The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I · PDF file · 2017-02-01The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I Volume II, Issue IV ISSN : 2395 4817 Ecocriticism

The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I Volume II, Issue IV ISSN : 2395 4817


The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I Vol. II, Issue IV I ISSN : 2395 4817

The Degradation of Green Culture in Amitav Ghosh’s ‘The Glass Palace’ – An Ecocritical Reading

Shruti Soni

Research Scholar Institute of Advance Studies in English

Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA.

Abstract

In the literary texts, the poets and writers has treated Nature as a main concern. The physical environment and

Man, both in art and literature, have been a continuous practice since long back. Though the approach of

illustration of the physical environment has gone through the many changes in its style and exposure with the

changing perceptions of human mind. Many writers and poets have depicted this amicable relationship in the

literary texts. The worry for ecology and the danger that the unceasing exploitation of our environment poses on

humanity, has only recently trapped the attention of the writers. This sense of concern has given rise to a new

branch of literary theory, namely Ecocriticism. Ecocriticism is a swiftly mounting area of research which shelters

wide range of texts and theories and studies the relationship between man and nature. In the literary texts,

through the nature imagery, man-woman relationship, culture, tourism, gender construct etc. the issues of

environment has been studied which have wider meanings than what is actually exhibited in their literal

expressions. There are very rare works in literature which actually focus on this term, though nature has been

used as a setting against which the story runs. Colonialism has been a substantial reason in the devastation of

environment globally. Because of this, the transformation in the social and cultural environment of the world has

completely changed the representations of man’s attitude towards nature in literary expressions. Among the

Indian writers like Salman Rushdie, Vikram Seth, V. S. Naipaul, Kiran Desai and many more, there is one writer

who has chosen Fiction as a tool to mark a new pattern in writing novels with post-modern thoughts and

emotions, Amitav Ghosh, is one of among the postmodernists. Among his various themes like diaspora, cultural

fragmentation, search for love and identity, voyages etc. there is one more aspect of his tremendous writing is the

attitude of mankind towards environment or nature. The present paper will be dealing with this sensitive

relationship of Man and Nature in the novel of Amitav Ghosh, The Glass Palace, published in 2000 which shows

how the British intervention in the South Asia has caused the environmental damages which resulted into the

destruction and dislocation triggered by it and the approach which deals with the study of representations of

nature in literary works and of the relationship between literature and the environment termed as “Ecocriticism”.

Keywords : Ecocriticism, Ecology, Colonialism, Relationship between human and non-human forms,

Environmental Degradation


“Just as feminist criticism examines language and literature from a gender-conscious

perspective, and Marxist criticism brings an awareness of modes of production and

economic class to its reading texts, ecocriticism takes an earth-centered approach to

literary studies.” Cheryll Glotfelty (xviii)

Ecology and Ecocriticism

Man is a part of this earth as the plants and animals are. Man is considered to be the only literary

creature on the earth and here the superiority of human minds arise and forget that he is the only part of

this physical surrounding. It has no doubt that we, Human Beings, depend on Nature for our survival.

The human culture directly or indirectly connected to the physical world. This intimate relationship

between human and non-human worlds has been vividly and minutely presented in the literary texts.

The physical environment and Man, both in art and literature, have been a continuous practice since

long back. Though the approach of illustration of the physical environment has gone through the many

changes in its style and exposure with the changing perceptions of human mind. In this context and to

understand this concept more clearly two terms become very imperative – Ecology and Ecocriticism.

Ecology is the science to study the interrelationships of living organisms to one another and with the

physical surroundings. As the topic deals with the groups of living beings and their interaction and such

interacting groups called ecosystem. The term ecology has derived from Greek words Okios means

home means the earth and Logos which means Reason or Study. Therefore it studies how human

interrelates with the home i.e, the earth; with its treasurable resources like water, land, mineral

resources, soil etc. William Rueckert in “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism”

mentions the first law of ecology, “Everything is connected to everything else”(108).

In the mid-eighties, Jospeh W. Meeker has introduced the term ‘literary ecology’ in “The Comedy of

Survival: Studies in Literary Ecology” (1972), which refers to “the study of biological themes and

relationships which appear in literary works. It is simultaneously an attempt to discover what roles have

been played by literature in the ecology of the human species”(9). This study certainly influences both

man’s perception towards nature and his responses to it. As Glen A. Love in “Revaluing Nature” says,

“The most important function of literature today is to redirect human consciousness to full consideration

of its place in a threatened natural world"(237). The worry for ecology and the danger that the unceasing

exploitation of our environment poses on humanity, has only recently trapped the attention of the

writers. This sense of concern has given rise to a new branch of literary theory, namely Ecocriticism.


