Ecocriticism: A New Approach in Literary Studies

Ecocriticism: A New Approach in Literary Studies

Before, in theory and criticism, we usually focused on events, topics, and metaphysical ideas. But now, we will examine a concrete reality: Ecocriticism, which has recently attracted a lot of attention from scholars. We are looking at nature—the ground we stand on and the air we breathe—moving away from abstract thoughts. Nature is no longer just a background in literature; it takes centre stage in the story. Ecocriticism studies the place and importance of nature in literature. It tries to understand how people relate to nature, how they treat it, and how these relationships are reflected in texts. This theory encourages us not only to think about books but also about the world we live in. Because nature is not just a background; it is the foundation of our lives. Understanding and protecting it is everyone’s responsibility. First, we will start our article by looking at the historical background of ecocriticism—how and why it emerged. We will ask some questions and try to find the answers together. Then, starting from the term Environmentalism, we will meet some important writers. Moreover, we will explore key figures in ecocriticism, such as Serpil Oppermann and Greg Garrard. We will also discuss the main characteristics of ecocriticism and examine its different waves or phases. By the end of our study, we hope to better understand how ecocriticism helps us see the connection between literature and the environment, and why this relationship matters today more than ever.

The Idea of Ecocriticism

Ecocriticism came about because of several natural crises we face today, such as:

• Pollution
• Global warming
• Overpopulation
• Waste disposal (including nuclear waste)
• Climate change
• Deforestation
• Ozone layer depletion

These problems made people ask important questions:

• What exactly is nature?
• Where does humans’ place lie in nature?
• Is nature only here to serve human needs?
• How should we understand nature today, especially with ongoing ecological disasters?
• What role can literature and literary studies play in ecology?

Ecocriticism studies the relationship between literature and the environment from many different fields. Critics look at how nature is shown in texts and think about possible solutions to today’s environmental problems. They explore how literature talks about nature and what it teaches us about our world.

Ecocriticism is one of the newest movements that has changed the way we study the humanities. It started to grow in the 1990s, mainly in the US and the UK. More and more literary scholars began asking how their work could help us understand the growing environmental crisis. So, what is this new theory about? Ecocriticism asks us to rethink other types of criticism. It challenges traditional ideas about language and offers a fresh way to look at literary works.

One of the leading figures in ecocriticism, Cheryll Glotfelty, explains it simply: “Ecocriticism is the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment.”

Environmentalism and Its Roots in Literature

Environmentalism is a broad term that refers to caring for the environment and taking action to reduce the harmful effects humans have on it. In the USA, ecocriticism draws inspiration from 19th-century Transcendentalist writers who celebrated nature, life, and wilderness. Some of these important figures are Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller, and Henry David Thoreau.

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s first short book, Nature (published in 1836), is an essay reflecting on how the natural world affected him. His writing often shows a direct and powerful connection with nature. For example, he writes:

"Crossing a bare common, in snow puddles, at twilight, under a clouded sky, without having in my thoughts any occurrence of special good fortune, I have enjoyed a perfect exhilaration. I am glad to the brink of fear.” (Emerson 38)

Margaret Fuller and Her Connection to Nature

Margaret Fuller’s first book, Summer on the Lakes (1843), is a powerful journal about her experiences with the American landscape. Before writing this, she was the first woman student at Harvard, which was a big achievement at the time.

In her book, she describes places like Niagara Falls with strong and vivid language. For example, she writes:

"For here there is no escape from the weight of perpetual creation; all other forms and motions come and go, the tide rises and recedes, the wind, at its mightiest, moves in gales and gusts, but here is really an incessant, an indefatigable motion. Awake or asleep, there is no escape, still this rushing round you and through you. It is in this way I have most felt grandeur—somewhat eternal, if not infinite." (Fuller, 71)

Thoreau, Transcendentalism, and Differences Between US and UK Ecocriticism

Thoreau’s Walden tells the story of his two-year stay, starting in 1845, in a small hut he built by Walden Pond in Massachusetts. This book is a classic example of leaving behind modern life to find renewal by “returning to nature.” Because of this, the three books by these Transcendentalist writers—Emerson, Fuller, and Thoreau—are seen as foundational works of American ecocriticism.

