The Drama of the Anthropocene: Can Deep Ecology, Romanticism, and Renaissance Science Rebalance Nature and Culture?

• Published date: 01 September 2017
• Date: 01 September 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12196
• Author: Robert Schimelpfenig

The Drama of the Anthropocene: Can Deep

Ecology, Romanticism, and Renaissance

Science Rebalance Nature and Culture?

By ROBERT SCHIMELPFENIG*

ABSTRACT. In the late 20th century, scientists began to warn the

public that human activity had begun to change planetary systems.

Some have thus named the current geological epoch the

Anthropocene, a period in which humans are degrading natural

systems. This damage occurs in part because we have not come to

terms with the dual character of human nature—being both inside

and outside nature.

To repair the alienation caused by the split within ourselves, I

envision three archetypal characters in the history of Western cul-

ture: the animal representing deep ecology; the poet representing

Romanticism; and the artisan representing Renaissance science.

They can help us find a way to heal ourselves and the Earth in the

“drama” of the Anthropocene.

Deep ecologists propose that we radically embrace our natural

selves and restore the world to a condition of wilderness as rapidly

as possible. Can humans stop changing the Earth, since evolution

has made us tool-makers? A “back to nature” solution cannot work.

Through us, technology is part of nature, for better or worse.

European Romanticism might seem similar to deep ecology in

reconnecting with lost elements of human nature, but it was not

grounded in love of nature, per se. Romanticism was entirely

human-centered, focused on the pursuit of sublime experience. It

was a call to reimagine our wilder selves so we can depend less on

artifice.

*Archivist for the library of Washington State University, Vancouver. Received PhD

from the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. Conducts interdisci-

plinary research with a focus on the human relationship with nature.

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 76, No. 4 (September, 2017).

DOI: 10.1111/ajes.12196

V

C2017 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

A third source of new understanding is the esoteric side of Renais-

sance science. Alchemy, which primarily focused on healing, posited

that causation emanates from within substances. It offered an early

alternative to mechanical science, which gradually came to dominate

the field. The participatory mindset of the alchemist and the Renais-

sance artisan considered humans part of natural systems, not as

external agents of change. Recognizing the choices made in the

early centuries of science could aid humanity in the Anthropocene

by reminding us that other ways of thinking about nature are

available.

Unless we can find a way to reorient modern culture, which is

based on the objectification and efficient use of nature for human

ends, the Anthropocene is likely to be short lived. Above all, we

need to learn to balance two competing ontologies: one holistic and

cyclical, the other productive and oriented toward linear time. The

three philosophies discussed here can contribute to a new equilib-

rium. By finding new roles for ourselves in this drama, we may

learn how to overcome the problem of the Anthropocene and create

a lasting home for our species on Earth.

The American Journal of Economics and Sociology822

Chapter 1

Introduction

In drama, there must be a protagonist whose words and actions

exemplify the universal plight of all humans. The drama of human

activity in planetary history is no different. As I approach the problem

of how to condense this epic encounter into a form with which an

urbanized 21

st

- century audience can relate, I envision the protagonist

as a seven-year-old boy, lying on the floor in the loving presence of

his household, receiving one of his first impressions of what he

believes to be the natural world through the warming glow of a tele-

vision screen. It is 1977, 8:00 p.m., and time for another episode of

Grizzly Adams, starring Dan Haggerty. Within a span of an hour, the

child watches attentively as images of mountains and wilderness are

shaped before him. Nature appears to be in partnership with human

survival. Nature is a gentle force that reminds the viewer of the

uncertainties of what might be just out of reach in order to survive

but always provides what is needed in abundance. So gentle is this

nature that a man can befriend a grizzly bear and maintain a mean-

ingful relationship with all species, even those in human form, such

as an American Indian named Nakoma and a wandering prospector

by the name of Old Mad Jack. So grand is this place called nature

that it serves as a kind of heaven for a watchful boy of seven.

Throughout childhood, his fascination with the natural world and

wild places grows. His parents take him to national parks like Crater

Lake, Glacier in Montana, and even Yellowstone, where he can

view the splendor of the wild at a safe distance through the regi-

mented control of the U.S. Park Service. Wildlife forages in defined

areas, just in view of passing motorists and vacationers. Nature is

somewhere else. It is a place that can be visited from time to time

as an escape from what is not natural. It is also a source of paradox.

Nature is a place that is so dangerous that one must be protected

from it, but it is so endangered that it must also be protected. It is a

place that remains out of reach for most people, and, in its truest

form, it holds the promise of a kind of paradise.

These are the initial impressions in this drama of nature as it

unfolds in the mind of a seven-year-old child. It is only years later,