Alison Gryzlo

Dr. Garner

Cambridge International Summer Schools Programme

Research Paper

Climate Fiction

Introduction

The apocalyptic novel is a popular category of literature due to its terrifyingly

realistic scenarios that usually lead to the end of the world as we know it. These novels

have been written for centuries, with a wide range of disastrous occurrences, such as

floods, fires, and scientific feats gone awry. However, human error always seems to be

the cause of these disasters, leading one to wonder if these adversities are analogous to

something more real.

Dr. Jenny Bavidge’s class at Cambridge University, “Cli-Fi? Climate Change and

Contemporary Fiction,” focused on literature relevant to climate change. She theorized

that apocalyptic literature might be attempting to teach us something about the modern

issue of global warming, which is a dangerously real concern that may just spark the end

of the world. Dr. Bavidge explained how authors create grandiose catastrophes that could

represent a more realistic demise of the world. This leads to the creation of a book

concerned with the inevitable doom of the Earth, actually due to the very real issue of

climate change. She called this genre of fiction “Cli-Fi”, which stands for Climate

Fiction. This classification consists of novels that focus on an environmental issue that

wreaks havoc on humans.

1

Does this “Cli-Fi” genre really exist? I will give some examples of literature that may

fit the stipulated criteria for Cli-Fi. I will then delve into a heavier question: can Cli-Fi

literature in any way help halt climate change?

Climate Fiction or Fantastical Nonsense?

Is climate change really the modern day apocalypse? Do contemporary authors use

the novel as a tool to portray global warming as the apocalypse in order raise

environmental awareness? Does much apocalyptic literature, unbeknownst to the reader,

stem from the issue of climate change? I thought this was a bit of a stretch, but after

reading some climate fiction novels for this class, I understood where Dr. Bavidge was

coming from.

Dr. Bavidge showed the class a graph that expressed the chilling fact that global

warming is increasing at a steady rate. I was not unfamiliar with this fact, but she also

shared that popular fiction authors, such as Margaret Atwood and Ian McEwan, have

written novels in which the world is doomed due to climate change. The copious amount

of literature written in which climate change is an incessant force may warrant its own

genre: Cli-Fi.

Dr. Bavidge began the first class with some statistics that, sadly, were not

shocking. She remarked that one in ten species in the world are at risk for extinction, due

to the excess of pollution that human life needs in order to sustain a certain standard of

life (Thomas, 145). According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA), greenhouse gas emissions have steadily increased from 1990 to the present day

(Berglund). I believe that the most optimistic of people would agree that counteracting

2

the damage we have done is impossible, regardless of increased awareness that climate

fiction bolsters.

Authors have reacted to this inevitable demise of Mother Earth by crafting novels

centered on climate change disaster. Dr. Bavidge posited that authors take an

“ecocritical” approach to the novel, which means that the concern lies in the treatment of

the environment, as opposed to the human characters driving the plot. Professor Kate

Rigby of Monash University introduces ecocriticism as it “remembers the earth by

rendering an account of the indebtedness of culture to nature…They are concerned to

revalue the more-than-human natural world, to which some texts and cultural traditions

invite us to attend. In this way, ecocriticism has a vital contribution to make to wider

project of Green Studies, which, in Laurance Coupe’s words, “debates ‘Nature’ in order

to defend nature” (153). By this, Rigby means that human nature would not exist without

the influence that environmental nature has on human existence. She defends the

“inextricability of culture and nature”, in which nature is imbedded in every aspect of

human life, specifically culture (Rigby, 2).

Lawrence Buell, professor at Harvard University, created a checklist of

characteristics that compromise “Environmentally-Oriented” literature. These are

nonfiction novels in which “the nonhuman environment is present not merely as a

framing device” in the novel. In contrast to the classic nonfiction novel, which Buell

would deem anthropocentric, environmentally oriented literature understands that human

interest is not the only legitimate interest. Buell’s four main criteria to classify

Environmentally-Oriented literature are as follows: human interest is not understood as

the only legitimate interest, humans hold accountability for the well-being of the

3

environment, and the environment is portrayed as a process rather than a constant in the

text. Many novels fit Buell’s criteria for Environmentally Oriented literature, including

some books I read for the class at Cambridge.

