《生态批评视角解析《洪疫之年》中的三重空间》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在学术论文-天天文库。
中图分类号：I1单位代码：11414学号：2015219007题目生态批评视角解析《洪疫之年》中的三重空间学科专业外国语言文学研究方向英美文学硕士生韦君霞指导教师唐建南副教授二零一七年六月 硕士学位论文独创性声明郑重声明：本硕士学位论文是作者个人在导师的指导下，独立进行研究工作所取得的成果。除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文中不包含其他个人和集体已经发表或撰写的研宄成果，也不包含为获得中国石油犬学或者其它单位的学位或证书所使用过的材料，。对本研宄做出贡献的个人和集体均已在论文中做了明确的说明并表示了谢意。作者和导师完全意识到本声明产生的法律后果并承担相应责任。．“作者签名：辛系廢日期：如〕？Ａ日期■■：〇Ｌ〇？，导师签名：（）（（硕士学位论文版权使用授权书本学位论文作者及指导教师完全了解中国石油大学（北京）学位论文版权使＊用的有关规定：保留并向有关部门和机构送交，使用方式包括但不限于学校有权学位论文的复印件和电子版；允许学位论文被查阅和借阐；学校可以公布学位论文的全部或部分内容，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇编学位论文；可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索。本学位论文作者如需公开出版学位论文的部分或全部内容，必须征得导师书一．，且）位面同意须以中国石油大＾（北京为第署名单。以１ｃ作者签名：君禮日期：ｙ导师签名：：日期〇Ｌ〇（＇＇－—Ｉ AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsFirstofall,myheart-feltgratitudegoestomysupervisor,Dr.TangJiannan.Withouthermeticulousguidanceandenlightenment,thethesiscouldnothavebeencompleted.IntheprocessofpursuingmyM.A.program,Dr.Tanghassharedherknowledgeandinsightswithme.WhenIhaddifficultyinmythesis,herthought-provokingadviceandencouragementhelpmegetthrough.Intermsofacademicstudy,herrigorousattitude,criticalthinking,andin-depthknowledgehavebeenasourceofwisdomforme.Secondly,specialthanksshouldbeextendedtoalltheinstructorswhohaveenlightenedmeduringmypostgraduatestudy.AlthoughmyresearchdirectionisBritishandAmericanLiterature,thestudyoflinguistics(CognitiveLinguisticsandVisualGrammarbyProfessorZhaoXiufeng,Systemic-FunctionalLinguisticsbyProfessorChaiTongwen)hasofferedmeinspirationstodoacademicresearches.Theacademicreadings,seminars,andliterarywritinginthoseclasseshavehelpedmelayasolidfoundationforcomposingthisthesis.Thirdly,Iamgratefulfortheinvaluablesuggestionsandencouragementsofmyroommatesandclassmates.ItismygreatpleasuretospendthepasttwoyearsatChinaUniversityofPetroleumwiththemsincewehavenotonlyexchangethoughtsbutalsosharedjoysandsorrowsinlife.Finally,mygratitudeshouldbeexpressedtomybelovedparentsfortheirunconditionalaffectionandsupport.-II- ContentsContents硕士学位论文独创性声明............................................................................................I硕士学位论文版权使用授权书....................................................................................IAcknowledgements.....................................................................................................IIAbstractinEnglish......................................................................................................VAbstractinChinese...................................................................................................VIChapter1Introduction................................................................................................11.1Researchbackground................................................................................11.2Researchobjectivesandresearchquestions.............................................21.3Researchmethodology.............................................................................21.4Organizationofthethesis.........................................................................2Chapter2LiteratureReview......................................................................................32.1ThepreviousstudiesonMargaretAtwood‘sworks.................................32.2ThepreviousstudiesonTheYearoftheFlood........................................72.3Summary.................................................................................................10Chapter3TheoreticalFoundation...........................................................................113.1Ecocriticism............................................................................................113.1.1Fourwavesofecocriticism...........................................................123.1.2Spaceandplace............................................................................153.2Environmentalapocalypticism...............................................................163.3Summary.................................................................................................17Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpaces.................................................................194.1Pleebs:adystopiaofmaterialism...........................................................194.1.1Oppressiononpeople...................................................................204.1.2Commodificationofnature..........................................................214.2HelthWyzerCompound:a―prison‖ofrationalism................................234.2.1Reignofreason.............................................................................234.2.2Dominationonnature...................................................................254.3EdencliffRooftopGarden:aneco-utopiaofEden.................................264.3.1Acknowlegementofemotion.......................................................264.3.2Respecttonature..........................................................................284.4Summary.................................................................................................29Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpaces....................................................................315.1DestructionofPleebs:thecollapseofa―non-place‖.............................315.1.1Non-place.....................................................................................315.1.2Collapseofthenon-place.............................................................32-III- Contents5.2DestructionofHelthWyzerCompound:theviolationofplacejustice..355.2.1―OneTruePlace‖and―ShadowPlace‖........................................355.2.2Exploitationofotherplaces..........................................................365.3DestructionofEdencliffRooftopGarden:thefalloftheutopia............385.3.1Imporosityofspace......................................................................385.3.2Singularculture............................................................................405.4Summary.................................................................................................42Chapter6Conclusion.................................................................................................436.1Majorfindings........................................................................................436.2Limitationsandimplications..................................................................44Bibliography...............................................................................................................46-IV- AbstractAnEcocriticalInterpretationoftheThreeSpacesinTheYearoftheFloodAbstractMargaretAtwoodisaCanadianwriterwhohasachievedinternationalfame.InthenovelTheYearoftheFlood(2009),aWaterlessFlood(aninfectiouspestilence)sweepsthroughtheentiresocietyandbringsanapocalypsetotheearth.Thestoriesofthetwosurvivors,TobyandRen,thenarratorsofthenovel,reflectasocietywithsocialandecologicalcrisis.ThepublicationofTheYearoftheFloodgetsarapturousreceptionfromnumerousscholars.Theyhaveanalyzedthenovelonitsenvironmentalconcerns,theconstructionofdystopia,thetechniqueofclassicalreconstruction,etc.Sofar,therearefewarticlesexploringtheworkonitsspaceconstructionandsenseofplacelessness,sothepaperhopefullycanprovidereaderswithanewperspectiveandalsomakeacontributiontotheresearchonAtwood‘sworks.AnecocriticalreadingofthenovelTheYearoftheFloodfromtheperspectiveofecocriticismrevealstheconstructionofthreespaces:Pleebsisanevildystopiawherepeoplearedestitute,HelthWyzerCompoundisaprisontoupholdthesuperiorityofmindanditsdominanceofthesociety,andEdencliffRooftopGardenisaneco-utopiaaimedatthereconstructionofawonderfulworld.However,allthreespacescollapseonthearrivaloftheWaterlessFloodortheplague.Judgingfromtheplaceresearchinecocriticism,thereasonstoaccountfortheirdestructionareasfollows.Asa―non-place‖withoutplace-attachment,thePleebsbreaksdownbecauseitspeoplecanhardlyprotectitwhentheythemselvesarewallowinginthemireofidentitycrisisandsocialchaos.Asthe―OneTruePlace‖,theCompoundisdestroyedwhenthosespacesfromwhichitderivesthesourceofdevelopmentthroughexploitationcollapse.Asautopiaofimporosityandsingularculture,theEdenclifffallsapartbecauseitsGardenersfailtoresisttheoverwhelmingpowerofevilfromtheoutside.Tosumup,itisimperativetocriticallythinkabouttheplaceconsciousnessinecocriticism:onlybybuildinganopenplacewhereplace-attachmentisensured,placejusticeisasserted,andthecoexistenceofmultipleculturesareallowed,canpeoplereallycareabouttheirplaceortheirhomeland,andthusalleviatethecurrentsocialandecologicalcrisis.Keywords:TheYearoftheFlood;ecocriticism;space;place-V- 摘要生态批评视角解析《洪疫之年》中的三重空间摘要玛格丽特•阿特伍德是位享誉世界的加拿大作家。在《洪疫之年》（2009）中，一场无水的洪水（传染性瘟疫）横扫整个社会，给地球带来了世界末日。小说的叙述者是两位幸存者托比和瑞恩，她们的故事塑造了一个深陷社会生态危机的世界。《洪疫之年》的出版欣起了评论热潮，大多数学者探讨其中的生态意识、反乌托邦社会建构和经典重构的写作手法等。但是，目前为止，从空间和地方的角度分析这部作品的文章屈指可数，所以作者希望论文的研究能够为读者提供不同的阅读视角，并丰富阿特伍德作品的研究。论文从生态批评视角分析小说《洪疫之年》三重空间的不同特点：民不聊生的废市是反乌托邦的罪恶之城，理智至上的大院是掌控社会话语的监狱，旨在重建美好世界的伊甸崖是生态乌托邦。三个空间在洪疫降临时都崩溃瓦解，从生态批评的地方研究角度审视其毁灭原因可以看出：废市是使人们失去地方依恋的“非地方”，水深火热中生活的人们无法与空间实现认同，难以呵护所居之地；大院居民将自己的家园视为“唯一真实的地方”，以牺牲其他空间的利益而获得大院的发展，他们对地方正义的践踏使大院也危在旦夕；伊甸崖是一个单一封闭的地方乌托邦，抹杀多元性、固步自封的理念使其无法抗拒外界强大的邪恶势力，最终走向瓦解。有鉴于此，人们有必要辩证思考生态批评研究中的地方意识，只有建构一个使人们产生依恋、宣扬地方正义、多元开放的地方，才能促使人们真正呵护地方家园，从而缓解当前的社会生态危机。关键字：《洪疫之年》；生态批评；空间；地方-VI- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter1IntroductionMargaretAtwood(1939-),isapoet,novelist,literarycritic,essayist,andenvironmentalactivistinCanada.Asafemalewriterwhoachievesinternationalfame,sheisconsideredas―theQueenofCanadianLiterature‖.Herworkscoverthefieldsofpoetry,fiction,criticism,telescripts,andchildren‘sliterature,concerningthethemesofCanadianidentity,Canadian-Americanrelations,Canadiannationalism,femaleidentity,andglobalenvironment.Theprolificwriterhasreceivedmanyhonorsandawardsforhercontributiontoliteratureandhercountry,includingtheCanadianBookseller‘AssociationAwardforLadyOracle(1976),theCityofTorontoBookAward,twoGovernorGeneral‘sAwardsforTheCircleGame(1996)andHandmaid’sTale(1985),theBookerPrizeforLiteratureforOryxandCrake(2003).Furthermore,TheYearoftheFlood(2009)waslong-listedforthe2011IMPACAward(InternationalDublinLiteraryAward).ThenovelTheYearoftheFloodisthesecondbookofAtwood‘sdystopiantrilogyofwhichthefirstbookisOryxandCrake(2003)andthethirdoneisMaddAddam(2013).TheYearoftheFloodistoldbytwofemalecharacters,TobyandRen.Inthenovel,aWaterlessFloodoraviralpandemicsweepsthroughthewholesociety,whichbringstheapocalypsetotheearth.Thestoriesofthetwosurvivors,TobyandRen,reflectasocietyplaguedwithsocialcrisisandecologicalcrisis.1.1ResearchbackgroundInthenovelTheYearoftheFlood,asacontemporarywriterwithhumanitarianconcerns,MargaretAtwood‘simaginationfullymanifestsherconcernsforourcurrentsociety.Itisabundantlyclearthatthesocietyinthenovelistheepitomeofourcurrentonebecausecontemporarypeople,likethepeopleinthenovel,alsofeeldisorientedinthedeterioratingidentityandsocio-ecologicalcrisis.Withtheprogressinoursociety,peoplearesomaterialisticthattheyalienatethemselvesfromotherpeople,themselvesandnonhumannature,whichexacerbatesthecurrentidentity,socialandecologicalcrisis.Sinceourcurrentsocietyisalsofacedwiththesameproblemsasthoseinthenovel,theapocalypseoftheworlddepictedinthenovelcanraisethepublic‘sawarenesstoourcurrentproblems.Furthermore,bycriticizingthethreespacesinthenovelandcallingonfosteringplace-attachmentandasenseofplace,theauthorhopesthatthediscussioninthethesiscanoffersomesuggestionsonthesolutionsofsomeglobalproblems.AlthoughthenovelTheYearoftheFloodhasbeenstudiedfromtheperspectivesoffeminism,ecocriticism,ecofeminismandwritingskills,fewwritershaveconductedaprofoundandsystematicstudyfromtheangleofspaceandplaceinecocriticism.This-1- Chapter1Introductionstudyismeaningfulinthattheplaceconsciousnessisbelievedtobeoneoftheremediestoabatetheidentity,socialandenvironmentalcrisis.Onlywhenpeoplefindplace-attachmentinaplace,cantheybegintoloveandmakecontributionstotheirplace.Thesenseofplacewillencouragepeopletocareabouttheirrelationshipwithpeoplearoundthemandtheirlivingenvironmentaswell.1.2ResearchobjectivesandresearchquestionsFirstly,thethesisintendstodescribethreespacesinthenovelfromtheperspectiveofecocriticism.Secondly,thestudyappliestheplaceresearchinecocriticismtoillustratethereasonsforthedestructionofthethreespaces.Thirdly,thepaperaimstocallonpeople‘splaceconsciousnesstodealwiththecurrentsocial,identity,andenvironmentalproblems.Followedaretheresearchquestions:(1)Whatarethethreespacesinthenovel?(2)Whyarethethreespacesdestroyedatlast?(3)Howcanplaceconsciousnesshelpdealwiththesocial,identity,andecologicalcrisis?1.3ResearchmethodologyClosereadingbasedonecocriticismisthefundamentalapproachinthisthesis.Thetheoriesofspaceandplaceresearchesinecocriticismareappliedtointerprettheconstructionanddestructionofthethreespaces.Thecharacterization,plot,dialogues,andpsychologicaldescriptionofthenovelbasedonclosereadingareusedtomakeacomprehensiveinterpretationofthetext,revealingthethemesofthenovelandtheimportanceofplaceconsciousnessinthemodernsociety.1.4OrganizationofthethesisThisthesisconsistsofsixchapters.ChapterOneintroducestheresearchbackground,objectives,questions,methodologyandorganizationofthethesis.ChapterTwoistheliteraturereview,analyzingthepreviousstudiesbothonMargaretAtwood‘sworksandthenovelTheYearoftheFlood.ChapterThreeprobesintothetheoreticalfoundationoftheresearch,includingtheintroductionofecocriticismandenvironmentalapocalypticism.ChapterFourdescribestheconstructionconceptsofthethreespaces,thePleebs,theHelthWyzerCompound(abbr.theCompound),andtheEdencliffRooftopGarden(abbr.theEdencliff)inTheYearoftheFlood.ChapterFiveexploresthereasonsforthedestructionofthethreespaces.ChapterSixexplicatesthemajorfindings,limitationsoftheresearch,andimplicationsforthefurtherstudies.-2- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter2LiteratureReviewAsagreatmaster,MargaretAtwoodhaswoninternationalprestigeandshehasbeenstudiedbothabroadandathomebyanumberofdistinguishedcritics.