“A Friend of the Earth” and “The Terranauts” Comparison Essay (Article)

Abstract

This paper compares/contrasts the novels A Friend of the Earth and The Terranauts by Tom Coraghessan Boyle. The main idea promoted throughout the paper’s entirety is that both literary works should be deemed reflective of the main inconsistencies of environmentalism/eco-radicalism, as we know it. Specific emphasis is placed on discussing the psychological and socioeconomic preconditions for the environmentalist movement to be deemed indicative of the ongoing decline of the West. In this regard, the deployed line of argumentation stresses the irrational/obsessive essence of one’s strong commitment to the cause of environmentalism, while exposing that there are a number of the clear fetishist subtleties to it. The paper also argues that, as it can be inferred from both novels, the very principles of the capitalist society’s functioning presuppose that such a society can never be environmentally sustainable, by definition. In the end, there are listed three main conclusions that derive from the conducted semiotic analysis of both novels.

Introduction

Nowadays, it became quite trendy among many contemporary American writers to explore the theme of the environmentally sustainable existence in their works of fiction. Among the most prominent of such writers are Edward Abbey, Karen Joy Fowler, Barbara Kingsolver, and Ann Pancake, as well as T.C. Boyle himself. One of the reasons behind the rising popularity of the “eco-fiction” genre has to do with the fact that the philosophy of environmentalism has now been firmly incorporated in the discourse of post-modernity, which nowadays exerts a powerful influence on the functioning of the public domain in the West. For example, it would now prove quite impossible to describe the political landscape in just about any Western country without mentioning the role played by so-called “green parties” in defining the socio-political realities on the locale.

Evidently enough, the theme of environmental preservation appeals to the widest range of unconscious anxieties in the targeted audience – hence, increasing the likelihood for the “environmentalist” literary pieces (the ones that have this theme integrated into the plot) to prove commercially successful. Even though the actual plots in eco-novels vary rather substantially, it is still possible to define the discursive axis around which they revolve. As a rule, the authors of these novels strive to instil readers with the idea that the cause of protecting the natural environment is incompatible with the continuation of socioeconomic/scientific progress on this planet. Another clue that the audience commonly derives from being exposed to the literary works in question is that the continual deterioration of the natural environment is intrinsically linked to the “problem of overpopulation”. This naturally causes many readers to assume that the most effective approach to reaching the environmentalist movement’s objectives would be reducing the Earth’s population in size. Apparently, there is indeed much emotional appeal to the earlier outlined themes and motifs, as perceived by the growing number of people in the West.

Evidently enough, T.C. Boyle was quick enough to realise this fact and take practical advantage of such his realisation – a fair number of Boyle’s novels appear to share a strong environmental ethos, which in turn is one of the most prominent trademarks of one’s post-industrial living. There is another prominent feature to these works of literary fiction by T.C. Boyle – most of them contain numerous indications of the fact that the cause of the environment’s preservation/environmentally sustainable living has long ago attained an unmistakable fetishist quality in the West. In my paper, I will aim to substantiate the validity of this suggestion at length while comparing/contrasting the author’s 2000 novel A Friend of the Earth and his most recent literary creation – the 2016 novel The Terranauts. The foremost idea that I will promote throughout the paper’s entirety is that the very fundamental principles of the capitalist society’s functioning make it impossible for the environmentalist/eco-radical movement to be serving the cause of humanity’s continual advancement (Carson et al. 296). I will also show that, as it can be inferred from both novels, one’s tendency to preoccupy himself/herself with trying to act “environmentally friendly” is likely to be reflective of the concerned person’s existential decadence

Analysis

When it comes to discussing A Friend of the Earth and The Terranauts in conjunction with each other, it will be impossible not to notice that there is a wide timely gap between these two novels. This alone implies that there should be found much discursive dissimilarity between the literary works in question. After all, it is only natural for a person to have his or her outlook on life undergoing a continual transformation as time goes on. What contributes even further towards legitimising this suggestion is that their plots indeed appear rather unrelated. A Friend of the Earth is, in essence, a dystopic account of where the ongoing deterioration of the environmental situation on this planet may lead to. The Terranauts, on the other hand, is about exploring the psychological aspects of the interrelationship between a few ecologically conscientious individuals within the completely sealed off (and presumably self-sustainable) environmental niche. Nevertheless, the close reading of the literary works in question will not only confirm that they have been written by the same author but also the fact that the key discursive features of A Friend of the Earth and The Terranauts are very similar. This could not be otherwise – both novels appear to convey to the audience essentially the same set of messages, with the most prominent of the latter being the following:

