Deep Ecology Versus Shallow Ecology: Comparative Study of Moniro Ravanipour’s Ahle
Ghargh and Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams

Raoufzadeh, Narges; Eslamieh, Razieh; Lak, Morteza

All

Webpages

Books

Journals

Tarbiat Modares University Press

Literary Criticism

Volume 16, Issue 64 (2023) LCQ 2023, 16(64): 109-157 | Back to browse issues page

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Raoufzadeh N, Eslamieh R, Lak M. Deep Ecology Versus Shallow Ecology: Comparative Study of Moniro Ravanipour’s Ahle Ghargh and Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams. LCQ 2023; 16 (64) :109-157
URL: http://lcq.modares.ac.ir/article-29-71729-en.html

Deep Ecology Versus Shallow Ecology: Comparative Study of Moniro Ravanipour’s Ahle Ghargh and Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams

Narges Raoufzadeh¹

, Razieh Eslamieh ^*

², Morteza Lak³

1- Department of English Language and Literature, North Tehran Branch. Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of English Language and Literature, Parand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , eslami_paranduniv@yahoo.com
3- Department of English Language and Literature, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract: (287 Views)

In recent decades, due to the crises created in nature by humans, the review of the relationship between humans and nature has gained special importance. The existing gap between environmental damage and its reverberations has resulted in people’s lack of attention to the consequences of environmental destruction. By applying ecocriticism and relying on concepts such as anthropocentrism, biocentrism, deep ecology and shallow ecology, the present study, for the first time, compares the two novels, Ahle Ghargh (1989), by Moniro Ravanipour and Animal Dreaams (1990) by Barbara Kingsolver. While introducing deep ecology as postmodern environmental ethics, the research completely rejects the domination of anthropocentric ideology and considers self- realization and identification with nature to be the only way out of environmental crises. Ravanipour and Kingsolver suffer from eco-trauma caused by environmental destruction and they try to take an effective step in improving deficiencies in nature. Eco-trauma inspires both novelists to deal with the damage that humans, knowingly or unknowingly, cause to nature. The study aims to demonstrate the dominance of anthropocentric ideology, which brings a self-seeking and self-interested attitude, strongly causing the destruction of nature. By relying on biocentrism, deep ecology has no concern other than preserving the environment and its resources while it avoids damage to the environment with the aim of gaining profit.
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Industrialization and urbanization have led to the separation of man from nature and made a false impression related to the superiority of human beings. Based on such a paradigm, what follows, is solving environmental problems only for the benefit of human beings, according to the needs of their time. Such a limited view suggests that the environmental movement has generally operated on a case-by-case basis. As long as various issues are not considered as distinct predicaments, environmentalists will never be able to fully protect ecosystems from the destructive abuses of human development. By examining Moniro Ravanipour’s Ahle Ghargh (1989), and Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams (1990), considering how anthropocentrism has caused irreparable damage to the environment and ecosystem, the study considers the reconnection of man with nature by changing the pattern in his relationships as a solution. Ravanipour (1952- ), and Kingsolver (1955- ), have skillfully depicted the effects of environmental destruction on human life in their works.
     The study indicates that there is a meaningful intimacy between nature and reasonable behavior towards the environment. Therefore, physical contact with nature is the necessary factor of procuring a sense of connection with it. Ahle Ghargh and Animal Dreams are in harmony with the specific geographical region of their authors’ hometowns and illustrate the deep connection of the authors with where they were raised. The research is a reflection of anthropocentrism in different climates that has achieved valuable results from the comparison of the two studied novels. Ravanipour and Kingsolver consider current environmental concerns as a major threat to human well-being. The present study is an argument of the consequences of anthropocentrism and a utilitarian attitude towards nature. Contemplating concepts such as anthropocentrism, biocentrism, deep ecology and shallow ecology, the researchers consider industrialization and the urban lifestyle to be the cause of the physical separation of man from nature and the deepening of this alienation. The article aims to investigate anthropocentrism and its reflection in the works of Ravanipour and Kingsolver in a comparative manner to clarify environmental worldviews through the application of biocentrism and deep ecology.
     The study tries to reconcile intellectual similarities and styles of Iranian and American female novelists. Although the presence of British colonialism in Ravanipour’s Ahle Ghargh is differentiated from Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams, the dominant theme in both novels is the rupture between man and nature and the mental and psychological problems which result from such separation. By choosing two female novelists from two different regions, Eastern and Western, while emphasizing the deep connection between women and nature, the article aims to portray their similar concerns about environmental issues resulting from its destruction. The present research introduces deep ecology as a solution for controlling and ending crises. The comparative analysis proves that the two novels Ahle Ghargh and Animal Dreams are a reflection of criticism on modernity and shallow ecology which has led nature into regression. In both novels, nature is the main background of the story and is the driving force behind the events which has an inevitable effect on the characters of the story. Ravanipour and Kingsolver believe that the world is on the edge of an ecological abyss, and the reason is anthropocentric thought which considers man to be the center and ruler of the universe, with regard to his materialistic and profit-seeking disposition.
The article is an example of the link between literature and environment which examines the similarities of Ahle Ghargh and Animal Dreams, for the first time, carrying out a comparative study of these two literary texts. In “What is Comparative Literature?” (2012) Alireza Anushirvani (1954- ), claims that comparative literature is an important field of literature and a branch of literary criticism that while regarding the interaction between the literature of various peoples, studies and analyzes their similarities and differences (37). This study aims to present a new reading of Ravanipour’s Ahle Ghargh and Kingsolver’s Animal Dreams by compiling the ideas of Arne Naess (1912-2009), Greg Garrard (1969), and using concepts such as anthropocentrism, biocentrism, deep ecology and shallow ecology. By analyzing two selected works, researchers noted the impact of biocentrism and deep ecology in restoring the discrete relationship between man and nature. Finally, in the concluding part, the findings of the study are summarized.