―MargaretAtwood,WilliamShakespeare,andCharlesDickensarethethreewriterswhohavebeenmostlystudiedinwesternuniversitiesofEnglishspeakingcountries‖(Hutcheon,1985:167).Scholarshadestablished―MargaretAtwoodSociety‖inFlorida,America.Moreover,ajournalisentitledMargaretAtwoodSociety.Sofar,internationalorregionalseminarsonMargaretAtwood‘sworksareheldinmanyplacesoftheworld.NowthestudiesonAtwoodhavewitnessedanall-roundeddevelopment.ThischaptermainlypresentsanextensiveoverviewofthepreviousstudiesonMargaretAtwood‘sworks.Inthesecondpartofthechapter,thepreviousstudiesofthenovelTheYearoftheFloodarediscussedfromtheperspectivesoffeminism,ecocriticism,herwritingskillofcanonreconstruction,theconstructionofdystopiaandthethemeofpoliticsinthenovel.2.1ThepreviousstudiesonMargaretAtwood’sworksThestudiesofAtwood‘sworksfromtheperspectiveoffeminismmainlyfocusonherworkssuchasSurfacing(1972),TheEdibleWoman(1969),TheBlindAssassin(2000),TheHandmaid’sTale,andLadyOracle.Specifically,anumberofcriticstendtoapplythefeministapproachtoexplorethethemesofpower,quilting,andmotherimages,etc.Gregersdotter(2003)exploresthepowerofwomeninAtwood‘sCat’sEye(1988),TheRobberBride(1992),andAliasGrace(1996).Thecriticarguesthatwomen‘sfriendshipcanbeformedinapatriarchalsocietyand―femininity‖canbeconstructedthroughthepowerofwatchingeachotherandthemselvesaswellastheirwaysofstorytelling(11).Yuan(2009)elaboratesontheideaofpatchworkquilts,asymbolofsolidarityamongwomeninAtwood‘sworks.Inlightofsomefeminists‘viewthatquiltingownsitslanguagecodesandcanhelpunitefemaleindividuals,Atwoodgetsinspirationfrompatchworksandconveysthepoweroffemaleculturewithherpresentationofquiltinginherworks.Zhang(2013)illustratestheimageofmotherwhoisneglectedbymanyscholarsinthenovelLadyOracle.ZhangexplainsthatAtwoodgivesvoicetothesilentmotherbyusingthegothicwritingskills,whichreconstructsthefemaletraditionandprovidesimaginationspaceforwomen‘ssalvation.Inaddition,theinterdisciplinarystudiesaccountforthelargeproportiontoexploreAtwood‘sfeministthemes,whichintegratesfeminismwithpsychoanalysis,herwritingtechniquesandspatialtheories.AnumberofauthorsareinclinedtoemphasizethethemesofAtwood‘sworksbyintegratingfeminismwithpsychoanalysis,sincethe-3- Chapter2LiteratureReviewmajorityoftheprotagonistsinAtwood‘snovelsarewomenwhosufferfromsomementalproblems.InMaddnessandSexualPoliticsintheFeministNovel:StudiesinBronte,Woolf,LessingandAtwood(1978),BarbaraHillRigneyappliesthefeministpsychoanalysistodemonstratethenamelessfemaleprotagonist‘sfemaleconsciousnessofalienation.Ding(2002)adoptspsychoanalysisandfeminismtoexplorethethemeof―deepeningintounderground‖whichisasymbolofunconsciousillusion(82).ThecriticclaimsthatthesymbolinAtwood‘sworkshelpshercharactersgetridofthethreatofandrocentricsociety,achievetheirpersonalintegrity,andfinallycuretheirmentaldiseases.WiththedevelopmentofthestudiesonAtwood‘sworks,theresearchisnolongerconfinedtothethemes,herwritingartsof―writingback‖inhercanonreconstructionstarttobeausefultooltoexpressherfeministideas.InthebookTheArtofMargaretAtwood:EssaysinCriticism(1981)editedbyArnoldDavidsonandCathyDavidson,therebuildingofherfemaleimagesofCircleandEurydiceintheclassicalstoriesisfurtherdiscussed,focusingonthefemaletransformationandpower.Chen(2006)discussesAtwood‘ssubversiveadaptationofGreekchorusthattakesmalecitizensastherepresentativesinThePenelopiad(2005).ChenarguesthatAtwood‘schorusofmaidservantsinthenovelhasretoldthestoryofPenelopiadbythefeministinthepatriarchalsociety.Sincepowerisrelatedwithspace,inAtwood‘sworksthatareonthecontextofpatriarchywherewomenfailtomaketheirvoicesheard,spatialtheory,especiallythepower-discoursetheoryandmicrophysicstheoryofpowerputforwardbyMichelFoucault(1926-1984)areemployedtoanalyzeherfeministideas.FuandHan(2006)usethepower-discoursetheorytocompareAtwood‘sGertrudeTalksBack(1997)andWilliamShakespeare‘sHamlet(1599).BycomparingthetwofemalecharactersOpheliaandGertrudewiththeparodyoftheclassicwork,theyfindthatAtwoodhasbuiltasimilarimageofGertrudethathasthepowerofdiscourse,whichironicallycriticizestraditionalimageofOphelia.Althoughtwocharactersaresimilarinseparatetexts,theirimagesaredifferentbecauseofthepowerofdiscourse.Atwood‘snationalconsciousnessisanotherimportanttopicinherwritingsbecauseofhercountry‘shistoryandgeographicalbackground.―CanadawasaffiliatedwithUnitedKingdom,butitisnotthecounterpartofUK;althoughitisadjacenttothepowerfulUnitedStatesofAmerica,itcannotbecomparedwithUSA‖(Lan,2008:1).Atwood‘snationalismcanbeillustratedfromthepostcolonialelementsinherworks.InChina,PanShouwenhaspublishedthefirstmonographonAtwood‘sworks,ConstructionandDeconstructionofNationalIdentity:APost-colonialReadingofMargaretAtwood(2007).ThebookaddressestheCanadianpost-colonialityandpost-colonialissuesreflectedinAtwood‘sworks.ProbingintoCanadianhistoryandculture,PandiscussesthetopicsofBritishimperialistheritage,anti-Americanism,-4- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文CanadianFrenchnationalism,Canadianaboriginalculture,Canadianmulticulturalism,andinternationalpoliticsinAtwood‘sworks.Inaddition,becauseofthelackofuniquehistoryandcultureconnotationinmulticulturalCanada,exploredinAtwood‘snovelsarethespecificpost-colonialissuessuchastensionsbetweenCanadaanditsformercolonizers,constructionsofnationality‘sidentity,thecultureofCanadianaborigines,nationalgrowthandsoon.Tolan(2005)examinesthetensionbetweeninsiders(Canadian)andoutsiders(Britishcolonists)inAtwood‘sTheRobberBride(1993),whichrevealsCanadianhistoryofstrugglingtoshakeofftheinfluenceofimperialism.Pan(2007)combinesCanadianmulti-cultureanditshistoryofmigrationtointerpretTheRobberBride.Inthearticle,PanillustratesthattheimageofthefemaleprotagonistXeniawhoisarefugeeinthenovelshapedbyanunreliablenarratorunveilsCanada‘sracediscriminationunderthebackgroundofCanadianmulticulturalism.Zhang(2014)pointsoutthatAtwood‘sworkshavedeepenedandwidenedtheCanadianculture.SinceCanadianliteraturehasbeenrecognizedas―ghostwithoutsoul‖becauseofitslackofhistoricalandculturalaccumulation,ZhangtakesAtwoodasspokespersonofCanadianliteraturesinceherworkshavepresentedachaoticCanadianworldbyseekingCanadiansoul―downward‖,―northward‖,and―past-ward‖(65).DifferentkindsofghostimagesinAtwood‘sworkshaveconstructedthemirrorof―otherworld‖whichreflectsthereality,thusremoldingtheCanadiannationality(ibid).Atwood‘swritingtechniques,especiallyhernarrativestrategiesandherskillofintertextualityalsoarouseheateddiscussionsamongcritics.In1995,HildeStaelsdemonstratesvariousthemesofAtwood‘snovelsbyexploringhernarrativeskillsinthemonographMargaretAtwood’sNovels:AStudyofNarrativeDiscourse.Inthebook,theauthormanifestseightdifferentkindsofnarrativestrategies.Forexample,Atwood‘sstrategyofpolyphonicnarrativeinBodilyHarmisregardedasthecontradictoryresponsesandrivalvoicesoftherepressedtothedominantsocialandmoralcode.ItisworthtoreferthatAtwood‘sthemescanbeusuallyshownfromheruniqueapproachofnarration.Ding(2010)appreciatesAtwood‘suniquenarrationfromthelensofcameras.TheauthorindicatesthatAtwoodhasdepictedaworldfullofdesire,power,controlandviolencefromthe―gaze‖behindthelens,decryingthegenderpoliticsandthesocialideologydominatedbymen.Li(2012)exploresthenarrativeartofMargaretAtwood‘snovelsbyapplyingbothclassicalnarratologyandnewclassicalnarratologytodiscusstheartistictechniquesintheworksfrompost-modernistcontext,whichrevealstherelationsbetweentheformandthecontextofhernovel.TheanalysisofAtwood‘scriticalinheritanceoftraditionalnarrativehelpsdisclosein-depthideologicalandculturalconnotationofhertexts.Moreover,theanalysisofnarrativetechniquesisalsointegratedwiththetraumatictheoryandecocriticism.Wang(2014)interpretsAtwood‘s-5- Chapter2LiteratureReviewCat’sEyeandBlindAssassintotheeffectthatthe―hypochondria‖narrativeofCat’sEyeand―schizophrenic‖narrativeofBlindAssassinaregoodapproachestoformthecontinuumthatconnectthepastwiththefuture,whichhelpsthecharactersconsistentlyachievementalmodelingwithself-salvation(78).JiandZhao(2011)discussAtwood‘secologicalnarrativestrategiesinfourrespects:narrativesequence,narrativespace-time,ecologicalmetaphors,andironicnarrative,allofwhichintegrateecologicalideasintoformstoshowAtwood‘shumanisticconcernsandherawarenessofecologicalcrisis.Furthermore,Atwoodisalsoaskillfulwriterincanonreconstructionofthenovels,suchasAliasGrace,ThePenelopiad,andTheYearoftheFlood.Zhang(2014)discussesAtwood‘sstrategiesofcanonreconstructiontoexpressthethemesofwomen,nationandhumansurvivalinherworksagainstthebackgroundofpostmodernismandcanondebates.ThecriticsummarizesthatAtwoodhasgivenvoicestowomen,Canadaandnaturethroughhercanonreconstruction,the―selectivelyreusingofliteratureresources‖(VI).ThestudiesfromtheangleofecocriticismmainlyfocusonthenovelsTheEdibleWoman,Surfacing,OryxandCrake,TheYearofFloodandTheMaddAddam.Theecologicalapocalypse,anthropocentrism,scienceandtechnologyarecentraltothemajorconcernsofecocriticism.Northover(2016)appliesCoupe‘smythicschematoanalyzesomeofthebiblicalmythsthatAtwoodemploysinhertrilogyofapocalypticfiction.Althoughthenovelsarepessimistic,thearticleseekstopointouthopesandtheimaginativepossibilitiesinthenovels.Pan(2012)describesthegroupsofimagesinAtwood‘snovelstoraisepeople‘sawarenessofthedestructionbroughtbyouranthropocentricismandthushesuggestsusbracingtheideaofholism.AzizmohammadiandKohzadi(2014)aimtoanalyzethedeleteriouseffectsofanthropocentrismonthenaturalenvironmentinOryxandCrake.Throughthevividdepictionofthenarrator‘s―animal-likelifestyle‖,theypointoutAtwood‘sappealforanecologicallifestylethatabandonstheconquestofnatureandexpectaharmoniousco-existencewithnature(647).Sanderson(2013)takestheOryxandCrakeasanexampletodescribeahybridworldwithgeneticallyengineeredtechnology.ReferringtoBrunoLatour‘stheoryofhybriditythatconnectshumanwithmaterials,thisarticleproposestheequalityamongindividualactorsinnatureandthecriticalsoaimstoattractreaders‘attentionto―themessyandcontingentweavingtogetherofbiotechnology,politics,attitudes,practices,values,commerceandlaw‖(218).Ecocriticismiscombinedwithfeminism,whichiscalledeco-feminism.Ji(2008)studiestheecofeministconsciousnessembodiedinAtwood‘sworks.Bycomparingtheharmonybetweenwomenandnaturewiththeconflictbetweenmenandwomen,theauthoradvocatesthehealthyrelationsofharmonyanddiversitybetweenhumanityandnature,menandwomen,aswellas-6- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文humanityandsociety.HeandYan(2008)integrateeco-feminismwithconsumerismtoconveythedeepmeaningof―theediblewoman‖(thetitleofabookwrittenbyAtwood)inAtwood‘sworksandtheypointoutthatwomenshouldliveinharmonywithnatureandreshapethemythofnaturemothertoshunthedestinyofbeingconsumedandeaten.TherearealsoquiteafewstudiesontheconstructionofdystopiainAtwood‘sworks,suchasTheHandmail’sTale,OryxandCrake,TheYearofFlood,andTheMaddAddam.ManuelBenjaminBeckerdiscussestheformsandfunctionsofdystopianwritinginAtwood‘snovelsinthebookFormsandFunctionsofDystopiainMargaretAtwood’sNovels(2008).Fourcentralaspectsofdystopianwriting,namely,socialorganizations,theinteractionbetweendreams/nightmaresandreality,andtimeareillustratedbythecritictoshowtheshackleofindividualsinAtwood‘sworks.InChina,Yuan(2016)talksabouttheimageofprisoninAtwood‘sTheHeartGoesLast(2015),adystopianfictionwherecitizensliveinahellishworld.BydiscussingthesymbolofTeddytoysinthenovel,theauthorwantsreaderstoponderoverourcontemporarypolitics,culture,andeconomics.Inconclusion,firstly,abundantresearchesonAtwood‘sthemesaremadefromtheperspectiveoffeminism.ItisdefinitethatAtwoodhasmadeasignificantcontributiontowomen‘sliterature.Secondly,becauseoftheculturalandgeographicalbackgroundofCanada,somecriticsexplorethenationalconsciousnessinAtwood‘sworksintermsofherconfrontationofthepost-colonialinfluenceandherendeavortoseekthesoulofCanadianliterature.Thirdly,Atwood‘swritingskillssuchasherdistinctanglesofnarrationandherintertextualityofclassicalworksoffercriticsspecialperspectivestoexploreAtwood‘sthemes.Fourthly,inthecontextofcurrentenvironmentalcrisis,ecocriticismisalsoapopularperspectivetointerprettheecologicalideasofAtwood‘sworks.Fifthly,becauseAtwoodisfamousforherdystopianfictionconcerningtheabuseofscienceandtechnologyandexcessivepursuitofmaterialism,whichresemblesthecontemporaryworldwithsocialcrisis,spiritualcrisis,andecologicalcrisis,somecriticsinclinetointerprethernovelsontheirdystopianimaginationtoraisepeople‘sawarenessofcurrentproblems.2.2ThepreviousstudiesonTheYearoftheFloodTheYearoftheFloodisthesecondbookofAtwood‘sdystopiantrilogy.ItisfirstpublishedintheUnitedKingdomonSeptember7,2009.Assoonasthenovelisreleased,ithasreceivednumerousreviewsandacademiccriticisminsomenewspapersandmagazines.AsaprequelstoryoftheearliernovelOryxandCrake,thenovelisusuallysimultaneouslyinterpretedwithOryxandCrake.Thecombinationamongfeminismandotherperspectives,suchasecocriticismand-7- Chapter2LiteratureReviewnarrativestrategies,iscomparativelypopular.Zhang(2013)interpretsthenovelfromtheangleofecofeminismbydiscussingthemarginalpositionofnatureandwomen.Thecriticstressesthewomen‘smentalintegrationwithnaturetoresistthediscriminationofthepatriarchalsociety.SincetwofemalecharacterswhoarefromthelowerstatusofthesocietynarratetheirstoriesinTheYearoftheFlood,theuniquenessofitspointofviewdeservesfurtherexploration.WangandTian(2011)exploretheskillofthefemalenarrativebyintegratingfeminismwithAtwood‘sskillofnarration.Femalevoicesandtheirfreethoughtsinthenovelrepresenttheempowermentandawakeningofwomen.Furthermore,sincethenovelisanimaginationofapocalypseofaworldstuckinsevereecologicalcrisis,ecologicalperspectivehasvigorouslyraisedscholars‘enthusiasm.Bartosch(2013)strivestorenderpoliticalandecologicalmethodstodealwiththetensionbetweenhumanityandnature.Inthewriter‘sopinion,theecologicalconnectionscanserveasaneffectivewaytocopewithhuman‘sseparatenessfromnature.Bahrawi(2013)arguesthatAtwood‘secologicalconceptscanbedeemedaseco-theology.Atwood‘scritiqueofscientismandhereco-theologyinhernovelsarticulatehopeinahopelessworld.InChina,theecologicalconcernsinthenovelarealsoheatedlydiscussed.Becauseanthropocentrismisanimportantassumptioninecocriticism,somewritersreadAtwood‘scriticismofanthropocentricismthatcausestheecologicalcrisisandothersdiscussherwritingstrategiesthatbreakthroughanthropocentrism.Yuan(2011)analyzesthenovelfromtheangleofenvironmentalcrisis,pointingouttherootcauseofhuman‘satrocitiestowardsnatureisanthropocentrism.Tao(2011)exploresAtwood‘sstrategiesofbreakingthroughanthropocentrism,includingtheapplicationofuntraditionalnarration,theendowmentofrespectandsurvivalabilitytotheweak,andappreciationofpowerofnatureandwomen.Sincethecurrentsocialcrisisiscloselyrelatedwiththeecologicalcrisis,shebelievesthatthesolutionistobuildanecologicalsocietywherehumanandnatureco-existinharmony.Besidesanthropocentrism,theabuseofscienceandtechnologyisanothermajorconcernofecocritics.Wang(2013)arguesthatthefallofhumannatureandtheabuseofscienceandtechnologyleadtotheecologicalapocalypse.Becausepeopleinthenovelsufferfromnotonlyecologicalcrisisbutalsosocialandspiritualcrisisandthethreekindsofcrisisareinterrelated,itisworthtoanalyzethenovelfromthethreeperspectives.Ding(2012)presentstheecologicalideasinthenovelfromtheperspectivesofnaturalecology,socialecologyandspiritualecologybyapplyingProfessorLuShuyuan‘s―trichotomy‖.Sheconcludesthatitisimperativeforhumanbeingstorebuildtheharmonybetweenhumanandnature,changethesocialdevelopmentmodelsanddealwithourspiritualproblems.Sinceanimalsareimportantmembersofnature,therelationshipbetweenhumanandanimalsraisessomeauthors‘-8- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文awareness.Yan(2015)talksabouthuman‘spersecutionofanimals,therelationshipbetweenhumanandnon-humannature,andtheestablishmentofhuman-animalrelationsinherthesis.ThereisnodenyingthatTheYearoftheFloodcanspuronhuman‘sreflectionsontheethicrelationbetweenhumanandnon-humannature.Inthecontextofpostmodernism,theprospectionoftherelationshipbetweenhumanityandnatureisthepriorityofecocriticim.Bouson(2011)arguesthateco-religionproposedbyGod‘sGardenersisourethicalcapacitytofindaremedytothesocialdisease,becausethecontemporarycultureof―unbridledconsumption‖and―Americanizedwayofcorporationcontrol‖threatentheverysurvivalofhumankindinaneraofenvironmentaldestruction,excessiveconsumption,andunregulatedbiotechnologicalexperiments(9).ItisobviousthatAtwoodhasappliedherspecialwritingtechniqueofcanonreconstruction.BecausethereisapreachandanodemadebyAdamOneatthebeginningofeachchapter,thecanonconstructionofcharacters,events,writingstyleofBibleisdelineatedinsomepapers.Zhang(2013)discussesthearchetypeofBibleinthenoveltoalarmpeopleofapocalypseandcallonthemtobeconcernedabouthuman‘sdestinyintheeraofmaterialismandrationalismprevalentinthesociety.Moreover,somecriticsinterpretthenovelfromtheangleofdystopiabecauseTheYearoftheFloodisregardedasadystopianapocalypsewithexcessivematerialism.Simut(2014)highlightsthedialecticbetweenthedystopiancityandthepost-apocalypticlandscape.ComparingTheYearoftheFloodwithTheHungerGames(2010),theauthortransgressestheimposedsocial,biological,andreligiousboundariestoexplorethethemeofsurvival.Uygur(2013)discussesAtwood‘sdystopiannarrativethatdepictsthecollapseofcivilization.ThecriticstatesthatAtwoodhasgivenapossibleendingofthesocietywiththeabuseofnature.However,healsomentionsthattheutopianaspectofthedystopiaisthefirststeptothehealingoftheworld.Thethemeofpoliticsisalsoamajorconcernofsomeauthors.Appleton(2011)arguesthatthe―Corpocracy‖policedbyCorpSeCorpscausesdeathinthestatebyexploitingpeopleanditistheGardenerswhoresistthematerialismthatcansurviveintheapocalypse.Labudová(2010)dealswiththemotifsofpower,painandmanipulationinTheYearoftheFlood.Inthearticle,thewriterexploresAtwood‘sspeculativeandexperimentalaspectsofspeculativefictionwhicharerelatedwithcontemporarysituationsofpolitical,ecological,andculturalcrisis.ItisobviousthatgreatachievementhasbeenmadeinthepreviousacademicstudiesofTheYearoftheFloodfromtheanglesoffeminism,ecocriticism,writingtechniques,dystopia,andpolitics.Theseresearchfindingsareofgreatsignificancetoprovidereferencesforfurtherstudiesofthebook.