• The cause of environmentalism is something inseparably interconnected with the capitalist conceptualisation of the society as merely the sum of the egoistically minded individuals, which implies that there can be no systemic soundness to this particular cause by definition. In A Friend of the Earth, it is specifically the ageing (and very rich) rock star Maclovio Pulchris being in charge of helping the rare species of animals not to become completely extinct. As the novel’s protagonist Tyrone Tierwater pointed out:
  • I manage the man’s private menagerie, the last surviving one in this part of the world, and it’s an important – scratch that, vital – reservoir for zoo cloning and the distribution of what’s left of the major mammalian species… He’s a friend of the animals. (Boyle, A Friend of the Earth 32)
  • The author refers to such a state of affairs as thoroughly natural, as if there is indeed no good reason to believe that the government should be interested in applying an active effort in preserving the natural environment, to begin with. It is understood, of course, that the outlined motif endorses the neoliberal take on addressing the issues of social importance, as such that should be discussed in terms of a corporate undertaking. Regardless of whether Boyle wanted it to be the case or not, this helps to popularise the idea that the government should refrain from meddling in the public domain. The foremost axiomatic premise behind this idea is that privately owned corporations/rich philanthropists indeed have what it takes to be genuinely interested in acting in an environmentally conscientious manner while preoccupied with accumulating riches at the very same time (Savevska 68).
  • The same motif defines the discursive significance of The Terranauts as well. The reason for this is apparent. As it can be inferred from the novel, the government did not have anything to do with conceptualising and financing the E2 project, aimed to test the selected participants’ ability to coexist peacefully within the congested settings of the completely sealed off “environmental bubble” for two years. Rather, E2 came into being because of the whimsical wish of a few rich moneybags, preoccupied with trying to pose as utterly progressive/unselfish individuals, committed to acting on behalf of humanity, as a whole. As one of the novel’s main characters, Dawn Chapman noted:
  • Darren Iverson, the millionaire – billionaire… financed the project from its inception to the tune of something like a hundred fifty million dollars and picked up the operating costs too, which were in the neighbourhood of ten million a year. (Boyle, The Terranauts 16)
  • Thus, by being exposed to both novels, most readers will invariably come to conclude that there is indeed nothing odd about the idea that the environmental well-being of ordinary citizens is in the hands of a few rich and powerful philanthropists.
• There is the very little scientific rationale behind people’s commitment to leading an environmentally friendly lifestyle – the former is merely extrapolative of the concerned individuals’ tendency to address life challenges in a strongly emotional/irrational manner. For example, in A Friend of the Earth most members of the Earth Forever! the eco-radical group are shown quite incapable of rationalising their willingness to serve the cause of environmentalism. Such their behavioural patterns appear reflective of these characters’ mental inadequacy – hence, the clearly hysterical undertones to how many of them go about advocating eco-radicalism. The character of Sierra provides a perfectly good example, in this respect, as someone who became completely possessed by the cause as some sort of idée fixe. The validity of this suggestion can be confirmed with respect to Sierra’s following rhetorical question:
  • The whole fucking biosphere is going to collapse like a balloon with a pin stuck in it, and then where’re you going to be with your let’s dress up – and – play soldier suits? Huh? Where are you going to go? What are you going to eat? (Boyle, A Friend of the Earth 78)
  • Clearly enough, the character’s affiliation with the environmentalist movement cannot be discussed outside of her psychological predisposition towards hypertrophying the significance of the ecological aspects of how the world turns around. This suggestion, in fact, applies to just about every environmental activist.
  • Most of the inhabitants of the E2 “environmental bubble” (especially women) also exhibit a strong tendency to indulge in the self-reflective type of thinking while focusing on negativity (degenerative trait). This appears to be the actual reason why they decided to pursue the career of an environmentalist, in the first place. The character of Linda Ryu stands out particularly illustrative, in this regard – throughout the novel’s entirety she never ceases to exhibit the signs of being affected by some sort of self-reflective neurosis:
  • Part of my problem is that I’ve been awake since three, too worked up to sleep. It had been one of those nights where you lie there in bed willing yourself into unconsciousness but every time you drift off the twisted sick catastrophe of what’s happening to you in the here and now surges up like a rogue wave and snaps you back to attention. (Boyle, The Terranauts 51)
  • The same can be said about the rest of the E2 sphere’s inhabitants, as well (although to a varying degree). Hence, their tendency to concern themselves with just about anything while inside of the “bubble”, but with conducting the scientific experiment as their actual priority.
• The de facto purpose behind the initiation of different ecological projects/civil actions is that these are the effective instruments of generating a commercial profit and allowing many people to “celebrate” their existential decadence. As it appears from A Friend of the Earth, most of the featured eco-radical characters have never made a secret of their affiliation with the environmentalist movement as something that used to allow them to have a steady and considerable monetary income. To exemplify the full soundness of this suggestion, we can point out to the author’s admission that these characters (Tierwater. Teo and Andrea) were, in fact, nothing but extortionists: “Teo and Andrea didn’t have jobs. Neither, any longer, did Tierwater. Teo and Andrea were supported by E. E! Contributions, the money they made stumping in places like Croton” (Boyle, A Friend of the Earth 212). By presenting themselves as “environmental activists” they were able to enjoy good living, without having to work hard – hence, proving their awareness of what the so-called “American dream” is all about, as well as their commitment to it. One may think that what has been said earlier does not really relate to the themes and motifs of Boyle’s latest novel. After all, both novels are indeed concerned with exploring what may appear as the semantically incompatible topics. This, however, is not quite the case. It will not take a particularly smart individual to realise what account for the rationale behind this suggestion. Despite the E2 project’s declared aim to contribute towards the eventual colonisation of Mars, it served the ultimate purpose of entertaining the public here on Earth. In fact, the project’s sponsors have deliberately strived to ensure that the rest of Americans would regard it as yet another “real TV show”. The novel’s characters seem to have been perfectly aware of this. As one of them (Ramsay Roothoorp) noted:

