On March 11th, Wai Chee Dimock, a english professor at Yale University, added to our series through a lecture titled, “William Blake and Elizabeth Bishop in the Anthropocene.” The speaker selected literary works by these two poets and really elaborated on how science and the humanities must merge in order to facilitate public understanding of highly relevant environmental issues. My first impression of the lecture was how it was somewhat similar to a previous talk by Georgetown Professor Nathan K. Hensley regarding “Action After Nature: Climate Crisis & the Force of Literature.” Professor Hensley’s lecture highlighted the importance of the relationship between thought and action, and how it is influenced by past events. I found it fascinating how Professor Dimock drew parallels between the works of Bishop and Blake just how Professor Hensley connected Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland to a transitionary period. Having made this connection early on, I paired my previously formulated opinions about this field with Professor Dimock’s knowledge to further understand the parallels between science and the written word.
Professor Dimock dissected Bishop’s poem, “The Sandpiper,” by highlighted the underlying ideas which combine scientific understanding with major environmental issues. He pointed out how the uncertainty and lack of confidence of the poem’s diction gives light to the modern environmental concept of ocean acidification and lack of sustenance for endangered birds. As well, Professor Dimock employed the use of Blake’s “Auguries of Innocence” to make the audience emotionally connect and further understand the abusive side effecting our environment. He was able to connect this to the detrimental effects of modern day America’s market for meat and how it negatively impacts climate. These direct parallels, which were very well articulated by Professor Dimock, caused me to feel upset and honestly overwhelmed by the lack of understanding which myself and the average person holds regarding how our actions impact the world we live in.
I enjoyed how Professor Dimock paired his opinions with scientific facts to additionally prove the importance which humanities can do in the scientific world. He discussed how knowing one discipline is crucial to understanding another. For example, in the context of climate change, science can prove an experiment or establish a hypothesis, while humanities is necessary to spread the fundamental public understanding of such an issue. I appreciated how two seemingly different fields must integrate in order to accomplish more complex issues. Professor Dimock reminded the audience throughout the lecture how these two disciplines need to be connected.
At the end of the Lecture, Professor Dimock took questions where an audience member posed the idea of how it seems that the general public can not grasp the idea of climate change and that it is real, and happening now. Professor Dimock’s response was clear and calculated. He stated how this gap in knowledge is due to a gap in society’s desire to learn. Given that science is hard to understand and connect with, people today lack the drive to do their own research. This is inevitable given the spectrum of abilities in our society. However Professor Dimock elaborated on how that if science and the humanities can collaborate, more people can understand the fundamental issues which face us today. If science can test hypotheses, then humanities can inform and educate us. I believe that as a world, we will see the most success through inter-discipline collaboration so that one day we may be able to derive solutions to our evolving issues. I thought that this final comment really captured the overall message of this lecture.
In conclusion, I found Professor Dimock’s lecture to be a valuable addition to our Presence of the Past series and I look forward to applying my new knowledge to next week’s talk.