Ecocriticism plays a vital role in the study of human relationship with nature. Cheryll Glotfelty, one of

the forerunners of Ecocriticism defines Ecocriticism as, “the study of the relationship between literature

and the physical environment” (xviii). According to Glotfelty, William Rueckert introduces the term

Ecocriticism in his essay “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism” in 1978, where he

means by the term “the application of ecology and ecological concepts to the study of literature”(xx).

After this, lots of other terms like ecopoetics, environmental literary criticism and green cultural studies

were circulating in the literary world. Ecocriticism means how nature is presented in literature. Cheryll

Glotfelty states for ecocriticism, “As a critical stance, it has one foot in literature and the other on land;

as theoretical discourse, it negotiates between human and the non-human”(xix). Ecocriticism is a

swiftly mounting area of research which shelters wide range of texts and theories and studies the

relationship between man and nature. In the literary texts, through the nature imagery, man-woman

relationship, culture, tourism, gender construct etc. the issues of environment has been studied which

have wider meanings than what is actually exhibited in their literal expressions. William Howarth in

“Some Principles of Ecocriticism” observes, “Since ecology studies the relations between species and

habitats, ecocriticism must see its complicity in what it attacks…….we cast nature and culture

opposites, in fact they constantly mingle, like water and soil in a flowing water”(69). The aim of such

ecocritical works is to examine the environmental limits and make us aware of the fact that we have

reached the line where we are exploiting the planet’s basic life support system for our materialistic

needs. Glen A. Love in Practical Ecocriticism says:

The disquieting fact is that we have grown inured to the bad news of human and natural disasters. . .

.Actual instances of radiation poisoning, chemical or germ warfare, all rendered more threatening by the

rise of terrorism. Industrial accidents like that in Bhopal, India, where the death toll lies between 20,000

and 30,000. Destruction of the planet’s protective ozone layer. The overcutting of the world’s remaining

great forests. An accelerating rate of extinction of plants and animals, estimated at 74 species per day

and 27,000 each year. The critical loss of arable land and groundwater through desertification,

contamination, and the spread of human settlement. Overfishing and toxic poisoning of the world’s

oceans. (14-15)

The Glass of Palace as an Ecocritical Reading

Colonialism has been a substantial reason in the devastation of environment globally. Because of this,

the transformation in the social and cultural environment of the world has completely changed the

representations of man’s attitude towards nature in literary expressions. Among the Indian writers like


Salman Rushdie, Vikram Seth, V. S. Naipaul, Kiran Desai and many more, there is one writer who has

chosen Fiction as a tool to mark a new pattern in writing novels with post-modern thoughts and

emotions, Amitav Ghosh, is one of among the postmodernists. Among his various themes like diaspora,

cultural fragmentation, search for love and identity, voyages etc. there is one more aspect of his

tremendous writing is the attitude of mankind towards environment or nature. The present paper will be

dealing with this sensitive relationship of Man and Nature in the novel of Amitav Ghosh, The Glass

Palace, published in 2000 which shows how the British intervention in the South Asia has caused the

environmental damages which resulted into the destruction and dislocation triggered by it and the

approach which deals with the study of representations of nature in literary works and of the relationship

between literature and the environment termed as “Ecocriticism”.

Amitav Ghosh throws light on the imperialist modes of social, cultural and ecological dominance in his

fourth novel The Glass Palace. The novel points out that how colonialization has brutally exploded in

the South Asia and results into the environmental degradation and spoils the green culture. The novel is

interlocked in the various historical events like colonization of Burma by the British, the First World

War, and conquest of Japan over Russia, the intense changes wrought by World War II etc. It’s a story

that initiates in Mandalay in the year 1885 and extents up to the three generations. The British force,

consists with more Indians, invaded Mandalay and King, Thebaw and forced to leave Mandalay with

Queen, Supayalat along with the attendants and compelled to live in Ratnagiri, in India. The Protagonist

of the novel, Rajkumar Raha with his family, is the key character for Amitav Ghosh and he uses it to

explain the politics of conspiracy and conflict to British colonialism.

The Glass Palace is a truly example to justify the term “Ecocriticism” which focuses on one of the

major concerns of ecocriticism, the environmental degradation or the degradation of the green culture.

