their advantage in order to have economic and and political control over the other less powerful countries. Some eco critics such as Dooho Shin criticize the movement for being a tool that western civilizations have used against the less powerful nations; “ecocriticism will be dismissed as just one of those foreign ideas that the First World foregrounds and pushes onto less powerful countries to keep them under economic and political control” (Shin 1999, 127).
This criticism stems from the greater issue many have with some aspects of Western environmentalism that can be seen as a form of colonialism. Slovic argues this point, “In many parts of the world today, one encounters the concern that Western environmentalism, including ecocritical literary scholarship, is simply a new form of colonialism” (Slovic, 227). Since the Ecocriticism movement is seen as somewhat elitist by critics, the concept can come into conflict with postcolonialism, as the ism indicates the absence of colonialism and critics of ecocriticism believe the concept is a present form of colonialism (Wikipedia, Postcolonialism, accessed on 3/22/17). Although this concern could be easily solved if the other countries across the globe are encouraged to investigate their own practices of environmentalism, not just blindly follow the practices put into place by the more powerful western countries.
Another weakness of ecocriticism is the apparent homogenous group of scholars that make up the movement’s community. As previously mentioned, ecocriticism grew to fruition in the western world and therefore is made up of mainly first-world, western scholars. This lack of diversity in the movement is often viewed as a qualm that invalidates ecocriticism, because it is assumed that these first-world eco critics will not acknowledge the ideas of smaller, less recognized groups. Some of the eco critics themselves come from very ‘first-world’ and homogenous backgrounds so some of their ideas are similar. Even though leading eco critics do not represent much racial or cultural diversity, their ideas present more diversity than the people behind them. The recognition of of non western cultures in ecocriticism ideas contributes to this diversity and is recognized by Dooho Shin in his work “Toward a Cross-Cultural Ecocriticism: Its Meanings and Implications in the New Millennium” in which he asserts that the west cannot be fully discredited as colonizers from the ecocriticism movement, because in the ecocriticism community “scholars from both west and east began to turn to eastern religious traditions as an alternative ecological solution, because, unlike the west’s tendency to materialize nature, eastern traditions value the harmony between nature and humans” (Shin 1999, 127). Just as Shin recognizes, ecocriticism works to promote the ideas of the eastern world, incorporating the religious and cultural practices of groups not included in western society. This important inclusion makes the ideas of ecocriticism less homogenous, as they are not fully comprised of western values.
Conclusion
The two movements that have come to define ecocriticism bring together ideas of pure nature as explored in literature and the works of scholars as well as the impact that human society and culture has on our physical environment and the way in which humans view these interactions. When looking at ecocriticism broken up into the two movements, the first movement discussed more specifically how the concept of physical nature is very separate from our human society and should be viewed as an element that should be protected and prized. The second wave discusses the interdisciplinary aspects of the physical environment and how that intersects with human society and culture regarding how humans and the natural world coexist.
Ecocriticism helps bring awareness to certain environmental concerns because the movement brings up a discussion of how aspects of nature relate to literature and culture in our daily lives. Ecocriticism in literature specifically shows how humans interact with their physical environment and the many differing views that encompass this. This opens an opportunity for scholars to share their own opinions about climate change and other contemporary issues within the broader environmental community. While ecocriticism is beneficial for most, some critics have their doubts about the movement. Eco critics argue that the movement is just a new form of colonialism because it provides an opportunity for powerful western countries to impose their own environmental strategies on less powerful countries. Another reason why scholars criticize the movement is because the ideas represented do not come from a very diverse group of scholars. Many of the eco critics themselves come from western homogenous backgrounds so their ideas are very similar.
After our group learned and discussed ecocriticism we came to the conclusion that this movement should be highly regarded by environmental scholars. Ecocriticism is crucial to understanding society’s views on aspects of the natural world as presented by literary scholars. We would recommend that the second wave of ecocriticism be used in education and incorporated into curriculums of higher education. Our reasoning behind suggesting the use of only the second wave, not the first comes from our opinion that the second wave constructs an argument that brings in opinions that are more well rounded and gives more diversity of opinions when referring to the physical environment and human culture. The second wave embraces a hybrid concept of the movement that we believe represents a more well rounded view that students would be able to learn more from. Overall we hold the opinion that ecocriticism is crucial to gaining an understanding of humans views on the natural world and the place that we as people have in it.
Works Cited
- Brizee, Allen, J. Case Tompkins, Libby Chernouski, and Elizabeth Boyle. “Ecocriticism.” Purdue OWL: Literary Theory and Schools of Criticism. August 17, 2015. Accessed March 22, 2017.
- Buell, Lawrence. “The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, Nature Writing, and the Formation of American Culture” (1995) and “Toxic Discourse,” 1998
- Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm. The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology, (1996)
- “Essentialism.” Wikipedia. Accessed March 24, 2017.
- Garrard, Greg. “Ecocriticism.” London: Routledge. 2004.
- “Postcolonialism.” Wikipedia. Accessed March 22, 2017.
- Shin, Dooho. 1999. “Toward a Cross-Cultural Ecocriticism: Its Meanings and Implications in the New Millennium.” Dong-Seo Bigyo Moonhak Jeonol (Journal of east-west comparative literature) 2: 111-131.
- Slovic, Scott. “Ecocriticism.” Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, edited by J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2009, pp. 225-228.