-9- Chapter2LiteratureReview2.3SummaryInconclusion,literarycriticshavestudiedAtwood‘sworksfromvariousanglesincludingfeminism,hernationalconsciousness,ecocriticismandherwritingskills.TheirstudiescanprovideotherresearcherswithinspirationtogiveadeeperunderstandingofAtwood‘sworks.Reviewingthefindingsabove,itisobviousthatthetopicsofspaceandplacewhichgraduallybecomeimportantassumptionsinecocriticismhavenotbeenextensivelydiscussed.Accordingtodifferentgeographicalfeatures,threespacesareidentifiedinthethesisinthefollowingpart.Afterthedescriptionofthethreespaces,therearediscussionsaboutthereasonsforthedestructionofthethreespacesbyapplyingsomeassumptionsofthespaceandplaceresearchesinecocriticism.Sincethesenseofplacecanofferpeopleasenseofbelongingwhichhelpspeopletosettledowninaspaceinsteadofescapingfromonespacetoanother,weadvocateconstructingthespaceintoplacewhichcangivepeopleasenseofplacetoshouldertheirresponsibilitytocareabouttheirplaces.TheauthorhopesthestudycanenlargethescopeanddepthofthestudiesonTheYearoftheFlood,offerinspirationtothedomesticstudiesonMargaretAtwood,andtoabroadersense,raisepeople‘sawarenessinsolvingthecurrentsocialcrisis,identitycrisis,andenvironmentalcrisis.-10- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationThischapterwillfirstlyexplicatedefinitionofecocriticism,fourwavesofecocriticism,andtheoriesonspaceandplaceinordertoprepareforthediscussionofthefollowingchaptersfromtheperspectiveofecocriticism.Thentheenvironmentalapocalypticismrelatedtothedescriptionofthreespacesispresentedtoillustrateconstructionanddestructionofthethreespaces.3.1EcocriticismTheterm―ecocriticism‖wasfirstlyputforwardbytheecocriticWilliamRueckertinhisarticle―LiteratureandEcology:AnExperimentinEcocriticism‖in1978.However,beforethetermwasproposed,somecriticshadconductedtheiracademicresearchesinawayverysimilartothatofecocriticism.Forexample,in1972,JosephW.Meekerhadmentionedtheterm―literaryecology‖inhisbookTheComedyofSurvivals:StudiesinLiteraryEcologyandheadoptsthe―comedyofbiology‖andthe―biologyofcomedy‖inliteraryworkstodiscusstheissueofhumansurvival(1972:9).Lateron,althoughthetermssuchas―ecopoetics‖,―environmentalliterarycriticism‖,―greenstudies‖,―greenculturalstudies‖,―thenaturalhistoryofreading‖areputforward,manyscholarsprefertheterm―ecocriticism‖becauseitcanbeeasilymorphedinto―ecocritical‖and―ecocritic‖.Moreover,itsprefix―eco‖whichissimilarto―ecology‖canemphasizetheco-existenceofandinterdependenceamongthings.However,theterm―environ-‖puttinghumanatthecenterofthephysicalsurroundingsisanthropocentricanddualistic.Sinceecocriticismaddressestherelationshipbetweenhumanityandthenaturalworld,theterm―environ-‖isnotagoodchoiceforecocritics.Itcanbeconcludedthatecocriticismemphasizestherelationshipbetweenthehumancultureandthephysicalworld.Thenwhatisthedefinitionofecocriticism?WhenRueckertproposestheterm,heexplainsitas―theapplicationofecology,andecologicalconceptstothestudyofliterature‖(1996:xx).However,hehasnotmentionedhuman‘srelationshipwithnatureandthephrase―ecologicalconcepts‖isnotclearenough.CombinedwiththeGreeketymologyoftheecocriticism,WilliamHowarthmakesamoreexplicitexplanation.InGreek,Ecoandcriticbothderivefromoikosandkritis,whichmean―housejudge‖.InspiredbytheGreeketymology,Howarthtakesnatureasourwidesthome,andecocriticsasthearbiterswhojudgethewritingsthat―depicttheeffectsofcultureuponnature,withaviewtowardcelebratingnature,beratingitsdespoilers,andreversingtheirharmthroughpoliticalaction‖(1996:69).Howarthhasattachedimportancetotheappreciationofnatureandaddressedanature-centeredorearth-centeredviewinhis-11- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationdefinition,whichchallengestherootedanthropocentricisminthewesternworld.ComparedwithRueckert‘sandHowarth‘sdefinitions,thoseputforwardbyLawrenceBuellandCheryllGlotfeltyaremorewidelyaccepted.InBuell‘sopinion,ecocriticismcanbedefinedasa―studyoftherelationbetweenliteratureandenvironmentconductedinaspiritofcommitmenttoenvironmentalistpraxis‖(1995:430).Glotfeltyholdsthatecocriticismis―thestudyoftherelationshipbetweenliteratureandthephysicalworld‖(1996:xviii).Itisevidentthatalthoughbothofthetwopopulardefinitionsfocusontherelationshipbetweenliteratureandphysicalworld,theformerismoreconcretethanthelatter.However,itisthebroaddefinitionofecocriticismbyGlotfeltythatprovideslargerresearchspaceforecocritics,revealingthecomplexityandvarietyofecocriticism.Inshort,ecocriticismappliesanearth-centeredapproachtoexploringtherelationshipbetweenliteraturestudiesandphysicalworld.Althoughtherearevariousresearchdirectionsofecocriticism,allofthemhaveonebasicpremise:humancultureiscloselyboundupwiththenaturalworldbecausetheyaremutuallyinfluenced.Focusingontherelationshipbetweenhumancultureandphysicalworld,ecocriticismcanbeconsideredasanethicaldiscourseontherelationshipbetweenthehumansocietyandthenon-humanworld.3.1.1FourwavesofecocriticismTherearefourwavesofecocriticism,whosedevelopmentwitnessesashiftfromsingularitytodiversity,fromwildernesstourbanity,andfromthelocaltotheglobal.Thefirst-waveecocriticismprevailingthroughthe1990s,focusesonnaturewritingofwildernessinBritishromanticliteratureandthenonfictionprosesuchasThoreau‘sWalden.Sinceecosystemisdestroyedbythedevelopmentofhumancivilization,whichhasalienatedhumanityfromnature,ecocriticsadvocatearejectionofanthropocentrismandturntothewilderness,thusconstructinganecocentrism-orientedsocietywherehumanbeingsandnonhumannatureco-existinharmony.Inthefirst-waveecocriticism,itisengagedwithnonhumannatureintwodistinctiveways.Thefirsteffortistorelatethehumanisticthinkingwiththe―post-Heideggerianphenomenologicaltheories‖whichaddresstheintimateinterdependencebetweenhumanconsciousnessandnonhumanworld(Buell,2011:90).Thetheoriesemphasizethesocialandculturalcircumstanceofindividualexperienceoftheenvironment.Theseconddistinctiveattemptistomakeliterarytheoryandcriticism―morescientificallyinformed‖(Buell,2011:92).Thescientific-orientedliterarycriticismhasinheritedthethinkingofecologyandlifescience,suchastheholistic,relationalandharmoniousthinking,whichhasofferednewanglestoliterarystudies.Themostinfluentialendeavorofthefirst-waveecocriticismis-12- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文tofusescientificandhumanisticthinkingintheareaof―bioregionalism‖(ibid).Itclaimsthatpeopleshouldbeloyaltotheirbioregionincludingitsplantsandanimalsintheirhomeplaceratherthantoanation.Comparedwiththefirst-waveecocriticismthatfocusonBritishandAmericanliterature,thesecondwaveseestheinclusionofotherecocriticsfromnon-Westerncountries.Afro-AsianLatinecocriticshaveactivelyengagedthemselvesintheexplorationofecocriticismbytakingintoconsiderationoftheparticularproblemsintheirowncountries.Inaddition,thesecond-waveecocriticismhasexpandedthegeographicalandculturalhorizonsofthefirst-waveecocriticism.Geographically,incontrastwiththefirstwaveofecocriticismwhoseattentionisonwilderness,thesecondwaveturnsits―geographicgaze‖at―landscapeofurbanand/orindustrialtransformation‖(Buell,2011:94).Againstfirst-waveecocriticismthatseparateswildspacesfromurbanones,thesecond-waveecocriticismarguesthatthe―wallofseparationisahistoricallyproducedartifact‖(ibid).Especiallysincetheindustrialrevolution,naturehasalreadybeenchangedorimaginedbyhumancultureandthewildernessisnoexceptionfromthat.Bythesametoken,man-madeenvironmentsuchascitiesandrurallandscapeshouldbeequallycentraltoecocriticalworks.Culturally,theenvironmentalethicsshiftsfromecocentricstandpointtosociocentriconewhichattachesimportanceto―culturalconstructionism‖and―socialjusticeconcerns‖(Buell,2011:97).Astheecocentrismofthefirst-waveecocriticism,the―prioritizationofissuesofenvironmentaljustice‖suchastheinequalityofdistributingenvironmentalbenefitsand―hazards‖betweenthewhiteandthenonwhite,therichandthepooriscentraltothesecond-waveecocriticism(ibid).Inordertodealwiththeissuesofenvironmentaljustice,thesecond-waveecocriticismincludesthenon-whiteecocritics‘voicesandflourishestheecocriticalpostcolonialstudies.Comparedwiththeearlytwowavesofecocriticismthatfocusonspecificcultures,thethirdwaveofecocriticismrecognizes―ethnicandnationalparticularitiesandyettranscendsethnicandnationalboundaries‖andexplores―allfacetsofhumanexperiencefromanenvironmentalviewpoint‖(Adamson&Slovic,2009:7).Inthiswave,theecocriticalranksaremorediversifiedsincedifferentkindsofethnicgroupsaroundtheworldhaveappliedtheirownwritingstyletodescribetherelationshipbetweenhumanandnonhumannature.Anotherfeatureofthiswaveisitsinitiativeof―postcolonialenvironmentalism‖whichhasbeenmentionedinthesecond-waveecocriticism(Buell,2011:99).Asanintegrationofecocriticismandpostcolonialism,postcolonialecocriticismupholdstheinterrelatednessofracismandspeciesismbecausebotharethereflectionofthedualisticideologyingrainedintheWesternculture.Furthermore,ifweconcludethattheabovetwowavesofecocriticismadvocatetheirallegiancetothelocal,-13- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationthethird-waveecocriticismtendstoenlargethelocalscopetoaglobalscale.Whenthesecondwaveofecocriticismbegins,thereisatendencytoadoptamulticulturalapproachtoecocriticalstudies.In2000,PatrickD.Murphyhasexhortedecocriticstoputtheirownnationalliteraryanalysis―inaninternationallyrelativeandcomparativeframework‖,whichformsoneofthecentraltraitsofthethirdwaveofecocriticism(2000:58).Until2009,thethirdwaveofecocriticismiscoinedbyJoniAdamsonandScottSlovic.Inthearticle―TheThirdWaveofEcocriticism:NorthAmericanReflectionsontheCurrentPhaseoftheDiscipline‖,theyillustratethefourmaincharacteristicsofthethirdwaveofecocriticism:theglobalconceptsofplacechallengingthe―neo-bioregionalistattachments‖tolocalplacesareexploredinthecontextofglobalization;somecriticsdeemthatitisofsignificancetokeepthe―ethnicidentities‖while―ethnicallyinflectedexperience‖shouldbeplacedinbroadercontexts;thenewwaveof―materialecofeminism‖hasbecomeoneofthetrendtowardnewgenderedapproachesinecocriticismincluding―eco-masculinism‖and―greenqueertheory‖;theconceptof―animality‖isintensifiedwiththeexpansionofthescopeofenvironmentaljusticetoincludenonhumanspeciesandtheirrights(Slovic,2010:6).Thefourthwaveofecocriticismmanifestsamaterialturnandthusitisalsocalledmaterialecocriticism.In2012,Slovichasfirstlycalledthematerialturninecocriticismasthefourthwaveofecocriticism.In2015,inthe―Foreword‖ofNewInternationalVoicesinEcocriticism,herelatesmaterialecocriticismasa―vigorousapplicationofNewMaterialistvocabulary‖to―environmentalaesthetics‖andadedicationtodeveloping―environmentalhumanities‖,challengingthe―sustainability‖inaworldofglobalwarming(viii).Fromthethirdmaincharacteristicsofthethirdwavementionedaboveconcerning―materialecofeminism‖,itisworthtopointoutthatthematerialresearchofthethirdwavehaslaidasolidtheoreticalfoundationforthedevelopmentofthefourthwaveofecocriticism.Derivingfromthetheoriesofnewmaterialismandecologicalpostmodernism,thetheoreticalassumptionsofthefourthwavecanbeillustratedfromthefollowingthreeaspects:matteranditsagency,matterandmeaning,andmatterandnarrative(Tang,2016:114).Firstly,theacknowledgmentofthepervasiveagencyinhumanandnonhumannaturesubvertsthehumansuperioritybydeconstructingthedualismbetweenmindandbody.Onlywheneverythinghasbeenacknowledgedwithitsownagency,canhumanandnonhumannatureco-existequallyintheeco-socialweb.Secondly,blurringtheboundarybetweenmatterandmeaning,materialecocriticismhaschallengedthepostmodernistandpoststructuralistassumptionthatsocialdiscoursesplaythedominateroleinexpressingmeanings.Thirdly,thenarrativeagencyofmatterinliterarytextsdeniesthathumanistheonlynarrativeagent.Inessence,thetextsofnonhumannaturearetheresultoftheinteractionbetweenhuman-14- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文andnonhumannature.Inshort,fourwavesofecocriticismaredevelopedwithdifferenttheoreticalfociandeachofthenextphaserunsstrongeronthebasisoftheformerwave.3.1.2SpaceandplaceSincethethesismakesananalysisofthethreeseparatespacesinthenovelTheYearoftheFloodbyapplyingtheplaceresearchinecocriticismandaccordinglyappealstotheconstructionofplaceconsciousnessintheend,itisnecessarytomakeabriefintroductionofspace,place,senseofplace,andsenseofplanettomakeabetterunderstanding.Whenthedefinitionofspaceisillustrated,itisinevitabletomentionthedistinctionbetweenspaceandplacetomanifestthedetailedmeaningofspace.Geographically,spaceandplacearerelevantinthatplacesentails―spatiallocation‖or―spatialcontainer‖(Buell,2005:63)However,fromtheperspectiveofecocriticism,spaceandplacearedifferent.Placesareidentifiedoracknowledgedbyhumanitywhilespacesonlyconnoteaconceptofgeometryandgeography.AsBuellmentions,weareusedtosaying―myplace‖insteadof―myspace‖,becauseplacesare―associativelythick‖whilespacesareassociativelythin(2005:63).Inthissense,placesarenotmerelyaspatialcontainerthatencompasseshumanandnonhumannature,ofwhomonlytheformercanassertagency;instead,placesaretheembodimentofourfeelingsandemotionsforahome.Placesarewherehumanandnonhumannatureinteract;whatwesee,smell,hear,thinkaboutiscloselyrelatedwithplaces.Theinteractionbetweenhumanbeingsandplacescontributestothebondbetweenbothandplaysanimportantroleintheconstructionofanindividual‘sidentityconstruction.Asenseofplaceisalsocalledplace-attachment,becauseitemphasizes―thelocalstructureofsubjectivefeelingassociatedwithanarea‖(Hubbard,2002:16).Manyecocriticsupholdthatasenseofplacecangiverisetoasenseofbelonging,whichhelpsustocopewithourcurrentidentitycrisiscausedbyuprootedness,becausetheconnectionsbetweenhumanbeingsandplacesmayhelppeoplefreefromtheapprehensionoftheirphysicalenvironment,―sothattheyinstillaformof‗amnesia‘thatallowsustoforgetourseparatenessandtheworld‘sindifference‖(Buell,1995:253).Althoughasenseofplaceisacriticalingredienttoliberatepeoplefromcontemporarysocialandecologicalcrisis,neither―disparagement‖nor―admiration‖oftheplacesenseisadvocatedandwecannotidealizethesenseofplacetoactas―apanaceaforthedisaffectionsofmodernuprootedness‖(ibid).Allwerequiretodoistorespectandcareforplacesaswellastoacknowledgeourintimacywithplace.