Ecocriticism

by Greg Garrard

Ecocriticism explores the ways in which we imagine and portray the relationship between humans and the environment in all areas of cultural production, from Wordsworth and Thoreau through to Google Earth, J.M. Coetzee and Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man.

Greg Garrard's animated and accessible volume traces the development of the movement and explores its key concepts, including:

pollution
wilderness
apocalypse
dwelling
animals
earth

Featuring a newly rewritten chapter on animal studies, and considering queer and postcolonial ecocriticism and the impact of globalisation, this fully updated second edition also presents a glossary of terms and suggestions for further reading in print and online.

Concise, clear, and authoritative, Ecocriticism offers the ideal introduction to this crucial subject for students of literary and cultural studies.

Genres: Nonfiction, Theory, Ecology, Academic, Literary Criticism, Philosophy, Environment

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Professor of Environmental Humanities

Reviews

[Ariya · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had been dodging around this book for several months, and able to finish it by the end of the semester. Not that the book provided the modern concepts about environment studies, but specifically focused on literary contexts, which I think, more friendly to my lack of knowledge. I would definitely come back for the revision soon.

[Viola · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ekokriticisms ir jau kādu laiku pētīts starpdiscipinārs žanrs literatūrzinātnē, filozofijā u.c. zinātnēs. Galvenā doma - kā daba tiek skatīta, attēlota, saprasta.

[Hank · Rating 3 out of 5]

This isn't the kind of book that many can pick up, read once continuously, and hope to extract its undiminished value. If one hopes to fully grasp the contents, the best approach is slow reading and rereading with Wikipedia close at hand.

Here's my crude simplification of what this book's about. It is a critical review of the literature, including film, poetry, philosophy, et. al, that describes nature and our perception of it. It starts by providing a brief account of the various political and philosophical orientations within the broad spectrum of environmentalism. For example, the first perspective is "cornucopia"; cornucopians claim that human welfare increases with population, economic growth and technological progress. As natural resources become scarce, entrepreneurs find substitutes or create efficiencies that ameliorate the issue. The other orientations are: environmentalism, deep ecology, ecofeminism, social ecology, ecomarxism, and Heideggerian ecophilosophy. The book proceeds to frame the analysis into 6 ecocritical tropes: pastoral, wilderness, apocalypse, dwelling, animals, and earth. Each trope is developed with brief discussions of the principle historical works and their criticisms, chronologically and, at times, geographically.

Ultimately, the purpose of this book and ecocriticism in general is to help people overcome anthropocentricism. By reviewing the various orientations that authors, artists, and the general public have held toward nature, we become capable of identifying and discouraging those that are harmful and flawed, and promoting the closest approximations of the good and true. I would only recommend reading this book if you have the time to dedicate to independently exploring the tropes in concert with the reading, or if you have a very solid grounding in ecological literature.

[Liv · Rating 3 out of 5]

vekrligen inte en dålig bok, men jag zonade ut typ varje gång jag skulle läsa i den :-) samt, är inte så brydd om facklitteratur tyvärr. jobbar på det!

[Asser Mattar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very useful insightful, and well-organized

[Ceren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Garrard's book is still a valuable resource for an introduction to ecocriticism and especially, ecocritical literature.
After a summary of positions, Garrard spends the first few chapters exploring ecocritical literature through metaphors such as pastoral, wilderness, apocalypse, and dwelling. As is the problem with introductory books, sometimes he jumps too quickly from one example to another without providing more than the summary of the literary work under analysis.
I particularly think Garrard explains Heideggerian ecophilosophy too superficially. I'd love to read a more in-depth analysis of how and to what extent Heidegger's philosophy can provide an ecological perspective that incorporates more than "The Origin of the Work of Art" (and maybe even a little bit of Merleau-Ponty?). The reason I am intrigued by this position is Heidegger's rootedness in experience (being-in-the-world) which posits an ultimately unknowable non-human perspective that lends itself not only to animal studies but also to the exploration of the apocalyptic/horror genre.
Finally, at the very end of the book, Garrard recognizes three problems in ecocriticism, two of which I'm noting here for future reference:
1. What is (or, should be) the relationship between ecocriticism and animal studies? (pp. 149 for the main discussion)
2. How to bridge the gap between green humanities and environmental sciences?

[Uroš Đurković · Rating 5 out of 5]

Od pokreta dubinske ekologije i kritike antropomorfizma / antropocentrizma, preko istorije pastorale, retorike naučnog štiva, ekofeminizma, odnosa Hajdegera prema nacizmu, ontologiji i filozofiji prirode, pa sve do fenomenologije i poetike dokumentarnih filmova (živeo Dejvid Atenboro!), ali i interesantne analize Blejdranera ili Terminatora.

