Surviving Progress, Modernity and Making Sense of the Crisis in Nature

  • Divya Anand
Chapter

Abstract

The historical understanding of progress as economic, social, and cultural finds its strongest disavowal when we measure “progress” against the right to clean air and water. Progress is also a word upon which ideas of nationhood and identity have been built and buttressed, wars fought and forests plundered, rivers dammed, people dispossessed and displaced, and animals and plants driven to extinction. The irony of Harold Crooks and Mathieu Roy’s documentary Surviving Progress does not escape this narrative from its start to the very end. Inspired by Ronald Wright’s A Short History of Progress, the documentary takes off from making sense of the term progress to the causes and outcomes of the particular idea of progress that has won universal traction and remains the foundational cause behind much of the world’s environmental problems. Interpolated with commentary from across the world and cutting across disciplines, the documentary cuts an arc across the common denominations of progress in different parts of the world. This chapter argues that modernity is the cornerstone upon which this particular idea of progress took shape and examines the variant themes of Surviving Progress as well as analysing the medium and the message of the documentary.

References

  1. Ahorro, J. “The waves of post-development theory and a consideration of the Philippines.” Edmonton: University of Alberta, 2008. Web. www.cpsaacsp.ca/papers-2008/Ahorro.pdf
  2. Barber, C.P., et al. “Roads, deforestation, and the mitigating effect of protected areas in the Amazon.” Biological Conservation 177 (2014): 203–09. Web.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. New Delhi: Sage, 1992. Print.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, U. “Climate for Change, or How to Create a Green Modernity?” Theory, Culture & Society 27.2–3 (2010): 254–66. Print.Google Scholar
  5. Bello, W.F. The future in the balance: Essays on globalization and resistance. Ed. Anuradha Mittal. San Francisco: Food First, 2001. Print.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, C. “Supporting the Posts in Development Discourse: Under‐development, Over‐development, Post‐development.” Sociology Compass 6. 12 (2012): 974-986. Print.Google Scholar
  7. Benton, T. “Marxism and Natural Limits: An Ecological Critique and Reconstruction.” New Left Review 178 (1989): 51–85. Print.Google Scholar
  8. Biro, Denaturalizing Ecological Politics: Alienation from Nature from Rousseau to the Frankfurt School and Beyond. Toronto, Canada; Buffalo, NY; London: U of Toronto, 2005. Print.Google Scholar
  9. Castoriadis, C. “From Ecology to Autonomy.” Thesis Eleven 3 (1981): 8–16. Print.Google Scholar
  10. Castoriadis, C. The Imaginary Institution of Society. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press, 1987. Print.Google Scholar
  11. Castoriadis, C. World in Fragments: Writings on Politics, Society, Psychoanalysis, and the Imagination. Ed. and trans. D.A. Curtis. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1997. Print.Google Scholar
  12. Castree, N. “The Nature of Produced Nature: Materiality and Knowledge. Construction in Marxism.” Antipode 27.1 (1995): 12–48. Print.Google Scholar
  13. Chatterjee, P. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse. London: Zed, 1986. Print.Google Scholar
  14. Ernst, C. et al. “National forest cover change in Congo Basin: Deforestation, reforestation, degradation and regeneration for the years 1990, 2000 and 2005.” Global Change Biology 19.4 (2013): 1173–187. Print.Google Scholar
  15. Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1991. Print.Google Scholar
  16. Gilens, M. and B.I. Page. “Testing theories of American politics: Elites, interest groups, and average citizens.” Perspectives on Politics 12.3 (2014): 564–81. Print.Google Scholar
  17. Heller, A. A Theory of Modernity. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999. Print.Google Scholar
  18. Heller, A. “The Three Logics of Modernity and the Double Bind of the Modern Imagination.” Thesis Eleven 83 (2005): 63–79. Print.Google Scholar
  19. Honoré, C. In praise of Slowness: How a Worldwide Movement is Challenging the Cult of Speed. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
  20. Martínez-Alier, J. et al. “Sustainable de-growth: Mapping the context, criticisms and future prospects of an emergent paradigm.” Ecological Economics 69.9 (2010): 1741–1747. Print.Google Scholar
  21. Kaika, M. City of Flows: Modernity, Nature and the City. London: Routledge, 2005. Print.Google Scholar
  22. Latouche, Serge. Farewell to Growth. Polity, 2009. Print.Google Scholar
  23. McKibben, B. The End of Nature. London: Viking, 1990. Print.Google Scholar
  24. McLaughlin, A. Regarding Nature: Industrialism and Deep Ecology. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1993. Print.Google Scholar
  25. Mingione, E. “Marxism, Ecology and Political Movements.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 4.2 (1993): 85–92. Print.Google Scholar
  26. Morrison, R. “Two Question for Theory and Practice: Can you be Marxist and Green?” Rethinking Marxism 7.3 (1994):128–36. Print.Google Scholar
  27. Parsons, L. “Surviving Progress: A dim view of humanity.” Review of Surviving Progress. World Socialist Website. 3 Feb. 2012. Web. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/02/prog-f03.html
  28. Petras, J. “Brazil: Extractive Capitalism and the Great Leap Backward.” Global Research. 23 July 2013. Web. http://www.globalresearch.ca/brazil-extractive-capitalism-and-the-great-leap-backward/5343624
  29. Sato, H, K. Kuribayashi, and K. Fujii. “Possible practical utility of an enzyme cocktail produced by sludge-degrading microbes for methane and hydrogen production from digested sludge.” New Biotechnology 33.1 (2016): 1–6. Print.Google Scholar
  30. Schmidt, A. The Concept of Nature in Marx. Tr. Ben Fowkes. London: New Left Books, 1971. Print.Google Scholar
  31. Scott, M. “‘Surviving Progress’ review: Documentary sounds an alarm for humanity.” 24 May 2012. Web. NOLA.com-The Times-PicayuneGoogle Scholar
  32. Shi, L. et al., eds. Rising inequality in China: Challenges to a harmonious society. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2013. Print.Google Scholar
  33. Shrivastava, A., and Kothari, A., Churning The Earth: The Making of Global India. Delhi: Penguin Viking, 2012. Print.Google Scholar
  34. Strathern, Marilyn. After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992. Print.Google Scholar
  35. Surviving Progress. Dirs. H. Crooks and M. Roy. Canada: Cinemaginarie and Big Picture Film Corporation, 2011 (DVD release date 2012), 86 minutes. DVD.Google Scholar
  36. Taylor, C. Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham; London: Duke UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
  37. Van den Bergh, J. “Environment versus growth—A criticism of “degrowth” and a plea for “a-growth”.” Ecological Economics. 70.5 (2011): 881–890. Web. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800910004209
  38. Wei, Y.D. Regional Development in China: States, Globalization and Inequality. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2013. Print.Google Scholar
  39. Worster, D. Rivers of empire: Water, aridity, and the growth of the American West. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1985. Print.Google Scholar
  40. Wright, R. A Short History of Progress. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2005. Print.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Divya Anand
    • 1
  1. 1.Diversity and Academic Programs AssociateNovartis Institutes for BioMedical ResearchCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations