Issue 17 (Spring 2022), pp. 5-33
DOI: 10.6667/interface.17.2022.158
“COVID-19 is the Earth's vaccine”: Controversial metaphors in environmental discourse
| Organisations | Greenpeace | Extinction Rebellion |
|---|---|---|
| Sources | Greenpeace.org | Rebellion.earth |
| Number of texts about humans’ responsibilities and effects of the lockdown | 130 | 121 |
| Metaphorical occurrences (responsibilities and lockdown) |
13 | 36 |
Table 1: Details of the corpus
While the scope of the present research is not to compare these different organisations, Table 1 shows that – within the same time-frame – Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion significantly focused on the topics under study. However, it has been observed that other organisations like Fridays For Future only offer a limited number of texts and metaphorical occurrences addressing these issues. This might be due to the particularity of the latter organisation which focuses on school strikes and demonstrations (the movement emerged as a result of the impact of Greta Thunberg's school strike). The results discussed below illustrate how the metaphorical expressions observed in these different environmental texts from Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion have blamed humanity and promoted the opportunities resulting from the lockdown. I first discuss the HEALTH metaphors which have been used to depict these two topics, I then present the different metaphorical statements which address the positive impacts of the lockdown and human responsibilities: the CRIME and the CONTAINER metaphors. I study how the images of “Nature is healing” have been endorsed or disputed by the different environmental organisations.
3 “Nature is healing”: HEALTH metaphors and counter-discourse
Environmentalists have described the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular, the lockdown, as an opportunity to “build back better”. These descriptions present the temporary end of (industrial) activities as an illustration showing that a different society can be built, i.e. a society in which humanity does not rely on industries to live. Therefore, the lockdown was used as an example of such a society, and environmentalists highlighted that this experience of lockdown could make the population realise that a more sustainable world is not only a utopia. They insisted on this aspect because they feared the end of the lockdown would mean a “return to normal”. The descriptions of the lockdown in environmental discourse thus presents an optimistic view on post-lockdown society. This is exemplified in the extract presented below:
(1) This is the time to reimagine our streets. The increase in air quality is tangible to all. We can’t go back to the pollution we had before where cars are king. It’s time to share space equitably; putting people and the planet’s health first. Enabling our children to walk and cycle will make our cities and towns thrive with life.” (Extinction Rebellion, 15/05/2020) [2].
In extract (1), from Extinction Rebellion, the pandemic is perceived through a PATH metaphor (“go back”). This description emphasises that pollution (“cars”) represents a lack of PHYSICAL PROGRESSION. This extract re-interprets the environmental characteristics of the past to reveal the unpleasant aspects of such a society. For instance, the past is perceived as a KINGDOM. This conceptualisation comprises negative features because it metaphorically establishes how the population has attributed authoritarian powers to non-human entities, i.e. cars. This description of the past echoes the description of the lockdown period when “the air quality” has increased. In turn, this positive effect of the lockdown is emphasised in the end of the extract where the environmentalists focus on the health impact of pollution from cars (“health of the planet”; “thrive with life”). Hence, the metaphorical depiction aims at presenting a eulogistic image of the consequences of the lockdown in order to show to recipients the extent of the damages done by the unrestrained “authority” of cars in the past. Such a comparison thus argues that air quality can be improved in the long term, if cities and towns stop being “dominated” by cars. The personifications of cars (“king”), planet (“health”), and cities and towns (“thrive with life”) establish a storyline which qualifies the past as a storied world dominated by an EVIL-MINDED AUTHORITY. This is opposed to the metaphorical depiction of the post-pandemic world, where living entities (planet and humanity) do not suffer from major health issues related to car pollution.
It should be noted that environmentalists have acknowledged the controversy associated with the metaphorical statement “Nature is healing. We are the virus” advertised on Twitter by individual activists (Bosworth, 2021). While these online activists may well be associated with one of the environmental organisations under study, the information provided in the Twitter thread does not explicitly associate such statements with any established organisations.
