AAU Student Projects - visit Aalborg University's student projects portal
A master's thesis from Aalborg University
Book cover


We in the Anthropocene: Subscendence, Hyper- and Hyposubjectivity in Galápagos, Oryx and Crake, and Cloud Atlas

Authors

; ;

Term

4. term

Education

Publication year

2022

Submitted on

Pages

149

Abstract

Starting from Jonas Salk’s question about whether we are being good ancestors, this thesis asks who the collective 'we' are in the Anthropocene—the era in which human activity shapes the planet—and how literature can help define that 'we'. It draws on concepts from Timothy Morton and Dominic Boyer: transcendence (pushing beyond one’s limits), subscendence (stepping back and recognizing that wholes are not necessarily greater than the sum of their parts), and hyper- and hyposubjectivity. Hypersubjectivity describes a deliberate, goal-driven, often predatory stance that can paradoxically lead to inaction by waiting for the perfect solution. Hyposubjectivity aligns with subscendence and favors spontaneity and trial-and-error, acting without a complete plan and accepting mistakes. The thesis also considers Morton’s Dark Ecology, which asks us to confront our entangled relations with nature, and hyperobjects, meaning vast, distributed phenomena that are difficult to grasp. Because these terms are relatively new (formulated in 2021), the study tests their usefulness as analytical tools in literary studies by bringing them to bear on the implied reader, narrator, implied author, plot, and characterization. Through readings of Kurt Vonnegut’s Galápagos, Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake, and David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas, the thesis examines how the novels imagine a 'we' in the Anthropocene as responsible or irresponsible ancestors. The analyses suggest that the implied authors show subscendence is needed to form a 'we' that is not harmful to the environment, while an overreliance on transcendence makes it hard to belong to any collective 'we'. In Galápagos, the implied author uses the ghost Trout as a narrator who observes a small group of humans evolving into seal-like people; his admiration for the new humanity highlights subscendence as environmentally beneficial and renders transcendence insignificant in the larger scheme. Oryx and Crake similarly depicts how hypersubjective behavior produces an unregulated neoliberal dystopia in which a shared 'we' cannot be formed; Crake annihilates humankind and positions himself as a kind of good ancestor to a different 'we' (the Crakers) living in harmony with their environment. Through Snowman, the implied author underscores the satirical critique of hypersubjectivity, as Snowman must accept that his transcendence only operates in relation to the Crakers. In Cloud Atlas, the implied author presents hypersubjectivity as a recurring human drive that leads to oppression and slavery, yet the novel also shows that someone with hypersubjective traits can subscend and abandon predatory selfishness for the sake of future generations; Adam Ewing exemplifies a more empathetic form of transcendence. Overall, the thesis argues that the novels criticize specific forms of hypersubjectivity by rendering them insignificant, satirizing them, or casting them as antagonists. At the same time, they encourage a subscendent approach to the environment that can build a capable 'we' able to confront the hyperobjects that threaten human existence in the Anthropocene. Finally, it concludes that being a good ancestor requires a subscendent posture that avoids colonizing the future and stripping descendants of their agency.

Med udgangspunkt i Jonas Salks spørgsmål om, hvorvidt vi er gode forfædre, undersøger denne afhandling, hvem det kollektive 'vi' er i Antropocæn – den tidsalder, hvor menneskelig aktivitet former planeten – og hvordan litteratur kan hjælpe os med at forstå og definere dette 'vi'. Afhandlingen trækker på Timothy Morton og Dominic Boyers begreber transcendens (at overskride egne grænser), subscendens (at træde et skridt tilbage og erkende, at helheder ikke nødvendigvis er større end summen af delene), samt hyper- og hyposubjektivitet. Hyper-subjektivitet beskriver en viljesstærk, målrettet og ofte rovdyrsagtig adfærd, der paradoksalt kan føre til passivitet, fordi man venter på den perfekte løsning. Hyposubjektivitet hænger sammen med subscendens og indebærer spontane, forsøg-og-fejl-prægede handlinger, hvor man tør handle uden en fuldstændig plan. Derudover inddrages Mortons ideer om Dark Ecology, som insisterer på at konfrontere vores sammenfiltrede forhold til naturen, og hyperobjekter, som betegner enorme, udbredte fænomener, der er svære at overskue. Fordi begreberne er relativt nye (formuleret i 2021), afprøver afhandlingen deres anvendelighed som analytiske redskaber i litteraturvidenskab ved at lade dem udfordre implicit læser, fortæller, implicit forfatter, plot og karakterisering. Gennem læsninger af Kurt Vonneguts Galápagos, Margaret Atwoods Oryx and Crake og David Mitchells Cloud Atlas undersøger afhandlingen, hvordan romanerne forestiller sig et 'vi' i Antropocæn som (u)ansvarlige forfædre. Læsningerne peger på, at de implicitte forfattere hver især viser, at subscendens er nødvendig for at skabe et 'vi', der ikke skader miljøet, mens overdreven transcendens gør det svært at indgå i et fælles 'vi'. I Galápagos bruger den implicitte forfatter spøgelset Trout som fortæller til at følge en lille menneskegruppes udvikling til sæl-lignende væsner; hans begejstring for den nye menneskehed fremhæver subscendens som miljømæssigt gavnlig, mens transcendens fremstilles som mindre betydningsfuld i det store billede. Oryx and Crake viser tilsvarende, hvordan hypersubjektiv adfærd skaber et ureguleret neoliberalt dystopi, hvor et fælles 'vi' ikke kan opstå; Crake udsletter menneskeheden og gør sig til en slags god forfader for et andet 'vi' (Crakerne), der lever i harmoni med omgivelserne. Via Snowman understreger den implicitte forfatter den satiriske kritik af hypersubjektivitet, idet han må erkende, at hans transcendens kun kan udøves i forhold til Crakerne. I Cloud Atlas viser den implicitte forfatter, at hypersubjektivitet er en tilbagevendende menneskelig drivkraft, der historisk fører til undertrykkelse og slaveri, men romanen demonstrerer også, at et menneske med hypersubjektive træk kan subscendere og lægge rovdyrsagtig egoisme fra sig for kommende generationers skyld; Adam Ewing eksemplificerer en mere empatisk form for transcendens. Samlet set argumenterer afhandlingen for, at romanerne kritiserer bestemte former for hypersubjektivitet ved at gøre dem ubetydelige, satirisere dem eller fremstille dem som antagonister. Samtidig opfordrer de til en subscendent tilgang til miljøet, der kan danne et handlekraftigt 'vi' i mødet med hyperobjekter, som truer menneskets eksistens i Antropocæn. Endelig konkluderes det, at det at være en god forfader kræver en subscendent tilgang, som undgår at kolonisere fremtiden og fratage efterkommere handlemuligheder.

[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]