The novel has an ample of incidents of ecocidal damages which occur during the colonialization in

Mandalay. The prime intention of British invasion over Mandalay is the teak forests which they want to

convert into the timber yards for their commercial purposes. Therefore the logs of wood is the cause of

the war and the British intervention in the South Asia results into an unusual eruption of deforestation

where the large species of flora and fauna were rubbed out to make for commercially money spinning

plantations, timber factories and industries. Such green devastation has been observed by one of the

major characters of the novel, Dolly, while roaming around the rubber plantation, observes the changes

in landscape and says:


They headed through the rubber trees. . . The ground underfoot had a soft, cushioned

feel, because of the carpet of dead leaves shed by the tress. . . It was like being in

wilderness, but not yet. . . But this was like neither city nor farm nor forest: there was

something eerie about its uniformity; about the fact that such sameness could be

imposed upon a landscape of such natural exuberance. . . ‘It’s like stepping into a

labyrinth,’ she said to Elsa. (The Glass of Palace 199)

Here Amitav Ghosh aims at the deterioration of the entropy for the human beings by human beings

itself. As William Rueckert says, “Green plants, for example, are among the most creative organisms.

They are nature’s poets”(111). We are the destroyer of ourselves which will lead to the extinction of the

both worlds, human and non-human. Ghosh has shown this horrible and terrible sight of the

colonialization. Lynn White, JR. depicts this picture in his essay “Historical Roots of our Ecological

Crisis” and mentions that the Europeans became mighty by the end of the fifteenth century, “By the end

of the fifteenth century the technological superiority of Europe was such that its small, mutually hostile

nations could spill out over all the rest of the world, conquering, looting, and colonizing” (7). The Glass

Palace instigates how the colonization of people devastated the human and non-human world for their

commercial purposes and misuses the wilderness. Amitav Ghosh points out to this business of nature at

the hands of the British colonialists. Christopher Manes in his essay “Nature and Silence” opines,

“Nature is silent in our culture….”(15). This is the reason Man always considers himself superior to

nature as he is the only creature on this earth who is bestowed with the ability to speak and is destroying

the physical environment for its contentment. This statement can be clearly found in the novel where the

writer serves the unkind behavior of timber merchants towards our environment. This incident proves to

be the best example of degradation of green culture by Amitav Ghosh as he describes the chopping of

the trees as assassination and killing of the trees; which also reflects his ecological vision and his

concern for the non-human forms that are degraded day by day.

In the dry season, when the earth cracked and the forests wilted . . . this was the season for the

timbermen to comb the forest for teak. The trees, once picked, had to be killed . . . the killing was

achieved with a girdle of incision, thin slits, carved deep into the wood at a height of four feet and six

inches off the ground (teak being ruled, despite the wildness of its terrain, by imperial stricture in every

tiny detail).

The assassinated trees were left to die where they stood, sometimes for three years or even more. (69)


Mircea Eliade writes, “All over the world learning the language of animals, especially of birds, is

equivalent to knowing the secrets of nature…..” (98) The human form should understand this silent

language of nature as we are part of it not the master of it. The Glass Palace demonstrates this picture in

one of the incidents where the tame elephants are used for the transportation as the Europeans find them

perfect for their commercial profits:

Yet until the Europeans came none of them had ever thought of using elephants for the

purpose of logging . . . It was the Europeans who saw that tame elephants could be

made to work for human profit . . . the entire way of life is their creation . . . this

method of girdling trees, these ways of moving logs with elephants, this system of

floating them downriver . . . (74, 75)

These words of Saya John to Rajkumar absolutely focus on the green imperialism. Dislocation of

thousands is also a brutal face of the colonization and this face has a fine portrait in the novel, when

King Thebaw is on his way to exile recounts the incidents when the British has brought the Indians to

Rangoon for their profit. He says:

Many Indians lived there. . .The British had brought them there, to work in the docks

and the mills, to pull rickshaws and empty the latrines. . .What vast , what

incomprehensible power, to move people in such huge numbers from one place to

another- emperors, kings, farmers, dockworkers, soldiers, coolies, policemen. Why?

Why this furious movement- people taken from one place to another, to pull rickshaws,

to sit blind in exile? (49-50)

Another degradation of the natural resource in the novel is the oil tanks at Yenangyaung on the Eastern

banks at Irrawady. It is the place where petroleum naturally comes out from the earth. And the

foreigners want to take the advantage of it and can reach to any extent. They have gained the control

over these oil pools and tanks and imperialized the local people of the town tiwn-zas. They have

exploited the people by imperializing them and robbed the natural resources and their respective lands.