The environmentalists from Greenpeace posted publications questioning this conceptualisation, with emphasis on the partial endorsement related to humans' responsibilities and to the positive effects of the lockdown. However, these official statements deny the controversial implications. Environmentalists thus adapted the statement to fit their arguments while avoiding the extended identification of HUMANITY AS A VIRUS or COVID-19 AS THE EARTH'S VACCINE. Such exploitations can be perceived in the extract presented below:
(2) Back at the beginning of the pandemic, we saw posts everywhere saying that “nature was healing” as animals strolled freely around cities, pollution levels dropped drastically, allowing people to see what wasn’t in their horizon before. But this was framed wrong: we should not focus on the healing, but on what had made nature sick in the first place. (Greenpeace, 07/08/2020)
In extract (2), from Greenpeace, the environmentalists explicitly refer to the Twitter thread. We can see that this thread has been used to produce a different argument, allowing the metaphor users to avoid the controversial implications. While Greenpeace praised the environmental effect of the lockdown (through the use of the CONTAINER metaphor; see section 5), they here deny their endorsement to such eulogistic views of the pandemic. By not focusing on the HEALING, Greenpeace acknowledges the irreversible impact of polluting industries. Indeed, the environmentalists state that the thread started “at the beginning of the pandemic”. However, extract (2) was selected from a text published in August 2020, when the (first) lockdown was over. At this time, the environmentalists already knew about and experienced the effects of the re-opening of industries. Therefore, this public denial is effective to on the one hand, dissociate the organisation from the controversies and, on the other hand, establish the responsibilities of industries for the negative effects of pollution. The depiction of a SICK NATURE thus highlights that environmental optimism cannot prevail since the cause of SICKNESS has not disappeared. Yet, the questioning of the conceptualisation “Nature is healing” does not so much refer to the associated controversies: environmentalists even partially endorse this image to use the online activists' relief in order to promote a long-term relief which would involve the definitive drop of emissions. In addition, this partial endorsement (associated with an explicit denial “this was framed wrong”) can be perceived in the use of the past perfect to describe nature' s SICKNESS, i.e. “what had made nature sick”. The use of the past tense to describe NATURE'S SICKNESS implies that, according to Greenpeace, Nature had indeed HEALED. However, Greenpeace still questions the reality of the HEALING because they associate the SICKNESS with industrial pollution: this insists on the fact that the HEALING is only punctual and does not prevail any more at the time the publication was released.
Even in publications which do not explicitly refer to the controversial Twitter thread, some extracts show that environmentalists have relied on HEALTH metaphors to emphasise the link between human activities, climate change, and COVID-19. This is exemplified in the extract presented below:
(3) We are at an intersection of global crises. Climate, COVID-19, racial injustice – all are symptoms of a toxic system that is driving us to extinction. We cannot carry on like this. (Extinction Rebellion, 01/09/2020)
In extract (3), from Extinction Rebellion, the environmentalists do not explicitly refer to the Twitter thread and its associated controversies. However, we can see that they similarly discuss the pandemic through the HEALTH metaphor (“symptoms”; see also Augé, 2021a). Here, the HEALTH metaphor does not mention any HEALING: instead, Extinction Rebellion focuses on the interrelation between different crises (“intersection”). The fact that the climate crisis and racial crisis have not been solved prevents the metaphor users from promoting a positive view of the COVID-19 pandemic and its environmental effects. For instance, they exploit the HEALTH metaphor to emphasise that the pandemic is only a SYMPTOM. This limits the scope of the metaphorical depiction and argues that other precarious CRISES-SYMPTOMS prevail. Within this conceptualisation, Nature is still SICK since its SICKNESS is not restricted to the pandemic. According to Extinction Rebellion, Nature can only HEAL when its VIRUS – i.e., the “toxic system” – is being treated. While in extract (2), Greenpeace partially endorsed the conceptualisation “Nature is healing” to convince recipients that industrial pollution is a SICKNESS, Extinction Rebellion explicitly denies this conceptualisation to place the COVID-19 pandemic, racial injustice, and the climate crisis on the same scale and to identify the prevailing VIRUS which has not yet been treated: the toxic system.
In the next section, I discuss the use of particular metaphors related to the personification of the industrialised world as a CRIMINAL HARMING HUMANITY. Here, the pandemic and the climate crisis are not identified as HEALTH CONDITIONS, but as CRIMINAL ACTIONS performed in order to impact the planet.
