Robinson writes about a “structure of feeling” in The Ministry for the Future (Robinson, 124). He says, “[o]ur feelings are not just biological but also social and cultural and therefore historical. Raymond Williams calls this cultural shaping a ‘structure of feeling’” (124). Feelings of climate change, for instance, change over time depending on one’s exposure and knowledge of the subject. One culture's feelings can also differ from another after similar events. After exploring how the structure of feeling changes for India and the US in the book, we can consider how it would change in the real world.
In the book, India experiences a heat wave that kills twenty million people (24). In response, India immediately takes steps to rectify the situation. First, a more representative party replaces the ruling party in India (25). Then, India’s citizens adopt a more collectivistic culture. India decides to drop chemicals into the air via plane to deflect sunlight (38). Those working in the planes say, “Everyone had lost someone they knew in the heatwave. Even if they hadn’t, it was India” (38). The citizens are quick to risk their safety and comfort for the good of India. Kerala emphasizes local government with “1,200 governmental bodies in Kerala, all dealing with issues in their particular area” (232). With a new government, citizens have more control over their specific needs. This makes it easier to address climate change at a local level. Sikkim recognizes that fossil fuels are a major contributor to climate change, and thus adopts “organic regenerative agriculture that, at the same time it provides more food than before, also sequesters more carbon in the soil” (126). The citizens and leaders of India both act immediately to prevent another climate disaster.
Another climate disaster the book explores is in the US. After a sudden flood in LA, “[s]omething like ten million people were on the move and in imminent danger of dying” (285). The damage is so extensive that “the entire city of Los Angeles is going to have to be replaced” (279). Despite LA being an iconic city in America, many Americans do not care about its destruction. Robinson writes, “[i]n fact, no place that was not LA cared about it at all” (286). While LA gets support from the Californian and US government, the general public does not have as immediate a response as India’s. Thus, America is not able to initiate the various programs India does.
We can compare the book to how nations respond to climate disasters in real life. Although recent disasters are not to the scale of the LA and India tragedies, there is much evidence of climate change today. Droughts in California, wildfires in Hawaii, and heat waves across the US are a few examples. Because of our individualistic culture, it is difficult for Americans to support a cause that is not affecting them. The politics of America are also generally split, hindering the quick response fictional India achieves. Creating the ideal structure of feeling in America that is present in India will take an extreme disaster. Then, there may be enough drive to implement more radical sustainability practices.
Robinson, Kim Stanley. The Ministry for the Future. Orbit, 2020.
Your observation that a catastrophe of the kind portrayed in the book might be required to bring about a change in the emotional structure of the United States is consistent with the idea of "crisis-induced adaptation." This implies that major upheavals in the status quo, like severe weather, can cause people to reassess their priorities and become open to making drastic adjustments. But it's important to stress that waiting for this kind of crisis to happen is a dangerous and possibly disastrous course of action. We need to actively create a mentality that places a high value on community well-being, environmental protection, and long-term future vision. This calls for encouraging empathy and understanding amongst diverse communities, cultivating a sense of shared responsibility, and having constant conversations about long-term solutions. Crucial elements in this process include informing the public about the far-reaching effects of climate change, emphasizing the interdependence of our global community, and promoting individual actions that lead to a more sustainable future. We can prevent the need for a crisis to compel us to act by fostering a sense of shared accountability and providing inspiration for a sustainable future. To sum up, Kim Stanley Robinson's book is a potent reminder that our reactions to climate change are greatly influenced by the structure of our emotions. India can act quickly because of its resilient and collectivist culture, but it will be more difficult for the politically divided and individualistic American society to mobilize a collective response. Developing a mentality that places a high value on environmental stewardship and communal well-being is essential to effectively and pro-actively tackling the climate crisis.
ReplyDelete