―Ifeveryplaceonearthwerecaredforasweliketothinka‗protected‘reserveiscaredfor,thenperhapsthehealthofplanetandpeoplemightbesecured‖(Buell,1995:68).-15- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationInthecontextofglobalization,someecocriticsarguethatecologicalawarenessisnotsomuchasenseofplaceasasenseofplanet,―asenseofhowpolitical,economic,technological,social,cultural,andecologicalnetworksshapedailyroutine‖(Heise,2008:55).FromHeise‘sdefinitionofthesenseofplanet,itisworthtonoticeitsemphasisontheword―networks‖thatfocusonecologicalconnectedness.Althoughasenseofplanetemphasizesthetiesto―territoriesandsystemsthatareunderstoodtoencompasstheplanetasawhole‖ratherthantiesonthelocalplace,asenseofplaceandasenseofplanetarenotinconflictwitheachother(Heise,2008:10).Inessence,theecologicalconnectednesscanbefacilitatedbythesenseofalocalplace,becauseitservesas―agatewaytounderstandingglobalconnectednessatvariouslevels‖(Heise,2008:56).Forexample,whenpeoplecareaboutthedetrimentalfactorsthatpollutethelocalrivers,theywillexplorethesourceofthepollutioninotherregions.Itisevidentthattheconcernsoftheglobestartwith―familiarity‖withthelocalwhichmightbe―naturally‖ledtotheglobal(ibid).Underthebackgroundofenvironmentalcosmopolitanism,amoresystemicsenseofplanetthatrequires―sustainedfamiliarityandfluencyinmorethanoneculture‖goesbeyond―environmentalclichés‖thatonlyvalueuniversalconnectedness(Heise,2008:159).Inshort,theconstructionofaplacewithasenseofplaceandasenseofplanetwhichembracesconnectednessandmulti-cultureshelpsusdealwithcurrentglobalecologicalcrisis.3.2EnvironmentalapocalypticismThephraseenvironmentalapocalypticismfirstlyappearedinLawrenceBuell‘sTheEnvironmentalImagination:Thoreau,NatureWriting,andtheFormationofAmericanCulture(1995).Itisdefinedasaliteraryterminliterature,representingauthors‘imaginationof―theremoteconsequencesofthetransformationofenvironment‖,whichinspiresreaderstoponderoveractualstateofphysicalnatureandhuman-naturerelationsaswellasacknowledgethenaturalorder(Buell,1995:284).Sincesomewriterspresupposethat―themostdangerousthreattoourglobalenvironmentmaynotbethestrategicthreatsthemselvesbutratherourperceptionofthem‖,theyexpectthattheirenvironmentalapocalypsespredictingthecatastrophicdestructionofbothhumanandnonhumannatureinthefuturecanhelpraisepeople‘sawarenessofthegravityofthecurrentlyecologicalcrisis(Gore,1992:36).AsBuellcommentsinhisWritingforanEndangeredWorld:Literature,Culture,andEnvironmentintheU.S.andBeyond(2001),environmentalimagination―mayaffectone‘scaringforthephysicalworld:makeitfeelmoreorlesspreciousorendangeredordisposable‖(2001:2).Buellhasidentifiedfiveingredientsofenvironmentalapocalypticism:-16- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文―interrelatedness‖,―bioticegalitarianism‖,―magnification‖,―conflation‖,and―thesenseofimminentenvironmentalperil‖(1995:305).Firstly,thenetworkedrelationshipsofenvironmentalrealityareemphasized.IntheexampleofthebookSilentSpring,Carsonmakesthemetaphorofnetworkveryclearbydecryingtheimpactofpollution:―theweboflife—ordeath—thatscientistsknowasecology‖(Carson,1963:189).Theunintendedconsequenceofchemicalproductswhichcausesawebofdeath,hasactivatedhuman‘senvironmentalconcernssincethe1960s.Secondly,theequalityofmembersinnatureisalsocentraltotheenvironmentalapocalypsticism.Whenthenetworkrelationshipisidentifiedbytheenvironmentalwriters,theirnetworksencompasspeopleandthenaturalelementssuchassoil,plants,andwaters.Inmanyworksofenvironmentalapocalypticism,nonhumannatureisimaginedas―plantpeople,sunyouths,orgrandmotherspiders,thenthekillingoffliesbecomesasobjectionableasthekillingofhumans‖(Buell,1995:303).Manyauthorsalsodescribetheextinctionofalargenon-humanpopulationasaholocaust.Itisunequivocallytruethatthewritersendowthenon-humanwiththehumanrightsintheenvironmentalapocalypticism.Thirdly,inlightofThoreauvianperceptionandEmersonianlegacies:―theaggrandizementoftheminuteandtheconflationofnearandremote‖,theenvironmentalapocalypticismregardsthe―magnificationofscale‖andthe―collapseofdistance‖asitstwomodesofperception(Buell,1995:304).Forinstance,acontemporaryfloodcanbeexaggeratedtobetheprototypeoftheGreatFloodthatwillbringanapocalypsein2020.Intheexample,thescaleofthefloodismagnifiedandthecontemporaryfloodisconnectedwiththefloodthatwillhappeninthefuture.Finally,thecommitmenttodescribingthecrisisofenvironmentaldisasterisanothervitalingredientoftheenvironmentalapocalypsticism.Forexample,Carson‘smetaphorofdeathwebcanleadtohuman‘sassociationofthepollutiondangeraroundthembroughtbythechemicalapplication.Furthermore,theimpugnationofMarshthathumanbeingsaredespoilingearth‘sresources,bringsthe―rhetoricofenvironmentalconcernintotheapocalypticera‖(Buell,1995:306).Inconclusion,withsevereweatherandglobalwarmingbringinghugeimpactsonourlife,environmentalapocalypticismplaysacriticalroleinraisingpeople‘sawarenessofthesignificanceandurgencytobeconcernedaboutourenvironment.3.3SummaryBecausethethesismainlyanalyzesthethreespacesinthenovelTheYearoftheFloodfromtheperspectiveofecocriticism,thedefinitionandfourwavesofecocriticismthatmapitsdevelopmentandassumptionsarefirstlyintroducedinthischaptertolayasolidfoundationforthefollowinginterpretationofthenovel.-17- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationFurthermore,whenwereadAtwood‘sTheYearoftheFlood,itisnoteasytonoticethedifferencesamongthreespacesandacknowledgetheimportanceofcultivatingasenseofplace,abriefintroductionanddistinctionofspaceandplacearepresentedtoillustratetheconstructionandthedestructionofthethreespacesinthenovel.Moreover,sinceTheYearoftheFloodisregardedasanapocalypsesciencenovelwithitsdestructionofthewholeworldattheend,theauthorhasintroducedtheenvironmentalapocalypticismfromtheperspectiveofecocriticismtomakereadersbetterunderstandthebackgroundoftheresearchwhenweinterpretthethreespacesinthenovel.-18- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacesBasedonthestoryNoah‘sarkintheBible,Atwood‘sTheYearoftheFloodarticulatesanapocalypsebroughtbyaWaterlessFlood,afatalvirusplaguethateliminateshumanpopulationatanoverwhelmingspeed.Twofemalesurvivors,RenandToby,haveescapedfromthedestinyofdeathbygettingoutoftouchwiththedisease.TheintertwinedstoriesofTobyandRenrevealthreespaces:Pleebs,HelthWyzerCompound,andEdencliffRooftopGarden.Withdistinguishingfeatures,thePleebsisadystopiaofmaterialismwherepeopleisoppressedandnatureiscommoditizedtomakeprofits;theCompoundisaprisonupholdingthesuperiorityofmind,wherepeopleareruledbyreasonandnatureisdominatedbypeople;theEdencliffisaneco-utopiaaimedatthereconstructionofawonderfulworld,wherepeoplecontrivetohelpeachotherandsavenature.4.1Pleebs:adystopiaofmaterialismThePleebswherecrimesanddesiresrulethewholecityresemblestheevilcitiesSodomandGomorrahintheBible,synonymouswithimpenitentsinandanomenfordivinepunishments.Sincegangsareoutrageousandferocious,andtheso-calledgovernmentandgreedybusinessmencolludetogethertomakeprofits,thePleebssymbolizestheverydystopianspacewherecitizenryandnaturearepoliticallyandeconomicallyabusedformonetarygains,whichrepresentsthefeaturesofapocalypticnarration.GregGarrardhasdiscussedthevalueofvariouslandscapesinhismonographEcocriticism(2004),inwhichhehaspointedoutthatbothliterarygenresofidealpastoralandhorribleapocalypseare―pre-existingwaysofimaginingtheplaceofhumansinnaturethatmaybetracedbacktosuchsourcesasGenesisandRevelation,thefirstandlastbooksoftheBible‖(2).Itiswellknownthatinthecourseofthedevelopmentofecocriticism,atitsoutset,thewildernessandpastoralwritingsarethetopicsthatattractscholars‘extensiveattentionbecausethestudiesexpresstheiryearningofthepureandthewild.However,thesignificanceofapocalypticresearchisneglectedinthemeantime.Itisindispensabletonoticethattheapocalypticwritingwithuniquenarrationandshockingendingismoreeffectivetowarnpeopleofthecurrentecologicalcrisis;thustheapocalypseisconsideredas―thesinglemostpowerfulmastermetaphorthatthecontemporaryenvironmentalimaginationhasatitsproposal‖(Buell,1995:285).Tosomedegree,thedescriptionofPleebsandthedestructionofthethreespacesinthenovelTheYearoftheFloodmanifestthetypicalfeaturesofapocalypticnarration.-19- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpaces4.1.1OppressiononpeopleInthePleebswhichischaracterizedbytheanarchicpoliticsandprofit-orientedeconomy,itspopulacesarestuckintheabyssofmisery.Politically,thePleebsisananarchicdystopia.ThereisnogovernmentinthecityandtheexecutivegroupinthePleebsiscalledCorpSeCorps.ThewordCorpSeCorpsistheabbreviationof―corpse‖and―corporation‖.Firstly,intermsoftheword―corporation‖,theCorpSeCorpsisindeedacompanyorcorporation.ItstartsasaprivatesecurityfirmhiredbytheCompounds.Whenthelocalpoliceforcesaredissolvedbecauseofcapitalshortage,theCorpSeCorpstakesplaceofthem.Atfirst,thepopulacesembraceitbecausetheydonotneedtopayforitsservice,butnow―thetentacles‖ofCorpSeCorpsareeverywhere(Atwood,2009:25).Secondly,withregardtotheword―corpse‖,theCorpSeCorpscausesdeathinthePleebs.Ittakesthebribesfromthelocalpleebmobsandturnsablindeyetotheirassassinationsandkidnaps.UndertheprotectionofCorpSeCorps,thepleebmobssellpeoplethetobaccoproductsthataredetrimentaltotheirhealth.Besidesthelocalpleebmobs,theCorpSeCorpsalsocooperateswiththeHelthWyzerCompound.TheytakethecitizensofthePleebsas―freelabanimals‖andinjectvirusintotheirsupplementpills(Atwood,2009:244).Aftertheytakethepills,theywillsufferfromtheillnesscausedbythevirusandfinallydieofthedisease.Moreover,itcausesnotonlythedeathofhumanbeingsbutalsothedeathofanimals.Whentheillegaltradesofendangeredanimalsarediscoveredbyothercitizens,itisriskyforthemtoreporttheillegaltradebecausethecorruptCorpSeCorpsistheaccompliceinthelucrativedeal,whichbooststhemarketofanimalsandthuscausesmoredeathofanimals.Inessence,undertheruleoftheCorpSeCorps,thePleebsisananarchicdystopia;theCorpSeCorpsismerelyamercenaryhiredbytheCompoundinanendeavortomakeprofitsinsteadofprotectingtherightsofthecitizens.AsTobyclaimswhendisasterhitsthearea,theymustbethefirsttorunfromthedisaster,turningbacktoitsheadquarter,theCompound,to―savetheirskins‖(Atwood,2009:21).AsAppletonsummarizes,―theCorpSeCorpsistheepitomeoftheOrwellianBigBrother,exceptthatitismotivatedbymoneyratherthanpolitics‖(2011:69).Economically,inthepursuitofmonetarygains,people‘srightsarethreatened.Tomakemoreprofits,thelocalpleebmobsgangupwiththeCorpSeCorps,killingtheinnocentpeoplerecklessly.Eventhecorpsesareatthepleebmobs‘disposaltobecomeingredientsofhamburgersformakingprofits.ThepopulacesarealsotakenasexperimentalobjectsbytheCompoundbysellingthemsupplementsinjectedwithvirus.Whentheirconsumersarediagnosedwithdiseases,thecompanyoverchargesthemtoofferacure.Inthisway,itcannotonlymakegreatprofitsbutalsokeepitsmarketrunning.AfterToby‘smothertakestheirsupplementpills,shefeelssick.Inordertocure-20- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文hermother,herfathersellstheirhouseandcommitssuicidewhenhermotherdies.ThereisnodenyingthatthisscambetweentheCompoundandtheCorpSeCorpshasdestroyedmanyfamilies,likeToby‘s.Italsomeritsnotethatwomeninthespacearesufferingfromtheoppressionofmen.Aboveall,womenareconsideredascommodities;theirvalueliesinwhethertheycanbeusedratherthanwhethertheyaretalented.ThePleebsmanifestsapatriarchalsocietythatreferstothe―male-dominatedsystemofsocialrelationsandvalues‖andreferstotherelationshipsofwomen‘subordinationandmen‘sdomination(Birkeland,1993:17).Beingconsideredascommodities,astheecofeministKarrenJ.Warrenpointsout,womenare―excluded,marginalized,devalued,pathologized‖as―Others‖inthesociety(2000:xiv).InthePleebs,prostitutionbecomeslegalandprostitutescanbeofficiallyacceptedinthe―SeksMart‖,theofficialsextrademarketestablishedbytheCorpSeCorp(Atwood,2009:6).However,oncetheprostitutesbecomeold,theywillbereducedtounmarketablegoodsandevenberegardedas―hazardouswaste‖bytheiryoungpeers(Atwood,2009:7).Furthermore,womenareexcludedfrom―economicinstitutionsofpowerandprivilege‖inthepatriarchalsociety(Warren,2000:64).Ironically,thegirlswhoareentitledtojointheSeksMartaresuccessfulinfindingagoodjob.Thosewhoarenotluckyenoughtoworkfortheofficialmarketneedtoexperiencethebitternessoflife.Inthepatriarchalsociety,womenareforcedtoselltheirbodies,hairs,eggsforsurvival.Exactly,Toby‘sstruggleinthePleebsisacaseinpoint.Whenherparentsdie,thehomelessyounggirlhastorelyuponher―marketablevalue,namelyheryoungass,andthereforeshewouldn‘tstarvetodeath,andnobodyhadtofeelguilty‖(Atwood,2009:28).WhensheworksintheSecretBurgers,shebecomesthesextoyofBlanco,themanagerofthestoreandanepitomeofapatriarchalfigure.Inthestore,Blancosexuallyharassesallthegirlsworkinginhisstoreandconsidersthemassexslaves.Ifagirlrebels,shewillbebeatentodeathorkilled.Ifthegirlsuccumbstohim,shewillbephysicallyandmentallytorturedtodeath.Nomatterhowthegirlsrespondtohisviolence,deathiswaitingforthem.Ultimately,inordertoescapefromtheinsultofBlanco,TobyhastofleefromthePleebs.However,aftershekicksBlanco‘sheadwhensheleaves,shestilllivesintheshadowofBlancobecausehekeepslookingforherandswearstokillherinretaliation.Inconclusion,theanarchicpoliticsandmonetary-driveneconomymakepeopleliveinmisery,depictingadystopiacharacterizedbyanevilregime,violenceanditstreadonhumanrights.4.1.2CommodificationofnatureInthePleebs,natureisalsotreatedascommoditieslikethewomentomakeprofits.