Here Amitav Ghosh portrays the harsh reality of the colonization that how the colonialization remains

the reason for the degradation of the green culture. He focuses on the never ending human greed which

is not only perishing the environment but also humans. This callous description of the colonizers is as

follows:


Many of Yenangyaung’s pools had been worked for so long that the level of oil had

sunk beneath the surface, forcing their owners to dig down. In this way, some of the

pools had gradually become wells, a hundred feet deep or even more- great oil- sodden

pits, surrounded by excavated sand and earth. Some of these wells were so heavily

worked that they looked like small volcanoes, with steep, conical slopes. At these

depths the oil could no longer be collected simply by dipping a weighted bucket: twin-

zas were lowered in, on ropes, holding their breath like pearl divers. (123)

The destruction of the mankind and nature has the deplorable picture in the novel. Amitav Ghosh

highlights the annihilations like the bombardments, emission of the toxic gases in the environment,

number of casualties, destruction of water fronts and mills. The attackers have demolished the ware

houses, oil tanks and the thriving sounds of bombarding; the hazardous clouds of smoke are the creators

of air and noise pollution and a threat to the human and non-human worlds and ardently contributing in

the environmental degradation. Harold Fromm in “From Transcendence to Obsolescence: A Route

Map” uses a phrase for humans “man unconquerable mind”(21), which is truly evident in The Glass of

Palace:

The first bombs fell several miles away, the explosions following in evenly spaced

rhythmic succession. Suddenly there was booming sound, several times louder than all

the proceeding blasts. From somewhere in the eastern reaches of the city, a huge cloud

of black smoke mushroomed up towards the sky, almost engulfing the bombers. .

.People had been crouching along the walls of the telegraph office when the water

source was hit. Many had died. Dismembered limbs could be seen in the pool that

spinning around the main: there was a child’s arm, a leg. . .(461-62)

This invincible and insuperable attitude of man towards nature and mankind itself is a threat to the

world. In this regard, Willian Rueckert rightly says, “In ecology, man’s tragic flaw is his anthropocentric

(as opposed to bio centric) vision, and his compulsion to conquer, humanize, domesticate, violate, and

exploit every natural thing”(112).

Conclusion

Therefore, the study of The Glass of Palace highlights that the ecocritical study of the literary texts


would be a cautionary warning to human world that the exploitation of nature over a period of time will

lead to an outburst of nature. Literature is the source which can bring the light in the field of ecology

and increase the awareness among us towards the non-human world. William Ruckert says, “We need to

make some connections between literature and the sun, between teaching literature and the health of the

biosphere”(109), Amitav Ghosh treats Nature as an expressive tool in his novel and explains the

engagement of the human world with non-human world. The environmental concerns blended with the

historical events are the leading track of this novel. He demonstrates in the novel that the colonialization

is not the only demolisher of the environment but also of the mankind. Amitav Ghosh has diagnosed the

causes of integration and disintegration of the various agencies of ecology and study the representation

of the various ecological concerns in The Glass of Palace.

References

Eliade, Mircea. Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. Print.

Fromm, Harold. “From Transcendence to Obsolescence: A Route Map.” The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed. Cheryll

Glotfelty and Harold Fromm. Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

Ghosh, Amitav. The Glass of Palace. Noida: HarperCollins Publishers, 2014. Print.

Glotfelty, Cheryll. “Introduction: Literary Studies in an Age of Environmental Crisis.” The Ecocriticism Reader.

Ed. Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

Howarth, William. “Some Principles of Ecocriticism.” The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed. Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold

Fromm. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

Love, Glen A. “Revaluing Nature”. The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed. Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm.

Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

---. Practical Ecocriticism: Literature, Biology and the Environment. London: Virginia UP, 2003. Print.

Manes, Christopher. “Nature and Silence.” The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed. Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold

Fromm. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

Meeker, Joseph W. The Comedy of Survival: Studies in Literary Ecology. New York: Scribner’s, 1972. Print.

Rueckert, William. “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism” The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed.

Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm. Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

White, JR Lynn. “The Historical roots of our Ecologic Crisis.” The Ecocriticism Reader. Ed. Cheryll Glotfelty

and Harold Fromm. Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia Press, 1996. Print.

Documents

The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I · PDF file · 2017-02-01The Global Journal of Literary Studies I December 2016 I Volume II, Issue IV ISSN : 2395 4817 Ecocriticism