The Sixth Extinction through a Marxist Criticism Lens
The Sixth Extinction, by Elizabeth Kolbert, is a nonfiction book that gives information on how the world is in the midst of its sixth mass extinction, and humans are the cause. She begins her story with the history of amphibians and how they have been on this earth millions of years before the dinosaurs and have survived multiple of the world's mass extinctions. She then shifts her attention to the town of El Valle de Anton in Panama, which she sees as the focal point for the wide disappearance of the Panamanian Gold Frog. Kolbert states how these frogs were numerous around a decade ago. Now these frogs are scarce in number and are much more difficult to come across. Through research they were able to determine that the cause for this disappearance was a type of Chytrid fungus, not native to Panama, killing the frogs. Through further research they discovered that people were the instrument for the delivery of this alien fungus to Panama. This event shows how humans have a form of direct control over the well being of a species and how humans “might not only be the agents of the sixth extinction, but also risk being one of its victims” (Kolbert 268).
For a story like this, the Marxist Criticism lens is the best choice for the common reader. With the amount of information and background of the author this story provides, multiple lenses could be used to view this book. The Marxist lens stands out above all due to the possible influence this book could have on people and how the book views humans in general. The Marxist lens views literature “not as works created in accordance with timeless artistic criteria, but as ‘products’ of the economic and ideological determinants specific to that era” (Abrams 149). The Marxist lens views how the works could serve as propaganda or look for views of oppression. With how Kolbert writes her story on the sixth extinction, this lens is very appropriate to apply in this reading.
Throughout the book it is very clear that humans tend to view themselves as above other species of animals. We do not see them as our equal and treat them as such. This is one good reason why the Marxist lens is the best option for this book, this lens allows you to view the ideological oppression of these species. When viewing the book through this lens you are able to focus on the overall power humans have on this world and how much we already control it. Humans have taken over so much that this sense of materialism blinds us from reality. The Marxist lens will show through the reading how we have abused our power and in doing so have ultimately doomed ourselves.
An advantage that the Marxist lens can bring when reading this book is effect on influence. When reading this story through a Marxist lens, the influence it could have on the general public becomes more apparent. The book can be viewed as a form of propaganda with an intention to try and change how people view the world they live on. By understanding how this piece of literature could strongly influence an individual in a certain direction intentionally, you allow yourself the freedom to see through any bias or influence and grant yourself a better understanding of the literature itself. The author clearly wants this to be an influential piece of literature and in an interview states that “in many ways I see myself as a translator” (Publishers Weekly) when asked how she sees her role as a popularizer.
Though the Marxist lens is the best choice of lens for this book, this does not mean it is perfect. What makes the Marxist lens function so well with this book is also one of its flaws. “Marxist critics pay more attention to the content and themes of literature than to its form” (Meyer 656). This can be seen as a flaw because a disregard to form in literature can lead to a disconnection to a more personal meaning in a piece of literature. If there is a statement in a book that is meant to be taken in a deeper meaning, the Marxist lens would skip over it. This however, is not a huge flaw when reading The Sixth Extinction. This book tends to focus on a clear message rather than a deeper meaning.
Another flaw that the Marxist lens provides is the lack of appreciation to the literature. Since this lens focuses more on the themes of the literature, there is no appreciation on its form. This is another way that the reader can become more disconnected with the literature using the Marxist lens. This disconnection with the literature can lead an individual to neglect a more personal meaning.
Though this lens has its flaws, it is still the best option for this piece of literature. However, due to the varied nature of this book, the Marxist lens is not the only good lens for reading this book. Biographical criticism is amongst one of these lenses. The biographical lens focuses more on the knowledge of the author's life to more fully understand his or her work. This lens works well with this book because the story follows Kolbert during her research on various things. This provides an advantage with the reading because you can connect more with the author and understand how and why she is writing this book.
A big disadvantage this lens provides for this reading is it draws attention away from the main purpose of the book. The main purpose of the book is to inform us about how humans are bringing the world into a sixth mass extinction. With the biographical lens, the reader is focusing more on the author than focusing on the contents of the literature. This is one of the main reasons why the Marxist lens is a better lens for this particular piece of literature.
Though the Biographical lens and the Marxist lens are completely different lenses, they do share some similarities. Both of these lenses tend to focus away from the finer details of the work, like its form, for example. These lenses focus so much on their own topic, it creates a void of information on the book as a whole. In other words, each lens gears your towards learning information on one end, and you end up missing information from the other end.
The main things that separate these lenses from each other and ultimately decide which lens is better for this book is in their advantages and disadvantages. The Marxist lens ultimately has more beneficial advantages for reading the book in this lens. It allows you to have a more personalized opinion of the book and the information that you read. This lens also provides you with an outlook of the book’s potential influence. This lens may have its flaws, but it is conclusively the better choice for the common reader.
The disadvantages for the Biographical lens is what sets it apart from being the better lens. With this lens you can have a better understanding of the author which enables you to have a better comprehension of certain aspects in the book, but you are missing some of the finer literary details within the book itself. By reading the book through this lens you are, in a way, viewing the book as the author and disabling yourself from taking your own opinions out of the reading. This lens takes away your comprehension of the book and replaces it with the author’s.
In conclusion, the best lens, for the common reader, to read the book The Sixth Extinction is through the Marxist Criticism lens. With how this lens allows you to see the book from a different perspective and allows you to truly form your own opinion, it is overall the best.
Works Cited
Abrams, M.H. "Marxist Criticism." A Glossary of Literary Terms. 7th ed. Fort Worth: Harcourt
Brace College Publishers, 1999. 147-153.
Kolbert, Elizabeth. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. New York: Henry Holt and
Company, 2014. 268. Print.
Meyer, Michael. Poetry: An Introduction. 7th ed. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin's, 1998. 656. Print.
"On Translating Science: PW Talks with Elizabeth Kolbert." Publishers Weekly 260.49 (2013):
55,n/a. ProQuest. Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