• Four men, four women, locked up together! And no, it wasn’t a stunt. And it wasn’t theatre. But certainly, those elements were present because while we were trying to avoid the missteps of the first mission, we were at the same time actively seeking to recapture some of the public attention. (Boyle, The Terranauts 32)
• And, to be emotionally comfortable with having its life completely exposed to others, as a part of some public spectacle, one must feel innately exhibitionist. This is exactly the reason why, despite their constant complaining about being required to put up with having been turned into the human “guinea pigs” throughout the experiment’s entirety, most featured characters seem to have been deriving a secret pleasure from the process. On their part, exhibitionists (as well as voyeurists) have been traditionally known for their strange attraction to filth (Långström 318). Therefore, it does not come as a particular surprise that The Terranauts is filled with graphic references to the subject matter in question, such as the following:
• The smell – that perfume pigs create as their highest achievement, a mix of sour milk, putrefying blood, shit, urine, vomit and some other unidentifiable element that binds it all together so it hits you like a club, over and over. (Boyle, The Terranauts 72)
• Evidently enough, there was much more to the characters’ willingness to be selected as “terranauts” than they themselves would be willing to admit. It also appears that the novel’s strong motif of filth/depravity is sublimative of the author’s own unconscious anxieties, as the representative of what is now being commonly referred to as the “creative class”. It is made of the physically and cognitively degenerative yuppies who seriously believe that they happened to be much more “progressive” than everybody else (Lewis et al. 589). After all, this specific motif never ceases to resurface again and again through A Friend of the Earth, as well:
• The place smells of mould – what else? – And rats…They have an underlying smell, a furtive smell, old sweat socks balled up on the floor of the high‑school locker room, drains that need cleaning, meat sauce dried onto the plate and then reliquefied with a spray of water (Boyle, A Friend of the Earth 15).

