Defining Nature: Exploring the Human vs. Nature Opposition

Abstract

This paper explores the question of what is nature. What can we know about nature given that the concept has many definitions? This paper argues that language has skewed the way humans perceive the word nature to the point where we associate the material world around us with ourselves. That is, we define nature from within the limits of our anthropocentric biases. Postcolonial ecocriticism attempts to explore both the environment and the social issues arising from the legacy of the imperial era; but how do we explore the two, nature and society, in relation to one another when postcolonialism focuses on the past and nature appears to be timeless? Humans need to seek justice for nature. But often we pursue conservation and preservation of landscapes not because nature is suffering but because of our own idea of what nature should be. We assume that nature and humans interact with one another, and while humans do interact with nature, nature does not necessarily reciprocate human desires. Arguably, the reciprocal interactions of humans with nature are the result of misconceptions brought about by how we define nature. This paper focuses on Olive Schreiner's The Story of an African Farm (1883) and explores the division between nature and humans and the tendency to impose our perception onto nature. The Story of an African Farm poses an interesting question: who owns the land on which the farm was built? And essentially, who owns the farm - Em or the aboriginal inhabitants of the land? This paper examines the role the natural environment plays in the text and how Schreiner asserts her own ideas of what nature should be.