Nature, Culture and Literature: An Ecocritical Contestation

Main Article Content

Khum Prasad Sharma

Abstract

Literary theory, in general, examines the relations between writers, texts and the world. In most literary theory, "the world" is synonymous with society-the social sphere. The two most influential schools of thought that brought about great remarkable changes in people’s perspectives and life in the twentieth century—Marxism and psychoanalysis have the common assumption that what we call ‘nature’ exists primarily as a sign within the cultural discourse. Apart from it, nature has no being and meaning, they claim (Coupe 2). This vision of nature as a cultural construct permeates various schools of thoughts like formalists, new historicist, and deconstruction - all of which repudiate the existence of nature outside the cultural discourse, and take is just as a sign. However, nature affects us in several different ways, and always remains influential in human life; it cannot, therefore, be dismissed merely as a linguistic construct, and from ecological point of view it will be a big mistake to take it just a sign within a signifying system or a mere concept within the cultural discourse.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Article Details

How to Cite
Khum Prasad Sharma. “Nature, Culture and Literature: An Ecocritical Contestation”. The Creative Launcher, vol. 5, no. 5, Dec. 2020, pp. 191-8, doi:10.53032/tcl.2020.5.5.24.
Section
Articles

References

Bennett, Michael and David W. Teague. “Urban Ecocriticism: An Introduction.” The Nature of Cities. Eds. Bennett and Teague. Arizona UP, 1999. 3-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1zm2t3p.4

Buell, Lawrence. “Representing the Environment.” The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Ed. Laurence Coupe. Routledge, 2000.

Coupe, Lawrence, Ed. The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Routledge, 2000.

Gifford, Terry. “The Social Construction of Nature.” The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Ed. Laurence Coupe. Routledge, 2000.

Gough, Noel. “Ecology, ecocriticism and learning: how do places become ‘pedagogical’?” Transnational Curriculum Inquiry, 5 (1). 2008. 10 July 2010 <http://nitinat.library.ubc.ca/ojs/index.php/tci Gough, Noel, Ecology, ecocriticism and learning: how do places become ‘pedagogical’?>

Hacking, Ian. The Social Construction of What? Harvard University Press, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1bzfp1z

Howarth, William. “Ecocriticism in Context” The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Ed. Laurence Coupe. Routledge, 2000.

Lopez, Bary. “A Literature of Place.” Portland Magazine Summer 1997. 3 July 2010 <http://arts.envirolink.org/literary_arts/BarryLopez_LitofPlace.html>

Nesbitt, William. “Bone Machines: Hotrods, Hypertextuality, and Industrialism.” Diss. Florida State U, 2003.

Slovic, Scott. “Ecocriticism: Containing Multitudes, Practicing Doctrine.” The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Ed. Laurence Coupe. Routledge, 2000.

Soper, Kate. “The Idea of Nature.” The Green Studies Reader: From Romanticism to Ecocriticism. Ed. Laurence Coupe. Routledge, 2000.

Speek,Tiju. “Environment in Literature: Lawrence Buell’s Ecocritical Perspective.” 3 July 2010< www.eki.ee/km/place/pdf/KP1_18speek.pdf>

Westlin, Luise, “What Would Be an Ecological Humanism?” Ecoriticism at the MLA: A Roundtable, ASLE News, 11(1), 1999