-21- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacesAstheecofeministKarrenJ.Warrenrelates,nonhumannaturealsosuffersfrom―unjustifieddomination‖inthesocietyasmen‘sdominationofwomenmentionedabove(2000:xiv).ThereisnodenyingthatthePleebsisalsoaspaceofanthropocentrism.AsanotherinfluentialecofeministValPlumwoodindicates,sinceanthropocentrismtakesnatureas―Otherizedgroup‖thatismarkedinthewaysas―inferiorandseparate‖,human‘sdependenceonthenonhumannatureisdeniedandtheroleofnatureinthephysicalworldis―treatedasbackground,asinessentialandnotworthnoticing‖(1997:337-338).BeingoneoftheOtherslikethewomenintheandrocentricPleebsasthebackground,natureiscommoditizedformonetarygains,andthusnonhumannatureisalsooppressedinthespacewithitslivingrightsandlivinghabitatsrobbedoff.Upontheinfluenceofanthropocentrism,ignoringpainsofanimalsandtakingthemascommodities,peopledepriveanimals‘livingrightstomakeprofitsandsatisfytheirvanity.InthePleebs,thetradesofendangeredspeciesareblooming.Toby‘sneighborisaluxurycouturecalledSlinkthatsellstheskinsofendangeredspecies.Aftertheslaughter,theskinnedcarcasseswillbesoldontoarestaurantcalledRairity.Forthebusinessmen,althoughthetradesareillegal,theyarestillflockingtojointhelucrativemarket.Ifwesaythemerchantskillanimalsforhighprofits,theconsumersdothatonlyforsatisfyingtheirvanity.Forthem,therighttoenjoythemeatofendangeredanimalsjuststandsfortheirsocialstatusandwealth.Furthermore,inordertoensurethegenuinenessoftheir―braggingrights‖,thecustomerswantthebosstokilltheanimals―onthepremises‖(Atwood,2009:31).Inaddition,withtheadvancementofscienceandtechnology,animalsarereducedtoobjectsorcommoditiesthatcanbeexperimentedon,whichgravelythreatentheexistingecosystem.Thenewlycreatedspeciessuchastherakunk,thegreenrabbitandtheMo‘HairsheepareallowedtoroamthePleebsthatisconsideredastheexperimentalrubbishfieldoftheCompound.Infaceoftheattackofnewspecieswithcombinedgenes,thenaturalcreaturesaretooweaktofightwiththehuman-madespeciesandtheirlivingspaceisgreatlydiminished.Forinstance,thepigswithhumanbrainsofteninvadeotheranimals‘habitatsandsnatchtheirlivingresources.Ifotheranimalsrevoltagainstthepigswithcapacitytomemory,theywillferociouslyfightbackinretaliation.Anotherthreattothelivinghabitatsoftheanimalsistheexpansionofthecity,Pleebs.Tobyusedtoliveinthesemi-countryofthePleebs―beforethesprawlhadrolledoverthestretchoflandscape‖(Atwood,2009:24).Inthepast,theirsweetcottageissurroundedwithtreesandsquirrelsandrabbitslivetherehappily.However,everythinghasgoneaftertheurbanizationofthecity.TheacresoftreesaroundToby‘shousearechoppedtobuildhousesbydeveloperstomakemoreprofits,whichmakestheanimals-22- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文livingtherehomeless.FromthetragedyofToby‘shomeland,itisrequisitetopointoutthatnotonlyanimalsareoppressedbutalsothetrees,theothermembersofnonhumannature,arebeingexploitedascommoditiestomakeprofitsinthePleebs.IfthePleebsisthechaoticdystopiawheretherightsofbothhumanandnonhumannaturearethreatened,theCompoundthatmanipulatesthePleebsisanextremelyorderly―prison‖wherepeoplearephysicallyandpsychologicallytortured.4.2HelthWyzerCompound:a“prison”ofrationalismAccordingtoValPlumwood,―theecologicalcrisiswefacethenisbothacrisisofthedominantcultureandacrisisofreason‖thatiscausedbyrationalismthatemphasizes―theapexofhumanlife‖and―thepracticeofoppositionalconstructioninrelationtoits‗others‘,especiallythebodyandnature,whicharesimultaneouslyrelieduponbutdisavowedortakenforgranted‖(2002:5-18).Rationalismhasprovidedhumanbeingswiththeidentitythathasallegedlyofferedthem―distancefrom,controlofandruthlessnesstowardsthesphereofnatureastheOther,whileminimisingnon-humanclaimstotheearthandtoelementsofmind,reasonandethicalconsideration‖(Plumwood,2002:4).Inordertosustaintheircivilizationandkeeptheuncivilizedawayfromthem,thecitizensoftheCompoundbuildstrongwallstobedistantfromtheOther(theinferiorandthesavaged,forexamplethosepeopleinthePleebsandEdencliffaswellasnature).Privilegingthesupremacyofrationalism,theCompound‘scitizensdenytheagencyofOtherandtrytodominateandexploittheothertwospaceswithoutanyethicalconsiderationforthepeopleandnonhumannaturethere.Inshort,trappedintheframeofrationalism,theCompoundislikeanorderly―prison‖wherescienceandtechnologyareprivileged,humanemotionsaredevalued,andotherspacesareexcluded.4.2.1ReignofreasonUnderthereignofreason,theCompoundischaracterizedbyitsemphasisonscienceandtechnology,itsrejectionoftheconnectionwiththeothertwospacesanditslackofhumanisticconcerns.Firstly,theelitesintheCompoundattachimportancetothedevelopmentofscienceandtechnology.Inlightof―theidentificationofrationalitywithdisengagementandegoism‖,thescientiststakescientificknowledgeastheirinstrumenttomakeprofits,whichstacksagainsttheother(Plumwood,2002:9).Inordertomakeprofits,thescientistsdevelopalargenumberofscientificproductssuchasthesupplementswithvirus,thecombinedgenesofthehighyieldgro-op,andgeneticallymodifiedanimals,whichturnstheoutsideworldintochaos.Intheprocessofutilizingscienceand-23- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacestechnologytomakeprofits,theoverrelianceonscienceandtechnologygivesrisetotheenvironmentalcrisis,inthe―highlyinstrumentally-directedformsofknowledgewhoseaimistomaximiseoutputs,oftenwithdevastatingresults‖(Plumwood,2002:38).Itisworthtomentionthatknowledgeisnotonly―instrumentalised‖butalso―privatized,opentobeharnessedtoprivateeconomicpower‖(Plumwood:2002:48).Inordertoensuretheireconomicpower,thephonesintheCompoundarebuggedtoavoidtheleakageoftheindustrialsecrets,whichwilldirectlythreatenstheirprofitmargins.Secondly,theCompoundtriestocutitselffromtheotherspaces.AsawinneramongthePleebsandtheEdencliff,theCompoundwantstodistanceitselffromany―ill-consequencesoftheirpropertyformationprocessesfortheenvironmentandforhumanhealth‖,becausethe―dualisticreason/naturepolatisation‖hasnaturalizedtheinequalitybetweenthewinnersandthelosers(Plumwood,2002:17).Inordertokeepthe―purity‖ofitsreason,theCompoundrejectsanyconnectionwiththeoutsideworld,becausetheythinkthatcitizensofthePleebsandEdencliff(theOtherandtheuncivilized)maynegativelyaffecttheirreasoningandbringaboutsocialdisorder.Ontheonehand,itisveryhardforpeopleoutsidetogoinside.WhenLucrene,Ren‘smothertakesRenbacktotheCompound,arequestforidentitiesbytheguardsisthefirstchallengetheyface.Aftertheiridentitiesarechecked,theyneedtostayintheholdingroom,waitingfortheirreportof―bioformclearanceandverification‖(Atwood,2009:207).Ontheotherhand,peopleinsidecannoteasilygooutside.WhenRencomesbacktotheCompound,sheisnotallowedtogooutwithoutheridentitycard.Also,thecitizensofCompoundarenotentitledtoafreecontactwiththeoutsideworldwiththeirphonesandletterscheckedbytheCorpSeCorps.WhenRensecretlycallsAmander,herbestfriendintheEdencliff,LucrencewarnsRenthat―unregisteredphones‖arebuggedbytheCorpSeCorpsanditisacrimetohavesuchphones(Atwood,2009:224).Bysupervisingitscitizens‘contactwiththeoutsideworld,theCompoundreducesitselftoaprisonofreason.Thirdly,theCompounddevalueshumanemotions,whichmakesitaspacewithoutanyhumanitarianconcerns.Sincepeopleinthespacedespise―alldistractionsandpassionswhichobscurethinking‖,theydegradeemotionsandsympathythatarebelievedtobeobstaclestoknowledge(Bordo,1987:27).Inaddition,the―reason/emotiondualism‖that―codestheformerasrational‖and―seestheopposingsphereofethicalasdispensable,meresubjectivesentiment‖,justifiestheindifferenceoftheCompound‘scitizens(Plumwood,2002:9).WhenRen‘sfather,FrankiskidnappedbyarivalCorpforthesecretsofsomeformulas,theCompoundrefusestomakethedealbecausetheexecutivesthink―diseasegermsandformulaswereworthmoretothemthanFrankwas‖aftertheyhavedone―acost-benefitanalysis‖(Atwood,2009:-24- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文293).Inaccordancewiththereason/emotiondualism,themanagersoftheCompoundhavenoreasontosympathizewithFrankwhousedtoworkforthemwithoutanycomplaints.ThereisnodenyingthattheCompound‘sapathyleadstoFrank‘sdeath.Furthermore,inlightofthe―dualismofsubject/objective‖whichexcludesrelationshipsof―care,sympathyandengagement‖,thescientistsoftheCompoundareindifferenttotheirfamilies(Plumwood,2002:42).Thescientistsworkinginlabsaroundtheclockareirresponsiblehusbandsandfathers.SinceLucerncouldnotstandFrank‘snonchalance,sheelopeswithZebtotheEdencliff.IfitissaidthatthewomeninthePleebssufferfromthetortureofbody,thewomenintheCompoundaresubjectedtopsychologicalharassment.WhensheandRencomebacktotheCompound,heshowsnointerestintheirstories.AsRenhasinsightfullycomments,―IcouldseenowwhyLucernehadrunoffwithZeb:atleastZebhadnoticedher.Andhe‘dnoticedme,aswell,whereasFranktreatedmelikeawindow:heneverlookedatme,onlythroughme‖(Atwood,2009:214).Tosumup,theCompoundisthespacewherepeopleprivilegescienceandtechnology,excludethemselvesfromotherspaces,anddegradeemotions.4.2.2DominationonnatureAsPlumwoodrelatesthathuman/naturedualismofrationalismhasmappedthesupremacyofreasonontohumansupremacyviathe―identificationofhumanitywithactivemindandreasonandofnon-humanswithpassive,tradablebodies‖,thescientistsoftheCompoundhavethehubristhatonlytheycandominateandcontrolnonhumannature(Plumwood,2002:4).Moreover,inthespaceidentifiedwithscienceandrationality,therecognitionofnonhumannatureisminimizedandthusitistreated―withoutethicalconstraintasresources‖(Plumwood,2002:12).Exemptedfromethicalconcerns,animalsaretreatedbythescientistsastheirexperimentaltoys.Intheirexperiments,thearrogantscientistplaytheroleofGodtocreatenewspeciessincetheyreckonthattheyhavetherighttodominatenonhumannaturelikeGod.Inlightofhumansupremacyinthespace,peoplearejustifiedtodominatednonhumannaturebychanginganimal‘sgenesatwill.GeneticengineeringgoesviralintheCompound.ThescientiststransplanthumanstemcellsandDNAintoanimals,creatingthepigswiththeabilityofthinking,theMo‘Hairsheepwithincrediblygorgeouscolorfulhair,thegreenrabbitswithlaminatinghairs,andtherakunksthatinheritthegenesofbothraccoonsandskunks.AftertheWaterlessFloodbreaksout,thepigsrunoutoftheexperimentalfarmsandreproduceatanastonishingspeed.Dangerously,theWatson-Cricksplicesthatlooklikedogsandfleefromprisonscantearoutothers‘throatsandbreedfast,potentiallymakingthewholeworldamess.-25- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacesThecombinationofgenesviolatestherulesofnatureandthescientistsintheCompoundwillpaythepricefortheirignoranceofthenaturalrules.Influencedbytheanthropocentrismthatregardshumanityasthecenteroftheuniverseandothercreaturesastheresourcesforhumanbeings,theignoranthumanracetakesforgrantedthedominationandconquestofnature.Inthewholeuniverse,everythinghasitsownrule.Ifweneglectitrecklessly,humanitywillultimatelyfacetheretributionofnature.Inthenovel,theCompounddoesgetitspunishmentsinceitsscientistGlenn,thegeniusscientistgrowingupintheCompound,injectssomefatalvirusintothepillsandfinallyeventheCompoundcannotdealwithpandemicpestilence.AfterthebreakoutoftheWaterlessFlood,theCompoundisrobbedbythecitizensofthePleebsandalmostallofitscitizensdieofthecontagiousdisease.Moreover,thecreatureswithcombinedgenesrunoutoftheexperimentalfarms,whichkillothercreaturesanddestroystheecosystem.AllthedisasterofscientismrevealsAtwood‘sconcernsabouttheprospectofgeneticengineeringinourcurrentsociety.Whenthegeneticcodesarecontrolledandoperatedbytheelites,thescientistswhoareconfidentintakingtheplaceofGodconducttheexperimentswithanassortmentofgenes,which,naturally,causestremendouseffectontheexistingecosystem.ComparedwiththeCompoundwherereasonreignsandnatureisexploited,theEndencliffRooftopGardenisaneco-utopiadeterminedtosavenature.4.3EdencliffRooftopGarden:aneco-utopiaofEdenDifferentfromthePleebsdominatedbymonetarygainsandtheCompoundruledbyrationalism,theEdencliffisaspacewhereitspeoplehopetorebuildtheAcadianEdenintheBibleandwherepeopleliveharmoniouslywithnonhumannature.ThepeopletherearecalledtheGod‘sGardeners(abbr.Gardeners),becausetheydeemthemselvesasthegardenerssentbyGodtorestoretheflourishingEdencreatedbyHim.InconcertwiththeEdenwhereAdamandEvelivewithoutsorrowandanxiety,theGardenersplantvegetablesandflowerstomakethebarrenrooftoplivelywithlife,sotheirspaceiscalledEdencliffRooftopGarden.IntheEdencliff,theGardenerswhoaregraduallyrecognizedasauthoritiescanbecomeAdamsorEveswhoareresponsibletoleadtheotherstoliveaself-sufficientandfrugallifetosurvivetheWaterlessFlood.InordertorestoretheEdenthatisfreefromsocial,identityandecologicalcrisis,peopleintheEdencliffhelpeachotherandrespectnature.4.3.1AcknowlegementofemotionContrastingwiththeCompoundthatischaracterizedbythedegradationofemotions,anddifferentfromthePleebsthathasaperverteddesireformonetarygains,-26- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文theGardenersacknowledgeemotionsandtheEdencliffisfeaturedbyitshumanisticconcernsandobjectiontoconsumerism.Firstly,theEdencliffisaspacewherepeopleappreciateemotions,whichaccountsforthehumanisticconcernsamongpeople.Infact,theEdencliffisareligiousgroupwhereindividualsenvisioningAcadianhomegettogether.TheorganizationacceptsthosewhocannotwithstandthehypocrisyandselfishnessoftheCompoundandthosewhoneedassistanceandshelter.Forinstance,thedoctorssuchastheinternistKaturoandtheeyesurgeonSuryawhoare―withanyshredoftheoldmedicalethic‖leavetheCompoundandworkfortheEdencliff(Atwood,2009:105).WhenTobyfleesfromthePleebswhereshesuffersfromphysicalandmentaltorment,theGardenerssaveherfromthetortureofBlanco.WhenshefirstreachestheEdencliff,shefeelsrelievedasifshehadbeensafelyheldbya―large,benevolenthand‖(Atwood,2009:43).Itisalsoworthytopointoutthatwomen‘stalentisacknowledgedintheEdencliff.ComparedwiththewomenofthePleebswhoaretreatedascommoditiesandthewomenoftheCompoundwhoseemotionsareignored,womenoftheEdencliffarevaluedbytheirabilityandtheircontributiontothespace.Forexample,whenTobylivesinthePleebs,sheistreatedasasexualtoyandsheneedstosellherbody,fair,andeveneggsforsurvival.However,intheEdencliff,hertalentofherspecializedsubjecttheHolisticHealing,isdiscoveredbyAdamOne,andthus,shebecomesatutorofthe―HolisticHealingwithPlantRemedies‖(Atwood,2009:61).Byconsistentlylearninghowtoregulatetheplants,shebecomesEveSix,aninfluentialpersonwhoisgreatlyrespectedinthegroup.Turinganewleaf,Tobymakesearnesteffortstostandherfeetandbeindependentwithself-constructionofheridentity.Shenotonlyreceivesothers‘loveandrespectbutalsoacquirestheabilitytotakecareofothers.Attheendofthestory,whenpeoplearestrugglinginthehandofpestilence,Tobyrisksherlifetosavetheothertwosurvivors,RenandAmanderbyprovidingRenwithtreatmentandfoodandbravelypointingherguytothetwomaliciousPainballers.ShenolongerlivesinthefearofBlancoandshebecometoughenoughtokillBlancoaftertheWaterlessFloodbreaksout.ThegrowthofTobyisfulfilledinthespaceofhumanisticconcerns.Secondly,inordertoliveaspirituallife,Gardenersliveafrugallifewithobjectiontoconsumerism.AllofthemliveindesertedbuildingsandcriticizePleebs‘excessiveconsumptionofresources.Theysleeponstraws.MostoftheirlivingsuppliesarethewasteofthePleebs‘citizens.Theyareusedtowearingdark,―sack-likegarments‖(Atwood,2009:46).Inordertosavewaterandsoap,theydonottakeabathandwashtheirclotheseveryday.Alltheircleanedclothesareonlyavailableeveryseventhday.Sincekilnsuseuptoomuchenergy,theystopmakingtheirownplatesandcups.Afterthat,alltheirdishes,pots,andpansare―salvaged‖fromtherubbishbinsofthePleebs.