As part of Dr. Bavidge’s class, I read the novel Oryx and Crake by popular

Canadian author Margaret Atwood. Atwood creates a world in which science has taken

over. Almost everything is artificial; even the animals slaughtered for consumption, large

pig-like creatures with sharp tusks and a vicious personality called “pigoons.” The

exponential increase in technology crafted a human race in which human worth is boiled

down solely to intellectual potential. People pump out new inventions at an absurd pace

for the sake of generating new technology alone. One invention, the ChickiNob, is a non-

sentient animalistic mechanism that produces chicken breasts through a web of tubers.

The people have completely lost touch with human feeling—the only emotions

they display is passion creating newer and better technology to make life even easier.

Things got so out of hand that the main corporation, HealthWyzer, modified a fatal

disease and implanted it in foods throughout the world. HealthWyzer created the sole

cure for this disease, in order to reap the benefits from people’s deteriorating health.

Mankind escalated into a callous, inhumane body of beings.

The main character, Jimmy, grows up in the world with his best friend, Crake.

Jimmy always felt inferior to Crake, for he was always invested in knowledge, acquiring

more information, inventing new gizmos. Crake spends his life at college in secrecy,

working on a project Jimmy later finds out is called “Paradice.” This is an artificial land

in which Crake created his own race of people, deemed “Crakers.” Once Crake brings

4

Jimmy into Paradice, revealing his life’s work, he instantly kills himself, leaving Jimmy

alone with the man-made beings.

HealthWyzer’s vaccine cure for their synthetic plague ends up wiping out most of

mankind, leaving Jimmy alone in Paradice with the Crakers. Jimmy is now a stranger in

the world, the last remaining human that he knows of. He chooses to lead the Crakers,

creating a new identity, calling himself “Snowman.” He proceeds to live like a savage in

this post-apocalyptic world, rummaging for food and evading ravenous pigoons that roam

free.

This novel depicts the devolving of mankind into a man-made horror-stricken,

apocalyptic world. By focusing solely on taking from the environment in order to

produce manufactured inventions, humans created their own demise. Mankind’s

egocentricity and disregard for the planet led to the loss of the world. Similarly, these

character flaws of man are slowly killing our planet.

For the Climate Fiction class, I also read Flight Behavior by Barbara Kingsolver.

This novel also used the environment as a driving force to carry the plot. For example, an

entire population of monarch butterflies veered off their course of migration due to a

change in global temperature, causing them to land in the Appalachia region of the

United States. The butterflies usually settle in Mexico, but a dramatic change in climate

drove the swarm to a mountaintop owned by Dellaboria and Cub, a couple who own a

sheep farm. While they want to sell the mountaintop to cut down the trees for timber,

they face the conflict of destroying the butterflies’ only current habitat. While reading,

the human conflict was more engaging than the interests of the butterfly population or the

well-being of the environment. However, this novel satisfies Buell’s checklist for

5

environmentally-oriented literature, for the environment is seen as a process, rather than a

given constant. The humans in the novel are held accountable for the future of the

butterflies, and human interest is not the only legitimate interest.

The natives of the Southern town all trek to see the butterflies, using them as a

source of pleasure for themselves. But Dellaboria, the owner of the land, recognizes that

these butterflies are not here for a natural reason. Once she discovers that they are in

danger of becoming extinct, she campaigns to preserve the mountaintop in order to save

the monarch population. The people of the town would not believe the monarchs were in

danger without seeing it firsthand. When trudging up the mountain to view the flying

insects, hundreds of thousands lie dead on the ground, unable to survive amidst the

climate. The more-than-human natural world is deteriorating around the human world,

causing a greater issue. Satisfying the human need of monetary gain is in direct conflict

with the environmental need of saving a species from extinction.

