The excerpt from the book ‘Dark Ecology’ by Timothy Morton is a complex, philosophical, often confusing piece about ecological awareness. It is anything but your cookie-cutter environmental diatribe about the evils of capitalism causing global warming. While capitalism doesn’t get away scot-free, he sees it as more of a symptom than the root cause. He contends that if capitalism were the cause, “then Soviet and Chinese carbon emissions would have added nothing to global warming”. The root cause is that humans consider nature a separate entity, as something that can be managed. This “command and control” approach, as he puts it, can be traced back to the origins of agriculture.
THE ORIGINS OF AGRICULTURE
Morton refers to us as Mesopotamians. Although agriculture was discovered by different people in different places, this is a reference to the development of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent. For most of human history, until about 12,000 years ago, humans were nomadic hunter-gatherers. Learning to grow plants in soil, then harvest and replant them, allowed people to obtain and store large amounts of food, eliminating the need to gather. Domesticating animals eliminated the need to hunt and this permitted them to stay in the same place.
Now that they no longer had to drag children around for years, until they grew old enough to keep up, they were able to have twice as many children. Food became abundant and they could sustain a much larger population. This led to villages, city-states, money, markets, trade routes and the invention of the steam engine to move things from place to place. The estimated population grew from an estimated 5 million to the 7 billion we have today in only a fraction of the entirety of human existence. Some historians blame agriculture for setting off the chain of events that led to famine, disease, wealth inequality, sexism, slavery, war and of course, the current predicament of climate change.
ENTER THE ANTHROPOCENE
The Sixth Mass Extinction Event: caused by the Anthropocene, caused by humans. Not dolphins; Not jellyfish; Not coral.
It turns out that things like polluting the air, nuclear waste, industrial wastewater, the use of poisonous agricultural chemicals, the decimation of forests, bodies of water and other systems needed to sustain life in an unending quest to obtain global influence and wealth, are extremely bad for -all- of Earth’s inhabitants. Morton uses the term ‘Anthropocene’ to describe the current geological time period where humans became a “geophysical force on a planetary scale” who had a substantial impact on Earth’s ecosystems.
Some scholars quibble that this term is too human-centric and hubristic and infers that humans have “godlike powers to shape the planet” or they argue that the term unfairly marks all humans when they believe it is Westerners or Americans who are responsible for climate change. Morton points out that that “Humans and not dolphins invented steam engines and drilled for oil” and that actual hubris or arrogance is using other lifeforms as prosthetics for agricultural purposes. He also argues that this cannot simply pawned off on a particular group of humans since it is humans in general who desire environmentally unfriendly things such as air-conditioning. “Neanderthals would have loved Coca-Cola Zero”, he writes.
Morton argues that we will not be able to use science and geoengineering to get out of this, nor can we pollute the planet in a more responsible way. He writes that the argument: “We have always been terraforming the planet, so let’s do it consciously from now on” is pointless and no more moral than what we’re doing now. In order to avoid ceding the entire biosphere to big science and technocrats, which would cause an even further impact on the planet, humans are going to have to think of the concept of species differently. Humankind will have to include the entire planet. We can not live in an “ostensibly privileged place set apart from all other beings”.
Becoming a geophysical force on a planetary scale means that no matter what you think about it, no matter whether you are aware of it or not, there you are, being that.
He maintains that people believe their actions are meaningless, since they cannot possibly pollute the entire planet all by themselves. They don’t mean to harm the Earth as they go about their daily lives. They presume that a single key turn to start an engine is statistically meaningless, but when you scale up these actions to include “billions and billions of key turnings and coal shovelings, harm to the Earth is precisely what is happening”. The necessary ecological thought a person needs to inhibit is that “every time I turned my car ignition key I was contributing to global warming and yet was performing actions that were statistically meaningless”.
NOIR
“Ecological awareness is that moment at which these narrators find out that they are the tragic criminal”.
Morton claims that we Mesopotamians are both the detective and the criminal. He compares ecological awareness to noir, a genre of fiction where the protagonist or narrator is also the perpetrator. Margaret Atwood’s novel also warns us about the dangers of humans believing they exist separate from nature. In ‘Oryx and Crake’, the story was narrated through the thoughts of Snowman, the last person presumed to be alive in a world decimated by both climate change and a virus created by an out-of-control corporation. He is also someone who was unwittingly complicit in both releasing the virus and participating in a society that allowed these destructive corporations to thrive.
Although it’s not obvious why anyone would choose him to guide the next generation of Earth’s inhabitants, he was the perfect choice for Margaret Atwood to represent humankind and it’s complacency. Snowman (Jimmy), was once concerned about the way animals were treated. He saw them as creatures much like himself and was “confused about who should be able to eat what”. He also questioned why society valued students of science, but not those who studied humanities. Jimmy would eventually go along with everyone else and forget about these concerns, frequently eating genetically modified chicken and taking a more prestigious job writing propaganda for one of the scientific corporations running society. This appears to be a commentary on our current situation by Atwood.
I disagree with some of the Morton’s ideas. He uses the phrase “the myth of human progress”, insinuating that everything humans have ever done is pointless and should have just went on living like animals. Humans are self-aware and curious, not simply a bunch of self-destructive animals. I’m not sure that natural curiosity could ever be contained. We’re the only species capable of asking questions about our origins and the universe and through science, fill in the missing pieces and find the answers. We don’t -have- to use science and technology to destroy everything.
I also question why he chose to write something he obviously considers important in a style that is inaccessible to most readers. The book is full of obscure pop culture references and abstract philosophy concepts which makes me wonder whether he is interested in solving problems or simply pointing them out. He may want to expand on what an environmentally responsible future looks like.
