Nature in Transition: An Ecolinguistic Study of Pre- and Post-Industrial Poetry

Authors

  • Waqas Ahmad University of Gujrat (Main Campus) Ahmad.Owlakh@gmail.com

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v2i2.800

Keywords:

Willaim Wordsworth, Ted Hughes, Bookchin, Theory of Ecosophy, Sigmund Freud, Pre-Industrial and Post-Industrial Era, Ecolinguistics

Abstract

This research paper examines the interplay of ecolinguistics and literary studies by examining the nature poetry of two distinguished British poets—William Wordsworth and Ted Hughes—who exemplify the pre-industrial and post-industrial eras, respectively. Ecolinguistics interrogates linguistic narratives that contribute to environmental degradation while advocating for those that promote ecological sustainability. Within this framework, the study investigates the shifting human perception of nature in response to industrial advancement. Wordsworth’s 19th-century poetry idealizes nature as a tranquil, restorative presence—an ever-harmonious force offering solace and spiritual fulfillment. In stark contrast, Hughes’ 20th-century works depict nature as tumultuous and antagonistic, reflecting a world unsettled by rapid industrialization and ecological disruption. Utilizing Bookchin’s theory of ecosophy and Freud’s psychoanalytic criticism, the analysis reveals how each poet’s unconscious environmental anxieties and ideological underpinnings manifest through imagery and thematic choices. The selected texts illustrate a broader transition from reverent admiration of nature to an awareness of its fragility and potential retaliation against human exploitation. Through this comparative and interdisciplinary lens, the study underscores the importance of sustainable development and positions literature as a powerful medium for cultivating ecological consciousness and critical reflection on humanity’s environmental impact.

Downloads

Published

30-11-2024

How to Cite

Waqas Ahmad. (2024). Nature in Transition: An Ecolinguistic Study of Pre- and Post-Industrial Poetry. Social Science Review Archives, 2(2), 2450–2455. https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v2i2.800