On the other hand, the UK’s version of ecocriticism, often called “green studies,” has its roots in British Romanticism from the 1790s, rather than American Transcendentalism of the 1840s.

In general, the US prefers the term “ecocriticism,” which tends to have a more positive, celebratory tone toward nature. In contrast, the British “green studies” often sound more serious and warning, focusing on environmental dangers caused by governments, industries, and businesses.

Major Figures in Ecocriticism

Cheryll Glotfelty

• The first Professor of Literature and Environment in the USA.
• In 1996, she co-edited The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology with Harold Fromm. This anthology helped bring environmental concerns into literary studies.
• Co-founder and past president of the Association for the Study of Literature and Environment (ASLE).

Lawrence Buell

• One of the founding scholars of ecocriticism, with many books and articles on nature and literature.
• His key work, The Environmental Imagination, traces how writers from Thoreau to the present imagine nature.
• Buell argues that an environmentally focused text should:

1.  Treat the nonhuman environment as an active part of the story, not just background.

2.     Show that human interests are not the only important ones.

3.  Include human responsibility to nature as part of its ethical message.

Greg Garrard

• FCCS Sustainability Professor at the University of British Columbia and a National Teaching Fellow in the UK.
• Founding member and former Chair of the Association for the Study of Literature and the Environment (UK & Ireland).
• Author of Ecocriticism (Routledge, 2004; 2nd ed. 2011) and editor of:
• Teaching Ecocriticism and Green Cultural Studies (Palgrave, 2011)
• The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism (OUP, 2014)
• Co-editor of Green Letters: Studies in Ecocriticism, with essays on eco-pedagogy, animal studies, and environmental criticism.

Serpil Oppermann

• A leading Turkish scholar in ecocriticism.
• Published many research articles on ecocriticism and postmodern English literature.
• Editor of Material Ecocriticism, a recent volume that brings new perspectives on how we study nature in literature.

What Are the Main Characteristics of Ecocriticism?

Ecocriticism is a literary approach that explores the connection between nature and culture. It asks important questions about how nature is shown in literature and how we, as humans, interact with the environment.

One of the key ideas in ecocriticism is that not everything is created by society or language. In other words, nature exists outside of human systems too. Ecocritics believe we must look beyond just human-centered (anthropocentric) views.

A well-known definition of ecocriticism comes from The Ecocriticism Reader (1996), a major book in the field. In it, Cheryll Glotfelty writes:

“Simply put, ecocriticism is the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment. Just as feminist criticism focuses on gender and Marxist criticism focuses on class, ecocriticism takes an earth-centred approach to literature.” (Glotfelty 1996: xix)

Glotfelty also lists the kinds of questions ecocritics ask, such as:

• How is nature shown in this poem or novel?
• How has the idea of "wilderness" changed over time?
• Can science be examined in a literary way?
• How can literary studies work together with history, philosophy, art, or ethics to understand the environment better?

Ecocriticism also challenges the old belief that humans are the rulers of nature. But it doesn’t see nature as a passive victim either. Instead, it highlights balance and respect.

Ecocritics encourage us to reread important literary texts with new eyes—to move away from the idea that humans are always at the centre. They often use ideas from philosophy and biology to better understand the ties between people, culture, and the natural world. By doing so, ecocritics aim to create ecological awareness and build eco-ethics—a way of thinking that respects both nature and culture together.

Key Concepts in Ecocriticism

What does it mean to read literature through the eyes of the Earth?

Ecocriticism—a poetic rebellion against human-centred narratives—invites us to see the world not as a backdrop to human drama, but as a character in its own right.

Anthropocentrism: Human at the Centre

Anthropocentrism is the belief—sometimes quiet, sometimes thunderous—that humans matter more than everything else.

In this worldview:

• Nature exists for human use.
• The environment is shaped to suit our needs.
• Other life forms become secondary or invisible.

This can manifest as:

• Strong anthropocentrism – a confident belief in human dominance over nature.
• Weak anthropocentrism – the view that while nature matters, human interests still take precedence in practice, due to necessity or strategy.