Despite the many examples of Cli-Fi in contemporary literature, the Cli-Fi tag has

not been accepted as a legitimate genre. Buell notes that “Environmental nonfiction,

however, gets studied chiefly in expository writing programs and in ‘special topics’

courses offered as the humanities’ tithe to environmental studies programs or to indulge a

colleague’s idiosyncrasies, rather than as bona fide additions to the literature curriculum”

(Buell 9). This is not surprising, for anything considered somewhat environmental falls

under the umbrella of Environmental Studies, not Literature. I do believe this will change

in the future, as long as climate change continues to threaten the well-being of the Earth.

Unfortunately, humans seem to care about climate change only when it affects them

directly, such as hindering their drive to work or causing a snowstorm that impedes one’s

6

vacation. Cli-Fi literature can help by having readers empathize with characters, then

experiencing the destruction of their lives through instances that do not seem so far-

fetched. Mankind needs Cli-Fi as its own genre in order to alert the world that the

apocalypse is not just a fantasy, but an all too reality.

Dr. Bavidge then showed us a poem titled Darkness by Lord Byron, which

expressed the inevitable demise of the world in beautiful prose. This poem is deeply

relevant to the modern issue of climate change. Written in 1818, long before global

warming was identified, Lord Byron comprehends the enormity of the impending doom

bound to reign over the Earth. How did people in the nineteenth century comprehend the

tragic destiny bound to terminate the Earth as we know it?

Lord Byron addresses the fact that the universe will one day cease, leaving all

beautiful nature extinguished. An excerpt expressing human desperation to survive

amidst the darkness reveals human futility once the damage has been done:

[“A fearful hope was all the world contain’d; Forests were set on fire—but hour by hour

They fell and faded—and the crackling trunks Extinguish’d with a crash—and all was

black.”] (Byron, 1818)

Lord Byron sees that humans are the root of disaster. He exploits the hubris of human

projects, such as “War, which for a moment was no more”, suggesting that humans are

solely responsible for the doom they face. The dark famine that overran the world left the

world “Seasonless, herbless, treeless, manless, lifeless—A lump of death—a chaos of

hard clay.” Byron’s imagery rendered a sublime feeling inside of me, with its description

of feats of nature that cease to exist. His tone is barren, hopeless, lifeless, matching the

7

depressing situation at hand. Man is miniscule in relation to the universe, and yet we are

slowly killing our world in order to sustain our masses of lives.

It is fascinating that even in the nineteenth century, the world’s end was a topic of

concern. It is hard to believe that Bryon wrote this poem with the intention of it being

fantastical and out-of-reach; in fact I believe he had a serious trepidation about the

possible end of the world. The poem begins “I had a dream, which was not at all a

dream,” which insinuates that the speaker did indeed experience this demise of the

universe.

I find it difficult to maintain that no one took Lord Byron’s poem seriously in the

nineteenth century. Currently, there are drastic measures taken in order to reverse the

effects of climate change, however this is simply because we are experiencing the worst

effects of it. Byron jumped the gun, confronting the existent threat with a phantasmagoric

state, although it was not close to happening in his lifetime. This apocalyptic poem

meshes realistic dangers with a surreal nostalgia about human life that one day will come

to an end. One in ten species are already expected to go extinct at a steady rate, and it is

only a matter of time before Homo sapiens are among them (Thomas, 145).

This pull towards literary apocalypse represents the all too real threat mankind is

already facing. Literature forces the reader to face the negative effects that human choices

have on the environment. Timothy Morton of the Harvard University Press writes, “…

nowadays we’re used to wondering what a poem says about race or gender, even if the

poem makes no explicit mention of race or gender. We will soon be accustomed to

wondering what any text says about the environment even if no animals or trees or

mountains appear in it.” Morton wrote this in The Ecological Thought in 2011, a very

8

recent excerpt. He makes a fine point indicating that environmental issues are not always

in the foreground of the literature, but almost always linger in the background

overlooked. The environment’s presence in literature will progressively manifest into the

foreground, obliging readers to confront the issues head-on.

