TRACES OF ECOCRITICAL ELEMENTS IN LORD BYRON’S “THERE IS PLEASURE IN THE PATHLESS WOOD”
Keywords:
Ecocriticism, Ecology, Lord, NatureAbstract
Eco-criticism as the scientific study of the relationship between nature and human beings plays an important role in the analysis of literary works. This theory is even more significant in Romanticism in which nature was of particular implication and Lord Byron was no exception. This research seeks to study “There Is Pleasure in the Pathless Wood” by Lord Byron from an ecocritical viewpoint in order to analyze the way nature is exemplified in this poem and how the beliefs conveyed in it are in accordance with the ecological understanding. It is found that Byron’s fascination in nature is because of its restorative power and being regarded as a source of inspiration. In other words, Romanticism which was established as a reaction to the Industrial Revolution and also Romantic poets like Byron referred to the rustic nature as a source of innocence in which God is closer to human beings.
References
Bone, D. (2004). The Cambridge companion to Byron. Cambridge University Press.
Buell, L. (2009). The future of environmental criticism: Environmental crisis and literary imagination. John Wiley & Sons.
Christensen, J. (1993). Lord Byron’s strength: Romantic writing and commercial society. JHU Press.
Damrosch, L. (1985). Adventures in English literature. Holt McDougal.
Day, A. (1996). Romanticism. Routledge.
Garrard, G. (2012). Ecocriticism.. Routledge.
Garrard, G. (Ed.). (2014). The Oxford handbook of ecocriticism. Oxford Handbooks.
Gersdorf, C. & Mayer, S. (2006). Nature in literary and cultural studies. Rodopi.
Glotfelty, C., & Fromm, H. (Eds.). (1996). The ecocriticism reader: Landmarks in literary ecology. University of Georgia Press.
Gomides, C. (2006). Putting a new definition of ecocriticism to the test: The case of “The Burning Season”, a film (mal) adaptation. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 13-23.
Heffernan, J. A. (2006). Cultivating picturacy: Visual art and verbal interventions. Baylor University Press.
Hubbell, J. A. (2017). Byron’s nature: A Romantic vision of cultural ecology. Springer.
Hutchings, K. (2007). Ecocriticism in British romantic studies. Literature Compass, 4(1), 172 202.
Lovejoy, A. O. (1924). On the discrimination of romanticisms. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 229-253.
Oerlemans, O. (2004). Romanticism and the materiality of nature. University of Toronto Press.
Perpinya, N. (2014). Ruins, nostalgia and ugliness: Five Romantic perceptions of the middle ages and a spoonful of Game of Thrones and avant-garde oddity. Logos Verlag Berlin.
Rostami, F., & Rashidi, M. (2020). Analyzing and comparing the prominent elements including nature, imagination and freedom in literary works by Lord Byron and Simin Behbahani with a focus on the relationship between and among these elements. Journal of DORRE DARI, 10(36), 43-60.
Sulaiman, T. A. (2018). A feminist reading of Byron’s poetry through the lens of Susan Gubar, Sandra Gilbert and Kate Millet. The Islamic college university journal, 2(50), 61-70.
Worster, D. (1977). Nature’s economy: The roots of ecology. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