Korisna knjiga. Inspirativne teorijske perspektive.
Odličan uvod u ekologiju književnosti.
(Nije prevedena na srpski, ali biće!)

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid introduction to the field of ecocritcism.

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Published in 2012, Greg Garrard's Ecocriticism offers an overview of how critical theorists understand the relationship between people and the physical world. I find critical theory fascinating but I worry that its utility is overstated by its adherents.

Several schools of critical thought have emerged under the umbrella of ecocriticism. The conventional wisdom I'd say we nearly all live in is Anthropocentric "cornucopianism," which holds that 1) what matters is human desires because we have mind and agency and 2) that the Earth offers mostly boundless bounty. "Environmentalists" are a bit skeptical of the second point, so they recycle or reduce their consumption or become politically engaged citizens who worry about the environment. "Deep ecologists" are skeptical of points 1) and 2). "Ecofeminists" appear to take feminist concerns and then discuss the environment, while "eco-Marxists" take Marxist concerns and then discuss the environment.

How useful are these theories? I suspect that what guides most individual response to the climate crisis is not reasoned theory but rather prior convictions and psychological predispositions. Environmentally tinged philosophy seems to worry more about the philosophical school of thought than the environment, which strikes me as a form of confirmation bias, sorry. And it seems to me that an anxious person looks at the news and worries a lot about the climate crisis, whereas a person with a high tolerance for change mostly shrugs it off--we'll adapt. (It seems clear to me that adaptation is overrated by its adherents.) Or perhaps what people worry about is coded into them by their group's values in a way similar to how conservatives worry a lot about debt or inflation when they're out of power, but they don't worry about either at all once elected. If this is how people often think, then perhaps we should be cutting to the chase a bit more in our environmental discourse and we can leave the theory to people who have a lot of time on their hands.

How strongly should we hold to these theories? Philosophically, it's tricky to follow more than one. Nevertheless, in Stubborn Attachments, Tyler Cowen argues for a pluralistic ethics and I think greens should do something similar under the umbrella of environmentalism. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I'm fine with the idea that people might identify as 80% environmentalist and 20% cornucopian. Solar, wind, and geothermal energy are very abundant, even if our ability to harness them faces some constraints. Still, aren't these energy technologies more cornucopian than not? Also, it seems to me that when we feel outrage reading about the annihilation of passenger pigeons when we read Kolbert's Sixth Extinction, we're basically admitting that we're 10% deep ecologists--sadly not enough to act to save polar bears or Amazonian frogs. I finally note that pluralism is what Garrard observes ecofeminists and eco-Marxists doing when they consider problems like environmental justice--the groups make real world compromises and alliances and maybe the GND is an example of this sort of pluralistic deal making.

If asked, I suppose I'd say the goal of the environmental movement should be some sort of "enlightened Anthropocentrism" -- basically environmentalism but with more conviction. We should aim to maximize human welfare while minimizing environmental damage, a nebulous phrase that philosophically doesn't really make much sense but that gets us into a negotiation like "present day human welfare matters 40% relative to 60% sustainability and future human welfare." The fields that are best at negotiating tensions like this are economics and political science, though neither is really mentioned in Ecocriticism--nor is intersectionality.

The conclusion I reach from this train of thought is that these theories are maybe not super useful, even if they are super interesting. I'd rather see people invest their cognitive load into getting to net zero emissions, and enlightened Anthropocentrism or "shallow environmentalism" seems like it offers enough philosophical umbrella to proceed with that project.

A lot of notes.

The widest definition of the subject of ecocriticism is the study of the relationship of the human and the non-human, throughout human cultural history and entailing critical analysis of the term 'human' itself. 5

Ecocriticism cannot contribute much to debates about problems in ecology, but it can help to define, explore and even resolve ecological problems in this wider sense. 6

There are the basic propositions of this book: environmental problems require analysis in cultural as well as scientific terms, because they are the outcome of an interaction between ecological knowledge of nature and its cultural inflection. This will involve interdisciplinary scholarship that draws on literary and cultural theory , philosophy, sociology, psychology and environmental history, as well as ecology. 16

The very broad range of people who are concerned about environmental issues such as global warming and pollution, but who wish to maintain or improve their standard of living as conventionally defined, and who would not welcome radical social change, will be described hereinafter as 'environmentalists.' Many value rural ways of life, hiking or camping, or are members of one of the mainstream environmental organisations. 21

Whereas 'shallow' [environmentalist] approaches take an instrumental approach to nature, arguing for preservation of natural resources only for the sake of humans, deep ecology demands recognition of intrinsic value in nature. It identifies the dualistic separation of humans from nature promoted by Western philosophy and culture as the origin of environmental crisis, and demands a return to a monistic, primal identification of humans and the ecosphere. The shift from a human-centred to a nature-centred system of values is the core of the radicalism attributed to deep ecology, bringing it into opposition with almost the entirety of Western philosophy and religion. 24.

