On Ecofeminism 1: A Manicured Garden

… there can be no question of the forest as a consecrated place of oracular disclosures; as a place of strange or monstrous or enchanting epiph- anies; as the imaginary site of lyric nostalgias and erotic errancy; as a natural sanctuary where wild animals may dwell in security far from the havoc of humanity going about the business of looking after its ‘interests.’ There can be only the claims of human mastery and possession of nature – the reduction of forests to utility.

— Robert Pogue Harrison (1992, p121)

Nature has been subjugated to the market as a mere supplier of commodities. Women have been subjugated to patriarchy as mere suppliers of labour. And both nature and women are now seen as mere instruments of economic growth.

— Val Plumwood (1993, p169)

In a sense of both majesty and melancholy, the striking figure of a tree floats along the water’s serene current. The visual spectacle is the opening scene to Salom ... Jashi’s, Taming the Garden (2021), an otherworldly tale of the venture of Georgia’s former prime minister and bil- lionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili. His presence is felt only through murmurs and folkloric tales, along his surreal quest to collect centuries-old trees across the country of Georgia, transporting them at colossal expense and upheaval into his private garden - a curated garden of flamboy- ance and excess. (Taming the Garden, 2021)

Jashi’s film is a very literal portrait of one man’s pervading power over the natural world, highlighting the absurdities of this is so hot quest to conquer and own. The natural world has for centuries been subjugated to oppressive systems that prioritise economic growth and human domi- nance. This view of the world, or even the universe, as a mere utility for us to master, perhaps began most critically during the Scientific Revolution. It marked a significant turning point in human history which ‘posited the universe as an assemblage of parts functioning according to regular laws that men could, in principle, know in their entirety’ (Garrard, 2012, p. 69). Led by Francis Bacon, Rene Descartes, and Isaac Newton among others, this view replaced the previous view of the Earth that our ancestors followed. What before was a nurturing ‘Mother Earth’ or ‘Magna Mater’ was now something that could be read, measured, extracted and used. This led to the belief that the uni- verse was a great machine that could be controlled and manipulated by humans, according to regular laws that humans could know in their entirety. This worldview, which places humans at the centre of the universe, is known as anthropocentrism. It refers to the point of view that ‘humans are the only, or primary, holders of moral standing. Anthropocentric value systems thus see nature in terms of its value to humans’ (Oxford Bibliographies, 2021).

Whilst this view of the world places the human at the centre, other schools of thought suggest there is also a gendered argument. Ecofem- inism is a philosophical and social movement that links feminism with ecology, arguing that the domination and exploitation of nature is intrinsically connected with the subjugation of women. Ecofeminist Val Plumwood argues that, ‘The inferiorisation of human qualities and aspects of life associated with necessity, nature and women—of nature-as-body, of nature-as passion or emotion, of nature as the pre-sym- bolic, of nature-as primitive, of natureas-animal and of nature as the feminine— continues to operate to the disadvantage of women, nature and the quality of human life. The connection between women and nature and their mutual inferiorisation is by no means a thing of the past, and continues to drive, for example, the denial of women’s activity and indeed of the whole sphere of reproduction’ (Plumwood, 2003, p. 21). With Caroline Merchant also presenting a view of the Scientific Revolution that saw the feminine Magna Mater disenchanted and rational- ised by masculine reason. She also notes that Mother Earth’s last followers, Europe’s ‘witches,’ were brutally rooted out (Merchant, 1990, p. 172). This relationship between feminism and ecology is explored in the works of many prominent writers who state even the story of the Garden of Eden has ecofeminist readings, suggesting the story represents the historical and ongoing exclusion of women from nature, as well as the exploitation of nature for the benefit of men. Vera Norwood speaks about this stemming into the early male domination in nature study, stating that, ‘From the earliest work in natural history- the general investigation of plants, animals, and the physical environment - to its nineteenth and twentiethcentury growth and the division into specialised disciplines like botany, ornithology, and geology, men have defined the subjects and methods of study’ (Norwood, 1993, p. XIV). In more recent history, ecofeminists have suggested that environmental deg- radation as a symptom of anthropocentrism has disproportionately affected the lives of women, especially those in the Global South, where women are more often responsible for collecting water, fuelwood and other resources that are more scarce due to climate change (Shiva, 2002, p. 75). The chauvinistic attitudes present here, can be considered in relation to the anecdote opening the pattern, the film Taming the Garden (2021). It can be read not only as a critique of anthropocentrism but also as an ecofeminist critique of the patriarchal dominating system that prioritises power, status and greed over the well-being of the environment and the citizens who inhabit it.

Whilst ecofeminism as an ideology suggests that women have continually been disregarded from conversations regarding nature, Mary Austin provides an enjoyably different standpoint. She confronts the myth that ‘nature is no place for a woman’ by noting the traditional roles that are necessary to survive in the wilderness, observing that the ‘self-reliance’ of the unafraid male figure battling the wilderness relies heavily on the ‘feminine’ domestic tasks such as mending clothes, cooking and foraging. An interesting restructure of the masculine harnessing of nature. (Garrard, 2012, pp. 84-85)

The human quest to conquer and dominate the natural world has been perpetuated for centuries, with the Scientific Revolution playing a significant role in the establishment of the view of the world as a mere utility to be mastered. A view that has given hegemony to humans and led to a disconnect between the human and the nonhuman systems that we are part of, causing extreme environmental destruction and social injustice. This viewpoint is also intrinsically linked to the patriarchal systems that have given rise to it, succeeding to exclude women from discussions around the natural world as well as to segregate them entirely. Vadana Shiva suggests that, ‘The industrial revolu- tion converted economics from the prudent management of resources for sustenance and basic needs satisfaction into a process of com- modity production for profit maximalisation... This new relationship of man’s domination and mastery over nature was thus also associated with new patterns of domination and mastery over women and their exclusion from participation as partners in both science and develop- ment’ (Shiva, 2002, p. xvii).

Therefore, the domination of nature and women is linked, and cannot be addressed separately.

Therefore, the domination of nature and women is linked, and cannot be addressed separately.

We must recognise that the domination of nature and women stem from the same social and political structures that value some beings over others. By recognising the intrinsic value of all human and non human beings, we can challenge the systems of oppression that are systemic in our societies, and can move from a culture of domination to one of respect, compassion and interconnectedness with the natu- ral world.