This once again raises a doubt about whether environmental activists can be deemed quite as productive members of the society as they tend to think of themselves. Quite to the contrary – what has been mentioned earlier suggests that it is not only that these people have a hidden personal agenda, but also that the latter is far from being considered appropriate, in the societal sense of this word.

There is, however, a certain dissimilarity between the discussed novels, as well. It has to do with the fact that, as compared to what it is the case with A Friend of the Earth, Boyle’s most recent literary creation appears to be much more psychologically plausible. The rationale behind this suggestion is concerned with the strongly defined idealistic ethos of the former novel, on one hand, and the overall pessimistic sounding of The Terranauts, on the other. To exemplify what do we mean by that, it will only be logical to refer to the most easily identifiable “between-the-lines” message, connoted by A Friend of the Earth. It can be formulated as follows: the reason why by the year 2015 the world ended up experiencing the ecological catastrophe of a global magnitude is that throughout the 20^th century’s nineties most people preferred to ignore the environmentalist warnings, on the eco-activists’ part (Mayer 222).

It is a truth that in A Friend of the Earth most members of the Earth Forever! organisation are presented as having been not altogether admirable individuals. At the same time, however, these characters are described being genuinely committed to the cause of eco-radicalism and capable of adopting a self-sacrificial stance in life – all for the sake of protecting the surrounding natural environment (Baird 5). The earlier mentioned character of Sierra stands out particularly illustrative, in this respect. After all, she did not hesitate to take an active part in the “direct action” against the logging industry in Oregon, despite all of the associated dangers – the move that in the end cost this character her life. As a result, readers get the impression that the very environmentalist movement is fully legitimate and that the only reason its advocates continue being marginalised is that the society is not yet ready to be set on the path of ecological self-sustainability.

In this regard, Terranauts is much different. In the aftermath of having been exposed to this novel, readers will be likely to realise that there is a strong utopian quality to the idea that it is indeed possible for humanity to adopt a fully rational approach to addressing the ecology-related matters. The reason for this is that, in order for such an eventual prospect to come into being, people must be willing to switch from thinking “biologically” (in the sense of being slaves to their biological instincts) to thinking socially (Bachev 445). As the author’s most recent novel implies, however, there are no objective preconditions for the concerned hypothetical development to take place. It was really the case that just about every of all eight “terranauts” inside the E2 “bubble” considered himself/herself an educated, environmentally aware and socially responsible individual on the mission of helping to save the Earth. However, this did not prevent the relationship between them from attaining the same atavistic quality as it is the case with the relationship among apes within the pack. Allegorically speaking, it has only taken the “terranauts” a few weeks of living together within the “bubble” to begin regressing back to what they truly are, in the biological sense of this word – hairless primates, solely preoccupied with seeking food, sex and domination, as the actual purpose of their existence (Tedeschi 157). Hence, the clearly Darwinian quality to how many of the project’s participants in The Terranausts were beginning to reflect on the significance of social dynamics inside E2, after having socialised with each other for some time:

There are winners and losers in this life, from the crack babies and Calcutta street urchins to the millionaire sons of millionaires and the movie star daughters of movie stars, and while it’s not right and it’s not fair, the fact is that everybody, from bottom to top, is competing for space and resources through every O2-laden breath they draw. Go ask Darwin. (Boyle, The Terranauts 36)

What this means is that when people promote the preservation of the surrounding natural environment they most likely do it for no other purpose than gaining the reputation of “progressively minded” sophisticates, which in turn will come in as an asset within the context of how the very same people aspire for dominance within the society.