Descartes hyperseparated mind and body, and denied to animals not only the faculty of reason, but the whole range of feelings and sensations that he had associated with thought. As a result, he saw animals as radically different from, and inferior to, humans. They were bodies without minds, effectively machines. 28.

Social ecology and eco-Marxists share the crucial insight with the cornucopian economists, whom they diametrically oppose politically, that the notion of ecological 'limits' is a kind of mystification. 31

Social ecologists [...] share with eco-Marxists  a distinctive view of the place of humans in nature. They claim the ecocentrism monism enjoined by deep ecologists is disingenuous because, although humans are supposed to be 'part of nature', many of the things humans do are still portrayed as 'unnatural,' thereby reintroducing the dualism they were trying to overcome.

Social ecology promotes a decentralised society of non-hierarchical affiliations avowedly derived from an anarchistic political tradition. 33

Since the Romantic movement's poetic responses to the Industrial Revolution, pastoral has decisively shaped our constructions of nature. 37

We can set out three orientations of pastoral in terms of time: the elegy looks back to a vanished past with a sense of nostalgia; the idyll celebrates a bountiful present; the utopia looks forward to a redeemed future. 42

The idea of wilderness, signifying nature in a state uncontaminated by civilisation, is the most potent construction of nature available to New World environmentalism. It is a construction mobilised to protect particular habitats and species, and is seen as a place for the reinvigoration of those tired of the moral and material pollution of the city. Wilderness has an almost sacramental value: it holds out the promise of a renewed, authentic relation of humanity and the earth, a post-Christian covenant, found in a space of purity, founded in an attitude of reverence and humility. 66

McKibben's construction of nature reinforces an idea of wilderness, in which any modification of the environment is a form of contamination. 

A further problem is apparent: the ideal wilderness space is wholly pure by virtue of its independence from humans, but the ideal wilderness narrative posits a human subject whose most authentic existence is located precisely there. This model not only misrepresents the wild, but also exonerates us from taking a responsible approach to our everyday lives:our working and domestic lives are effectively irredeemable alongside this ideal, so the activities we carry out there escape scrutiny. Wilderness, then, is ideological in the sense that it erases the social and political history that gives rise to it...  78

[Leopold's] formulation of the land ethic is elegant and apparently simple, bringing together normative criteria that are both aesthetic and scientific: 'A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise' (pp. 224-25). It is not the individual organism that attracts moral consideration, but the 'community as a whole, a community in which human beings are neither more nor less than 'citizens'. 

Beguiling as it may seem, Leopold's dictum raises substantial philosophical and ecological problems. [...] While it may seem obvious that we should prefer a healthy environment, the non-chauvinistic grounds for wanting one are not supplied. Moreover, the very idea of a 'biotic community' as an identifiable, stable locus of value would be considered extremely problematic from the perspective of modern theoretical ecology. The language of Leopold's ecology is nowadays treated with some caution since it suggests a degree of predictability that is seldom found in natural systems. 80

[Rachel] Carson's alternative is not an ecocentric or anti-interventionist vision, but rather a pragmatic environmentalism in which limited, targeted chemical pesticides combine with biological controls in an integrated pest-management approach. Consequently her enlightened anthropocentrism has been criticised by deep ecologists for whom the crisis is vaster and more intransigent. 104.

Apocalyptic rhetoric seems a necessary component of environmental discourse. It is capable of galvanising activists, converting the undecided and ultimately, perhaps, of influencing government and commercial policy. In the United States, in particular, it can draw upon deep wellsprings of popular and literary apocalyptic sentiment. The news media often report environmental issues as catastrophes not only because this generates drama and the possibility of a human interest, but also because news more easily reports events than processes. Apocalypse provides an emotionally charged frame of reference within which complex, long-term issues are reduced to monocausal crises involving conflicts between recognisably opposed groups, such as Greenpeace versus whalers. 113

On Wendell Berry's marriage to the land. Berry: A human community, too, must collect leaves and stories, and turn them to account. It must build soil, and build that memory of itself ... that will be its culture. These two kinds of accumulation, of local soil and local culture, are intimately related.  "To be fully human, the, is to be a part of such a community. More ominously, the reverse is logically true too: not to belong to such a community is to be less than human, although one might say so either as a lament or an indictment. 125