-27- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacesOnthe―gleaned‖Day,theygotothePleebsandcollecttheirresourcestomakesoapandvinegar(Atwood,2009:63).Besides,thesurplusistradedonthe―TreeofLifeNaturalMaterialsExchange‖marketforotherdailysupplies(Atwood,2009:68).IfweconcludethatthecitizensofthePleebspursueconsumerism,thecitizensoftheEdencliffupholdsimplicity.Inshort,peopleoftheEdencliffattachimportancetoemotionsandtheyfavorthesimplelifethatischaracterizedbyspiritualpursuitratherthanmaterialgains.4.3.2RespecttonatureComparedwiththecitizensofPleebsandtheCompoundwhodevalueandexploitnonhumannature,theGardenersthinkhighlyofnonhumannatureanddevotethemselvestothecauseofsavingnature.Firstly,theEdencliffisaspacewhereitsGardenersvalueanimals‘livesandtalent,admitpeople‘sfellowshipwithnonhumannature,andrecognizethecontributionofnonhumannaturetotheworld.Theyrefusetoeatmeatandbecomestrictvegetarians.ItmeritsnotethattheGardenersappreciatethemaggottherapytokillnecroticbacteriaandpreventgangreneinsteadofhavingmedicines.Theyalsotakevulturesastheirfriendsandacknowledgetheirmeritsofpurifyingtheearth.Fromtheiracknowledgementofthemaggotsandvultures‘talentwhichisusuallyloathedbymanypeople,itcanbeillustratedthattheGardenersrespectothercreatures‘life.Moreover,theGardenersupholdthathumanbeingshavethefellowshipwitheachCreature.InoneoftheinterviewsofAtwoodafterthepublicationoftheCrakeandOryx,shementionsthatGodhashadtheFellowshipwithalllivingcreatures,sotheGardenerstakeitastheirtheologicalfoundation(Yuan,2010:260).AccordingtotheGardeners‘creeds,humanbeingsandothercreaturesarebrothersandsisters,soweshouldlivetogetherpeacefully,asAdamOnepreachesthatwehave―ouranimalinside‖(Atwood,2009:54).Inoneofthepsalms,AdamOnepraysthattheLordkeepstheGardenersfromtheirprideoverthenonhumannature,andtheir―aggression,anger,greed‖towardnature(ibid).Inaddition,theGardenersappreciatealltheothercreatures‘meritstomaintainavigorousworld,including―theMoles‖,―theAnt‖,―theWorm‖,―theNematode‖thatliveinthedarkground,andthe―LittleCarrionBeetles‖thattidyupourspaces(Atwood,2009:162).ContrastingwiththePleebsandtheCompoundcharacterizedbytheircommodificationanddominationofnature,theEdencliffisaspacewherebothhumanandnonhumannatureareequal.Secondly,theEdencliffisaspacewhereitspeopletakeresponsibilitytosavenonhumannature.TheGardenersdeemthatpeopleofthePleebsandtheCompoundhavebrokenthehuman-naturefellowship―withmurder,lust,andgreed‖(Atwood,2009:-28- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文14).Facedwithman‘sbetrayofnature,theGardenersdevotethemselvestothecauseofsavingnature.IntheviewofGardeners,onlywhenotherspeciesareprotectedandtakengoodcareofbythem,dothedyingcreaturescomebackalive.Therefore,theypreachthat―untiltheGardenersarise,andyoutoLiferestore‖(Atwood,1).InordertoachievetheirdreamsofreinventingtheGardenofEdentotaketheplaceoftheinsidiousworldwithgreedandlust,theyhaveamassiveplan.Amassivedie-ofthehumanracewasimpending,duetooverpopulationandwickedness,buttheGardenersexemptedthemselves:theyintendedtofloatabovetheWaterlessFlood,withtheaidofthefoodtheywerestashingawayinthehiddenstoreplacestheycalledArarats.Asfortheflotationdevicesinwhichtheywouldrideoutthisflood,theythemselveswouldbetheirArks,storedwiththeirowncollectionsofinneranimals,oratleastthenamesofthoseanimals.ThustheywouldsurvivetoreplenishtheEarth.Orsomethinglikethat.(Atwood,2009:47)TheGardenerstakethestoryofNoah‘sArkintheBibleastheirprototype,hopingthatthevirusinthePlyssplusspillswouldwipeoutthewickedness,whichislikethefloodofGod.ImaginingthemselvesasNoah,thekindestandmostinnocentmaninGod‘seyes,theywilltaketheirfavoriteanimalsandplantstoescapefromtheWaterlessFlood.Withtheirstocksoffoodandwildernesssurvivalskills,theGardenersareexpectedtosurvivethefaminebroughtbytheWaterlessFlood.Whenallotherpeoplewhoareindulgedinmaterialenjoymentandmoraldegenerationdie,theGardenerswholoveandrespectnonhumannaturelivewiththeperfectnewlycreatedhumanspecieswhoaresimple,innocentandbeautiful.Inthisway,theycanprotectnatureandsavenaturefromthehandsof―greedySpoilers‖(Atwood,2009:1).However,thisisonlywishfulthinkingontheirpartbecausetheEdencliffwillalsofallapartlikeothertwospaces.Thereasonswillbeexplainedinthefollowingchapter.4.4SummaryInconclusion,thePleebs,theHelthWyzerCompound,andtheEdencliffRooftopGardenarethreeseparatespaces.InthePleebswhichisadystopiaofanarchyandmaterialism,theoppressedcitizensaresufferingintheabyssofmiseryandnatureisexploitedandcommercializedtomakeprofits.IntheCompoundwhichistheprisonreignedbyreason,citizensareindifferenttootherpeoplearoundandtheytakeadvantageofscienceandtechnologytodominatenonhumannature.IntheEdencliffwhichisaneco-utopia,peoplearewillingtohelpothersandrespectnature.-29- Chapter4ConstructionofThreeSpacesUnfortunately,allofthethreespacescollapseaftertheattackoftheWaterlessFlood.-30- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesInChapterFour,anextensivedescriptionofthethreespaceshasbeenmadefromtheperspectiveofecocriticism.Inthischapter,withregardtothespaceandplaceresearchesinecocriticism,potentialreasonsforthedestructionofthethreespacesareprovidedtomakeacomprehensiveanalysisofthenovel.Inaccordancewiththestudiesofplaceinecocriticism,thePleebscollapsesbecauseitisanon-placewherepeopledonothaveplace-attachment;theCompoundbreaksdownbecauseitsdevelopmentviolatestheplacejustice;theEdenclifffallsapartandtheGardener‘sambitionsforreinventingtheGod‘sEdenfallflatbecauseitscitizensupholdimporosityofspaceandsingularculture.5.1DestructionofPleebs:thecollapseofa“non-place”Attheendofthestory,thelethalvirusrampantlysweepsawaythewholecityofthePleebs.Corpsesareeverywhereinthecityandthesurvivors―wereinthelaststages,wanderingaroundlikezombies;ortheywerealreadydown,foldedinonthemselveslikecloth‖(Atwood,2009:323).Inessence,amajorcauseofthedestructionofthePleebsispeople‘splacelessness,ortheirsenseofnon-place.Sincethecitizenshavenoplace-attachmentthatcultivatespeople‘saffectionfortheirplaces,theywilldonothingtoprotectitbutevenpromoteitsdownfalltoacertaindegree.5.1.1Non-placePlacesarethespacesthatendowpeoplewithasenseofplace.Sinceplacesareconcretewhilespacesareabstract,placesareusuallyloadedwithhuman‘sfeelingsandmemories.AstheprestigiousecocriticLawrenceBuellcomments(2005),―wespeakofplace-attachmentratherthanofspaceattachment‖(63).Tosomedegree,thespacementionedbyBuellisthesynonymofnon-placewhichismentionedbyMacAugéinhisNonplaces:IntroductiontoanAnthropologyofSupermodernity(1995).Inthebook,heillustratesthedefinitionofnon-placebyfirstlypointingoutthat―thedistinctionbetweenplacesandnon-placesderivesfromtheoppositionbetweenplaceandspace‖(1995:79).Inhisdefinition,thenon-placeis―aspacewhichcannotbedefinedasrelational,orhistorical,orconcernedwithidentity‖(1995:77-78).Tosomeextent,spaceisequaltothenon-placeduetotheirabsenceofplace-attachmentthatcanpromotepeople‘srelationswiththeirlivingsurroundings,andtheirconstructionofhistoricalmemoriesandidentities.Firstly,anon-placecannotbedefinedasrelational,becausethereisnospiritualbondbetweenhumanbeingsandtheirplaces.Inthenon-place,peopleconsidertheirlivingspacejustasaspatialcontainerwhichoffersthemmaterialsupportoffoodand-31- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesaccommodation.Theydenyemotionstowardtheirlivingspaceandtheymakenoefforttocareabouttheirrelationshipwiththeirsurroundingsandeventhemselves.Whenpeopleignoretheirlinkswithnonhumannature,theywilldegradeandexploitnature,whichcausestheecologicalcrisis.Whenpeopleneglecttheircloserelationshipwitheachother,therewillbenotrustandrespectamongthem,whichcausesthesocialcrisis.Whenpeoplearealienatedfromthemselves,thiswillresultintheirownidentitycrisis.Secondly,anon-placecannotbedefinedashistorical,becausethereisnoconnectionbetweenpeople‘slivingspacewithhistoryandculture.AsDreesementions,―culture,language,history,beliefsystems,socialpractice,andotherinfluencesonhumandevelopment‖arepartsofaplace(Dresse,2002:3).Peoplesufferingfromplacelessnessandidentitycrisiscannotcontributegreatlytothehistorymakingandculturalmemoryofaplace.Onlywhenweloveaplaceandinvolvethemselvesintheconstructivecommunityactivities,canwecreateourownhome,which―wecaninhabitandfeelateasewithourselvesandoursurroundings‖(ibid).Inthenon-placewithoutconnectionwithhistory,peoplecannotlivecomfortablywiththemselvesandtheirsurroundings.Thirdly,anon-placecannotpromotetheconstructionofindividualidentitybecausepeoplecannotfindwhotheyareinthespacethatcannotbedefinedasrelationalandhistorical.Asplacesarealwaysconsideredas―sourcesofsecurityandidentityforindividualsandgroupsofpeople‖,withoutplace-attachment,peoplearestuckinidentitycrisis(Johnston,1986:88).Aswhatismentionedabove,placeisnotonlyourmaterialsupportbutalsoourspiritualhomethathelpsusknowourselves.AsDressepointsout,ifwewanttoknowwhoweare,wemustfirstknowwhereweare,because―environmentalfactorsplayacrucialroleinthephysical,emotional,andevenspiritualconfigurationsthatdetermineourideasofwhoweare‖(2002:1).Inthenon-placewherepeopledenytheirrelationshipwiththeirhabitats,peoplearesubjecttoidentitycrisis.Inconclusion,inthenon-placecharacterizedbytheabsenceofplace-attachment,peopledonotcareaboutothers,nottosaymakecontributionstotheirlivingspace,whicheventuallygivesrisetoecological,socialandspiritualcrisis.ThereisnodoubtthatthePleebsinTheYearoftheFloodtypifiesthespaceofnon-place,whichpartlyaccountsforthecollapseofthePleebs.5.1.2Collapseofthenon-placeThePleebsisatypicalnon-place.Whenpeopleonlytaketheirlivingspaceasthespatialcontainerthatprovidesthemwithmaterialsupportratherthanacomplexityofourhistoryandculturethathelpsourselvesconstructtheiridentity,theywillbereluctantto-32- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文careabouttheirrelationshipwiththemselves,othersandnature,whichcausessocial,identityandecologicalcrisis.InthePleebs,thetyrannicalcontrolofCorpSeCorpsandprofit-orientedmaterialismpreventthecitizensfromfosteringaffectionfortheirlivingspace,cuttingofftheirrelationshipswithnature,othersandeventhemselves.Inordertosurviveinthenon-place,thecitizenslivealifelikeawalkingdeathorotherwiseescapefromthespace.Firstly,peopleinthePleebssufferfromthesocialcrisis.Onthepretextofnon-placewhererelationshipsamongpeoplearecutoff,thecitizensareobsessedwiththepursuitofmonetarygains,beingcoldtoothers‘sufferings.Intheprofit-pervertedsociety,illegalactivitiesprevailwithanoverabundanceofwildlifetrafficking,drugtrafficking,andsexualpleasures.Peoplekillendangeredanimalsfortheirrarefuranddeliciousmeat.Althoughthefinesfortheillegaltradearehigh,peoplearestillflockingtojointhelucrativemarket.Thedrugtraffickersarefreetoretaildrugsonthestreets.ThebusinessofprostitutionislegalinthePleebswiththeestablishmentofofficialsextrademarket―Seksmart‖(Atwood,2009:7).Allofthesemarketsarebloomingbecauseoftheirhighprofits.People‘ssoulsareparalyzedinsuchaspacecharacterizedbyprofitseeking.Topromotetheirlongevity,theysparenoefforttobuytheCompound‘supplementpillsthatcarrythevirus.DifferentfromtheGod‘sGardenerswhoarewillingtohelpothers,theyareindifferenttothosewhoneedhelp.Whentherefugeescometothecity,theyturntheirblindeyestotherefugeesbybuildingthehighandstrongwallsandholdgunsagainstthem.Theyvictimizetheillegalimmigrants,restoringto―themethodusedbyfarmerswhofoundadiseasedcowintheherd:shoot,shovel,andshutup‖(Atwood,2009:30).Livinginthefantasyofnon-place,thecitizensarereducedtomoraldepravitybecause―seedywasgoodforbusiness‖(Atwood,2009:7).Besides,themoraldegenerationinPainball,aprisonforcriminals,reachesitsacme.There,thecriminalsaredividedintotwoteamstoplaythegameofkilling.Thekilledinthegamearehungonthetreeswiththeirheadscutoff,andtheirheartsandkidneystornout.Cruelly,theprocessofthemassacreisonscreenandsomecitizensgambleonitwithexcitement.AfterthebreakoutoftheWaterlessFlood,thebrutalPainballersfleetheprison,plunderandmurderdiscretionarily.Inthesocietywherepeoplearealienatedfromeachother,peopleliveinmisery.Secondly,peopleinthePleebssufferfromthespiritualcrisisoridentitycrisis.Inthenon-place,peoplecannotliveateasewiththemselvesbecausetheydon‘tknowwhotheyareandwhattheywanttobe.Toby,oneofthetwonarratorsinthestory,isatypicalexamplewhenshestillstaysinthePleebs.Afterherfathercommitssuicidewithhisgun,Tobyfearsthatshemightbeaccusedofmurderorgetstroubleasthedaughterof―anadmittedlawbreaker‖inthattheCorpSeCorpsoutlawsthefirearmsofthePleebs‘-33- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacescitizensinordertocontrolthem(Atwood,2009:27).Additionally,sinceshemightbe―framedoutforsex‖bytheCorpSeCorpsforpayingbackherfather‘sdebts,sheburnsher―identity‖toeludetheCorpSeCorps‘investigationandexploitation(Atwood,2009:30).Withoutfamilies,identity,andmoney,shewandersaroundthecitypurposelessly.ItneedstopointoutthattheidentitypaperTobyhasburnedsymbolizesthelossofheridentity.Withoutthepast,shebecomesrootlessandfindslifemeaningless.Shedoesnotcareaboutanyonearoundher.Allsheneedstodoisstrugglinginthecityforsurvival.Withoutidentityinformation,Tobycanonlyfindademeaningjobasa―furzooter‖,apromotionworkerdressedinanimalcostumes(Atwood,2009;31).Whenshefindsherselfphysicallyandmentallyharassedbythecustomers,shequitsthejob.Afterthat,shesellsherfairandevenhereggsformoney.Shelosesherabilityofhavingchildrenwhensheisinfectedbytheextractionneedleofeggs.Aftersheisinformedofthenews,shefeels―allthelightleakingofher‖(Atwood,2009:33).Lateron,thedesperateTobyspendsallhermoneyon―adrug-fuelledholidayfromreality‖(ibid).Inordertosurvive,shefindsanewjobintheSecretBurgers,astoresellinghamburgerswithsecretsofitsingredientresources.AlthoughshesuffersfromthesexualassaultbythemanagerBlanco,shehasnochoiceandshehasnoplacetogotobecausesheneedsthepaymentofthejobtosurviveinthePleebs.Finally,whensheisdyingofBlanco‘ssexualviolence,shefleesfromthePleebs.Infact,therearenumerouspeoplelikeTobywanderingaroundthecitywithoutsouls.Withastrongself-denial,theydon‘tknowwhotheyareandwhattheywanttobe.Thirdly,thePleebsalsoissubjectedtotheecologicalcrisis.Peopleexploitnaturerecklessly.Inordertomakeprofits,theytakethefurandskinofendangeredspecies.Theyalsodestroytheforeststoexpandtheircity.WhenToby‘sfatherrefusestosellhishouseinthecountrysidetothelandagent,heloseshisjob.Intheprocessofexploitingnature,theconflictamongpeopleisalsointensified.AstheecologicalethicistLiPeichaoarguesinTheEthicalDignityofNature(2001),theconflictsbetweenhumanbeingsandnonhumannaturearecloselyrelatedwiththeinternalconflictsamonghumanbeingsinthattheintensificationoftheformerwillleadtotheintensificationofthelatterandviceversa.Whenthenaturalresourcesareinshortageorunavailable,moresocialconflictsemerge.Itcanbesummarizedthatsocialcrisisandecologicalcrisisarecloselyrelatedbecausesocialproblemsbringabouttheenvironmentalproblemswhichinreturnworsenthesocialcrisis(Yuan,2010:263).Inconclusion,peopleinthePleebsarestuckinsocial,identityandecologicalcrisis.Ontheonehand,theyarethevictimsofthenon-placesincetheysufferfrompoliticalandeconomicoppressionoftheCorpSeCorps;ontheotherhand,theyembracethesenseofnon-placethatjustifiestheirpursuitofprofits.Inthenon-placewherepeople-34- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文donothaveplace-attachment,peoplehavenopastbecausepeoplefailtodevotethemselvestomakingthehistoryandculturalmemoryofaplace;peoplemakenosenseofthepresentbecausetheyarealienatedfromnonhumannature,othersandthemselves;theyhavenopromisingprospectbecausetheirspacecharacterizedbysocial,identityandecologicalcrisiswillcollapseinthefuture.5.2DestructionofHelthWyzerCompound:theviolationofplacejusticeAftertheWaterlessFloodbreaksout,theCompoundisrobbedbythedesperatesurvivorsanditscitizensalsodieofthepandemicdisease.Eventually,thegiganticcastlebuiltonthebedrockofreasonhascollapsed.Infact,beforetheapocalypse,theCompoundhaseconomicallyandpoliticallyspoliatedtheothertwospaces.Inthecourseofdevelopingitsownhomeplace,theCompoundalwaystakesthematerialsupportfromotherspacesforgranted,whichviolatestheplacejustice.Asaresult,thedestructionofotherspacesinturnleadstoitsowndestruction.5.2.1“OneTruePlace”and“ShadowPlace”Inordertodealwiththeimpactofecologicalandsocialcrisis,ecocriticsarepayingmoreandmoreattentiontotheconstructionoftheplace-attachmentor―asenseofplace‖,hopingtoeliminatethenegativeaffectofnon-place.Accordingly,Plumwoodcallsonustorethinktheimportanceofplaceconsciousnesstoavoidthenarroworfalseplaceconsciousness.Shedividestheplaceintotwogroups:OneTruePlaceandShadowPlace.OneTruePlaceisanelevatedandperfectplace―whosepurificationdemandstheevictionofalienelements‖anditisdevelopedattheexpenseofother―lesserhomes—thoseof‗lesscivilised‘indigenousothers‖(Plumwood,2008:144).