4 “Normal is killing us”: (SELF-INFLICTED) CRIME metaphors to identify the responsible sectors
During the pandemic, environmentalists produced texts emphasising humanity's responsibilities in the surge of the crises. They perceived the pandemic as an explicit, global manifestation of environmental disruptions. Metaphorical expressions have been used to criticise the various polluting activities which have led to such a global health crisis. These metaphors promote particular arguments aiming at emphasising the damaging features of these “past” activities, i.e. the activities that were performed before lockdown.
For instance, several occurrences from the corpus refer to humans' “normal” behaviour, which highlight the unprecedented and surprising aspects of the consequences of the pandemic. This “normal” behaviour is defined by environmentalists as a lack of attention towards gas emissions, leading humanity to increase pollution regardless of the impacts on health and on the environment. These metaphorical depictions of “normality” can be observed in the extracts presented below:
(4) “We can’t go back to normal when ‘normal’ is a toxic mix of climate emergency, systemised oppression and inequality, and a dangerous political shift to the right, leading to a scary and unpredictable climax”. (Greenpeace. 16/09/2020)
(5) “We are at a turning point in human history. It’s becoming clearer every day that the Government isn’t capable of getting us out of the coronavirus mess, or preventing climate breakdown and animal suffering. They are more concerned with getting us back to “normal” as rapidly as possible. But it’s normal that is killing us. So as the UK lockdown begins to ease, we stand at the crossroads: Bail out people and the planet OR bail out the industries that are killing us. We have a choice. (Extinction Rebellion. 11/07/2020)
In extract (4), from Greenpeace, we see that the pandemic is perceived as a PROGRESSION ALONG A PATH (“go back to”). This PROGRESSION, in view of the impact of the pandemic, has allowed humanity to experience the consequences of their past mistakes (i.e., uncontrolled pollution, inequality, political choices). This experience has helped humans to “move past” the obstacle of “normality”. In other words, in this extract, “normality” is implicitly conceptualised as a PATH THAT IS LIMITED BY AN OBSTACLE. Because the pandemic has forced the population to adopt an “abnormal” behaviour, this has produced a NEW PATH which is characterised by the absence of “climate emergency, systemised oppression and inequality, and dangerous political shift to the right”. Yet, this NEW PATH is not the focus of the extract: instead, the environmentalists expressed their anxiety regarding the end of the pandemic which would, ultimately, allow people to “return to normality”. Hence, another metaphorical conceptualisation appears in order to convince recipients that “normal is not normal”. Here, “normality” is perceived negatively but the extract implies that the population (or politicians and people working in the industries) has a positive image of this concept. Therefore, the environmentalists highlight the various aspects which contradict this positive image, through the metaphor NORMALITY AS A TOXIC MIX. This metaphor does not only deny the positive features of normality, it also questions the identification of the concept “normality”. Indeed, “normality” is a highly complex concept which may be too subjective to define, but through the lens of environmentalism, “normality” is perceived in relation to dangerous social trends (like uncontrolled pollution) which endangers humans' health. Thus, the environmentalists rely on the conceptual association linking human life to the concept of “normality” and emphasise that human life trends eventually prevent the continuation of human life (as it has been demonstrated by the impacts of the pandemic, i.e. “toxic”). In turn, this endangerment of human life alters the concept “normality”, and this alteration is at the heart of Greenpeace's arguments. The environmentalists conceptualise recipients' perception of “normality” as a TOXIC MIX in order to promote a “new normal” which would allow human life to continue and evolve according to different environmental trends. This implicitly produces an absurd image of humans’ past behaviour: humanity is depicted as producing a TOXIC MIX to eventually KILL its individuals. Therefore, in this extract, Greenpeace uses the pandemic as an explicit illustration of the “abnormality” of past behaviour.
