Ecocriticism as applied by Michael J. Vandeman, PHD
MV has been noteably missing from the ng lately. Why? Perhaps it may be the current schedule of the "Sixth Biennial Conference of the Association for the Study of Literature and Environment" which is going today (June 21) to June 25. His name shows up as presenting, yet again, his "Wildlife Need Habitat Off Limits To Humans" paper. *Also presented at the same Conference in 1998 in Nevada.
His presentation, like others scheduled for Saturday, June 25 between 8:00AM and 9:15AM, is slated for 15 minutes. (strictly adhered to, so says the agenda for the conference.)
If you would like to attend, it is going on at the University of Oregon in Eugene.
This conference has a focus on "ecocritism", literature and ecological basis within literature from the standpoint of criticism, discussion and exploring relationships between human culture and the natural environment.
Naturally, this would seem to fall right in line with the philosophy of nature as presented by MV. Closer examination of the goals and definitions of an "ecocritic" may show otherwise. On the surface, MV does present his "review" of several books and articles on wildlife and humanity. Go beyond his own claim of critical review, and one can find MV has an agenda which runs to the extreme for ecology and preservation. It is this agenda which MV firmly stands upon that also discredits any discourse he may present by referencing the works of other writers in the field.
To begin, MV seems to fall into the category:
"As historians and literary critics sometimes move beyond traditional literary and historical studies of intersecting American nature and culture toward the question of what it would mean to act wisely, many of us now study to inform, that people may live well, and as we now say, sustainably."
There is also an aspect of vindication for MV and his continued and often argumentative statements concerning wildlife and trails in regards to off-road cycling:
"ECOCRITICISM FOCUSES on literary (and artistic) expression of human experience primarily in a naturally and consequently in a culturally shaped world: the joys of abundance, sorrows of deprivation, hopes for harmonious existence, and fears of loss and disaster. Ecocriticism has an agenda. As a feminist film theorist says to an Israeli semiotician in a recent novel of academic life, "Ecocriticism's new, still finding its feet, but it offers a broad vision of life and our place in nature. It could help you out of the bind you're in now, caught inside a self-enclosed definition of culture that only mirrors your own obnoxious little self-regarding angst-ridden egomaniacal crypto-smugness." The response she gets is not surprising: "Culture is a refuge from life in nature, not a part of it . ..." In ecocriticism, positions reveal themselves as persons. So the voice of ecocriticism speaks as an American woman here, speaks as if she were nature and as if speaking to culture. When culture dismisses her position, and herself, the process would seem to be self-defeating. If you want to be an ecocritic, be prepared to explain what you do and be criticized, if not satirized."
Note the last phrase: "be prepared to explain what you do and be criticized, if not satirized."
Is it possible MV takes this statement, or similar viewpoint, to accept the criticism and satire of his own statements as necessary roadblocks in the path of his goal? If so, it plays into his own ego as being "smarter" or "better educated" than his detractors by simply dismissing anything brought forth as being unimportant because it can not possibly match the scale, or importance, of his message. He than can justify, because of this moral platform built on the premise that his views are so beyond our comprehension that he will be vilified anyway, the arguments he presents and the use of terms such as "stupid", "moronic" and "ignorant" when countering any viewpoint not matching his own.
More to the point, and thankfully and finally, MV falls short as an "ecocritic" as shown below:
"Interesting critics do not simply choose ideas and authors that best fit a pre-arranged interior cognitive décor. The purpose of subjecting texts and authors to critical inquiry is not simply to search for authority to buttress an argument or perspective. Criticism is not the same as sermonizing; it must be able to entertain ideas as they are established."
MV fails by choosing texts which, by his presentation, support his position. He often pulls selective quotes or passages from the whole to support his statements and philosophy. This diminishes his own statements and belittles the works he cites. His argumentative statements reduce any discussion of ideas into positions of extremism which can not be resolved. This, so far as I have been able to determine, counters the goals of "ecocritics" and environmentalism in general.
To see the website and agenda for the Sixth Biennial Conference of the Association for the Study of Literature and Environment
go here: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~smcfarla/index.html
To see the text quoted above in context, see "Blues in the Green - Ecocriticism under Critique" here: http://www.asle.umn.edu/archive/intro/cohen.html#FOOT4
M Vandeman's website is here: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/
S Curtiss
Naturally Occuring Human and Offroad cyclist