It dares those who teach Shakespeare to practice an activist pedagogy that engages students in environmental politics. The marmoset-snaring Caliban may not beso easily allied with animal liberation. Estoks book discusses many significant environmental and animal rights con-cerns during the early modern period. It balances the claims of historicism and presentism, activism and theoretical integrity more deftly than previous studies. Nonetheless, the romantic anxiety from which Holbrooks book springsanabiding sense that we cannot simply historicize Shakespeare or ourselves because our shared practical world fails to completely account for our individualexperiences, sufferings, and joysis not misplaced. Ecocriticism and Shakespeare: Reading Ecophobia. Much of Ecocriticism and Shakespeare is devoted to proving that the converse is also true: i.
The anti-climax with which the twentieth century rolled into the twenty-first was only outdone by the terror that blindsided the world and has grown like a cancer to involve many an unwitting accomplice. Each section contains fine insights and carefully crafted essays. It also may not follow that the playsrejection of Coriolanus because of his extreme individualism is ecophobic. See Vernants succinctdiscussion of Antigone and historicist scholarship in Greek Tragedy: Problems of Interpretation, inThe Structuralist Controversy: The Languages of Criticism and the Sciences of Man, ed. Drawing on diverse theoretical perspectives in environmental thought and scholarship, this volume presents valuable and original contributions to global conversations.
Her essay will change the way I teach the play. However, thesebooks, especially Brayton and Bruckners collection, remind us that Shakespeare ismore than a poet of humanity. The term is central to all of the discussions that follow in the book. Precisely because thefate of Antigone is also the fate of the social world to which she belongs as Hegel of course knew ,one cannot but read Sophocles play as overdetermined by the cultural context in which it was firstproduced and performed. No sermons in stone here; it is the Duke Seniors among the first-wave of ecocritics that have given this approach a bad name. To Estok, the concept of ecophobia i This book is basically about linking Shakespeare to ecocriticism but with an ecophobic view. The collection as awhole achieves this goal.
Conceptualizing the Other in Hostile Early Modern Geographies : Situati. Estok's work is known for making the uncomfortable inaccuracies between theory and practice visible, highlighting the distinction between ecocriticism's activist origins and its institutionalization within the academy. The verbal analogy with gynophobia, homophobia, and xenophobia is a potent reminder that nature is historically implicated in discourses that have marginalized or denigrated minorities and outsiders. It unearths fresh or unsung categories in Shakespearean criticism such as environmental fear, disgust, and sleep. That chapter consistently reads Coriolanuss rejection of the bodypolitic and society as ecophobia.
Estok argues that we cannot ignore the context of terror in and through which ecocriticism works and that the relationships between the imagining of terror on the one hand and of conceptualizing hostile environments on the other is in very serious need of critical analysis. This alone would make Ecocriticism and Shakespeare a milestone work, setting aside its other considerable merits. Incorporating short readings of Romeo andJuliet and Hamlet, Raber explains how in the plays depictions of the urban envi-ronment and the human body animals and humans are mutually, materiallyinterdependent, with one another and with the spaces they inhabit 16. Watsons essay offers a fascinating view of A Midsummer Nights Dream as pre-sciently showing a world in which humans are less fully conscious, independentbeings than Freudian and microbiological creatures, penetrated always by invisibleentities 36 and largely directed by unconscious desires. Theoretically challenging to both Shakespeareans and ecocritics alike, its combinations of ethics and scholarship, close reading and polemics, originality and lucidity, make it essential reading for students and scholars who want to see cutting-edge criticism at work. From this perspective, Shakespearean drama, often touted as the definitive literary testament of our species, may offer one of our best hopes for understanding and perhaps counter-acting the legacy of human exceptionalism. And they are all significant ecocritical concerns.
Estok argues that this vocabulary is both necessary to the developing area of ecocritical studies and for understandings of the representations of Nature in Shakespeare. In part 2, some essays confirm theoretical insights from part 1. It is easy for us beneficiaries of modern medicine and agribusiness to blast early moderns as paranoid about nature when the only consequence of an unseasonable frost is that we have to pay an extra dime for a carton of orange juice. Estok is very interested in the linkages hesees between homophobia and ecophobia; Shakespeareans who believe that earlymodern sexuality was organized along the lines of dominant late twentieth-centuryAmerican sexuality might find his readings of The Merchant of Venice andCoriolanus chapters 7 and 3 more persuasive than do I. Although Estok is certainly right that the social isembedded in the natural, it does not necessarily follow that rejection of social tiesequals rejection of the natural world 40. Estok argues that this vocabulary is both necessary to the developing area of ecocritical studies and for understandings of the representations of Nature in Shakespeare. We can learn about, or be reminded of, theLittle Ice Age in the late sixteenth century, the pollution problem in early modernLondon, the connections people were making between bad sanitation and ill health,and early arguments for vegetarianism.
But fear of ecological instability can be a virtue as well as a vice. Thereare thoroughly contextualized studies of translations, adaptations, and productionsin Romania, Germany, Denmark, Italy, and Croatia, as befits the volumes origin inthe 2003 conference, Shakespeare and European Politics, held in Utrecht. Reading The Taming of theShrew as a contest between two human-shrew or -mouse hybrids, J. . First, it offers a means to conceptualize speech and actions that represent nature not simply as subservient to humans but as dangerous or even malicious when it fails to be so.
Surely a stormy, miserable winter is as much evidence of natures predictability as itis of its unpredictability. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. It dares those who teach Shakespeare to practice an activist pedagogy that engages students in environmental politics. For instance, he seems to exaggerate King Lears misogynywhen he says,In Cordelias nothing, Lear hears something, and whatever her noth-ing signifies for him. Theoretically challenging to both Shakespeareans and ecocritics alike, its combinations of ethics and scholarship, close reading and polemics, originality and lucidity, make it essential reading for students and scholars who want to see cutting-edge criticism at work. Theoretically challenging to both Shakespeareans and ecocritics alike, its combinations of ethics and scholarship, close reading and polemics, originality and lucidity, make it essential reading for students and scholars who want to see cutting-edge criticism at work.