Land Deterioration and Environmental Damage: A Postcolonial Eco-critical Study of How Beautiful We Were (2021)
Abstract
The paper tries to answer, how western corporations are responsible for land deterioration and environmental damage under the guise of development. It brings forth neocolonial forces into the limelight that have caused ecological damage. The study is guided by the postcolonial eco- critical model of Huggan and Tiffin (2010). Huggan and Tiffin assert the intertwined correlation among environmental violence, marginalization of the indigenous groups, and destruction of land by the neocolonial agencies. The findings are based on data supplied by textual analysis of the novel. The study reveals the ways in which oil corporations exploit the resources, contaminate the land, damage the environment, and cause economic inequality. It is a typical fictional study of neocolonial agencies’ ironic dreams of development and progress. The novel not only voices the environmental injustices and the disastrous consequences of Oil Corporation but also the cultural and social marginalization of locals. It has been suggested that western neocolonial corporations are the real culprits of ecological damage in Asia and Africa. Therefore, time is ripe for the world to reverse the damage and take a step towards inclusive and human-centered sustainable development.
Keywords: postcolonial ecocriticism; environmental exploitation; development; oil corporations
References
Brummett, B. (2018). Techniques of close reading. Sage Publications.
Buell, L. (1995). The environmental imagination: Thoreau, nature writing, and the formation of American culture. Harvard University Press.
Chakrabarty, D. (2012). Postcolonial studies and the challenge of climate change. New Literary History, 43(1), 1-18.
Chamberlin, J. E. (2003). If this is your land, where are your stories?. Toronto.
Cuddon, J. A. (1999). Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory, revised by C. E. Preston. Penguin Books.
De Loughrey, E., Didur, J., & Carrigan, A. (2015). Introduction: A postcolonial environmental humanities. In Global Ecologies and the Environmental Humanities (pp. 19-50). Routledge.
Di Chiro, G. (2017). Welcome to the White (M) Anthropocene?: A Feminist-environmentalist Critique. In Routledge handbook of gender and environment. Routledge.
Dyer, K. (1994). Vassanji, MG The Book of secrets. Ilha do Desterro A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies, (31), 165-172.
Escobar, A. (1997). Anthropology and development. International Social Science Journal, 49(154), 497-515.
Feldman, M. B., & Hsu, H. L. (2007). Introduction: Race, environment, and representation. Discourse, 29(2), 199-214.
Haraway, D. (2015). Anthropocene, capitalocene, plantationocene, chthulucene: Making kin. Environmental Humanities, 6(1), 159-165.
Harris, E. (2013). 'The earth-haunted mind': the search for reconnection with nature, place and the environment in the poetry of Edward Thomas, TS Eliot, Edith Sitwell and Charlotte Mew (Doctoral dissertation, Manchester Metropolitan University).
Heise, U. K. (2017). Comparative literature and the environmental humanities. In Futures of Comparative Literature (pp. 293-301). Routledge.
Huggan, G., & Tiffin, H. (2010). Postcolonial Ecocriticism: Literature, animals, environment. Routledge.
Kadafa, A. A. (2012). Oil exploration and spillage in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. Civil and Environmental Research, 2(3), 38-51.
Kankam, N. K. (2021). How Beautiful We Were, written by Imbolo Mbue. African and Asian Studies, 20(3), 373-374
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human communication research, 30(3), 411-433.
Lazarus, N. (2006). Postcolonial studies after the invasion of Iraq. New Formations, (59), 10-23.
Mackenthun, G. (2015). Postkolonialer Ecocriticism. Ecocriticism. Eine Einführung, 81-93.
Mbue, I. (2021). How Beautiful We Were. Random House.
McKee, A (2003). Textual analysis: A beginner′ s guide. Sage Publishers.
Mouton.J. (2001) The Practice of Social Research. Cape Town. Oxford University Press.
Nixon, R. (2005). Environmentalism and postcolonialism. In Postcolonial Studies and beyond (pp. 233-251). Duke University Press.
Nixon, R. (2011). Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Harvard University Press.
Plumwood, V. (2003). Decolonizing relationships with nature in Adams, W. and Mulligan, M.(eds) Decolonising Nature: Strategies for conservations in a post-colonial era.
Rockwell, G. (2003). What is text analysis, really? Literary and Linguistic Computing. 18, (2), 209-219.
Rowell, A. (2017). Green backlash: Global subversion of the environmental movement. Routledge.
Roy, A. (1999). The end of imagination. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 31(2), 35-53.
Said, E. W. (2012). Culture and imperialism. Vintage.
Sloterdijk, P. (2015). Das Anthropozän–Ein Prozess-Zustand am Rande der Erd-Geschichte. Das Anthropozän. Zum Stand der Dinge, 2, 25-44.
Trujillo, A. P. (2016). Postcolonial ecologies: The cross-pollination of postcolonial and environmental studies. The Trumpeter, 32(1), 38-54.
Varga, H. H. (2017). Arundhati Roy, the end of imagination. Romanian Journal of Indian Studies, (1), 125-132.
Zammito, J. H., Ivanhoe, P. J., Longino, H., & Sloan, P. R. (2008). Philosophical approaches to nature. In Altering Nature (pp. 63-136). Springer, Dordrecht.
Ziai, A. (2007). Exploring post-development. Routledge.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
- for any purpose, even commercially.
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
