Analyzing the Discourse on Hyperobjects

    One of the most abiding discussions in the scholarly community is that of humans and their impact on global climate change. Although its lasting impact is viewed through a scientific lens, due to shifts in the environment, the humanities plays an essential role in developing our ever-changing world. In understanding what the future holds for us by analyzing our response to the phenomenon of hyperobjects, this paper explores their characteristics as a catalyst around the discourse of what the humanities can do to mitigate climate change.

    Timothy Morton, a professor at Rice University and part of the philosophy movement, is renowned for coining the term ‘hyperobjects’. In his book Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, he describes hyperobjects as having intangible continuity in which these, ironically enough, ‘objects’ cannot be touched, but still experienced. He argues their proximity, yet uncanniness on how they are portrayed in the book. Nevertheless, by interpreting hyperobjects, Morton describes their first characteristic as viscosity, specifically its sliminess by leaving remnants wherever present.[1] Andrew Baldwin uses styrofoam to depict its accumulation as waste that will permanently leave a footprint wherever disposed.[2] Unlike grains of sand without a sense of viscosity, styrofoam has a stickier, honey-like nature and in the case of climate change, harms the environment.[3] Next, Morton describes the nonlocality of hyperobjects, such as nuclear radiation. Although not visible, nuclear radiation still negatively affects the health of humans and ecosystems, occupying more space therefore being substantial to entities it affects. Morton defines the third characteristic of hyperobjects as ‘Temporal Undulation’ where “Time bends them and flattens them, the same that an electromagnetic wave front shortens at its leading edge.”[4] Peter Campbell[5] and Qiang He[6] use the sea to illustrate this phenomenon as an extensive geographical entity which doesn’t conform to human activity. The fourth characteristic is “Phasing”, where certain parts of hyperobjects can be seen at a time, which in Morton’s opinion, attributes to their perplexing nature. For instance, the way time and space interact with and inside a star millions of light-years away that humans cannot fully perceive or feel its direct effects.

    In light of perceiving hyperobjects, Elizabeth Boulton provides a critical review on their underlying characteristics and relates these descriptions to Morton’s narrative. She highlights their strange interobjectivity and addresses the limits to comprehending this concept beyond the realm of human thought. The inconspicuousness of time in relation to hyperobjects works on a timescale different from that of a ‘human relevant’ world. Boulton remarks on his myriad of word choice, noting how “Morton also accounts for the slow and physical way in which new deep frames are constructed and the sense of dislocation or unease this may evoke”.[7] Wind as a hyperobject influence human response to it on a micro scale like listening to leaves rustle or macro scale in witnessing the powers of wind gusts on a ship at sea. On the contrary, she criticizes and argues that Morton’s philosophies and concepts mentioned are clouded at times.[8] Morton defends his vagueness, stating that “Hyperobjects seem to inhabit a humean casual system in which association, correlation, and probability are the only things we have to go on, for now” in which we won’t know the beginning or end of their ‘life-cycle’. In this quotation on “Nonlocality”, Morton describes hyperobjects as a diagnostic tool that won’t unambiguously prove its direct impact on climate change, but provide leeway into distinctively analyzing a human’s response to this problem. He emphasizes the importance on the power of how we perceive hyperobjects and encourages us that by seeing them as empowering, we set aside the scale of our individual issues. As a result, we can do so to find solutions as a whole for lessening the impact of climate change. [9]

    One interesting aspect in relation to Morton’s quote about the lack of direct proof is the connection Boulton makes to art. She speaks on the process of describing and delineating a piece of art one sees at a museum and the large gap for the interpretation of a piece, specifically a painting. There is a large margin for error in doing so, which affects human emotion and attitude. Morton tackles this observation philosophically by reconceiving how the humanities are architects of their world while examining how hyperobjects are significant to influencing the ways we think of them. On the other hand, Boulton criticizes how Hyperobjects can be disempowering, giving many a sense of resignation and hopelessness towards being able to control such a vast concept. Therefore, she explains that lack of agency characterized humans as vulnerable and susceptible to any uncontrollable natural occurrences, like climate change.[10]