―ShadowPlace‖standsfortheunrecognizedplacesthatprovidetheOneTruePlacewith―materialandecologicalsupport‖(Plumwood,2008:139).However,inaglobalmarket,shadowplacesareoften―eludeourknowledgeandresponsibility‖(ibid).Inlightoftherationalthinking,therelationshipbetweenOneTruePlaceandShadowPlaceisoneofthevariantsofreason/emotion.InthedualismofOneTruePlace/ShadowPlaceinplacestructure,asShadowPlaceisconsideredastheOther,it―deservestobeincontrolandtobedisproportionatelyrewarded‖anditisnaturaltodenyandbackgroundthecontributionoftheShadowPlacetotheconstructingofOneTruePlace(Plumwood,2002:17).Furthermore,thepeopleoftheOneTruePlacetrytokeepawayfromtheillconsequencesbroughtbytheshadowplaces,whicharecausedbythematerialandecologicalexploitationoftheOneTrueplace,soithasnoreasontoshoulderitsresponsibilityfortheillconsequencesintheshadowplaces.-35- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesTheattachmenttoOneTruePlaceisakindoffalseornarrowplaceconsciousnessbecausetheOneTruePlaceisdevelopedatthecostofthedegradationofothershadowplaces.Withthisfalseplaceconsciousness,itspeoplewillsquandertheresourcesofotherplacesandoppressthecitizensoftheotherplacessoastoperfecttheirownhomeplace.Inthissense,theyviolatetheenvironmentaljustice,namely,an―injunction‖thatadvocatespeopletocareaboutandcherishtheirownplaces,―butwithoutintheprocessdestroyingordegradinganyotherplaces,where‗otherplaces‘includesotherhumanplaces,butalsootherspecies‘places‖(Plumwood,2008:147).InTheYearoftheFlood,theCompoundstandsfortheOneTruePlacewhereasthePleebsandtheEdencliffareconsideredasshadowplaces.Theviolationofplacejusticeisthemajorcauseofthedestructionofthespace.5.2.2ExploitationofotherplacesInordertoleadacomfortableandluxuriouslifewithadvancedandconvenientfacilitiesintheCompound,thepeopleoftheCompoundbuildtheirdreamplaceattheexpenseofotherspaces.Politically,thePleebsandtheEdencliff,asshadowplacesoftheCompound,sufferfromitspoliticaloppression.SincetheCorpSeCorpsistheemployeeoftheCompoundtocontrolthePleebs,inreality,itistheCompoundthatmanipulatestheCorpSeCorpstoguaranteeitsownprofits.InthePleebs,whentheCorpSeCorpstakebribesfromsomeofthecitizens,theillegalsactivitiesofkidnaps,prostitution,drug-trafficking,andevenmurderareignored.IftheillegalactivitiesareexposedbytheTVreporters,theCorpSeCorpstriestoavoidtheirresponsibilityforthesocietyandonlymakea―pretenseatinvestigation‖(Atwood,2009:34).WiththeignoranceoftheCorpSeCorps,theillegaldeedsrunrampantlyinthecityandpeoplesufferfrommoralitydegeneration.InordertocontrolthecitizensofthePleebs,peopleareweaponlesswiththeconfiscationofalltheirgunsbecausetheCorpSeCorpsoutlawstheirfirearmsinthenameofpublicsafety.Furthermore,whenmorepeoplecometotheEdencliffandGardenersmakemorerooftopsbloomingwithflowers,theCorpSeCorpstriestoattackGardenersforfearthattheirgrowingpowerwillthreatentheCompound‘s―profitmargins‖(Atwood,2009:275).TheCompound‘spoliticaloppressionofthePleebsandtheEdenclifftoensureitscontrolovertheotherspacesanditsprofitmarginshasviolatedtheplacejusticethatresiststhedegradationanddestructionofshadowplacesbytheOneTruePlace.Economically,theelitesoftheCompoundtakethePleebs‘citizensasfreeexperimentalarticlesandinjectvirusintotheirsupplementpills.Whenthevictimsaresick,theCompoundsendsitsdoctorstotreatthemandchargethemhighfees.OncethecitizensofthePleebsareinfectedbythevirus,itisveryhardforthemtorecover.Inorder-36- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文tobecured,theyneedtopaymoretothedoctorsoftheCompound.Forinstance,whenToby‘smotherisdiagnosedwithanillness,theyspendalltheirmoneyandevenselltheirhousetopaytheirbills.Besides,theEdencliffcannotalsobefreefromtheextortionoftheCompound.ThelatterhasinstigatedsomeGardenerstogrowthegrop-opwhichisakindofhighyieldtransgenicmarihuanasoastomakemoney.Alltheproductsofgrop-oparesoldtothecitizensofthePleebs.Inthegro-opbusiness,thescientistsoftheCompoundmakeagreatprofitbysellingtothecitizensoftheothertwospacestheirscientificproductsthataredetrimentaltotheirhealth.Tomakemoreprofits,theCompoundhasviolatedtheplacejusticesinceitsprosperityisachievedbyitseconomicexploitationofthePleebsandtheEdencliff.Ecologically,thescientistsoftheCompounddestroytheecologicalsystemofthePleebssincetheyregardthePleebsastheirlabsandgarbagefields.AlltheirgeneticengineeringproductsincludingrakunksandgreenrabbitsarestockedinthePleebs.Allthespecieswith―gene-splicing‖multiplyataquickspeedandtheyloottheoldspecies‘habitatsandresources(Atwood,2009:16)AsAdamOneinforms,allthescientistsoftheCompoundaredestroying―oldSpecies‖andmakingnewonestoruntheworld(Atwood,2009:146).TheCompound‘sdevelopmentofscienceandtechnologyattheexpenseofthedestructionofthePleebs‘ecologicalsystemhasviolatedtheplacejusticethatadvocatescareandlovefortheshadowplaces.AlthoughalltheillconsequencesarecausedbytheexploitationoftheCompounds,itdeniesthesupportoftheshadowplacesandrefusestotakeresponsibilityforallthewrongdoingsintheshadowplaces.InthenovelOryxandCrake,aprequelofTheYearoftheFlood,allthekidsintheCompoundareonlytoldthatthePleebsarethesourceofvirusandtheyareforbiddentogothere.WhenitisnecessaryforthemtogotothePleebsorcontactthecitizensofthePleebs,theyneedtobevaccinated.WhenRentellstheCompound‘skidsaboutherexperienceinthePleebs,theyareverycuriousaboutitbecausealmostnoneofthemhasbeentothePleebs.Moreover,peopleoftheCompoundarereluctanttoshouldertheirresponsibilityfortheillconsequencestheybringtothePleebs.InsteadofhelpingthePleebs‘peopleeliminatetheviruswhichresultsfromtheirexperiments,theCompound‘scitizenstrytoavoidthemselvesfromtheillconsequencestheycauseinthePleebs.Theyshutuptheirdoorandexcludeallthepeoplefromtheotherspaces.WhenRenandhermothercomebacktotheCompoundfromthePleebs,theguardscallherfathertochecktheiridentitiesfirstandtheyalsoneedtoacceptacheck-uptoensurethattheydonotcarrythevirusofthePleebs.Ironically,whentheWaterlessFloodbreaksout,peopleoftheCompoundfailtokeepthepeopleoutoftheirdoorandallofthemareinfectedbythevirus.Sincetheplacejusticeexhortsthatshadowplacesshouldbecaredbytheplacesthattheyoffermaterialecologicalsupport,Compounds‘-37- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesignoranceofthePleebsandtheEdencliffanditsshunningofitsresponsibilityfortheillconsequencestheybringtotheotherspaceshaveviolatedplacejustice,whicheventuallyleadstoitsowndestruction.Tosomedegree,thesituationbetweentheCompoundandtheothertwospacesresemblestherelationshipbetweenthewesterndevelopedcountriesandtheunderdevelopedonesinourcontemporaryworld.TheCompoundistheepitomeofdevelopedcountrieswhilethePleebsandtheEdencliffaretheepitomesofunderdevelopedcountries.InordertobuildtheirOneTruePlace,thepeopleofthedevelopedcountriestakecontrolofthepoorareas,exertoppressionontheirpeople,androbthemoftheirlimitedresources,makingpeopleoftheunderdevelopedcountriesgrapplewiththeproblemsofoverpopulationandinsufficientresources.Inordertokeepawayfromtheillconsequencescausedbytheircontrolandexploitation,thedevelopedcountriesarereluctanttoprovidehelpandshelterwiththerefugeesfromtheunderdevelopedones.However,theworldisinterrelatedanditconsistsofaweboflife.Thedisastersinthepoorareaswillinfluencethedevelopedcountriesinaviciouscycle.Whenshadowplacesthatoffermaterialsupportcollapse,theOneTruePlaceisonthevergeofbreakingdown.Therefore,inordertoensuretheflourishingofallspaces,―wewouldhavetoacceptalltheseshadowplacestooas‗our‘place,notjusttheprivileged,special,recognisedplace,thecastle-of-the-self-placecalledhome‖(Plumwood,2008:147).Ifweviolatetheplacejusticetomakeourownhomemoreprosperous,thedestructionoftheshadowplaceswilleventuallyruinourownplace.Allinall,thecitizensoftheCompoundtaketheirspaceastheOneTruePlaceandtakethePleebsandtheEdencliffastheirshadowplaces.Todeveloptheirownspace,theyrapaciouslysnatchtheresourcesoftheothertwospacesandtheytrytoshuntheirresponsibilityfortheillconsequencestheybringintheprocessofitsowndevelopment.TheCompound‘sexploitationofotherspacesviolatestheprincipleofplacejustice.Intheinterrelatedworld,whenotherspacesaredestroyedbytheplague,theprosperousCompoundcouldnoteludethedestinyofruin.5.3DestructionofEdencliffRooftopGarden:thefalloftheutopiaInordertoreinventtheir―Eden‖,theGardenersofEdencliffendeavortobuildtheirplaceofAcadianutopia.However,thisisaspacecharacterizedbyimporosityandsingularculture.Inthissense,peopletherecanonlydevelopafalseconsciousnessofplace,whichfailstoarousepeople‘sstrongsenseofplacetoprotecttheirownhome.5.3.1ImporosityofspaceJudgingfromtheGardeners‘dailybehaviors,itisclearthattheytendtoembrace-38- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文theimporosityoftheirspace.However,thespaceofimporositycannotbedevelopedintoplacethatcanbedefinedasrelational.AsHubbardhaspointedout,placeis―conceivedasauniquesitethat,whileconnectedtootherplaces‖(2002:16).Whenwewanttobuildaplace,itsconnectionswithotherplacescannotbedenied.AccordingtoMassay,―itisasenseofplace,anunderstandingof‗itscharacter‘,whichcanonlybeconstructedbylinkingthatplacetoplacesbeyond‖(2001:155).Ifwedenythelinkbetweenourplacewithotherplaces,thesenseofplacecannotyetbeconstructed.Inessence,theEdencliffhasmadethesamemistakeastheCompound,becausebothofthespaceshaveisolatedthemselvesfromotherspaces.DuringtheprocessofrebuildingtheirEden,GardenerscutofftheEdenclifffromotherspaces.Inordertoachieveitsidealdream,theGardenersexcludethecontactwithallotherspacesbecausetheythinktheotherspacesarewickedwithgreedanddesires.Insteadofcooperatingwithotherspacestosolvethecurrentecologicalandsocialproblems,theynaivelyreckonthattheycanbuildaperfectnewworldfreefromevils,iftheyjustabandonhuman‘sdeep-seatedanthropocentrismandstrivetobuildasealedspacewithharmonybetweenhumanandnonhumannature.Inordertokeepawayfromtheotherspaces,theyseektoliveaself-sufficientlifebyplantingvegetablesthemselvesandresistthecontemporaryhouseholdproductssuchasdryersandvehicles,whichareprovidedbytheCompoundandthePleebs.However,theyarenotfar-sightedtonoticethatspacesareinterrelatedandtheirboundariesareblurry.Itisimpossibletobuildaplacewithoutlinkingwithotherspaces.AlthoughtheGardenerstrytokeeptheimporosityoftheEdencliffbylivingaself-sufficientlife,theycannotdenytheirgeographicalandmaterialdependenceontheotherspaces.Geographically,theEndencliffislocatedinthePleebsandtheregiontheGardenersoccupyiscalled―Sinkhole‖thatisnexttothepleebmobs‘―SewageLagoon‖(Atwood,2009:48).Besides,someoftheGardenersusedtobemembersofthePleebssuchasToby.Intheirdailylife,thePleebs‘rubbishbinshaveprovidedthemwithmaterialresourcestomaketheirdailynecessities.TheyoftengoouttothePleebsforgleaning―theGardeners‘recycled-materialscrafts‖(Atwood,2009:68).Inordertomakesoapsandvinegarwhichtheyneedtoconsumeeveryday,theyneedtocollectsoapendsandwineinthePleebs‘rubbishbins.Fortheexchangeforothermaterials,theyarerequiredtoselltheircraftsmadeoftherecycled-materialintheTreeofLifeNaturalMaterialExchangeinthePleebs.Thus,thereisnodenyingthatthedevelopmentoftheEdencliffisbasedonthegeographicalandmaterialsupportofthePleebs.Tosumup,peopleshouldrecognizethatthedevelopmentoftheirownspacesiscloselyrelatedwithothers.Iftheconnectionsbetweenspacesarecutoff,theimporosity-39- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesofthespacewillhinderthedevelopmentofitself.5.3.2SingularcultureOnthebasicofthesenseofplace,theecocriticUrsulaHeisehasproposedthesenseofplanet.Inheropinion,inthecontextofglobalization,peopledonotdependsomuchonthetraditionallifestylethatischaracterizedby―cultivatinglocalrelationships,beingasself-sufficientaspossible,resistingnewtechnologiesthatdonotimprovehumanlifespirituallyaswellasmaterially‖(Heise,2008:65).Currently,fromfood,clothes,transportation,andentertainment,ourdailylifestyleisshapedbytheworld.Withregardtothesenseofplanet,the―network‖orthe―connectedness‖isemphasized.Forexample,theimpactofenvironmentaldegradationisnotconfinedtoaspecifiedplaceanditisinaviciouscycleintheecologicalweb.Peoplecannotdenytheinfluenceofotherplaces,especiallyinthecontextofglobalization.Thedevelopmentofaplacerequiresmutuallearningamongplacesintheconflictsofmulti-cultures.AsMassayindicates,placesarefullofinternalconflicts.―Conflictoverwhatitspasthasbeen(thenatureofits‗heritage‘),conflictoverwhatshouldbeitspresentdevelopment,[and]conflictoverwhatcouldbeitsfuture‖(Massay,2001:155).Ifcitizensofaspacefavorsinglecultureandresisttheinfluenceofmulticulturesbydenyingtheconnectednessamongplacesandtheinternalconflictsinaplace,theirspacecannotbedevelopedintoaplacewithpromisingfuture.TheprocessofreinventingtheEdenbytheGardenersisalsothecourseofeliminatingthemultiplicityofcultures.TheEdencliffischaracterizedbyitssingularculture,astheGardenerscontrivetoavoidbothoftheexternalculturalconflictsanditsinternalculturalconflicts.Firstly,theGardenersavoidtheculturalinfluenceofotherspaces.Forexample,theGardenersforbidtheiryounggenerationtousethecellphonesandlaptops,becausetheyareafraidthattheinformationexchangedamongthemdestroystheirpurebelieftocreateanewworldwherepeoplearefreefrommoraldegeneration.WhentheEvesfindthatRenhaspickedupacellphonefromthePleebs,theyareextremelyangryandtellherthatitwill―burnherbrain‖,whichmeansitwillbringbadinfluencestoherbelief(Atwood,2009:67).IntheEdencliff,laptopsarealsoconsideredas―adangerousobject‖,especiallyforkidswhoareeasilyinfluenced(Atwood,2009:189).AccordingtoZeb,oneoftheAdams,thelaptopislike―Vatcian‘sporncollection‖forthekids(ibid).Secondly,theGardenersdenytheinternalculturalconflict.AlthoughtheGardenersclaimtoembraceandlovedifferentkindsofcreatures,theirlifestylebetraystheirbelief.Thesimplestexampleisthattheyhavenooptionofchoosingtheirownclothesexceptthedarkandfatrobe.AsRencomplains,theirclothesare―soflat,soplain,soscrubbed-40- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文[and]sodark‖,whichcouldnotshowtheirfiguresandforcesthemtohidetheirlongingforshowingofftheirbeautyandpersonality(Atwood,2009:66).Inthemeantime,itisdifficultforthecitizensofEdenclifftomaketheirvoicesheard.AdamOne,theleaderofEdencliff,consistentlyadvocatestheharmonyofEdenclifftounitethepeoplewiththesameconviction.However,fewoftheminthegroupmakedifferentvoices.Tobyremembersthat―sheearlydesiretoleavetheGarden,outofboredomandclaustrophobia,andthedesireforwhatsheusedtothinkofasalifeofherown‖(Atwood,2009:257).InthespaceofEdencliff,everyonehashisorherownjobthatisnotrelatedwiththeworkofothers.AsTobyfinds,theGardenersdonotwelcomepersonalquestions.ItseemsthatthespaceisdominatedbyAdamOne‘smonotonousspeech,becausethecultureconflictsamongGardenerswhoowndifferentbackgroundswilldisturbpeople‘sdeterminationtorebuildtheEdenwithoutdesireandanxiety.Infact,theexclusionofmulticulturesisnoguaranteeoftheGardeners‘immunizationfromthetemptationofotherspaces.Althoughwineisconsideredassomething―fromsinfulplaces‖andtheGardenersareforbiddentodrinkwine,kidsoftheEdencliffoftensneaktothePleebstodrinkthewhiskeyinthetrashcans(Atwood,2009:69).Someboysevensmokecigarettesorcigars,andeventhegro-op.WhentheyareinthePleebs,kidsareusedtoswearinginthestreet.Althoughkidsareeducatedtohavenogreedanddesires,theyareattractedbysex.Secretly,theyoftenmakejokesaboutsexandmakeupsexstoriesofAdamsandEves.SomeoftheGardenerscannotkeepawayfromthetemptationofprofits.CooperatingwiththePleebsandtheCompound,someoftheGardenersgrowthegro-optomakehighprofitsintheEdencliff.Embracingthesingularculture,theGardenerscannotdeveloptheEdenthattheyexpect