What I found most interesting in comparing Buell and Garrard is the extension of the apocalyptic genre from Garrard in Buell's "Toxic Discourse." This makes it a more social concern and the apocalyptic is placed within "everyone's backyard." This is reinforced by the Silko and Berry readings in that they challenge readers to make the most mundane landscapes "the center of the world" by demonstrating the dignity of marginalized "spaces" and demonstrating the interconnectedness of living things.
While Buell was mostly theory on the matter, what he chose to present had a clear purpose: to get his audience to think about how the ecological safety of places can be determined by class. This is apparent in reference to Wideman about the town of Homewood near Pittsburgh. Wideman makes a run down socio-economic disadvantaged area sympathetic, worthy of renewal, and beautiful. I thought of Wideman many times when reading Silko's essay.
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeleteAgain, good job presenting the other night.
I mentioned this on Si-Yang's blog too, but the idea of social class and toxic discourse constantly turns my mind towards the fast food industry. It will be interesting to see where our segment on this topic takes us.
Agree~ Writing about place and ecology can't be merely about the physical places.
ReplyDelete