{"title":"Destabilizing ‘Development : A Critique of Capitalocene in Sarah Joseph s Gift in Green","authors":"Swapnit Pradhan, Nagendra Kumar","doi":"10.59045/nalans.2023.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dean Curtin (1999) and Mariko Lin Frame (2023) argue that a minor portion of the world’s population has autonomy over resource consumption dynamics, while the majority is confined to the periphery (p. 35; p. 8). The global North sets the standards, as their lifestyles based on resource exploitation are depicted as ‘developed’. Promoting such ‘ecologically impossible’ conducts as benchmarks of development has grave consequences in the global south, where the ecological experiences of human beings are driven primarily by aims of subsistence and survival (Curtin, 1999, p. 35). Gift in Green (2011) by Sarah Joseph narrates the plight of a closely knit Pulaya (Dalit) community in Kerala, India. Their harmonious coexistence with the surrounding environment is manifested through the indigenous ecological structure. The congenial relationship between humans and nature is disrupted by Kumaran’s ideals of extractive and urban-industrial development. Eventually, the Edenic village ‘Aathi’ turns into a stinking dump yard of toxic pollutants. The “people of the ecosystem,” who rely on the meager resources around them, are deprived of their primary source of survival. Through close textual analysis of this novel and with a critical background informed by bioregional, ecocritical, and developmental theories, the article exhibits three facets of the central argument. First, we investigate how indigenous ecological structure strengthens human-nonhuman connections. Further, the essay demonstrates how Anthropocentric developmental notions based on ecological imperialism, extractivism, and capitalogenic plundering of the environment systematically destroy the socio-ecological fabric of the village of Aathi. Finally, the article explores the feasibility of environmentally and socially just development models.","PeriodicalId":36955,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies","volume":"68 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59045/nalans.2023.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Dean Curtin (1999) and Mariko Lin Frame (2023) argue that a minor portion of the world’s population has autonomy over resource consumption dynamics, while the majority is confined to the periphery (p. 35; p. 8). The global North sets the standards, as their lifestyles based on resource exploitation are depicted as ‘developed’. Promoting such ‘ecologically impossible’ conducts as benchmarks of development has grave consequences in the global south, where the ecological experiences of human beings are driven primarily by aims of subsistence and survival (Curtin, 1999, p. 35). Gift in Green (2011) by Sarah Joseph narrates the plight of a closely knit Pulaya (Dalit) community in Kerala, India. Their harmonious coexistence with the surrounding environment is manifested through the indigenous ecological structure. The congenial relationship between humans and nature is disrupted by Kumaran’s ideals of extractive and urban-industrial development. Eventually, the Edenic village ‘Aathi’ turns into a stinking dump yard of toxic pollutants. The “people of the ecosystem,” who rely on the meager resources around them, are deprived of their primary source of survival. Through close textual analysis of this novel and with a critical background informed by bioregional, ecocritical, and developmental theories, the article exhibits three facets of the central argument. First, we investigate how indigenous ecological structure strengthens human-nonhuman connections. Further, the essay demonstrates how Anthropocentric developmental notions based on ecological imperialism, extractivism, and capitalogenic plundering of the environment systematically destroy the socio-ecological fabric of the village of Aathi. Finally, the article explores the feasibility of environmentally and socially just development models.
Dean Curtin(1999)和Mariko Lin Frame(2023)认为,世界上一小部分人口对资源消耗动态具有自主权,而大多数人口被限制在外围(第35页;全球北方设定了标准,因为他们基于资源开发的生活方式被描述为“发达”。推动这种“生态上不可能”的行为作为发展的基准,在全球南方有严重的后果,在那里,人类的生态经验主要是由生存和生存的目标驱动的(Curtin, 1999,第35页)。莎拉·约瑟夫的《绿色礼物》(2011)讲述了印度喀拉拉邦一个关系密切的普拉亚(达利特)社区的困境。它们与周围环境的和谐共存,通过本土的生态结构表现出来。人与自然的和谐关系被库马兰的采掘和城市工业发展的理想所破坏。最终,伊甸园村庄Aathi变成了一个充满有毒污染物的恶臭垃圾场。“生态系统中的人们”依赖于他们周围贫乏的资源,被剥夺了他们生存的主要来源。通过对这部小说的密切文本分析,并结合生物区域,生态批评和发展理论的批评背景,文章展示了中心论点的三个方面。首先,我们研究了本地生态结构如何加强人类与非人类的联系。此外,本文还展示了基于生态帝国主义、采掘主义和资本主义对环境的掠夺的以人类为中心的发展理念是如何系统性地破坏Aathi村的社会生态结构的。最后,本文探讨了环境和社会公平发展模式的可行性。