November 20, 2015 - 15:38
The downfall of civilization and a sixth mass extinction are too grave of issues to not stimulate a shift in society's priorities. Elizabeth Kolbert who wrote The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History and Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway who collectively wrote The Collapse of Civilization: A View from the Future, all write in contrasting approaches, to warn humanity of its detrimental impact on the earth. The authors utilize different components in their pieces to argue that if humans aim to survive, environmental protection must be a priority. In Kolbert's optimistic novel, she reports a hopeful situation to evoke a positive response from her reader. Kolbert does not portray an already daunting situation with despair, as Oreskes and Conway do, and is therefore more able to elicit action from her audience.
Because of the manner in which Oreskes and Conway write their science fiction, the tale acts as a caveat rather than an inspiration for change. First, it details the fall of western civilization with a sense of overwhelming fatalism through fictional events. “As food shortages and disease outbreaks spread and sea level rose, these governments found themselves without the infrastructure and organizational ability to quarantine and relocate people” (83). The two authors are careful to intertwine real, historical events with future, fictional occurrences, creating a credible storyline. In response, the audience will understand these events are not unlikely. Moreover, Oreskes and Conway distance themselves from the collapsing society using diction like "they", shifting the blame away from themselves. “The carbon-combustion complex was clearly in the self-interest of these groups, so they cloaked this fact behind a network of “think tanks” that issued challenges to scientific knowledge they found threatening” (64). “And so the development that the neoliberals most dreaded—centralized government and loss of personal choice—was rendered essential by the very policies that they had put in place” (80). Because of this shift, Oreskes and Conway want readers to recognize their own mistakes. This forces the audience to feel responsible for the downfall of society in a powerful manner, however, their storyline details the fall of civilization with an overpowering negativity. "The most startling aspect of this story is just how much these people knew, and how unable they were to act upon what they knew. Knowledge did not translate into power.” (16). Ultimately, this futuristic, climate-fiction tale recounts the end of civilization, indicating there was and is no hope.
In contrast, Kolbert emphasizes the severity of occurring environmental issues while still guaranteeing the possibility of survival. Kolbert's non-fiction novel tells of devastating events that have prevailed because of human impact on the environment. "A group of biologists... had concluded that the golden frog was in grave danger. They decided to try to preserve a remnant population by removing a few dozen of each sex from the forest and raising them indoors. But whatever was killing the frogs was moving even faster than the biologists had feared. Before they could act on their plan, the wave hit” (5). Kolbert relies on factual evidence to prove extinctions are occurring. However, she does not exclude herself from the responsibility of the negative impact humans have on the environment. “Those of us alive today not only are witnessing one of the rarest events in life's history, we are also causing it” (7). Kolbert employs diction such as "us" and "we" to show the union society must have to improve environmental conditions. Finally, Kolbert claims that we, society, are still able to change our future. "Does it have to end this way?… Isn't the whole point of trying to peer into the future so that, seeing dangers ahead, we can change course to avoid them?” (261). The author wishes to inspire a change in society. "Wouldn't it be better, practically and ethically, to focus on what can be done and is being done to save species, rather than to speculate gloomily about a future in which the biosphere is reduced to little plastic vials” (263). Kolbert uses scientific evidence with a positive tone to ultimately declare that if humans are more mindful, we can save the earth.
While both books allow readers to recognize the impact "human intervention" has on the environment, Kolbert's novel will evoke more change from society. Will society address an issue if the situation seems hopeless? Will nations feel compelled to change their environmental and economic policies if there is no solution to this mass extinction? It is because of these questions, Kolbert finds an appropriate balance between despair and hope. Furthermore, Kolbert accepts responsibility for her negative impact on the earth. When Oreskes and Conway distance themselves from their readers using pronouns such as "they", the two blame society. If someone feels they are to blame for the downfall of a civilization, will they accept their faults? Will this blame cause society to deny the problem completely, or worse, cause society to defend its wrong actions? Yes. Thus, Kolbert reveals that she- that everyone- has contributed to environmental harm. Finally, Kolbert insists that humans can save the earth if we choose to do so. With an optimistic tone, Kolbert claims that the downfall of civilization is still a choice. "History is neither strictly uniformitarian nor catastrophist; rather, it is a hybrid of the two. What this history reveals, in its ups and its downs, is that life is extremely resilient but not infinitely so" (265).
Society needs to prioritize the environment and all the living creatures among it. "Human intervention" must not exist in the same manner it does now, if survival is the ultimate goal. Oreskes and Conway write to warn society of a likely ruination. Yet, Kolbert approaches the situation with a contrasting aim. Kolbert explains that if we, as humans, act now, we can still save our planet.
Works Cited
Elizabeth Kolbert, Prologue, Chapters 1, 5 & 13, The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. New York: Henry Holt, 2014. 1-22, 92-110, 259-269.
Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, The Collapse of Civilization: A View from the Future. New York: Columbia University Press, 2014.