But here's the paradox:

Can we hold biocentric values in our hearts, yet act within anthropocentric boundaries?
The ecocritic answers: Yes, but we must be honest about it.

Biocentrism: Life at the Centre

Biocentrism shifts the focus. Now, the forest speaks. The rivers have rights. The butterfly matters.

All life forms—including humans—are part of a vast biotic web.

In biocentric or ecocentric thinking:

• Human concerns do not override the needs of other beings.
• The Earth is not ours to conquer, but ours to commune with.

This view challenges the literature to stop seeing nature as a silent stage and start hearing it as a vibrant, complex voice.

What Do Ecocritics Do?

Ecocritics are the wanderers of literary landscapes who listen for the rustling of leaves between the lines. Their tasks include:

• Re-reading literature through an ecocentric lens—paying attention to how nature is represented.
• Expanding critical tools: using concepts like growth, energy, symbiosis, sustainability—not just metaphorically, but ethically.
• Highlighting authors who place nature at the centre of their works, such as the American Transcendentalists or British Romantics.
• Valuing ‘factual’ writing—essays, travelogues, memoirs, regional literature—where human interaction with nature is directly expressed.
• Turning away from purely linguistic theories, favouring ethical responsibility and ecological awareness.

“The world is not just a text. The world is the world.” — The Ecocritic’s Creed

Conclusion

The ecocritical approach allows us to read literature not only through human perspectives but also through its relationship with nature. In this view, nature is not just a background, but an active element in the creation of meaning.

In Shakespeare’s As You Like It, the forest becomes a place where people reconnect, simplify their thoughts and emotions. Nature plays a healing and instructive role here.

On the other hand, in King Lear, nature appears as a powerful force that witnesses the character’s inner breakdown. Lear’s confrontation with the storm reflects not only the weather but also the turmoil within his soul.

These examples show that nature is not a passive ornament in literary works; it is a presence that thinks, speaks, and transforms alongside humans. Ecocritical readings invite us to reconnect with nature and to listen to its voice in literature.

Structuralism: How Patterns Shape Meaning in Literature

 Structuralism: How Patterns Shape Meaning in Literature

Structuralism suggests that nothing exists or gains meaning in isolation. Everything—whether a story, a word, or even a cultural practice—should be analysed in the context of the larger system or structure it belongs to. The first thing you have to get used to when you begin to study structuralism is that common uses of the word structure do not necessarily imply structuralist activity. For example, you are not engaged in structuralist activity if you examine the physical structure of a building to discover if it is physically stable or aesthetically pleasing (Tyson, 2014).

For example:

• A word's meaning comes from itself and its relationship to other words in a language system.
• A character in a story can only be understood about other characters and the overall narrative structure.

Structuralism encourages us to look at the bigger picture. It focuses on understanding the connections and patterns between elements rather than isolating a single part. The meaning of an object or event does not exist within the object itself. The meaning comes from how we, as individuals, see and interpret it. For example, when we look at a work of art, its meaning is not just in the painting—it is created by how we understand and experience it.

After briefly explaining, we will explore major figures and key concepts in Structuralism. Then, we will show you this theory in a work.

Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) was a Swiss linguist whose ideas laid the foundation for structuralism, which became an important approach in the study of language and literary theory in the 1950s and 1960s. Before Saussure, linguistic scholars focused mainly on the history of languages, such as how languages developed and their historical relationships with each other. However, Saussure shifted the focus to how language works in the present, emphasizing the patterns and functions of language as it is used today. He was particularly interested in how meaning is created and maintained, and how grammatical structures play a role in this process. His work transformed the way language and literature are analysed, moving away from historical concerns to exploring the underlying structures that shape meaning in communication. Saussure's work focused on understanding language as a system of signs that function in the present, rather than just studying its history.

Roland Barthes (1915-1980) applied structuralist methods to modern culture, examining everyday cultural phenomena through the lens of symbols, values, and beliefs. In his 1957 book Mythologies, Barthes analysed common cultural elements in modern France, many of which had never been studied in this intellectual way before.

