This page was created by Alison Morgan.
Artist Statement: Theresa Mokrzan
There are many different things that have contributed to harming the environment. Many of these negative realities have become engrained in our way of life today, such as pumping gasoline in our cars and driving every day and purchasing products from large factories that emit an extreme amount of pollution. Other things seem to be out of our hands, since we do not all directly contribute to them. A major example of this is water contamination from chemical plants, which negatively impacts both humans and animals. Even though these issues exist, and are prevalent in the United States as well as in other countries, the number of people that seem content with ignoring these issues is overwhelmingly large.
This story, “Man versus Nature”, exemplifies the different outlooks that people have on the environment, and the outcomes that having these thought patterns can have. It is impossible to generalize that all of these people know about the atrocities being committed against the environment on a daily basis and do not care, for Theresa is sure this is not the case. We must consider a vast possibility of explanations for their behavior. Maybe they are not aware of the details behind global warming, or they underestimate its malignancy. Even if they are aware of the state of the environment, though, it is understandable that they have been paralyzed by feelings of powerlessness. After all, global warming, deforestation, water toxicity, depletion of the ozone layer and other environmental problems began a long, long time ago. Consequently, people may feel that since the overall issue of environmental damage is so much bigger than them, there is no point in doing anything to fight it. Why would people be motivated to do anything at all if they are resolved to the belief that the world is ending and there is nothing they can do about it?
These issues are out of sight, out of mind for many people, and Theresa thinks that this absence of clear destruction in our own backyards also leads to denial that there are environmental issues at all. Theresa has seen many people react to environmental problem warnings in this way, and this really concerns her. She believes the goal of green literature should be identical to the goal of green art: both should evoke a sense of urgency while empowering people to change the course of events. The belief that there is no hope for the environment, and nothing we can do will fix Earth, is just as dangerous as the foolish belief that environmental problems do not exist at all, and that change is impossible. She says this because both positions foster a sense of hopelessness and thus initiate an apathetic complacency among people. When they believe the ball is out of their court, in other words, that they can do nothing to help the environment, it is no longer framed as a personal concern. This belief frees them to do whatever they want, and “live for today”. In this story, Joshua denies that chemical pollution is a problem. He rationalizes that this pollution is unimportant because it is not killing people, only aquatic life. By using this out, Joshua is freeing himself from the perceived responsibility to act on the issue. Joshua’s position is important because many people believe and fail to act the same way as him, but when laid out objectively, this reasoning is clearly flawed. Joshua realizes this at the end of the story and changes his view, with the help of his wife Julia.
People will not act if they do not believe there is a reason to act, but they will also be paralyzed if they believe that there is no way that their actions can benefit the environment, and help resurrect it from crisis. In “Man versus Nature”, Julia’s grandfather, Gramps, falls under this category, as he regards all negative environmental changes with hopelessness and despair. Rather than being a helpful perspective, it is evident that this view poses a negative cycle: Gramps withdraws from the world and ultimately, unable to deal with his despair, commits suicide. Julia, the protagonist of this short story, is caught between both these extremes and is not sure how to feel about the changes that the environment has undergone, or if there is anything she can do about those changes. These two people influence her more than anyone else, but she recognizes that the ways they view environmental pollution and harm are unproductive.
The story’s title, “Man versus Nature”, is somewhat ironic because it is targeting Joshua’s questionable perspective that it is fine if nature is harmed as long as man is protected. This view causes a separation between man and nature in a way that is detrimental, because it is a way to use rationalization to convince oneself that helping the environment is not necessary. This view is very anthropocentric, and Julia’s recognition that it does not make sense to separate man and nature is the main reason why she questions Joshua’s views on the subject.
After much wrestling with her thoughts she finally decides to engage in proactive behavior by restoring the woods past her grandfather’s house. The significance of Julia deciding to do something positive instead of making excuses or withdrawing inside her is that this is a beneficial response that leads to a boost in mental health and empowerment. It is significant that Julia took her despair from Gramps’ death and pollution and used it to empower herself by doing something small. Having Gramps’ funeral at St. Terese of Avila’s Church is significant because she is the patron saint of doing little things with great love. Thus, the overall message of this story is this: doing something to help the environment, no matter how small, can make a big difference because it is a way that we can regain control and advocate for the environment every day. In this case, Julia’s success leads her to continue her advocacy, and also shows Joshua the importance of confronting the problem head-on instead of ignoring it. If we are to have any hope for the environment’s turnaround, more people need to step up and confront the problem.