2. Methodology and Approach
What has been on the human mind for a long time is the importance of preserving nature, plant and animal species, which have a very fundamental and inevitable role in maintaining the health of the human soul and psyche. In recent decades, due to the crises created by man in nature, the review of the connection between human and nature has become of significant importance. Meantime, literature has had a distinctive status and an excessive contribution in this field. Today, many intellectuals and critics seek to study the confrontation between human and nature. For this reason, a new field of study has emerged from the link between the humanities, that is literature and the natural sciences which is ecology. The combination of these two disciplines has led to the emergence of a new science called ecocriticism in the field of literary criticism, which aims to find the connection between human and nature. Ecocriticism was formed in the second half of the twentieth century. The term was first coined in 1978 by William H. Rueckert (b.1926), the American literature educator and writer. Taking into account environmental concerns, it tried to get help from the literature to preserve and improve the environment. Through an environmental approach to literary works, it attempts to create a new attitude to nature that leads to the improvement of human relationship with it.
Ecocriticism is a recently developed critical approach which links the humanities, natural sciences, and environmental sciences. One of the notable recognized pioneers of ecocriticism is Cheryll Glotfelty (b.1958), the American professor of literature and environment at the University of Nevada, Reno. In The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology (1996), Glotfelty and Fromm define ecocriticism as ‘simply put, ecocriticism is the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment” (xviii). They describe the environmental crisis and the various dimensions of the humanities, including anthropology. Glotfelty and Fromm study the aspects of ecology and predict the future of this branch of literary criticism due to the expansion of modern science. They believe that the main focus of discussion in ecocriticism is the correlation between literature and physical environment (Glotfelty & Fromm, 1996: 3). Greg Garrard in his outstanding book Ecocriticism (2004), examines the concepts of ecocriticism, such as dwelling, wilderness, pollution, animals, and the earth. He believed that “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 humanity” (Garrard, 2004: 59). Ecocriticism aims to create an interactive approach between the language of nature and the literary language that it creates through environmental literary discourse.

3.Conclusion
Since decades ago, humans have had a special consideration for the environment. The reason for such attention was the concern about the protection of nature against industrial development, urbanization, pollution, and significant climate changes. Industrialization and urbanization have caused the separation of human from nature and presented a false representation related to the superiority of human beings. In Ahle Gharg (1989), and Animal Dreams (1990), Moniro Ravanipour (1952- ), and Barbara Kingsolver (1955- ), reflect their environmental sorrow, try to take an effective step in improving the nature by changing the attitude of man in the environment. Both artists consider the alienation of human populations from nature as a product of industrial modernization and the rise of urbanization. This detachment is the result of a world view that regards human and nature as fundamentally in isolation while reflecting on the value of nature only as a means of fulfilling human needs. Generally speaking, the urban lifestyle has created a marked schism between man and nature. Physical intimacy with nature is necessary in order to create a sense of connection.
     Relying on an ecological narrative, Moniro Ravanipour and Barbara Kingsolver have managed to reveal the vulnerability of the environment and its impact on people’s lives since neither author has ever been a neutral observer in advocating the environment. In their works, Ravanipour and Kingsolver have taken effective steps to reveal the damage caused by anthropocentrism. By relying on what literature has given them, both novelists have skillfully dealt with problems and solutions. The environmental damage that humans purposefully or inadvertently cause to nature will return over time, although due to the deep gap between the damage and its consequences, effects may last for decades, or even centuries. Ravanipour and Kingsolver have clearly reflected this truth in their works by portraying the environmental despair which the protagonists of the novels face and the efforts they make to save nature. Both contemporary authors point out the seriousness of environmental issues while ruminating over the deep connection between human, nature, and the recognition of its damage, eventuating in environmental trauma. The misery following in the wake of environmental destruction drives the main characters of both novels towards experiencing trauma. Both novelists try to amplify people’s awareness of the environment.
Nature plays an essential role in healing the complications of the soul and psyche so that they can reduce their suffering by taking refuge in it. In fact, the manifestation and excellence found in nature reduces stress and anxiety. Researchers believe that a comprehensive and non-hierarchical perception of all life forms should replace the hegemonic conceptual framework in which nature is merely a means for humans to take advantage of. In fact, the widespread belief is that humans are intrinsically more valuable than other creatures and nature should be replaced by empathy with nature. Ravanipour and Kingsolver deal with current environmental concerns since they believe they are real threats to man’s well-being.

Keywords: Anthropocentrism, biocentrism, deep ecology, environmental ethics, shallow ecology

Full-Text [PDF 1073 kb] (388 Downloads)

Article Type: Original Research | Subject: Contemporary Contemporary Criticism
Received: 2023/09/26 | Accepted: 2024/02/24 | Published: 2024/02/29

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.