I do not hesitate to posit that Lord Byron’s Darkness is a warning for the near

future, however I do not think this poem should be placed under the Cli-Fi genre. Byron

does display anxiety through his vivid image of the demise of the Earth as we know it,

but it is impossible to know if it is about climate change in particular. This poem is

evocative of unease and distress over the future state of the world, like any apocalyptic

work. By embellishing the potential end of mankind, Byron has created a futuristic horror

during his time. Sadly, his vision is slowly coming to life as we continue to utilize the

Earth for our luxurious, unnecessary comforts. We can only hope that this poem will

never be deemed nonfiction.

Dr. Bavidge began the first class by positing an interesting idea: all apocalyptic

literature is forewarning of the imminent doom of Mother Earth. Claiming Shelly’s

Frankenstein, and even modern day television shows like The Walking Dead, are

representative of climate change, I thought was a grandiose claim.

While we did not discuss Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein extensively, I put

some thought into why she would bring it up in a class centered on Climate Fiction. Dr.

Bavidge suggested that Frankenstein could be considered a dramatization of climate

change. Written in 1817, the height of Romanticism, Frankenstein yielded to the

Romantic movement through its emphasis on horror, the sublime, and nature’s effect on

9

the human being. Rejecting the Enlightenment’s emphasis on scientific rationalization,

the Romantic period celebrates naturalness and purity.

The pursuit of knowledge is a recurring theme in the novel, for Victor

Frankenstein seeks to create life through the parts of deceased people. He disregards the

potential dangers of giving life to a creation of dead parts, which is comparable the

manner in which humans disregard the harmful effects they have on the Earth until it is

too late.

Nature is symbolic of the sublime in this novel, however this is not uncommon in

Romantic literature. Nature is a static element in the novel, always in the backdrop of the

evolving plot. While the seasons do change and the surrounding nature does alter, nature

is not a significant force in the catastrophe of the novel. It is simply a tool used to bolster

the events of the plot. This makes it hard to see this novel through the lens of climate

change, when indeed the climate is a stationary force that provides comfort and solace for

the characters. Perhaps it emphasizes the importance of nature for human life, but Shelley

represents it as a force that is always present, rather than a deteriorating entity that ought

to be preserved.

Frankenstein’s monster led a lonely, solitary life, rejected by society due to his

hideous appearance. He initially acts with the intention for the greater good, such as

gathering wood for a poverty-stricken family. However, humans disregard the kind

actions, simply because they are disgusted by his appearance. This indicates that Shelly’s

intention was to expose the human flaw of drawing judgment. While the creature was

doing nice things with good intentions, mankind responded with hate, merely due to his

appearance. This seems analogous to racism. Mankind’s initial reaction to someone who

10

physically looks different to the majority is disgust and hatred. Shelly does a fantastic job

in causing the reader to empathize with the monster, being embarrassed of mankind. This

has more to do with disappointment in the human race’s reactions to differences rather

than their responsibility for the demise of the Earth. However, these two ideas go hand-

in-hand: mankind’s treatment of Frankenstein’s monster is analogous to how we treat the

world. I think that is what Dr. Bavidge was referring to when she brought up this novel.

Envious of human interactions and love, the monster becomes livid, destroying

everything in his path. This premise makes Frankenstein a human-oriented novel, due to

emphasis on emotional turmoil, human character flaws, and ignorance of mankind. In

response to his rejection, the monster’s jealousy, depression, and rage manifest, sparking

him to kill, filling the role that mankind has already cast him in.

After secluding himself and observing family interactions, the monster eventually

decides it is his right to a female companion. Witnessing the world around him and the

connections people make, the monster grows jealous and disappointed, and so he

demands Victor to create again. This could be analogous to the rights of the environment

that are frequently overlooked because it is perceived as a stagnant force, always

surrounding our everyday lives. We focus on our own needs, disregarding those of the

world that supports us. Victor refuses to create another, and so the monster sets out to

seek revenge on the human race.

