"The term Anthropocene suggests that the Earth has now left its natural geological epoch, the present interglacial state called the Holocene. Human activities have become so pervasive and profound that they rival the great forces of Nature and are pushing the Earth into planetary terra incognita."
Dr Crutzen



I wonder whether this an ego driven theory. Regardless, I can confidently predict that the term anthropocene and anthropogenic will be kicked around by environmentalists, politicians, lobbyists and well, anyone who wants to convince you of anything. Perhaps even philosophers? More so than a geological shift (which I don't really care for), it is an ontological shift, that will superlatively affect how we interpret the meaning of our existence and our relationship with the natural. As a kid, I thought my existence and really the existence of mankind was trivial in the "grand scheme of things" and not because I was a clever kid who contemplated her own ontology but rather because it was a line from a film. A solemn character who features in an equally solemn film, who is in the midst of contemplating his mortality in a prison cell, enlightens his other inmates, "Mankind is an insignificant speck in Earth's time line". For ages I considered people and mankind as peripheral. And science dictated so, Copernicus relegated Earth from the center of the universe and Darwin placed human species onto a single twig of the evolving tree of life. But in light of anthropocence my somewhat inconsequential life is actually quite consequential. We are actually a gargantuan agency. (Massive human ego trip)


As much as I have an affinity with Buddhism, the Cosmos and generally the idea that we are mere insignificant spirits or particles in space I appreciate Anthropocene's Brave New World-esque prophecy. I use Brave New World as a prophecy point for everything but I do think it is particularly relevant to human separation from nature. The dichotomy of nature and man. In Brave New World, Man is the progressive and Nature is the savage. In the distant future kids will learn that they evolved from monkeys and think it absurd, that humans were once symbiotic with the natural world. Will kids in the distant future understand the concept of ecosystem and ecology- will such concepts exist? I find myself resenting man made structures and environments and yearning natural environments; but even then it is still man made nature. Ski resorts, beaches, national parks; man-centric.


I briefly mentioned politicians because in our current economic, political and social climate where sustainability and environment are massive buzzwords, anthropocence will be mixed into this green salad. Environmental consciousness has led to growing trend in literature, titled such as, 'An Economic Ethics for the Anthropocene.' More interestingly when I Googled "Anthropocene + Ontology" I accidentally came across Oxford Literary Review calling for papers on the deconstruction in the Anthropocene (here) to be published in 2012. Eco-criticism is obviously a rising academia field. I found this paragraph pretty captivating: "OLR is particularly interested in papers that take up the challenge of the Anthropocene in relation to the following questions. In what ways does thinking currently associated with deconstruction and the work of Jacques Derrida now take on new force, re-interpret itself or become anachronistic? Does thinking through the challenges of the Anthropocene tally with a turn to a more thing- or object -oriented ontology, the need to acknowledge the separate incalculable agency of the nonhuman, that “All reality is politics, but not all politics is human”"



Anthropocene will perhaps empower mankind with a new sense of responsibility, but also a fearfully large sense of duty too.