Weekly Reading Response #7

[Jay Jay]

Murphy, Patrick D.  Literature, Nature, and Other: Ecofeminist Critiques.  Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.  Print.

Chapters Read:

• “Let the Survivors of Contact Speak: In the Canon and in the Classroom”
• “The Present Is to Nature as the Past Is to Culture as the Future Is to Agency”
• “Simply Uncontrollable, Or Steaming Open the Envelope of Ideology”

I sincerely enjoyed reading the chapter “Let the Survivors of Contact Speak: In the Canon and in the Classroom” because of its call to action: include rather than exclude Native American voices in both the nature writing canon and the American literature canon, especially women Native American writers.  This call to action fits in perfectly with the transformation aspect of ecofeminism, as inclusion of Native American women’s voices could transform the canon in beneficial ways.  In an earlier chapter, Murphy examined the failure of the anthology The Norton Book of Nature Writing (1990) to capture a diversity of writers.  This chapter extends that criticism to two other anthologies: On Nature (1987) and This Incomperable Lande (1991), and also includes The Idea of Wilderness: From Prehistory to the Age of Ecology (1991).  I want to include a quote from Murphy that I found exhilarating:

The effect of The Idea of Wilderness and This Incomperable Lande is to create the impression that Indians have nothing to say on their own, except in ‘mythic narratives,’ and that they are saying and writing nothing today, literary or otherwise, and this I would label literary genocide. (127)

Exciting, right?  I thought so, because it’s true.  To systematically silence, degrade, and exclude an entire culture simply because the academy and its editors don’t agree with the culture’s approach to writing, style, genres, etc. is inexcusable.  It’s wrong, and frankly, it’s nausea inducing.  I expect better from the academy, and so should you all.

Murphy mentions The Native American Authors Distribution Project, which is available online here: nativeauthors.com.  On the front page of their site is an important idea: “Don’t just learn about Native Americans, learn from them!”  I have to admit I’ve been exposed to very little Native American poetry, fiction, non-fiction, etc. in the classroom as an undergraduate, but my graduate experience has been more positive.  Still, there is room for improvement.

Weekly Reading Response #6

[Jay Jay]

Murphy, Patrick D.  Literature, Nature, and Other: Ecofeminist Critiques.  Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.  Print.

Chapters Read:

• “Prolegomenon for an Ecofeminist Dialogics”
• “Ground, Pivot, Motion: Ecofeminist Theory, Dialogics, and Literary Practice”
• “Voicing Another Nature”
• “ Reconceiving the Relations of Woman and Nature, Nature and Culture: Contemporary Environmental Literature by Women”
• “Sex-Typing the Planet: Gaia Imagery and the Problem of Subverting Patriarchy”

First, let’s get a basic definition out of the way.

dialogic (adjective): of, pertaining to, or of the nature of dialogue; sharing in dialogue. (OED)

Also, I need to preface this reading response by saying I have little working knowledge of Mikhail Bakhtin—my only encounters with Bakhtin occurred in my theory survey course three years ago.

The first chapter, “Prolegomenon for an Ecofeminist Dialogics,” addressed the need Murphy sees for scholars (and ecological, ecofeminist activists) to use Bakhtin’s dialogical method to transform the fields of ecology and feminisms.  The method, previously used only for “literature, language, and thought” can become a “livable critical theory” if used as a foundation for the intersection of ecology and feminisms (4).  It is necessary to recognize the differences and use of things-in-themselves, things-for-us, and us-as-things-for-others as descriptors for the relationships of interdependence between humans, nonhumans, and the environment.  Murphy states scholars must develop a criterion of ecological values based on three variables: interrelationship, maintenance, and sustainment (6).  These variables would allow us to evaluate the health of the ecosystem as a foundational judgment, allowing actual nature and the environment to become a subject rather than object.

While Murphy urges us to embrace Bakhtin’s method of dialogics, he recognizes the limitations of the methodology and points towards corrections that must be made.  For example, Bakhtin’s method makes it impossible for the nonhuman to become the speaking subject, which contradicts the goals of ecofeminist and ecocritical theory (12).  Bakhtin also often erases the physical environment as an integral part of the self-formation.  Scholars also need to recognize there will always be two voices: that of the nonhuman speaking subject, and that of the rendering human author.  Theoretical traps that we should be wary of include becoming too attached to the centers that appear on the margins (ecofeminism is situated on the margins), and nostalgia (it is static idealization).  

Weekly Reading Response #4

[Jay Jay]

Gaard, Greta, and Patrick D. Murphy, eds. Ecofeminist Literary Criticism: Theory, Interpretation, Pedagogy. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1998. Print.

Chapters Read:

• “Introduction” by Greta Gaard and Patrick D. Murphy
• “A Root of Ecofeminism: Ecoféminisme” by Barbara T. Gates
• “‘The Women Are Speaking’: Contemporary Literature as Theoretical Critique” by Patrick D. Murphy
• “Toward an Ecofeminist Standpoint Theory: Bodies as Grounds” by Deborah Slicer
• “Ecofeminist Literary Criticism: Reading the Orange” by Josephine Donovan

I think Blake and I are in agreement: we wish we had read this anthology of essays the first week of our independent study instead of Buell.  This collection is comprehensive, wide-ranging, and best of all, provides definition(s) of ecofeminism by the second page of the introduction.  What I did not realize is that ecofeminist literary criticism, or ecofeminist literary analysis, is a very recent branch off the ecofeminist tree, so to speak.

The introduction provides a clear definition of ecofeminism: “a practical movement for social change arising out of the struggles of women to sustain themselves, their families, and their communities” (2).  As the definition suggests, ecofeminism is based on “resistance and vision, critiques and heuristics” (2).  However, as I learned in my readings from this anthology, ecofeminism is not a static, all-encompassing theory.  Rather, there are different branches and approaches based on the individual applying ecofeminism.  Despite the fluid nature of ecofeminism, Gaard and Murphy have found what they believe to be a common thread in all ecofeminist theories: transformation (3).  Specifically they state:

ecofeminism is based not only on the recognition of connections between the exploitation of nature and the oppression of women across patriarchal societies.  It is also based on the recognition that these two forms of domination are bound up with class exploitation, racism, colonialism, and neocolonialism. (3) 

From my understanding, ecofeminism seeks to make visible these connections and then take action to fight against the domination of nature and oppression of women—to enable transformation on cultural, social, economic, and political levels.  What does this mean for my literary project?  It means I should look for literary instances of the domination and nature and the oppression of women and see if they are artificially linked; if so, what are the consequences of this link?  Is there any resistance to this artificial link in the literature?  Are there attempts to transform this link to the advantage of certain persons?  What types of women are being linked to the domination of nature and do any groups of women escape this forced relationship?  Is it lower class working white women?  African American slaves?  Indentured white servants?  Non-Christians?  Native Americans?  I’m incredibly fascinated to read through early American literature with this new filter of ecofeminism.

I’m going to provide you with what I thought were the highlights of chapters one through five, but I would strongly encourage anyone interested in ecofeminism and ecocritical theories to purchase and read all of the selections.  The combination of “ecofeminist literary theory, criticism, and pedagogy” provides for a wide range of material that showcases the fluidity of ecofeminism and its practitioners (2).