[Gaia theory] is now used by deep ecologists and ecofeminists to counter the inflection of the Earth as a technologically and economically enframed globe. Lovelock's work in planetary ecology led to the hypothesis that the Earth could be described as a self-regulating system, analogous to a living organism. It has been known since the discovery of planet photosynthesis that living organisms produce the atmosphere they need to inhabit, but Lovelock took the argument a stage further, asserting that the planet has been so thoroughly altered physically and chemically by living things that the Earth itself has to be seen as king of super-organism. Rather than merely being a rock in space with life clinging to it, the non-living parts of the planet are as much a part of the whole as the non-living heartwood of a living tree. 199-200

Much ecocriticism has taken for granted that its task is to overcome anthropocentrism, just as feminism seeks to overcome androcentrism. The metaphysical argument for biocentrism is meant to sustain moral claims about the intrinsic value of the natural world, which will in turn affect our attitudes and behavior towards nature. Wilderness experiences, or apocalyptic threats, or Native American ways of life, are supposed to provide the impetus or the example by which individuals come to an authentic selfhood orientated toward right environmental action. Whilst the importance of changing the minds and lives of individuals is undeniable, this book has aimed to show the political dimension to complete the moral and metaphysical arguments. 202

There is no such thing as bad 'weather', only inappropriate clothing, and likewise there is no such thing as 'saving the planet'. Gaia is well beyond our capacity to 'destroy' -- although we are making it horribly uncongenial for ourselves, our symbionts, and the other organisms we love. In addition to the clever technologies, wily policies and ethical revaluations that we shall need to respond to environmental crisis, we shall need better less anthropocentric metaphors. That is the project, and the promise, of ecocriticism. 205

[Mike Degen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Solid introductory survey into ecocrit

[Avni Alper · Rating 5 out of 5]

Kitaptan : Elinizdeki kitabın temel meseleleri şunlardır : Çevresel sorunlar bilimsel olduğu kadar kültürel incelemeye de tabi olmalıdır zira bu sorunlar doğaya ilişkin bir çevre bilgisiyle bunun kültürel yansımaları arasındaki etkileşimlerin sonuçlarıdır.

[nathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The fact that Garrard was able to write such a thorough-yet-compact overview of ecocriticism & environmental humanities is remarkable. He deftly covers literary styles (pastoral, georgic, apocalyptic narratives, nature writing, etc.), glosses major figures and forebears in ecocritical thought, and explores major themes in the field in a wide-ranging & endlessly curious way.

I am especially impressed with his ability to hold nuance in debates over the construction of scientific knowledge. Placing ecocriticism & ecological science in dialectical relationship, Garrard falls into neither hyper-rational scientism or totalizing postmodern skepticism. His discussion of the ozone layer in the final chapter is a prime example, as he makes pains to demonstrate how we construct metaphors & narratives to explain observable, natural phenomena. The respect for and engagement with biology, ecology, and climate science on their own terms was refreshing. Garrard is critical when he needs to be, but is, overall, a very generous thinker. He’s quite fair in his appraisals of different ideas & concepts, but rarely rejects a thinker’s contributions outright.

This is an excellent primer to ecocritical thought & I’m finding it’s really helping me guide my reading as I prepare for qualifying exams.

[Nasreddine EL Guezar · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the first book that I have finished reading on ecocriticism; not being able to understand the main idea of the book was the reason why I was putting off posting a review on it.

Basically, the book is an overview of ecocriticism, and most reviewers recommend it as the first-hand guide for the concerned students. Even if the book is greatly organized, I have found difficulty in recalling what I have learnt from it. I am not denying the importance of this book nor the superior style the book is written in, yet I would resent the ambiguity of book chapters. Garrard’s book is crucially important for a first look on what ecocriticism is about, yet this reading trip would necessitate patience and require more than one read.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although a decent enough overview of ecocritical literary studies as it exists in the Anglosphere, Garrard’s book fails to either excite the reader with the cutting edge or help the reader by providing accessible summaries of the field’s more complex arguments. Early on the book he appears to perk up at the notion of Heideggerian ecocriticism, giving the reader the impression that he will provide a more in-depth explication of the Heideggerian approach. Such an explication never materializes. It’s even more disappointing since Heidegger’s relationship to literary studies is a complex one that can be used to highlight the thread which runs from him through the luminaries of the so-called “French theory” that took American academia by storm in the 70s and 80s. Heidegger looms large in the background of deconstruction, and his thought is the whetstone against which a number of political criticisms honed their arguments. To see Garrard raise such a titillating figure, only to sideline him is disappointing.

