Analysis Of Solar By Ian Mcewan

“The End of Nature,” by Bill McKibben is a startling book of non-fiction depicting the future in store for the environment and humans. His somber yet hopeful approach allows readers to sense the real intensity of this situation of mass environmental changes whilst remaining expectant of the advancements in the

In the book The Future of Life, author Edward O. Wilson highlights the ineffective nature of the debates between the two side of environmentalism. He achieves this by pointing out parallels and similarities of the language between two sides in the satirical piece.

As The World Burns: 50 Simple Things You Can Do To Stay In Denial, by Derrick Jensen and Stephanie McMillan, is a graphic novel about the state of our environment. They use cartoons and abundant sarcasm to convey the message that the attempts people are making to save the environment are not enough to do any real good. Their message challenges both those of Edward O. Wilson and the University of Connecticut in that Jensen and McMillan’s ideas are much more radical and suggest that the ideas posed by Wilson and UConn, such as the importance of recycling and sustainability efforts, are ineffective at saving the environment. We must resolve the challenges posed by Jensen and McMillan so that all of the ideas put forth in the sources may work together rather than against each other. In order to do this we must accept that some of the ideas given by Jensen and McMillan may be too extreme to do any real good and that the ideas suggested by Wilson and UConn, though slightly ineffective, are nonetheless important steps in saving the environment. Taken alone, none of their ideas will save the environment; instead it is necessary to combine the ideas of Wilson, UConn, and Jensen and McMillan in order to create a more realistic plan to save the planet.

This adds a deeper level of relatability to a topic that is typically seen as complicated and full of confusing data analysis too complicated for the average person. One of her few uses of logos is to push the point that most people can understand climate change without needing to understand the data. She recounts a time the Canadian government tried to deny the disappearing sea ice through data manipulation (reference). Through her use of pathos she urges people to support climate change without getting caught up in statistical details. Atwood uses metaphors less sparingly then Wallace to describe human’s foolish and idiotic attempts to deal with climate change, such as burying our heads in sand in order to filter what we hear. (reference Atwood). She goes on to compare two possible futures; an environmental utopia where humans are self-sufficient, and a horrible dystopia where humans are forced to eat their pet dogs (Atwood reference). This serves as a rhetorical question as no one would willingly wish to live in the apocalyptic society she describes. The dark themes of her essay are masked with the use of satire and comedy which serves to soften the heavy tone and make light of foolish humans

Global climate change has been an unresolved issue since the 1970’s. Despite the facts presented by scientists, the governments refuses to take action. It has been estimated that the global mean temperatures have already risen by 0.8°C and the current amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause the temperature to rise by another 0.8°C, whereas 2°C is considered the maximum rise which the earth will be able cope without any major catastrophes (Mckibben, 2012). At the present rate of climate change we are already experiencing a shift in seasonal patterns. The governments’ inability to make strict laws regarding reduction in emission, therefore, stirs the controversy that what is stopping them and why do they refuse to do anything about it.

Edward O. Wilson’s The Future of Life uses satire to show the two opinions of two different sides of the idea of environmentalism. On one side, the “People First Critic” accuses the environmentalists as being out of control in their efforts to make the world a better place by helping the environment. However, the “Environmentalist” criticises the opposing critic as not caring enough about the environment and that supposedly makes him wrong. These are both two different sides to the same argument and both are out to prove a point.

The essay opens up with McKibben talking about how the political campaign against global warming is flawed because at our current point there is nothing much that can be done to fix it.(Mckibben,1) He then goes to state that humans are the biggest culprit behind global warming and supports this by giving examples such as SUVs and American ignorance.(2,9) He concludes by saying that if ten percent of America were to go green, it still would not save the planet, but ten percent could get the government’s attention to pass laws making everyone go green. (11)

Contemporary scientist Edward O. Wilson captures the opposing viewpoints of environmentalism based discourses through satirical language. In Wilson’s literary work The Future of Life, the author, by use of candid tone, frequent hyperbole and an appeal to pathos, is able to satirize the unproductiveness of such discussions.

In the book, Future Of Life (2002), Edward O. Wilson, satirizes and jokes about how childish and unsophisticated arguments are such as those between the People-First Critics and Environmentalist. The results of this book is to showcase how these arguments lead to nowhere and Wilson presents this information by satirically mocking both sides of the argument with exaggeration, sarcasm and hyperboles.

The two passages by Edward O. Wilson from the book The Future of Life revolve around the issue of environmentalism. Each passage utilizes satire to show the views of the opposing side. Wilson’s use of satire illustrates the unproductive nature of the discussions between the two sides.

Modernism represents an optimistic view of human impact on the environment that has been the dominant viewpoint for the last 200 years. The knowledge that mankind holds the ability to control the environment heavily stresses why climate change is not such a problem to worry about. One of the core beliefs of the modernistic perspective is that people have no need to fear future environmental disaster because the next technological advancement that will prevent it is right around the corner. Furthermore, those who share this view do not include themselves in their image of the ecosystem, believing they are detached from it. Lastly, a laissez-faire approach is taken to environmental problems, focusing on progression through technology, stressing that as long as progress is made in this area all problems will be fixed. For a modernist, climate change is nothing to worry about. This may be a real situation, but it will be solved with advancements in technology before one’s way of life is changed. What people should be worrying about is ensuring a laissez faire approach to the market with sponsorship to new technologies. As a result of reusable energy technology already existing, modernists believe that the problem of climate change has been solved and without disrupting free market system these technologies will be further implemented. As long as there are people given the opportunity to innovate, some will focus on and ultimately solve the concern of climate change. The issue of

Environmental issues such as climate change affect life on Earth every day. As Leonardo DiCaprio discusses in his speech during the Paris Agreement for Climate Change Signing at the United Nations, the only way to diminish global warming, one of the most critical issues of this generation, is to take unprecedented action. By informing the audience with an effective strategy, DiCaprio persuades the delegates to make the right decision that will mold the future. His evidence compliments the coherent use of ethos, logos, and pathos. Climate change is a universal matter that can either persist, or be put to an end.

In the writing of this paper the author uses Ecocriticism as the main theory and the movie Wall-E (2008) by Pixar Animation Studios and directed by Andrew Stanton as the object of analysis. The story follows a robot named Wall-E, who is designedto clean up an abandoned, waste-covered Earth far in the future. The author feel interested and challenged to analyze further the learning about the growing issue of Ecocriticism because of disharmony of nature with other elements in nature itself.

Milton is considered one of the most renowned English poets in the world of literature, as journalist and politician Joseph Devlin states, “... [T]he three greatest works are those of Homer, Dante and Shakespeare. These are closely followed by the works of Virgil and Milton.” Many make the misconception that Milton is part of the Romanticism movement along with Mary Shelly and William Blake but Milton’s career took place during the Late Renaissance and the Restoration Age. Paradise Lost and On His Blindness are two of Milton’s finest works; Milton incorporated the sacred telling’s of the Bible into these two poems by analyzing and elaborating on the teachings of Christianity to a depth that had not previously been reached. The reoccurring theme found in his work are disobedience, eternal providence and justification.

Ecocriticism is best exhibited in Aranyak-Of the Forest where the protagonist Satyacharan, a city dweller gets hypnotized by nature. Initially urban lifestyle revolted against the loneliness of the forest. He has been sent to the forest as an estate manager to clear up a forest land of 30 thousand bighas. But as the novel progresses he fell madly in love with nature. The novel is told in the manner of a reverie which ever haunts his imagination. It is a good example of an ecocide. The narrator writes-