In extract (5), from Extinction Rebellion, the pandemic is similarly perceived as a PROGRESSION ALONG A PATH (“turning point”; “crossroads”). The conceptualisation slightly differs in this extract since the environmentalists do not describe a NEW PATH but a DIFFERENT DIRECTION made available following the impacts of the pandemic. In the beginning of the extract, the metaphor users explicitly blame the UK government for forcing the population to “remain” in the PATH-CONTAINER (“getting us out”) that presents precarious characteristics associated with COVID-19. The interrelation of PATH and CONTAINER metaphors in the extract has a significant role in the argumentation performed by Extinction Rebellion. Indeed, the CONTAINER metaphor “getting us out” is followed by another PATH metaphor “getting us back”: this interrelation implicitly establishes that the pandemic has allowed the population to “exit” the CONTAINER, but the government is preventing people from “escaping” to a different PATH. Thus, in this extract, “normality” is perceived as a FORCED CONTAINMENT – this conceptualisation aims at highlighting governmental responsibilities for the crises. In addition, the metaphor is extended in the end of the extract where “normality” becomes personified: it transforms into a KILLER, which echoes the lethal consequences of the climate and health crises. Such a conceptualisation is highly effective in the context of the pandemic, when people experience loss and precarious health conditions. The source domain KILLER is exploited further with an emphasis on the identification of “normality” as the “industrial world” (“industries are killing us”). This represents an indirect depiction of the government as a KILLER: because the government wants to protect industries, it puts the health of the population at risk. Metaphorically, this is represented by the images of the population TRAPPED IN A DEADLY CONTAINER (CONTAINING A KILLER) BY THE GOVERNMENT. The responsibility is put on politicians instead of humanity, but the stance of the extract aims at warning recipients that it is people's responsibilities not to listen to the government (“We have a choice”). Extinction Rebellion emphasises the extent of such a choice through metaphorical exploitations presenting the deadly characteristics of “normality”.
In the next section, I focus on the metaphors used by environmentalists to describe the environmental optimism resulting from the lockdown. While this section focused on the metaphorical descriptions of humans' responsibilities, I now pay attention to the use of the CONTAINER metaphor to depict the opportunity to “build back better”.
5 “The system is broken”: the CONTAINER metaphor to describe new opportunities
Several metaphorical occurrences convey effective arguments which depict a bad past that led to the pandemic. In the following extracts, we see that the “normality” of pollution is denied to focus on the unpleasant characteristics of the past which are highlighted by environmentalists in order to convince recipients about the benefits of a new society. This is exemplified in the extracts presented below:
(6)“The Coronavirus pandemic has created a rare crack in the system – let’s use it to create a better world. During the 2008 economic crisis, governments saved the banks. Politicians adopted relief packages that de facto favored the most polluting industries. This time it must be the planet that is ‘too big to fail’. (...) When the corona crisis starts to subside, we can choose to glue the cracks in our system together. We can also choose to look into them and catch a glimpse of a future in which our economies are designed for the wellbeing of both humans and the planet.” (Greenpeace. 16/04/2020).
(7) Join our first No Going Back action this Thursday. Close down the biggest polluters, hang up posters over the doors of the most polluting businesses to make clear that they cannot reopen for business as usual, if we want to rebuild a better world. We can all feel it, the wind is turning, change is on its way. Let‘s rise up on the winds of change. Let’s reclaim our future. (Extinction Rebellion, 14/04/2020)
In extract (6), Greenpeace's main argument is related to the unsuitable decisions taken by politicians. They rely on the metaphor POLITICAL SYSTEM AS A BROKEN CONTAINER to reveal politicians' responsibilities in the Coronavirus crisis. They refer to existing political decisions which have already endangered humanity, i.e. the 2008 economic crisis and the industrial bailouts. Indeed, we see the effective use of metonymies in this extract: instead of referring to the people working in banks and in industries, Greenpeace relies on the metonymy PLACE OF ACTIVITY FOR THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS ACTIVITY (see discussion of metonymies in environmental discourse in Augé, 2019b). This has an argumentative function which emphasises the negative aspects of governmental decisions: politicians have supported non-human entities instead of supporting the population. In addition, these bad decisions are associated with the COVID-19 pandemic which is presented as a consequence of such decisions. Metaphorically, this is represented as a CONTAINER that has been FRAGILISED by previous decisions which led it to BREAK following the pandemic. Yet, this image of a BROKEN CONTAINER is perceived positively by the environmentalists: unlike other CONTAINER metaphors (e.g., “greenhouse effect”; Augé, 2022), the environmentalists limit the characterisation of the CONTENT to politicians (and not humanity). Thus, the CRACK allows environmentalists to “see” the CONTENT. In this case, the impact of the pandemic is presented through a positive viewpoint: people “outside the CONTAINER” can now monitor politicians more easily. In the end of the extract, the representation of the political system as a simple object that humans can easily manipulate is exploited. The environmentalists attribute a role to the recipients by metaphorically referring to a simple action one can take to fix the problem: GLUE THE CRACKS. This highlights recipients' responsibilities to “strengthen” the system so that future pandemics and environmental issues can be averted. Therefore, the pandemic is perceived as a punctual event which BROKE THE FRAGILISED CONTAINER, and the idealised, post-pandemic politics is represented as a CONTAINER THAT HAS BEEN MENDED (i.e., the DANGEROUS CONTENT has been removed from the CONTAINER). In this extract, we can see that the post-pandemic world imagined by environmentalists is depicted through HEALTH metaphors (“well-being of the planet”). Environmentalists explicitly blame politicians for the present pandemic, and they metaphorically emphasise the causal relationship between the environmental crisis and the health crisis.
