ECOLOGICAL BIOSEMIOSIS: A BIOSEMIOTIC READING OF CULTURE AND NATURE RELATIONSHIPS IN THE SELECTED POEMS FROM A NATIVE CLEARING AND MAN OF EARTH

Jan Raen Carlo M. Ledesma, Chuckberry J. Pascual

Abstract


This paper attempts to flesh out how the biophiliac, anthropocentric, and ethnological modes of biosemiotic representation aid in the imaging and discoursing of nature-culture relationships in the selected poems from the anthologies A Man of Earth and A Native Clearing. Capitalizing on ecocriticism, biosemiotics provide an ecological reading of the manifestations of human culture and their natural surroundings. This reading underscores how meaning-making and the intricacies of the sign system transpire in all living systems. This reading also paves the way for modeling the environment through literature highlighting the complex relations between the environment and human culture with an amplified and specialized view of the individual entities that shape and affect the environment. Using the descriptive-analytical research design and the theories of Zapf, Hoffmeyer, and Uexkull, we illustrate how the biosemiotic foregrounds of the poems speak of how sign relations project the dealings and ruptures between human-cultural activities and other natural semiotic subjects. We also underscore the perils stemming from anthropocentric players with emphasis on their cultural undertakings, the hallowed character of nature steering tragic ecology, the evolutionary fitness and adaptability of animals, ecosophy and speciesism and how these affect the biosphere and the formation of biosemiotic linkages and reciprocations.


Keywords


biosemiotics, ecocriticism, nature-culture, semiotic scaffoldings, Umwelt

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abad, G.H. (ed.). (1993). A native clearing: Filipino poetry and verse from English since the 50s to the present: From Edith L. Tiempo to Cirilo F. Bautista. Quezon City, PH: University of the Philippine Press.

Abad, G.H. (1989). Man of earth: An anthology of Filipino poetry and verse from English (1905 to the mid 50). Quezon City, PH: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Baker, S. (1993). Picturing the beast: Animals, identity and representation. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.

Bellarsi, F. (2009). The challenges of nature and ecology. Comparative American Studies: An International Journal, 7(2), 71-84.

Commoner, B. (1972). The closing circle: Nature, man, and technology. New York, NY: Bantam Books.

Cooke, S. (2016). Fire was in the reptile’s mouth: Towards a transcultural ecological poetics. Landscapes: The Journal of the International Center for Landscapes and Language, 7(1), 1-18.

Coupe, L. (2000). The green studies reader: From romanticism to ecocriticism. London & New York: Routledge.

Devall, B., & Sessions, G. (1985). Deep ecology: Living as if nature mattered. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith.

Emmeche, C., & Kull, K. (2011). Towards a semiotic biology: Life is the action of signs. London, UK: Imperial College Press.

Favareau, D. (2010). Essential readings in biosemiotics: Anthology and commentary. Dordrecht: Springer. Retrieved from https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9781402096495

Garrard, G. (2012). Ecocriticism. New York, NY: Routledge.

Glotfelty, C., & Fromm, H. (eds.). (1996). The ecocriticism reader: Landmarks in literary ecology. Athens: University of Georgia.

Hoffmeyer, J. (2008). Biosemiotics: An examination into the signs of life and life of signs. Scranton: The University of Scranton Press.

Hoffmeyer, J. (2007). Semiotic scaffolding in living systems. In M. Barbieri (ed.), Introduction to biosemiotics: The new biological synthesis (pp. 149-166). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4814-9_6

Kull, K. (2010). Umwelt and modelling. In P. Cobley (ed.), The Routledge companion to semiotics (pp. 43-56). London: Routledge.

Manghi, S. (2002). Foreword. Mind and nature: A necessary unity. New Jersey: Hampton Press.

Maran, T. (2016). Biosemiotics. In J. Adamson, W. A. Gleason, & D. Gleason (eds.), Keywords for environmental studies (pp. 29-31). New York, NY: New York University Press.

Mayo, A. (2015). Ants as ecosystem engineers. Retrieved from http://onsnetwork.org/mayonotebook/2015/05/07/ants-as-ecosystem-engineers/

Mishra, S.K. (2016). Ecocriticism: A study of environmental issues in literature. BRICS Journal of Educational Research, 6(4), 169-170.

Morton, T. (2007). Ecology without nature: Rethinking environmental aesthetics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: A summary. Inquiry, 16(1), 95-100.

Neubauer, D. (2016). The biosemiotics imagination in the Victorian frames of mind: Newman, Eliot and Welby (Doctoral Dissertation). London Metropolitan University, England. Retrieved from http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/1142/1/NeubauerDeana%20-%20PhD%20Fulll%20thesis.pdf

Phillips, D. (1999). Ecocriticism, literary theory, and the truth of literary ecology. New Literary History. Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 577-602. Retrieved from https://ejcj.orfaleacenter.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/1999.-Dana-Phillips-Ecocriticism-Literary-Theory-and-the-Truth-of-Ecology.pdf

Potter, E. (2005). Ecological consciousness in Australian literature: Outside the limits of environmental crisis. Hawke Research Institute Working Paper Series. Hawke Research Institute for Sustainable Societies: University of South Australia. Retrieved from https://www.unisa.edu.au/Documents/EASS/HRI/working-papers/wp29.pdf

Simpson, D.L. (n.d.). The new arts of persuasion: Contemporary media, communications, and rhetoric. Chicago: The School for New Learning, DePaul University.

Smil, V. (2003). The earth’s biosphere: Evolution, dynamics, and change. Cambridge, MA: the MIT Press.

Sun, L. (2020). The cultural symbols of stone and ecopoetics. Frontiers in Art Research, 2(5), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.25236/FAR.2020.020502

Suresh. F. (2012). Contemporary contemplation on ecoliterature. New Delhi: Authorpress.

Wheeler, W. (2008). Postscript on biosemiotics: Reading beyond worlds – and ecocriticism. New Formations, 64, 137-III. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/211582022

Wheeler, W. (2006). The whole creature: Complexity, biosemiotics and the evolution of culture. London, UK: Lawrence & Wishart, 2006.

World Wide Fund for Nature. (2019). Impact of habitat loss on species. Retrieved from https://wwf.panda.org/our_work/wildlife/problems/habitat_loss_degradation/

York, R., & Mancus, P. (2013). The invisible animal: Anthrozoology and macrosociology. Sage Journals, 31(1), 75-91. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275113477085

Yu, M., & Lei, Y. (n.d.). Biocentric ethical theories. Environment and development, 2, 253-261. Retrieved from http://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c13/E4-25-07-03.pdf




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/ijhs.v7i1.6293

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Jan Raen Carlo M. Ledesma, Chuckberry J. Pascual

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Indexed and abstracted in:

 

         

 

IJHS Sinta 3 Certificate (S3 = Level 3)

International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHShas been nationally accredited Sinta 3 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 4 No 1, 2020 till Vol 8 No 2, 2024

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

p-ISSN: 2597-470X (since 31 August 2017); e-ISSN: 2597-4718 (since 31 August 2017)

Flag Counter

International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS) is a scientific journal in English published twice a year, namely in September and March, by Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

 

Note: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the editorial team or publishers.