,becausetheirexclusionofalltheinfluencesofotherspacespreventstheircommunicationwithotherspaces,whichmakesthemtooweaktofightagainstthewickednessofotherspaces.InthespacethatisdominatedbythedoctrinesofAdamOne,theGardenersfirmlybelieveinfairytales.AccordingtoAdamOne,theyarechosenbyGodtosavetheworld.Aslongastheykeepawayfrommoraldegenerationandthedominationofnature,theywillbeperfectcitizensinthenewworldwholiveharmoniouslywithnatureandothers.Inordertoachievetheirdream,whattheyneedtodoisonlytoholdontotheirbeliefratherthanfightagainstthewickednesswithviolence.However,whentheyareattackedbytheCorpSeCorpsbecausetheirgrowingpowerhasthreateneditsprofitmargins,whattheyknowistoescapefromviolenceratherthanfightagainsttheevil.Asaresult,mostoftheGardenersdieinthemassacreoftheCorpSeCorpsbeforetheWaterlessFlood.ItisessentialtopointoutthatitisTobywhodoesnottotallybelieveinthefairytaleoftheGardenerssurviveattheendofthe-41- Chapter5DestructionofThreeSpacesstory.BecauseTobyhasexperiencedtheexcruciatinglifeinthePleebs,itishardforhertostopquestioningthefantasyoftheidealembracedintheEdencliff.WhensheisinthePleebs,shehaslearntthatifpeoplewanttosurviveinthesocietywithsocial,identity,andecologicalcrisis,theyneedtolearntofightagainstthewicked.WhenshelivesintheEdencliff,shelearnshowtohelp,cooperate,care,andloveothers.Becauseofhertoughnesstobattlewiththewickednessandherabilitytohelpandcareaboutothers,TobysurvivestheWaterlessFlood.Inshort,thetragedyofEdencliffliesinitsimporosityanditsadvocateofthesingularculture.AlthoughtheGardenersseektobethemoralmodelintheworldofmaterialismandpreachtheirecologicalbelief,―suchan‗easysolution‘isrepeatedlyquestioned‖(Bartosch,2013:250).Becauseplacebyitsnatureisacomplexwebofsolidarityandcooperationaswellas―verycomplexentities‖thatareshapedby―forcesfromwellbeyondtheirownnotionalboundaries‖,theEdencliffisdoomedtofailincreatingtheirdreamEdenwiththeirself-enclosureandsingularculture(Hubbard,2002:17).5.4SummaryInconclusion,firstly,thePleebsisanon-placewherepeoplehasnoplace-attachment,whichleadstothealienationofpeoplefromothers,nature,andeventhemselves.Thealienationofpeoplemakesthemsufferfromsocialcrisis,identitycrisis,andecologicalcrisis,whichbecomesoneofthereasonsforthedestructionofthePleebs.Secondly,peopleoftheCompoundhaveviolatedplacejustice,astheytaketheirhomeastheOneTruePlace.Todeveloptheirspace,theyirresponsiblyexploitshadowplacesthatprovidethemwithmaterialandecologicalsupport.Sincespacesareinterrelated,thecollapseoftheotherspaces,whichiscausedbytheillconsequencesofitsexploitation,inturnleadsitselftodestruction.Thirdly,theEdenclifffailstobuilditsEden.ItisdestroyedbythemassacreofCorpSeCorpsandtheWaterlessFlood,becausetheimporosityofthespaceandthemonogamousculturecannothelpitscitizenssurviveinthecomplicatedandmulticulturalworld.-42- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文Chapter6ConclusionInthischapter,abriefconclusiontoillustratethemajorfindingsisfirstlysummarized,andthenthelimitationsandimplicationsarepresentedforfurtherstudies.6.1MajorfindingsFromtheaboveanalysis,thethreespacesinTheYearoftheFloodcannotbedevelopedintoplaces.ThePleebscharacterizedbyitspoliticalandeconomicoppressionofpeopleanditscommodificationofnature,isthenon-placewithoutplace-attachment.Inthenon-place,sincepeoplearereluctanttocareabouttheirrelationshipwithnature,othersandeventhemselvesandtodevotethemselvestotheconstructionoftheirhistoricalorculturalmemoriesandtheirownidentifies,theyaresubjectedtothesocial,ecological,andidentitycrisis.TheCompoundfeaturedbyitssupremacyofreasonanditsdominationofnature,istheOneTruePlacethatisdevelopedattheexpenseofexploitingshadowplaces.TheCompoundviolatesthejusticeofplaceandthecollapseofotherspacesalsoleadstoitsowndestruction.TheEdencliffcharacterizedbyacknowledgmentofemotionandpeople‘srespectofnature,isaspaceofimporosityandsingularculture.Sincetheboundaryamongspacesisblurryandtheworldisinterrelated,theEdencliffcannotbedevelopedintoaplacepowerfulenoughtofightagainsttheCorpSeCorpsandtheWaterlessFlood.Finallyitalsocollapses.Thedestructionofthreespacesprovokesustothinkabouttheplaceresearchesinecocriticism.AsChineseecocriticHuzhihongcontends,placeconsciousnessplaysanimportantroleintheprocessofcultivatingecologicalawareness,enhancingenvironmentalimagination,andalleviatingecologicalcrisis(2007:57).Inordertoconstructtheplaceconsciousnessthathelpsussolveourcurrentsocial,identityandecologicalcrisis,itisnecessaryforustocultivateplace-attachment,complywiththeplacejustice,andsustainthecoexistenceofmultiplecultures.Accordingtowhatismentionedabove,themajorfindingsofthethesiscanbeillustratedbythefollowingthreeaspects.Firstofall,people‘sloveorplace-attachmentfortheirplacesshouldbeassertedbymakingeffortstocareabouttheirrelationshipswithothers,nature,andthemselves.Whenpeople‘sattachmenttoaspaceisabsent,peoplecanhardlyprotecttheirspaceanditisjustanon-placewherepeopleliveintheabyssofsocial,identityandecologicalcrisislikethecitizensofthePleebsinTheYearoftheFlood.Secondly,thejusticeofplaceneedstobepromoted.Loveforaspecificplacedoesnotmeantheignoranceofothersupportingplaces;instead,loveforourownplaceisthepremisetoloveotherplaces,as-43- Chapter6ConclusionPlumwoodmentionsthatlovefor―aspecificearthplace‖isthepremisetocareaboutotherplacesintheworld(Plumwood,2008:143).Itisnecessaryforpeopletoguaranteethatthedevelopmentoftheirhomesisnotenhancedbyinfringingonothercitizens‘rightsandevenotherspecies‘benefits.ThefalseconsciousnessoftheCompoundthatcapitalizesonotherspacesultimatelyruinsallspacesinthenovel.Therefore,itiscriticalforustoupholdthejusticeofplaceprincipleandbringwell-beingstothewholeecologicalsociety.Thirdly,thelinksbetweenourplacewithotherspacesshouldberecognizedbycooperatingwithotherplacesandacknowledgingtheircultures.―Participatingregularlyincontextsofneighbourhood‖isaneffectivewaytoavoid―anthropocentricwaysofthinkinganddisrupthumanself-enclosure‖(Plumwood,2008:143).SincetheGardeners‘refusetounitepeopleoftheotherspacestocombatwiththeincreasinglyseriousecologicalandsocialcrisis,theyfailtorealizetheirdreamwithintheirself-enclosure.Furthermore,inthecontextofglobalization,multipleculturesshouldbeallowedtointensifythecooperationbetweenplaces.Inshort,whenthelinksamongplacesarerecognizedbypeopleandplacesaretakencarebypeople,thecurrentecologicalandsocialcrisiscanbealleviated.6.2LimitationsandimplicationsThethesisisatentativestudyofMargaretAtwood‘sTheYearoftheFloodspecializingonthespaceandplaceresearchesfromtheperspectiveofecocriticism.Throughdetailedstudiesofthethreespacesandthereasonsoftheirdestructioninthenovel,theauthorhopesthatthisthesiscanprovidereaderswithabetterunderstandingofthebook.Bydiscussingtheplaceconsciousnessinthethreespaces,theauthoralsosincerelyanticipatesthattheresearchcanidentifypeople‘sfalseplaceconsciousnessandraisetheirawarenessofcurrentsocial,ecologicalandidentitycrisis.Importantly,theauthorwishesthespaceandplaceresearchinthisthesiscancontributetothestudiesofAtwood‘sworks.Althoughithasreachedthegoalofprovidingreadersanewperspectivetounderstandthenovel,depictingthethreespacesfromtheperspectiveofecocriticism,andanalyzingthereasonsfortheirdestructioninaccordancewiththespaceandplacestudiesinecocriticism,herearestillgapstomakemoreextensivestudies.Itisinevitablethattherearesomelimitationstobeillustratedattheendofthispaper.Firstly,thethesislackslogicalandargumentativequotationstomakeitmorepersuasivebecausetheauthor‘sinabilitytoapplymorereferences.Secondly,sincethenoveliswrittenbyaCanadianwriter,asanon-nativespeaker,theauthor‘sdifferentworldviewsandlifeexperiencepreventherfromofferingapenetratingreadingofthetext.Thirdly,duetotheauthor‘simperfectunderstandingofthetheoriesofecocriticism,theanalysisofthetextisnotin-depthasexpectedinthethesis.Todealwiththelimitations,moretime-44- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文andenergyshouldbespenttounderstandtherelativetheoriesandtextstomakemoreprofoundinterpretations.Forfurtherstudies,moreeffortsshouldbemadetoconducttheresearchesfromtheanglesofspaceandplaceinecocriticismbecauseintheglobalcontext,itissignificanttoraisepeople‘splaceconsciousnesstosolvethesocialandecologicalcrisis.Moreover,althoughmorescholarssuchasHuZhihongandTangJiannandevotethemselvestothespaceandplaceresearchesinecocriticism,itstillneedsmoreeffortandattentiontodeepenthetheoriesandstudies.-45- BibliographyBibliography[1]Adamson,J.,&Slovic,S.(2009).Theshoulderswestandon:anintroductiontoethnicityandecocriticism.MELUS,(34.2),5-24.[2]Appleton,S.A.(2011).Corp(Se)ocracy:marketingdeathinMargaretAtwood‘sOryxandCrakeandTheYearoftheFlood.LatchAJournalfortheStudyoftheLiteraryArtifactsinTheo,(4),63-73.[3]Atwood,M.(2009).Theyearoftheflood.NewYork:AnchorBooks.[4]Augé,M.(1995).Non-places:introductiontoananthropologysupermodernity.J.Howe.(Trans.).London:Verso.[5]Azizmohammadi,F.,&Kohzadi,H.(2014).TheimpactofanthropocentrismonnaturalenvironmentfromtheperspectiveofMargaretAtwood.Anthropologist,17(2),647-653.[6]Bahrawi,N.(2013).Hopeofahopelessworld:eco-teleologyinMargaretAtwood‘sOryxandCrakeandTheYearoftheFlood.GreenLetters,(17),251-263.[7]Bartosch,R.(2013).―Zerotime‖andtheapocalypse:postnaturalsurvivalinOryxandCrakeandTheYearoftheFlood.NatureCulture&Literature,9(5),220-254.[8]Birkeland,J.(1993).Ecofeminism:linkingtheoryandpractice.InG.Gaard(Ed.),Ecofeminism:women,animals,nature.Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress.[9]Bouson,J.B.(2011).We‘reusinguptheearth.It‘salmostgone:areturntothepost-apocalypticfutureinMargaretAtwood‘sTheYearoftheFlood.JournalofCommonwealthLiterature,(46),9–26.[10]Bordo,S.R.(1987).Theflighttoobjectivity:essaysoncartesianismandculture.Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.[11]Buell,L.,&Ebrary,I.(2001).Writingforanendangeredworld:literature,culture,andenvironmentintheU.S.andbeyond.Cambridge:BelknapPressofHarvardUniversityPress.[12]Buell,L.(1995).Theenvironmentalimagination:Thoreau,naturewriting,andtheformationofAmericanculture.London:theBelknapPressofHarvardUniversityPress.[13]Buell,L.(2005).Thefutureofenvironmentalcriticism:environmentalcrisisandliteraryimagination.Malden:BlackwellPublishing．[14]Buell,L.(2011).Ecocriticism:someemergingtrends.QuiParleCriticalHumanities&SocialSciences,19(2),87-115.[15]Carson,R.(1963).SilentSpring.Boston:HoughtonMifflinCompany.[16]Dresse,M.D.(2002).Ecocriticism:creatingselfandplaceinenvironmentalandAmericanIndianliteratures.NewYork:PeterLangPublishing.[17]Garrard,G.(2004).Ecocriticism.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.[18]Gregersdotter,K.(2003).Watchingwomen,fallingwomen:poweranddialogueinthreenovelsbyMargaretAtwood.(DoctoralDissertation).SwedenUmeåUniversity.[19]Glotfelty,C.,&Harold,F.(Eds.).(1996).Theecocriticismreader:landmarksinliteraryecology.Athens:TheUniversityofGeorgiaPress．[20]Gore,A.(1992).Earthinthebalance:ecologyandthehumanspirit.Boston:HoughtonMifflin.-46- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文[21]Howarth,W.(1996).Someprinciplesofecocriticism.InC.Glotfelty,&H.Fromm.(Eds.),Theecocriticismreader:landmarksinliteraryecology.Athens:TheUniversityofGeorgiaPress..[22]Hubbard,P.etal.(2002).Thinkinggeographically:space,theoryandcontemporaryhumangeography.London&NewYork:Continuum.[23]Hutcheon,L.(1985).Atheoryofparody:theteachingsoftwentieth-centuryartforms.NewYork:Routledge.[24]Heise,K.U.(2008).Senseofplaceandsenseofplanet:theenvironmentalimaginationoftheglobal.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.[25]Johnston,R.J.(1986).Philosophyandhumangeography:anintroductiontocontemporaryapproaches.London:EdwardArnold.[27]Labudová,K.(2010).Power,pain,andmanipulationinMargaretAtwood‘sOryxandCrakeandTheYearoftheFlood.BrnoStudiesinEnglish,(36),134-146.[28]Meeker,J.(1972).Thecomedyofsurvival:studiesinliteraryecology.NewYork:CharlesSeribner‘sSons.[29]Murphy,D.P.(2000).Fartherafieldinthestudyofnature-orientedliterature.CharlottesvilleandLondon:UniversityofVirginiaPress.[30]Massay,D.(2001).Space,place,andgender.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.[31]Northover,R.A.(2016).EcologicalapocalypseinMargaretAtwood‘strilogy.StudiaNeophilologica,(88),1-15.[32]Plumwood,V.(1997).Androcentrismandanthropocentrism.InK.J.Warren.(Ed.),Ecofeminism:women,culture,nature.BloomingtonandIndianapolis:IndianaUniversityPress.[33]Plumwood,V.(2002).Environmentalculture:theecologicalcrisisofreason.London:Routledge．[34]Plumwood,V.(2008).Shallowplacesandthepoliticsofdwelling.AustralianHumanitiesReview,(44),139-150.[35]Rueckert,W.(1996).Literatureandecology:anexperimentinecocriticism.InC.Glotfelty,&H.Fromm.(Eds.),Theecocriticismreader:landmarksinliteraryecology.Athens:TheUniversityofGeorgiaPress.[36]Sanderson,J.(2013).Pigoons,rakunksandcrakers:MargaretAtwood‘sOryxandCrakeandgeneticallyengineeredanimalsina(Latourian)hybridworld.Law&Humanities,7(2),218-239.[37]Slovic,S.(2010).Thethirdwaveofecocriticism:northAmericanreflectionsonthecurrentphaseofthediscipline.Ecozon,(1),4-10.[38]Slovic,S.(2015).Foreword.InS.Oppermann.(Ed.),Newinternationalvoicesinecocriticism.London:LexingtonBooks.[39]Simut,A.(2014).DystopiangeographiesinTheYearoftheFloodandHungerGames.CaieteleEchinox,(27),260-297.[40]Tolan,F.(2005).SituatingCanada:theshiftingperspectiveofthepostcolonialotherinMargaretAtwood‘s.AmericanReviewofCanadianStudies,35(3),453-470.[41]Uygur,M.A.(2013).Utopiaanddystopiaintertwined:theproblemofecologyinMargaretAtwood‘sOryxandCrakeandTheYearoftheFloodandMaddAddam.TheJournalofInternationalSocialResearch,(7),42-48.-47- Bibliography[42]Warren,J.K.(2000).Ecofeministphilosophy:awesternperspectiveonwhatitisandwhyitmatters.NewYork:Roman&LittlefieldPublishers.Inc.[43]陈榕.(2006).阿特伍德《帕涅罗帕记》中对古希腊合唱团传统的改写.当代外国文学,(3),138-146.[44]丁静怡.(2012).玛格丽特•阿特伍德生态思想研究.硕士论文.哈尔滨工程大学.[45]丁林棚.(2002).阿特伍德小说中“潜入地下”主题的反复再现.国外文学,(1),82-90.[46]丁林棚.(2010).视觉、摄影和叙事：阿特伍德小说中的照相机意象.外国文学,(4),123-130.[47]傅俊,韩媛媛.(2006).论女性话语权的丧失与复得——解析阿特伍德的短篇小说《葛特露的反驳》.当代外国文学,(3),94-99.[48]纪秀明,赵永青.(2011).阿特伍德小说生态叙事策略分析.湖南大学学报（社会科学版）,(3),78-82.[49]纪秀明.(2008).阿特伍德小说的生态女性主义解读.外语与外语教学,(06),55-7.[50]胡志红.(2007).地方意识的生态建构：文学的乌托邦工程——生态批评对环境想象的探讨.当代文坛,(2),57-61.[51]蓝仁哲.(2008).加拿大文化论.重庆：重庆出版社.[52]李培超.(2001).自然的伦理尊严.南昌:江西人民出版社.[53]何畅,闫健华.(2008).试论《可以吃的女人》中的消费主义意识.解放军外国语学院,(05),106-110.[54]李文良.(2012).玛格丽特•阿特伍德小说叙事艺术研究.博士学位论文.上海外国语大学.[55]潘守文.(2007).多元文化语境下族裔身份的解构与建构——评阿特伍德的《强盗新娘》.国外文学,(2),109-117.[56]潘克栋.(2012).阿特伍德小说生态主义的当代价值和意义.江西社会科学,(5),94-7.[57]唐建南.(2016).物质生态批评——生态批评的物质转向.当代外国文学,(2),114-121.[58]陶兰.(2011).论阿特伍德突破人类中心主义的若干策略.硕士学位论文.华东师范大学.[59]王韵秋.(2014).创伤的叙事与叙事的创伤——玛格丽特•阿特伍德创伤主题初探.山西师大学报（社会科学版）,(6),78-82.[60]王彩霞,田祥斌.(2011).《洪疫之年》中的女性叙事技巧.三峡论坛,(5),77-78.[61]王劭弥.(2013).解读《洪疫之年》中的生态预警.硕士论文.河北师范大学.[62]严莉莉.(2015).“动物即我们”——小说《洪水之年》动物问题研究.硕士学位论文.苏州大学.[63]袁霞.(2010).生态批评视野中的玛格丽特•阿特伍德.上海:学林出版社.[64]袁霞.(2009).玛格丽特•阿特伍德与“百衲被”.当代外国文学,(3),138-145.[65]袁霞.(2016).论《最后死亡的是心脏》中的监狱意象.湖南科技大学学报（社会科学版）,(3),44-48.[66]袁霞.(2011).试论《洪疫之年》中的生态思想.外国文学,(2),140-145.[67]张传霞.(2013).《神谕女士》的母亲形象及文化隐喻探析.山东社会科学,(12),90-93.-48- 中国石油大学（北京）硕士学位论文[68]张传霞.(2013).新世纪的洪水神话——《羚羊与秧鸡》和《洪疫之年》的圣经原型解读.文艺争鸣,(12),128-132.[69]张传霞.(2014).玛格丽特•阿特伍德“生存”主题和“经典重构”策略研究.博士学位论文.山东大学.[70]张雯.(2014).另一世界：玛格丽特•阿特伍德的文学招魂.外国文学评论,(2),65-77.[71]张业.(2013).阿特伍德小说《使女的故事》、《羚羊与秧鸡》和《洪水之年》的生态女性主义解读.硕士学位论文.辽宁师范大学.-49-
此文档下载收益归作者所有