In extract (7), from Extinction Rebellion, environmentalists call readers for a passive, distanced protest. This extract was published during the peak of the epidemic, in April 2020. The beginning of the extract refers to the need to stop polluting activities – as previously discussed in section 4. Here, the pandemic is conceptualised as an event that DESTROYED the world, with a characterisation of the WORLD AS A (BUILT) CONTAINER. The environmentalists use this concrete image of a DESTROYED HUMAN CONTAINER to present environmental actions as necessary (“rebuild”) and as simple steps that humans can take (i.e., building a container). The association with polluting industries implicitly establishes that these have a responsibility in the DESTRUCTION, but we can notice that the blame is not emphasised in the metaphorical exploitation. Indeed, in this extract, the environmentalists focus on the positive impacts of the DESTRUCTION, which forces humanity to REBUILD THEIR CONTAINER – implying that this RECONSTRUCTION will be safer for its CONTENT. This description of a BETTER RECONSTRUCTION as a forced, necessary measure is emphasised in the remainder of the extract: the environmentalists involve the recipients through the use of the pronoun “we” and insist on the fact that the need for a BETTER RECONSTRUCTION is self-evident, i.e. they refer to the recipients as a subject of an epistemic verb “feel” which shows that the change is so obvious that environmentalists can assert that everybody can “feel” it. The idiomatic reference to the WIND exemplifies this assertion: the responsibilities of polluting industries and the negative characteristics of the pre-COVID-19 world transform into a physiologically perceptible entity, the wind. This metaphorical exploitation is extended through a JOURNEY metaphor (“on its way”), personifying “change” and identifying it as an environmental SAVIOUR COMING TOWARDS HUMANITY. In the end of the extract, the perception of the DESTRUCTED world insists on the need for humanity to be saved: the perception of the pre-COVID-19 world is indirectly conceptualised as an IMPRISONMENT for environmentalists, who identify the prevalence of polluting industries as a DENIAL OF THEIR FUTURE. In other words, pollution prevents a future – which is not only impacting environmental activists but also the recipients.
Environmentalists significantly exploited the CONTAINER metaphor in order to describe COVID-19 as a possible EXIT from a polluted world to a more sustainable society. Yet, they also considered the impacts of polluting industries on society. In such cases, the CONTAINER metaphor is exploited to emphasise the risks to ENTER – or to let pollution ENTER – a new, damaged world. This is exemplified in the extracts presented below:
(8) We’ve all watched the last six months in disbelief, hoping that the Covid-19 crisis would at least provide a doorway to a new and better world. But instead, what we all feared has unravelled before our eyes: a return to an even worse version of ‘business as usual’. (Greenpeace, 16/09/2020)
(9) We will be delivering an Open Letter to the UK Government, signed by scientists, NGOS, animal rights organisations and environmentalists, to demand that the UK Government urgently address the cause of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government must heed this stark warning ~the next global pandemic is on our doorsteps, and on people’s plates. (Extinction Rebellion, 08/09/2020)
In extract (8), Greenpeace activists conceptualise the past (and present) polluted reality as an IMPRISONMENT. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic is identified as a DOORWAY, highlighting the environmentalists' perception of the past world as being deprived of such an EXIT. The image of an IMPRISONMENT is effective in reflecting the powerlessness of activists: this extract insists on the fact that past environmental actions – even if they were aimed at raising awareness – could not result in a “better world” because industrial pollution prevailed (there was no EXIT). Yet, the lack of industrial activities during the lockdown could have helped them to produce actions that would lead to sustainability. However, the “business as usual” strategy in place at the end of the lockdown “closed the door” to this possibility: pollution was not reduced, and this contradicts the reality of a greener society. In addition, this lack of reduction is here materialised, i.e. “unravelled before our eyes”: this strengthens the environmentalists' arguments which, this time, depict uncontrolled pollution as a MISCHIEVOUS PERSON “moving towards” humanity and IMPRISONING them in a damaged, dangerous world.
