67 pages • 2 hours read
Daniel QuinnIshmael
Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1992A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Background
Sociohistorical Context: 1960s and 1970s Counterculture
Part of the context of the narrator’s life in Ishmael, and the context of Ishmael’s lessons, are the countercultural movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Though these anti-establishment movements are largely associated with United States history, such movements were popular throughout Europe and in countries that were heavily influenced by American and European cultural trends. Ideologically, such movements were generally left-leaning, meaning they favored scaling back military investment and involvement, increasing spending on institutional support for marginalized and underprivileged peoples, and embracing elements of diversity, religious and spiritual freedom, and communal lifestyles. In many ways, counterculture was aimed at dismantling the superstructures of contemporary society, such as racism, sexism, and classism, and opposing the rapid increase in corporate control over daily life in the form of propaganda, advertisements, and unsafe or overly demanding working conditions.
An important element of counterculture was the preservation and appreciation of indigenous and marginalized cultures, such as those of North and South America, Africa, and Asia, as well as conservation of wildlife and the global ecosystem. After the rapid increase of industrialization during the first half of the 20th century, many within counterculture movements foresaw the lasting effects of pollution, deforestation, and overpopulation, which would later become focal points for specific environmentalist movements. Activism for civil rights, specifically for people of color and women, ran alongside decolonizing movements, encouraging a global respect for marginalized populations, including those that Ishmael calls Leavers. In the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the global expansion of the economy in the late 1970s and 1980s, though, counterculture faded from mainstream thought. Nonetheless, these movements had a lasting effect on perceptions of the government, the military, and the global economy and ecosystem that continue to be expanded upon and taught in the modern day.
Ideological Context: Sustainability and Ecocriticism
The ideological basis of Ishmael is one of sustainability and the perspective that humanity is one of many species that need to share the planet to survive. Ecocriticism, like other forms of literary criticism, is essentially a lens through which the reader views the text. For instance, in feminist criticism or Marxist criticism, the reader looks specifically at how sex or gender, or class and economics, affect the overall impact of the work or the various points and assumptions made by the text. For ecocriticism, this focus is on examining the fundamental assumptions of the text regarding nature, natural processes, or the relationship between humanity and nature. Ishmael is an eco-critical reading of the “narrative” of Taker culture, which—as Ishmael explains—functions on the assumption that humanity is the peak of natural existence and that all the world was made for human consumption. By looking at modern culture through an ecocritical lens, Ishmael uncovers the assumptions of humanity that lead to deforestation, pollution, and genocide as he looks at the ways in which Taker culture uses or abuses nature and natural processes for the sole benefit of the human species.
The goal of ecocriticism, and of Ishmael, is to encourage further thought on sustainability and ecologically sound practices. Ishmael notes how the Leavers view themselves as a part of nature, rather than as rulers or conquerors of the world, leading them to live more sustainable lives. According to the United Nations, sustainability is “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (“Sustainability,” United Nations). However, Ishmael broadens this definition, which is still too focused on humanity, by noting that sustainability is meeting one’s needs without compromising the abilities of any other species to meet their needs, now or in the future. The United Nations definition focuses on humanity, ensuring that future generations of humans can live comfortably, while for Ishmael, this is a Taker mentality, ignoring the damage dealt to the ecosystem and the other species that live within it. For Ishmael, true sustainability, when looking at humanity through an ecocritical lens, is living in a way that allows all other species to continue living, as well.
