Fields Related to Ecocomposition
The authors explore what ecocomposition has gained from different fields and how ecocomposition differs from those fields.
Composition Theory
Gains:
- the idea that discourse creates environments and vice versa: “The environment is an idea that is created through discourse. We argue not that mountains, rivers, oceans, and the like do not actually exist, but that our only access to such things is through discourse, and that it is through language that we give these things or places particular meanings…In a sense, humans occupy two spaces: a biosphere, consisting of the earth and its atmosphere, which supports our physical existence, and a semiosphere, consisting of discourse, which shapes our existence and allows us to make sense of it. These two central spheres of human life - the biosphere and the semiosphere - are mutually dependent upon each other. Whereas a healthy biosphere is one that supports a variety of symbiotic life forms, a healthy semiosphere is one that enables differences to coexist and be articulated. In both a material and a discursive sense, differences are a critical measure of a system's health” (573-4 emphasis added).
- “seeing writers as contributing members of larger systems” (575). “As writers shift from one environment to another, they readjust their discourses to match” (576).
Differs:
- "However, even in composition's move post-process there was little actual recognition of environment beyond theoretical understandings of ideology and other constructed critical categories…Ecocomposition continues the post-process move to understand relationships between writers and larger systems by taking into consideration the role of environment, place, nature, and location in those larger systems, examining the relationships between discourse and place” (575).
Ecocriticism
Gains:
- “the inquiry as to whether ‘in addition to race, class, and gender, [...] place [should] become a new critical category’” (569)
- “the notion that ‘all ecological criticism shares the fundamental premise that human culture is connected to the physical world, affecting it and affected by it’” (569)
Differs:
- “ecocomposition's split with ecocriticism comes from the will to examine and participate in the activity of textual production rather than to engage in textual interpretation. If ecocriticism looks toward textual interpretation, ecocomposition is interested in examining the activity and locations of textual production as well as all of the other environments that affect and are affected by the production of discourse” (578).
- While ecocriticism claims it encourage change, the authors argue that “the activity of literary criticism…does not effect change; activism effects change” and ecocomposition encourages activism (578).
Environmental rhetoric
Gains:
- “Ecocompositionists have embraced the notion that human thought and conduct are (most likely) always mediated through language, and they identify such mediation as the source for the construction of nature, place, environment, and the conduct and behavior directed at those locations” (570).
- Because our language affects how we interact in and with our environments and how we see our environments, rhetoric is important to ecocomposition.
Other
“Many other critical schools, including cultural studies, postcolonialism, and ecofeminism, have contributed and continue to contribute to this growing discipline through their pointed investigations of discourse and environment. Indeed, at ecocomposition's core is its interdisciplinarity; it draws upon and melds many perspectives, methodologies, and investigations from disciplines across the academic spectrum” (571).
Ecocomposition Pedagogy
“In all ecocomposition courses, issues that directly assist students in becoming better producers of writing in a variety of writing environments should be the central focus, encouraging students to recognize their experiences in all environments as affecting and being affected by their writing… An ecocomposition pedagogy thus encourages political activism, public writing, and service learning, and student writing can be directed beyond the limited scope of classroom assignments to address larger, public audiences. Students can be encouraged to become active” (580).
The authors list two focuses for ecocomposition courses:
- “The first, and perhaps fastest-growing in American colleges and universities, is that which tends toward ecological literacy. Essentially, this pedagogy teaches environmental awareness in the writing classroom” (581). This focuses “asks students to write in their environments, to be critical of those environments, and to consider what effect their own writing and literacies have on that very environment” rather to only write about environments (582).
- “The second form is what we call ‘discursive ecology.’ Much like social ecology, which examines the relationships within and among societies, discursive ecology examines the relationships of various acts and forms of discourse. This branch of pedagogy asks students to see writing as an ecological process, to explore writing and writing processes as systems of interaction, economy, and interconnectedness” (581).
Key Terms
- Post-process: the “move from examining individual writers’ cognitive processes to inquiries regarding the interactions between writers and the social forces that acted upon them and upon which they had effect” (568).
- Ecocriticism: “the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment…[E]cocentrism takes an earth-centered approach to literary studies" (Glotfelty and Fromm’s definition)
- Ecocomposition: “the study of the relationships between environments (and by that we mean natural, constructed, and even imagined places) and discourse (speaking, writing, and thinking). Ecocomposition draws from disciplines that study discourse…and merges their perspectives with work in disciplines that examine environment” (572).
- Ecompositionist: “Ecocompositionists inquire as to what effects discourse has in mapping, constructing, shaping, defining, and understanding nature, place, and environment; and, in turn, what effects nature, place, and environment have on discourse. This includes all environments: classroom, political, electronic, ideological, historical, economic, natural” (573).
- Webbed writing: “In a sense, webbed writing projects often work like ecosystems. Ideas, words, and texts connect with one an-other, work relationally by referring to one another, and assume no intrinsically hierarchical order of importance. The use of hypermedia, such as digital images and sounds, adds another dimension to webbed writing, allowing for more diversity and variety-the attributes of a healthy ecosystem. Webbed writing can indicate a hierarchy of topics, but its basic structure does not inherently categorize and codify information in the same linear structure as does a traditional printed book” (585).