In extract (9), from Extinction Rebellion, the environmentalists refer to the pollution induced by humans' food consumption (“people's plates”). Similarly, they describe the world as a CONTAINER. In this case, the CONTAINMENT is not perceived as an IMPRISONMENT. Here, the DOORWAY represents a danger which can let INTRUDERS in. Indeed, the continuous uncontrolled consumption is represented as an absurd behaviour from humanity who OPENS THE DOOR to the next global pandemic. The present COVID-19 pandemic was thus perceived as a “stark warning”, inviting the population to CLOSE THE DOOR to such INTRUDERS. The argument can be related to the arguments discussed in extract (8): Extinction Rebellion and Greenpeace activists significantly criticise the “business as usual” post-pandemic strategy, and they rely on metaphors to on the one hand, illustrate the possibility of a more sustainable world, and on the other hand, depict the danger of past and present consumptions through more concrete features. This also emphasises the ease by which humanity can be impacted, since uncontrolled consumption facilitates the spread of viruses (or “let viruses enter”).
Alternatively, environmentalists produced metaphorical descriptions of the lockdown in order to praise the environmental impact of the interruption of industrial activities. This is exemplified in the extract presented below:
(10) With factories stopped, cars parked, and airplanes grounded, the skies opened up for us and the waters cleared. The drop in emissions has thus brought the issue of air pollution to the attention of many in a more tangible way. (Extinction Rebellion, 30/07/2020).
In extract (10), Extinction Rebellion relies on the CONTAINER metaphor. Yet, in this example, we see that the argument differs from the one presented in extract (9). Indeed, this extract refers to the increased air quality during the lockdown as an OPENING. This implies a conceptualisation of the past world as an IMPRISONMENT. In addition, this OPENING is associated with visible features (“brought to the attention”), which echoes the conceptual metaphor KNOWING IS SEEING (Lakoff and Johnson, 2002). Hence, the environmentalists rely on the dichotomy between a past polluted world where air was of low quality and where people were UNINFORMED and IMPRISONED, and a world under lockdown, where air is of higher quality and where people can SEE nature through the OPENING of the CONTAINER. Even if Extinction Rebellion does not explicitly argue in favour of reduction in this extract, we can still see an effective argument promoting the benefit of air quality.
In the next section, I will discuss the argumentative roles of the metaphors used by environmentalists to address the topics at play in the controversial statement “Nature is healing. We are the virus”. I will also provide more details about the role of metaphors to attribute different responsibilities in environmental discourse.
6 Summary, Discussion, and Concluding Remarks
The present research has demonstrated that environmental organisations – Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion – partly endorsed the arguments implied by the thread “Nature is healing. We are the virus” (Bosworth, 2021). Indeed, they produced several official statements blaming humanity for the different crises (the climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic), and praising the opportunities offered by the lockdown. However, we saw that HEALTH metaphors were used with caution. On the one hand, Greenpeace has indeed endorsed the image of “Nature is healing” but the environmentalists have been careful not to exploit the metaphorical conceptualisation. They even explicitly criticised the content of the thread, despite the fact that their statements still argue that NATURE HAD HEALED. On the other hand, Extinction Rebellion explicitly contradicts the arguments promoted by the thread. They draw a causal link between COVID-19, climate change, and racial injustice to emphasise that these are not VIRUSES but only SYMPTOMS of the SYSTEM-VIRUS. Such an interrelation between COVID-19 and climate change has indeed been previously noticed in a study focusing on Extinction Rebellion's use of HEALTH metaphors during the COVID-19 pandemic (Augé, 2021a).
