This page was created by Alison Morgan.
Article Summary by Jared K.
The nature of ecocriticism, according to Estok, is the differing manner in which it addresses and acknowledges the environment. The two contrasting, yet mutually related, approaches are called “biophilia” and “ecophobia” and take either a positive or negative form. Positive biophilia emerges from a love of the environment while indulging in and mastering everything it offers. Negative biophilia emerges from the same love, but enjoys a more “intuitive understanding of human nature as opposed to an accurate knowledge” through a heightened sense of stewardship that tends to encourage personal reductionism, or simplicity. The positive approach is seen Western consumption habits as people exacerbate resources, like beef, while at the same time trying to drive an electric car. The negative approach is used by Native Americans who try to preserve their sacred lands. On the other hand, positive ecophobia is a dramatized fear of potential environmental harms that often drives drastic action to ‘save’ the world. Negative ecophobia is a calmer approach that directs attention elsewhere, which tends to be a more personal and local way of dealing with our natural realm. There is an obvious continuum among these four essences, but they each uniquely guide ecocriticism.
Understanding the cultivation of biophilia and ecophobia sheds light on the relativism involved in literature. Every writer responds differently to how they experience life, and furthermore literature and environmentalism. Relativism is clearly seen in the mutuality of these different approaches. It is important to recognize this because the degrees of utility for ecocriticism will vary from culture to culture and person to person. Likewise, specificity is beneficial in literature and analysis. Taking a closer look at certain things gives a more honest context to criticism. The application of eco-literature must take different forms to address certain audiences, likewise the utility is not universal and dependent on the circumstances and its constituents.
The utility of empirical and systems studies for ecocriticism is minimal. However, the utility of ecocriticism itself has value. The former only gives a recommendation while the latter provides an experience. They may occur simultaneously, but are independent events nonetheless. It is a vicious cycle, though the utilitarian ideal suggests to focus on criticizing rather than analyzing. The omniscient approach (analyzing ecocriticism) is just another way of experiencing ecocriticism. For the individual, it seems that raw experience is more valuable, and meaningful, than rhetorical elaboration. Once again, this steers our attention back to the approaches, but this time excludes the essence of relativity and prioritizes specific utility.
Estok acknowledges the relativism and therefore bases the true utility off of the approach itself. Analyzing ecocriticism can bring forth these ideas used for teaching, but empirical and systematic studies have shown education is subpar to action. The positive experiences, of both biophilia and ecophobia, make a change in the world, regardless of its help or harm. Positive approaches grant some kind of utility while the negative, which tend to be nihilistic and involve learning experiences, have shown to make no significant impact, and are deemed to have no utility. Though no impact has been seen, this type of impact is impossible to scientifically notice in a lifetime, let alone a millennium. The benefit of this cannot or will not be seen and requires faith and human investment. In spite of this, Estok recommends an overhaul of new attitudes, primarily including ecophilia, to reconcile this pricelessness and ensure a better future for ecocriticism. Given the determined utility, it is recommended to ‘do’ rather than embrace pedagogy.
‘Doing’ involves affirmative action and calls us as humans to experience the world, in ways like ecocriticism. It sheds more light on the personal experience and gives way to liberty for people and their surrounding environment. Estok’s piece gives inspiration and confirmation to constructive behaviors that regard the grand scheme of our ecosystem.