Conclusion

I believe that the insights obtained through conducting the analysis of the chosen environmentalist novels by T.C. Boyle substantiate the validity of the paper’s initial thesis, as to the environmentalist movement being innately degenerative, in both psychological and socioeconomic senses of this word. The most prominent of the acquired clues, in this regard, can be summarised as follows:

• Environmentalism/eco-radicalism is the conceptually fallacious approach to managing society’s functioning. The reason for this is that it does not take into consideration the biologically predetermined aspects of how most people go about striving to attain self-actualisation. This, however, does not mean that our civilisation cannot be environmentally friendly by definition. Rather, it is specifically the currently prevailing socioeconomic climate on this planet that makes the achievement of such an objective utterly challenging.
• For a person to be willing to become a committed eco-activist, he or she must be mentally deviated to an extent. This insight has to do with the fact that, just as one can infer from reading both novels, a hypertrophied ecological awareness in people is nothing but yet another societal extrapolation of their deep-seated neurosis. Such a take on the subject matter in question correlates well with the idea that the very cause of environmentalism (in its current form) is symptomatic of the ongoing “decline of the West” due to decadence/degeneracy.
• The very logic of Capitalism presupposes that the projects that aim to help humanity to become ecologically self-sustainable (such as E2) are doomed to sustain a fiasco. The rationale behind this suggestion is apparent – as it appears from The Terranauts, despite being formally concerned with serving a scientific purpose, these projects are there to provide spectators with cheap entertainment. This, in turn, presupposes that the initiatives of ecological relevance must be short-termed – the main prerequisite for them to be able to attract private investors. And yet, it is specifically the long-termed ecological projects what have a chance of proving beneficial to humanity. Thus, the very capitalist paradigm stands out as opposed to the most fundamental principles of environmentalism.

In light of the mentioned analytical insights, it appears that there is indeed nothing odd about the fact that the environmentalist movement continues to win more and more adherents in the West. Apparently, even though this societal tendency is thoroughly objective, it cannot be defined in terms of the people’s spontaneous collective response to the worsening of the environmental situation in the world – something that the representatives of the social elites would like us to believe. Rather, the growing popularity of environmentalism/eco-radicalism seems to serve the purpose of diverting ordinary citizens’ attention from the truly relevant issues of socio-economic importance, such as the rapidly widening gap between the rich and poor in the West. In this regard, a certain parallel can be drawn between the tendency in question, on one hand, and the seemingly unexplainable preoccupation of more and more governmental officials with the protection of “gay rights”, on the other. Evidently enough, both social causes are there to channel the energy of socially active individuals into doing something that does not pose any danger to the continued domination of the rich and powerful. Therefore, in full accordance with how we have hypothesised it initially, environmentalism/eco-radicalism is best seen as yet another existential fetish that many decadent Westerners are being attracted to, as something that makes them feel better about themselves – that is the movement’s de facto purpose.

Works Cited

Baird, Neil. “Clean, Green and Poverty Stricken.” Ausmarine, vol. 34, no. 8, 2012, p. 5.

Boyle, Tom C. A Friend of the Earth. Viking, 2000.

The Terranauts. HarperCollins, 2016.

Carson, Jennifer, et al. “Terrorist and Non-Terrorist Criminal Attacks by Radical Environmental and Animal Rights Groups in the United States, 1970–2007.” Terrorism and Political Violence, vol. 24, no. 2, 2012, pp. 295-319.

Bachev, Hrabrin. “A Holistic Approach for Assessing the System of Governance of Agrarian Sustainability.” Journal of Economic and Social Thought, vol. 3, no. 3, 2016, pp. 434-457.

Långström, Niklas. “The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Exhibitionism, Voyeurism, and Frotteurism.” Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 39, no. 2, 2010, pp. 317-324.

Lewis, Hannah, et al. “Hyper-Precarious Lives: Migrants, Work and Forced Labour in the Global North.” Progress in Human Geography, vol. 39, no. 5, 2015, pp. 580-600.

Mayer, Sylvia. “American Environmentalism and Encounters with the Abject: T. Coraghessan Boyle’s A Friend of the Earth.” Genus: Gender in Modern Culture, vol. 9, no. 5, 2007, pp. 221-234.

Savevska, Maja. “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Promising Social Innovation or a Neoliberal Strategy in Disguise?” Romanian Journal of European Affairs, vol. 14, no. 2, 2014, pp. 63-80.

Tedeschi, Enrica. “Animals, Humans and Sociability.” Italian Sociological Review, vol. 6, no. 2, 2016, pp. 151-184.