The paper also demonstrated that the environmental organisations metaphorically discussed the two (interrelated) target domains under study: humans' responsibilities and opportunities permitted by the lockdown. However, the present study finds that these organisations favoured different source domains to address these topics. It has been demonstrated that Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion significantly relied on CONTAINER and JOURNEY-PATH-MOVEMENT metaphors. They thus used ubiquitous metaphorical expressions (see Grady, 1997) which do not bear any controversial implications in the context of the pandemic (as opposed to HEALTH-related expressions). For instance, they pictured the end of polluting activities as a PROGRESSION ALONG A PATH or a DIFFERENT DIRECTION that is being BLOCKED by political decisions and industrial authority over society. Alternatively, they described the political system as a BROKEN CONTAINER while the lockdown offered humanity an EXIT so that the MISCHIEVOUS CONTENT can be REMOVED, and the CONTAINER can be FIXED. In different cases, the complex concept of (pre-COVID-19) “normality” has been depicted as a SELF-INFLICTED CRIMINAL ACTION. Environmentalists relied on this absurd image to mock humanity’s past behaviour. In other extracts, the CRIME is COMMITTED by a particular sector: industries. This image insists on the necessity to prevent the “business as usual” scenario, which involves the complete re-opening of industries and the lack of control over industrial pollution.
Overall, these metaphorical depictions emphasise that humans' “normal” behaviour has been disrupted. These highlight the (un)surprising aspects of the pandemic and expose the “abnormality” of the pre-pandemic world. These arguments aim at convincing recipients to take responsibilities in the BUILDING of a better society.
In view of the existing criticism of the conceptualisation “Nature is healing. We are the virus” (Bosworth, 2021), the present research aimed at testing environmentalists' reliance on such a controversial metaphorical statement. The HEALTH metaphor can indeed effectively convey environmental arguments, particularly in a social context impacted by a global pandemic (see Augé, 2021a; Charteris-Black, 2021; Sorce and Dumitrica, 2021). However, the characterisation of Nature as a HEALING BODY implies that climate change does not require long-term actions to be mitigated. This argument has notably been emphasised in the extracts discussed in this paper. Instead, environmentalists favour metaphorical descriptions which, on the one hand acknowledge the unprecedented consequences of the pandemic (e.g., a BROKEN CONTAINER) and on the other hand, take into account the supremacy of the industrialised world and of the political system (e.g., a DOORWAY BLOCKED by political decisions). The focus was thus on the damaging impacts of the decisions taken by political leaders, preventing sustainability.
A major conceptual difference exists between the metaphorical statements “Nature is healing” and “Build Back Better”: the latter comprises the DESTRUCTION caused by non-environmentally friendly decisions and the concrete actions that every human-being can take to improve society (i.e., FIXING A BROKEN OBJECT). However, in the “Nature is healing” statement, the VIRUS or SICKNESS does not necessarily involve a new opportunity, and it does not necessarily involve a serious HEALTH CONDITION (i.e., the source domain VIRUS can be interpreted as a DEADLY VIRUS, but also as a simple FLUE). In addition, this controversial statement does not argue in favour of global mitigation: the metaphorical frame of MEDICINE implies that only a DOCTOR can CURE Nature. This conceptualisation thus excludes the possibilities for every human-being to perform individual actions to solve the climate crisis. Metaphorical references to the SYMPTOMS, or TREATMENT of the environment can still advertise suitable solutions (Augé, 2021a; Ross et al., 1997) as these emphasise humans' dependence on Nature: recipients can perceive environmental damages interpreted as BODY DAMAGES. Yet, these metaphors are mostly aimed at raising awareness through a concrete representation of the impact of pollution (Augé, 2021b). The controversies discussed by Bosworth (2021) are related to the role played by humanity within the mapping NATURE AS A DISEASED BODY. For such a mapping to produce effective arguments, humanity needs to be included within the concept of NATURE – echoing James Lovelock's depiction of Gaia as a living organism (2007). Yet, humans should be excluded from the concept DISEASE, which may recall existing xenophobic statements produced during past periods (Musolff, 2010). In the context of the pandemic, the identification of humanity as a VIRUS is particularly concerning at a time when the population experiences major health concerns. Similar controversial metaphorical statements about the role of humanity during the COVID-19 pandemic have indeed yielded significant debates among linguists. They observed how the questionable exploitations of the WAR metaphor could result in the identification of sick people as ENEMIES (Augé, forthcoming; Charteris-Black, 2021).