    From a new perspective, in her paper “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically”, Libby Robin conceptualizes and expands the idea of ethics in the humanities by correlating them with the environment. She highlights the transparency of environmental humanities, which enables moral and logical conversation in approaching the hyperobject of climate change.[11] Similarly, Boulton talks about how the humanities are essential to “a greater role in the ‘meaning-making’ of climate change”.[12] In response to Morton and Boulton, Robin comments on how this humanistic approach “offer[s] a new frame or narrative, that is more than merely logical and quotidian”.[13] Robin explores two concepts that play a role in how the humanities responds and deals with changing climate and environmental justice. First, the Metaphor of the Anthropocene “rests on the question of whether Earth might have entered a new geological epoch, and how this might be manifested in rock strata”. She argues a relevance in this present era in order to make humanities aware that it should be “used as a tool for action” for climate change. This context is particularly interesting, as it contributes to, as Morton would agree, the foreseeable effects of hyperobjects. The second concept is through “Climate and Biodiversity Justice”, where Robin underlies the urgency of preserving ecosystem biodiversity since biologists and activists emphasize the impermanence of these organisms from global warming.[14] She also notes how “historical relations between the humanities and science communities in different places have shaped different frames for the environment crisis and approaches to human responsibility”. For example, the Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, was passed in 2010 in Bolivia due to the exploitation of its land, specifically the Amazon rainforest. Because of this, these ‘Rights for Nature’, as described in Robin’s article, recognizes nature and life forms associated with it as having the right to continue its life cycles.[15] Morton, alternatively, may dismiss the idea and instead say the concept of nature needs to be undetached from humans in a law-like way, but rather we are the sensitive ones who take on the necessary roles to survive.

    Ultimately, Boulton agrees with Morton in his realistic approach towards what the future holds for humanity. However, Robin may argue a stronger correlation between how history shapes humanities interaction with the environment. Nevertheless, all three authors would approach climate change from a part-to-whole perspective, concluding that to familiarize ourselves with the effects of it, we must be receptive to its changes and unite the humanities with science.

___________________________________________________________________

Bibliography

Baldwin, Andrew. “Climate Change, Migration, and the Crisis of Humanism.” WIREs Climate Change 8, no. 3 (2017): e460. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.460.

Boulton, Elizabeth. (2016), Climate change as a ‘hyperobject’: a critical review of Timothy Morton's reframing narrative. WIREs Clim Change, 7: 772-785. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.410

Campbell, Peter B. “The Sea as a Hyperobject: Moving beyond Maritime Cultural Landscapes.” Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 8, no. 3–4 (October 1, 2020): 207–25. https://doi.org/10.5325/jeasmedarcherstu.8.3-4.0207.

He, Qiang, and Brian R. Silliman. “Climate Change, Human Impacts, and Coastal Ecosystems in the Anthropocene.” Current Biology 29, no. 19 (2019): R1021–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.08.042.

Horn, Eva. "The aesthetics of heat. For a cultural history of climate in the age of global warming." Metaphor J Lit Theory Media 2 (2017): 1-16.

​​Lakoff, George. “Why It Matters How We Frame the Environment.” Environmental

Communication 4, no. 1 (March 1, 2010): 70-81.https://doi.org/10.1080/17524030903529749.

Morton, Timothy. Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. U of Minnesota Press, 2013.

Robin, Libby. “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically.” WIREs Climate Change 9, no. 1 (2018): e499. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.499.

[1] Morton, Timothy. “Viscosity.” In Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, 27–37

[2] Baldwin, Andrew. “Climate Change, Migration, and the Crisis of Humanism.” WIREs Climate Change 8, no. 3 (2017): e460.

[3] Morton, Timothy. “Nonlocality.” In Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, 38–54. University of Minnesota Press, 2013.

[4] Morton, Timothy. “Temporal Undulation.” In Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, 55–68. University of Minnesota Press, 2013.

[5] Campbell, Peter B. “The Sea as a Hyperobject: Moving beyond Maritime Cultural Landscapes.” Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 8, no. 3–4 (October 1, 2020): 207–25.

[6] He, Qiang, and Brian R. Silliman. “Climate Change, Human Impacts, and Coastal Ecosystems in the Anthropocene.” Current Biology 29, no. 19 (2019): R1021–35.

[7] Boulton, E. (2016), Climate change as a ‘hyperobject’: a critical review of Timothy Morton's reframing narrative. WIREs Clim Change, 7: 772-785.

[8] Boulton, E. (2016), Climate change as a ‘hyperobject’: a critical review of Timothy Morton's reframing narrative. WIREs Clim Change, 7: 772-785.

[9] Morton, Timothy. “Nonlocality.” In Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, 38–54. University of Minnesota Press, 2013.

[10] Boulton, E. (2016), Climate change as a ‘hyperobject’: a critical review of Timothy Morton's reframing narrative. WIREs Clim Change, 7: 772-785.

[11] Robin, Libby. “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically.” WIREs Climate Change 9, no. 1 (2018)

[12] Boulton, E. (2016), Climate change as a ‘hyperobject’: a critical review of Timothy Morton's reframing narrative. WIREs Clim Change, 7: 772-785.

[13] Robin, Libby. “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically.” WIREs Climate Change 9, no. 1 (2018)

[14] Robin, Libby. “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically.” WIREs Climate Change 9, no. 1 (2018)

[15] Robin, Libby. “Environmental Humanities and Climate Change: Understanding Humans Geologically and Other Life Forms Ethically.” WIREs Climate Change 9, no. 1 (2018)