Questions
- Did Crake overlook anything when designing the Crakers or with his plan in general?
- Crake stated that he did not believe in God or Nature with a capital ‘N’. What did he mean?
- What warnings do you see from Atwood pertaining to our current climate crisis?
Works cited:
Atwood, Margaret. Oryx and Crake. 2003.
Diamond, Jared. The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. 2 May 1987,
http://www.sigervanbrabant.be/docs/Diamond.PDF
Morton, Timothy. Dark Ecology: for a Logic of Future Coexistence. Columbia University Press, 2018.
National Geographic. The Development of Agriculture
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/development-of-agriculture/
8 replies on “Timothy Morton: Dark Ecology (excerpt)”
I would have to agree with John’s opinion on Morton’s views about humans. Despite the damage we may have caused as a species, it was only out of motivation to further ourselves. The massive strides we have made as a species in such a short time(on a planetary scale) proves how resourceful and efficient human beings can be. If we can achieve the seemingly impossible for ourselves in such a short time, then surely we can do the same to save ourselves from the environmental predicaments that we have placed ourselves in.
Morton’s view of the “myth of human progress” is a disturbing perspective that may be difficult to accept, yet, may have some truth. It is comforting to believe that humanity stands as the pinnacle of nature and does everything with purpose, yet, considering the statistics, it would seem just as possible that its actions are a product of random evolution that has brought mankind to its “triumphed state”.
Morton’s view is limited in how he suggests that the actions of humanity are pointless. Although humanity may be a product of randomness, this does not necessarily mean that its actions are pointless. Since humanities nature has brought it to its current state, it is equally valid to humanity remaining in an animal-like state and continuing as is. Altogether, while Morton’s argument has some aspects that may be true, I feel that he goes too far to say that the actions are pointless.
Crake overlooked the importance of emotions and the human psyche when developing the Crakers. Although it’s hard to assume or predict what the world would look like with “people” who do not feel things, I am sure that there would be some kind of repercussions to it. We kind of see some consequences of an artificially created human in Frankenstein. Crake goes ahead and decides for himself that there is no purpose for the things he didn’t include in his creations but he doesn’t realize there may be a reason for why something is there or gradually disappearing. The explanation of the creation of agriculture in this blog explains that although something is created to progress the human existence, it’s not always beneficial. There are consequences to almost anything. Crake uses nature with a capital N which could possibly be him comparing the idea of nature to a belief just like not all people believe in God. Atwood alludes to the implications of genetically modifying the world and what’s in it.
Like Katrina, I think Crake did overlook a few things when designing the Crakers. He designed the Crakers to do without things like art, music, and religion. Crake did not want the Crakers to think symbollically or think critically about anything. They were meant to be peaceful, vegan creatures that lived without worry. However, Crake’s design showed signs of flaws when the Crakers began to exhibit signs that they are not as brain-dead as Crake would’ve liked. In the section “Idol” of Chapter 14, Snowman is surprised to hear the Crakers playing instruments in a “rhythm band.” They also made a picture of Snowman and began worshiping him like a god, which is something Crake explicitly warned against.
Crake overlooked a lot of things when it came to the design of the Crakers and the overall plan in creating a race of perfect individuals. Crake’s ambitions in removing the brain of the Crakers shows his mission in removing the ability of logical thought and any conflicts of war that may arise among the Crakers. Crake’s plan is overlooked as the Crakers retained the ability to dream and that this was one flaw overlooked by Crake, similarly, the Crakers are ever persistent in their curiosity endeavors in consistently questioning Snowman’s statements and stories as a way to understand the world around them.
This statement by Crake reflects his lack of appreciation in both God and Nature and can be seen as even mocking both God and Nature in this statement.
Atwood gives a lot of messages in our current climate crisis in Oryx and Crake. In the chapter Roses, a scenario of a chaotic city filled with people and cars and discusses the physical state of the city as being hurtful and the overall noise and bad smells experienced in this introduction to the chapter. This scenario portrays the dark side of what happens when urbanization is not managed correctly by the inhabitants of the city.
Crake was a talented scientist who was really interested in the idea of a biologically ideal human. He claimed that he did not believe in God or Nature, but I think he was portrayed as a godlike character. He wanted to create a new kind of human life, a life that is peaceful and in harmony. It reminds me of the life Adam and Eve had in Garden of Eden. They did not need to think or worry about anything because they were living in Paradise. I think Crake wanted to create a life as the Paradise and that’s why he designed the Crakers without religion, emotion and the ability to think. So the Crakers wouldn’t become rebellious and violent to each other.
Atwood viewed the activities of humans as the main reason for climatic instability and degradation. He reminds us of the possibility of a world of nonexistent living things if we persist to scorn and pay little importance to climatic changes. It is in the nature of man to better their living conditions and as a result, we incautiously create environmental problems which we suffer. Humans are the main cause and sufferers from their activities. Atwood highlighted that further civilization could result in the doom of man. Necessities such as Industries and cars used universally are important to our dispensations activities and development but the future painted by Atwood can only be avoided if we find alternatives to our day to day activities. The development of cars and trains which uses electricity to function other than fuel is a positive initiative to curb the looming danger, therefore, research and findings as before mentioned should be supported by the government and institutions to better the achievement.
Crakes goal was to make his idea of a perfect human which he called Crakers. He had some flaws while creating the Crakers for example he didn’t want them to believe in religion or do any form of music or art but in the end found that the Crakers soon during just what he didn’t want. Cake doesn’t believe in God but in a sense he is seen as a kind of god to the Crakers which is contradictory to what he wants or believes.