While it is a typical representation of literature in the Romantic era, Frankenstein

does have some Cli-Fi elements. Although the monster’s ugly appearance is the primary

reason people hate him, he is also an entirely unnatural character. Created from the body

parts of corpses and infused with chemicals, he is completely artificial. Similar to

11

factories pumping out radioactive pollution and manmade cars emitting fossil fuels, the

monster is a byproduct of human invention. He is a scientific collaboration that ends up

wreaking havoc on the human race. This seems eerily similar to climate change, for

humans themselves have created the mechanisms that sparked global warming.

However, it seems as though Victor Frankenstein, the human being who created

the monster out of secrecy and the sheer drive to push the limits, is the true monster.

Similar to man being the direct cause of the demise of the Earth, Victor Frankenstein is at

fault for his creation. By abandoning his creation in a world where he is undeniably

alienated, Victor is the true monster. This could be analogous with how the human race

pushes the boundaries, satisfying short-term “necessities”, which in reality are luxuries.

Using up the world’s oil to pump our gargantuan cars full of gas, heating our homes year-

round, fueling airplanes for millions of flights a day, all culminate to produce a real-life

monster: global warming. This monster is more life-threatening than Victor’s because

when it snaps, it is the whole human race that ends.

This novel would not be classified under Buell’s environmentally-oriented

literature, for the nonhuman environment is portrayed as a framing device for the humans

in the novel. The interests are solely focused on the monster’s lack of love, causing this

novel to spark empathy, compassion, and love; feelings that are strictly human.

While comparing the moral of Frankenstein to that of climate change is a stretch,

Shelley did intend to point the finger at mankind, as opposed to the monster, which is

indeed the conclusion in the Cli-Fi novel. Mankind rejected the monster based solely on

physical appearance, but ironically, it was mankind that gave the monster life. Shelley

makes us realize that sometimes we ourselves are the problem, but also the solution.

12

While human blunder did elicit the demise of the world, the climate remained a static

force unharmed throughout the novel.

Halting the Issue

Since I have stipulated that climate fiction does indeed exist in an obscure and

complicated way, can this genre of literature aid in halting climate change? Is raising

awareness enough to stimulate people to take action?

The fact is this: there are more pressing issues in the minds of human beings than

the status of the environment. Tending to children, ensuring our elderly are well-off,

managing money-- the object of desire that runs our world. Raising awareness will

simply not stimulate action unless we are under direct pressure to survive ourselves.

British philosopher Derek Parfit postulates a rational idea for this behavior in

humans. In his “Future Generations: Future Problems”, he rationalizes current human

beings’ neglect for the environment. He poses a “Risky Policy”: where people have a

choice between two policies. One would be totally safe for two centuries, while the other

would pose risks in the future. If the Risky Policy were chosen, the standard of living

would be higher for the current generations. As a result of choosing the Risky Policy for

the benefit of the current generation, there is a catastrophe two centuries later, in which

leaked wastes kill thousands of people (Parfit, 115). Parfit maintains that the same

individuals would be born two centuries later no matter what the situation. Is it our duty

to protect future generations that may or may not come into existence? The Risky choice

only adversely affects the people of the future. Parfit questions if it is morally relevant to

adhere to their needs, given the fact that they are currently non-existent.

13

Parfit’s view of future generations is how people currently view the climate

change situation. If it isn’t going to affect me in my lifetime, then I am not going to do

anything about it. The conclusion is this: we owe our future generations absolutely squat,

given the assumption that they would rather have existed for a period of time rather than

not.

Do we owe it to our future generations to preserve the environment and ensure a

life unhindered by disaster? Edith Brown Weiss, Francis Cabell Brown professor of

International Law, puts it beautifully, “This we know: the Earth does not belong to man:

the man belongs to the Earth…Whatever befalls the Earth, befalls the sons of the Earth.

