Ecocriticism: An Essay

BY NASRULLAH MAMBROL ON NOVEMBER 27, 2016 • ( 3 )

Ecocriticism is the study of literature and environment from an
interdisciplinary point of view where all sciences come together to analyze
the environment and brainstorm possible solutions for the correction of the
contemporary environmental situation. Ecocriticism was officially heralded
by the publication of two seminal works, both published in the mid-
1990s: The Ecocriticism Reader, edited by Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold
Fromm, and The Environmental Imagination, by Lawrence Buell.
Ecocriticism investigates the relation between humans and the natural world
in literature. It deals with how environmental issues, cultural issues
concerning the environment and attitudes towards nature are presented and
analyzed. One of the main goals in ecocriticism is to study how individuals in
society behave and react in relation to nature and ecological aspects. This
form of criticism has gained a lot of attention during recent years due to
higher social emphasis on environmental destruction and increased
technology. It is hence a fresh way of analyzing and interpreting literary
texts, which brings new dimensions to the field of literary and theoritical
studies. Ecocriticism is an intentionally broad approach that is known by a
number of other designations, including “green (cultural) studies”,
“ecopoetics”, and “environmental literary criticism.”
Western thought has often held a more or less utilitarian attitude to nature —
nature is for serving human needs. However, after the eighteenth century,
there emerged many voices that demanded a revaluation of the relationship
between man and environment, and man’s view of nature. Arne Naess, a
Norwegian philosopher, developed the notion of “Deep Ecology” which
emphasizes the basic interconnectedness of all life forms and natural
features, and presents a symbiotic and holistic world-view rather than an
anthropocentric one.

Earlier theories in literary and cultural studies focussed on issue of class,

race, gender, region as criteria and “subjects” of critical analysis. The late
twentieth century has woken up to a new threat: ecological disaster. The most
important environmental problems that humankind faces as a whole are:
nuclear war, depletion of valuable natural resources, population explosion,
proliferation of exploitative technologies, conquest of space preliminary to
using it as a garbage dump, pollution, extinction of species (though not a
human problem) among others. In such a context, literary and cultural theory
has begun to address the issue as a part of academic discourse. Numerous
green movements have sprung up all over the world, and some have even
gained representations in the governments.

Large scale debates over “dumping,” North versus South environmentalism

(the necessary differences between the environmentalism of the developed
and technologically advanced richer nations—the North, and the poorer,
subsistence environmentalism of the developing or “Third World”—the
South). Donald Worster‘s Nature’s Economy (1977) became a textbook for
the study of ecological thought down the ages. The historian Arnold
Toynbee recorded the effect of human civilisation upon the land and nature
in his monumental, Mankind and Mother Earth (1976). Environmental issues
and landscape use were also the concern of the Annales School of historians,
especially Braudel and Febvre. The work of environmental historians has
been pathbreaking too. Rich-ard Grove et al’s massive Nature and the
Orient (1998), David Arnold and Ramachandra Guha’s Nature, Culture,
Imperialism (1995) have been significant work in the environmental history
of India and Southeast Asia. Ramachandra Guha is of course the most
important environmental historian writing from India today.

Various versions of environmentalism developed. Deep ecology and

ecofeminism were two important developments. These new ideas questioned
the notion of “development” and “modernity,” and argued that all Western
notions in science, philosophy, politics were “anthropocentric” (human-
centred) and “androcentric” (Man/male-centred). Technology, medical
science with its animal testing, the cosmetic and fashion industry all came in
for scrutiny from environmentalists. Deep ecology, for instance, stressed on a
“biocentric” view (as seen in the name of the environmentalist group, “Earth
First!!”).
Ecocriticism is the result of this new consciousness: that very soon, there will
be nothing beautiful (or safe) in nature to discourse about, unless we are very
careful.
Ecocritics ask questions such as:
(1) How is nature represented in the novel/poem/play ?
(2) What role does the physical-geographical setting play in the structure of
the novel?
(3) How do our metaphors of the land influence the way we treat it? That is,
what is the link between pedagogic or creative practice and actual political,
sociocultural and ethical behaviour towards the land and other non-human
life forms?
(4) How is science —in the form of genetic engineering, technologies of
reproduction, sexualities—open to critical scrutiny terms of the effects of
science upon the land?
The essential assumptions, ideas and methods of ecocritics may be summed
up as follows.
(1) Ecocritics believe that human culture is related to the physical world.
(2) Ecocriticism assumes that all life forms are interlinked. Ecocriticism
expands the notion of “the world” to include the entire ecosphere.
(3) Moreover, there is a definite link between nature and culture, where
the literary treatment, representation and “thematisation” of land and nature
influence actions on the land.
(4) Joseph Meeker in an early work, The Comedy of Survival: Studies in
Literary Ecology (1972) used the term “literary ecology” to refer to “the
study of biological themes and relationships which appear in literary works.
It is simultaneously an attempt to discover what roles have been played by
literature in the ecology of the human species.”
(5) William Rueckert is believed to have coined the term “ecocriticism” in
1978, which he defines as “the application of ecology and ecological
concepts to the study of literature.”

Source: Literary Theory Today,Pramod K Nair

1. Мґр. Міхал Павліч, ПгД.: Віршы Даньєлы Капралёвой з погляду екокрітікы –
rusynlit.sk
2. Is “Anti-Science” a Fair Description of Vandana Shiva? If so, what does this mean for
the University? Part I. – Ethnography Undone
3. Ecocriticism began as an environmentalist literary movement that challenged Marxists
and New Historicists over the meaning and significance of British Romanticism. An
important component of the environmental humanities, ecocriticism has been
characterized using the metaphor of waves. “First-wave” ecocriticism is inclined to
celebrate nature rather than query “nature” as a concept and to derive inspiration as
directly as possible from wilderness preservation and environmentalist movements.
“Second-wave” ecocriticism is linked to social ecological movements and maintains a
more skeptical relationship with the natural sciences. The contributions to the book,
which encompass both “waves”, are organized in a widening spiral, from critical
historicizations of “nature” in predominantly Euro-American literature in the first section
to a series of surveys of work in ecocriticism’s “emerging markets” – Japan, China, India
and Germany – in the last. The “Theory” section includes essays adopting perspectives
from Latourian science studies, queer theory, deconstruction, animal studies,
ecofeminism and postcolonialism. The “Genre” section demonstrates the diverse
applications of ecocriticism with topics ranging from British literary fiction, Old Time
music, environmental humour, climate change nonfiction.