[Eric Shapiro · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s difficult to “rate” this book as this functions more as a textbook than anything else, overviewing the academic field of ecocriticism and related fields of study. I absolutely love the relationship between writing/literature/media and nature/the environment, so this was very interesting to me personally, although this is most definitely an academic text and would be challenging for most readers. Even so, it accomplishes its task of providing an introduction to this field of study quite well, even though some sections seemed to flow better than others. There’s so many works listed in the bibliography I want to read but as with most academic texts, I doubt I’ll have the time or energy to get through them.

[Jessica Toro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Garrard did an AMAZING job breaking challenges and views of ecocriticism into ‘Tropes’. Just as feminism’s task is to tackle androcentrism, ecocriticism’s work is primarily to overcome anthropocentrism. It is fascinating to read about how much of our lens has been shaped by western thought (i.e. The Bible), the idea of a pastoral “wilderness” without the realities of the lives of indigenous people, and the fact that no where on Earth is truly wild. We have impacted, water, air, resources, and managed even the wildest parts of national parks, commercialized and disnified wildlife and cartoonized our relationships to animals. So much work to shape a more ecocentric future, but also incredible to step-out of a human-centered frame of mind.

[Maya Alexis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I must give it 5 stars as Dr Garrard is my professor this term in Environmental Literature and I am very much enjoying the content of the course with the backdrop of this book.

If you are looking to learn solely about nature, climate change, etc, this might not be for you. But if you are interested in how we think about nature etc (especially in literature), then I highly recommend this.

It also explains different 'positions' on environmental thought very well.

[Charlie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A really helpful intro into eco-theory, using literary and cultural references to illustrate and analyze its various (and often contradictory) streams of thought. Since it takes the form of a survey, covering a large swath of complicated concepts, it’s not a super fun read, but excellent to have for reference.

[Lorraine · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really excellent overview of ecocriticism that defines what is a very broad term (housing many theoretical and practical points of view) through the lens of pastoral, wilderness, apocalypse, dwelling, and animals. This would be a fantastic textbook for an upper division level undergrad course or a grad course on the topic.

[Alex Tischer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Made a few mindmaps from this great intro book to ecocriticism:

Dwelling - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVNDegBa...

Animals - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVNBgkr_...

Absolutely essential book. Wide scope but not too fast on any topic, alternating praise and critique of other works in the same breath.

[Keit]

This was the first ‘textbook’ I’ve read on ecocriticism, and I think it was a solid introduction to the field. Garrard gives a decent overview of the key concepts without overwhelming the reader. As someone who would like to continue researching this area, I also appreciate the extensive further reading list he provides at the end

[Lisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not what I'd call a 'fun' or 'easy' read (it was required reading for a class) but it definitely changed/enhanced the way that I view the world, particularly that intersection of art + the environment and/or nature in many ways.

[Bea · Rating 2 out of 5]

It brings up some interesting points, but overall this is a rather boring book to read. At times it also has a rather pretentious tone... and the last paragraph begins with a sentence that I have despised since my childhood: "There is no such thing as 'bad weather', only inappropriate clothing".

[Bulcanilo · Rating 3 out of 5]

It explores the major tropes in the field, but tends to be a bit unnecessarily inaccessible as it happens to too many academic books today. If you are new to ecocriticism, it might be better to choose another handbook.

[Trilby O'Farrell · Rating 1 out of 5]

Although it appeared to be organized, as many have mentioned, it turned out to be rambly and too scattered. It might have been more focused if he discussed fewer texts. He's quite dismissive of feminism, and I got the sense he just didn't consider it that much.

[Makayla · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fours stars instead of three simply for the fact that it introduced me to a suuuppper cool new thought of criticism. I'm already over here like, ecocritical reading of The Last Man anyone???? (swear I can write good. I just chose to not. Also wine.)

[Damla Birlik · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitabın konuları aslında hoşuma gitti, güzel. Bazı noktalarda tam anladım derken bazı noktalar karışık geldi ve okurken böyle bir iniş çıkış yaşadım. Biraz konularda kullanılan terimleri ilk defa görüyor olmaktan da kaynaklanıyor olabilir. İleride ikinci bir şans tanıyabilirim.

[Regitze Xenia · Rating 3 out of 5]

So many things to consider... but I will definitely use this book for my thesis. Onwards to more theory!

[Brady · Rating 2 out of 5]

Far too scattered to be recommended. I had a hard time following Garrard's meandering and overly verbose thoughts.

[Andrei Lewis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read the chapter on Apocalypse for a paper, ended up reading the whole thing after the semester. Good starter on picking up the current ecocritical trends.