Man did not weave the thread of life; he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the

web he does to himself” (Weiss, 1). This quote encapsulates man’s presence on Earth.

The Earth is where we dwell, therefore whatever happens to our environment also

happens to us, for it affects our state of living. Man is just a part of life, not the all-

powerful creator.

A recent poem titled “Here Lies Our Land”, written in 2011 by Scottish poet

Kathleen Jamie, expresses the importance of the land over the human being. In just a few

simple lines, Jamie recognizes the respect and love we as humans owe the land. It begins,

“Here lies our land: every airt

Beneath swift clouds, glad glints of sun,

Belonging to none but itself.”

In these lines, Jamie chooses to acknowledge that the land exists apart from

mankind. It continues,

“We are mere transients, who sing

14

It’s westlin’ winds and fernie braes,

Northern lights and siller tides,

Small folk playing our part.” (Jamie, 2011)

Jamie’s tone suggests a quiet, humble adoration for the land, which is not

common to come across in contemporary literature. The recognition that we, as people,

are “mere transients” displays how futile our existence on Earth is, in relation to how

long the Earth has been around. We are passing by, living as consumers until the day we

die. But Mother Earth is always here, existing for eons and providing us with the ability

to live.

I think it would be shameful to consider this poem as Climate Fiction, simply for

acknowledging the respect we, as humans, owe our land. This should be a fact that

everyone knows and embodies, rather than an insightful realization. Unfortunately in the

current state of the environment, we as humans need it beaten into our heads that the

environment deserves an inherent respect in itself, for providing not just human life, but

all life to thrive. By taking advantage of Mother Earth’s resources as we do, the human

species has developed an utter dependence without regard to the consequences.

I believe it would be wishful thinking to maintain that the production of literary

fiction could in some way halt climate fiction. It does help raise awareness about the

pressing issue, which is beneficial in minimizing ignorance. However, people will be not

be encouraged to take action unless the issue affects them directly in the here and now.

These books’ preaching may be as effective as vegetarians boycotting meat. You can

refrain from eating it all you want, but it is still going to continue being produced and

consumed, end of story.

15

While it is reasonable to assume that Cli-Fi literature can raise awareness about

the pressing issue of global warming, it is a futile attempt to halt the actual threatening

process. I encourage the production of environmentally-oriented literature for the sake of

Mother Earth, but it is going to take a lot more than some catastrophic novels to reverse

the incoming tide. Like Lord Byron, I believe the Darkness has already been cast.

16

Bibliography

Atwood, Margaret. Oryx and crake. Random House LLC, 2004.

Bavidge, Jenny. “Cli-Fi?” Cambridge University International Summer Schools Programme. 7-11 Jul, 2014. Lecture.

Buell, Lawrence. The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, Nature Writing, and the Formation of American Culture. Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Berglund, Ronald L., Susanne A. Cordery-Cotter, and Roberto G. Morales. "Assessing and Controlling Emissions of Greenhouse Gases: A Pragmatic Perspective for the Oil and Gas Industry."

Byron, George Gordon Byron Baron. Darkness. University of Toronto, 2003.

Jamie, Kathleen. Here Lies Our Land. 2011

Kingsolver, Barbara. Flight Behaviour. Faber & Faber, 2012.

Morton, Timothy. The Ecological Thought. Harvard University Press 2011.

Parfit, Derek. “Future Generations: Further Problems.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 11, No. 2 113-172. Princeton University Press 1982. JSTOR. Web. 9 Aug. 2014.

Rigby, Kate. “Ecocrticism” in Julian Wodfreys (ed.) Introducing Criticism at the Twenty-First Century, Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2006. 151-178.

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein. Plain Label Books, 1966.

Thomas, Chris D., et al. "Extinction risk from climate change." Nature 427.6970 (2004): 145-148.

Weiss, Edith Brown. “Our Rights and Obligations to Future Generations for the Environment.” American Journal of International Law Vol 13, 1991.

17