For example, he compared boxing and wrestling, two sports that appear similar but have different cultural meanings. Boxing, Barthes argued, represents stoic endurance and repression. Boxers don’t show pain when they’re hit, they follow strict rules, and they fight as themselves—there’s no performance or fantasy involved. In contrast, wrestling is more theatrical, with fighters displaying exaggerated emotions and dramatic struggles. Wrestlers fight as larger-than-life heroes or villains, performing for the audience.

Barthes used this comparison to show how each sport fits into a broader cultural structure. Boxing reflects the endurance required in everyday life, while wrestling symbolizes the ultimate battles between good and evil. His structuralist approach takes individual items or events and places them in a larger framework, revealing deeper meanings and layers of significance. This is a key characteristic of structuralism: understanding something by examining its place within a bigger structure.

Ferdinand de Saussure introduced the concepts of langue and parole to explain how language works:

1.     Langue: This refers to the entire system or structure of language – the rules, conventions, and shared understanding that all speakers of a language have. For example, the rules of grammar, vocabulary, and syntax in a language like French.

2.     Parole: This refers to individual utterances or spoken/written expressions made by people. For example, a specific sentence spoken in French, like "Je mange une pomme" (I’m eating an apple), is parole.

To understand a single sentence (parole), you need to know the whole system (langue). For example, if you hear someone speaking French, you can understand their sentence only because you're familiar with the rules and vocabulary of French.

In literature, parole would be an individual work, like the novel Middlemarch, while langue would be the general structure or genre of the novel, which is a shared practice among writers and readers.

In simpler terms: Langue is the whole system of language, and parole is a single instance or example of that system in use. Both rely on each other to make sense.

1.     Analyzing Stories: Structuralists look at stories and connect them to bigger ideas like:

o    The rules of a specific genre (e.g., mystery or romance).

o    How the story connects to other stories.

o    Basic storytelling patterns are found in all stories, no matter the culture.

o    Common ideas or themes that appear throughout the story.

2.     Looking at Language Structures: Structuralists compare stories to how language works. For example:

o    Levi-Strauss used the idea of "mythemes," which are small units of meaning in a story, like how words in a language are built from smaller parts.

3.     Focusing on the Text, Not the Author: Structuralists care only about the text itself. They don’t look at who wrote it or the author's life story. They just study the structure of the story.

4.     Using Language Theories: They use ideas from linguists like Saussure to study how words and signs (symbols) work in literature.

5.     Finding Common Patterns: Structuralists look for repeating themes or ideas in a story. They believe these patterns help us understand the meaning of the text.

1.     Parallels

2.     Echoes

3.     Reflections/Repetitions

4.     Contrasts

5.     Patterns

6.     Plot/Structure

7.     Character/Motive

8.     Situation/Circumstance

9.     Language/Imagery

Structuralism seeks to uncover the "big picture" or hidden meaning within a text. It suggests that everything is "textual," composed of signs and language that acquire meaning through patterns, often connected to other texts. This theory laid the foundation for Deconstructive Criticism, particularly with the use of binary oppositions—where one term is privileged over the other, like good/bad, sweet/bitter, etc. Structuralism focuses on identifying these binary patterns or repetitions in literary genres and individual stories, exploring how they mirror societal structures and norms.

• Characters: Little Red Riding Hood, the grandmother, the wolf.
• Roles:
• The girl represents innocence.
• The wolf represents danger or evil.
• The grandmother represents safety and comfort.
• Settings: The forest (uncertainty and danger), the house (security).

The story gets its meaning from how these parts interact. Structuralists also say that this isn’t just one story; many stories have similar structures, and by studying them, we can find common patterns.

Understanding Language

Let’s look at words in a language. For example, the word "home."

• On its own, "home" is just a word. But when we hear it, we think of warmth, family, and safety.
• Structuralists say the meaning of a word comes not from the word itself but from how it relates to other words in the system of language.

A Real-Life Example

Think about a soccer game.

• You can’t understand football just by looking at the ball. You need to know the rules, the players, the teams, and how they interact. Structuralists would say, "To understand anything, you need to understand the whole system it belongs to."