This paper thus demonstrated that the use of metaphors to blame humanity should be carefully processed: the extracts discussed in this paper emphasised how Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion promoted humans' power to mitigate the crises through the use of metaphors. Metaphorical arguments blaming particular groups – like politicians – relied on source domains which represented actions that evil-minded individuals may perform (e.g., breaking an object or blocking a path) but, despite bearing negative features, cannot harm the population. Even if reducing pollution is a necessary mitigation that can be produced at the level of the individuals, the emphasis – through metaphors – on the damages done by humans' activities (i.e., “We are the virus”) contradicts environmentalists' main argument, which is to present sustainability as an achievable, concrete goal to live in a better world.
References
Augé, A. (2019a). How metaphor scenarios can reveal socio-cultural and linguistic variations of meaning: A cross-linguistic perspective on the NURTURING PARENT and STRICT FATHER frames. Metaphor and Symbol, 34 (4), 209-228. DOI: 10.1080/10926488.2019.1683949
–––. (2019b). Climate change (un)certainty: the GREEN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT metonymy in UK national newspapers. Papers in Language and Communication Studies, 2 (1), 1 -20. ISSN: 2515-4001
–––. (2021a). COVID-19 as a framing device for environmental protest: the ECOSYSTEM HEALTH metaphor. Environmental Communication, Online first. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2021.1890174
–––. (2021b). How visual metaphor can contradict verbal occurrences: A cross-linguistic and multimodal analysis of the IMPRINT of climate change. Metaphor and the Social World, Online first. DOI: 10.1075/msw.20001.aug
–––. (2022). From scientific arguments to scepticism: Humans’ place in the Greenhouse. Public Understanding of Science, 31 (2), 179-194. DOI: 10.1177/09636625211035624
–––. (forthcoming). Ideological and explanatory uses of the COVID-19 AS A WAR metaphor in science. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, accepted- in press.
Bonnefille, S. (2008). When green rhetoric and cognitive linguistics meet: President G.W. Bush’s environmental discourse in his State of the Union addresses (2001-2008). Metaphorik.de, 15/2008, 27 – 61. https://www.metaphorik.de/en/journal/15/when-green-rhetoric-and-cognitive-linguistics-meet-president-g-w-bushs-environmental-discourse-his.html
Bosworth, K. (2021). The bad environmentalism of “nature is healing” memes. Cultural Geographies, Online first. DOI: 10.1177/14744740211012007
Charteris-Black, J. (2021). Metaphors of Coronavirus: Invisible enemy or zombie apocalypse? Cham, Palgrave Macmillan.
Doyle, J. (2007). Picturing the clima( c )tic: Greenpeace and the representational politics of climate change communication. Science as Culture, 16 (2), 129–150. DOI: 10.1080/09505430701368938
Grady, J. (1997). THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8 (3), 267-90. DOI: 10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.267
Lakoff, G. (1993) [1979]. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (ed). Metaphor and Thought (second edition, pp. 202-252). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
–––. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant! Know your values and frame the debate: The essential guide for progressives. Vermont, White River Junction, Vt.: Chelsea Green.
–––. (2010). Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication, 4 (1), 70-81. DOI: 10.1080/17524030903529749
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2002) [1980]. Metaphors we live by. Second edition, Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press.
Lovelock, J. (2007). The revenge of Gaia: Why the earth is fighting back – And how we can still save humanity. London, Penguin.
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and conceptual evolution. Metaphorik.de, 07/2004, 55 – 75. https://www.metaphorik.de/sites/www.metaphorik.de/files/journal-pdf/07_2004_musolff.pdf
–––. (2010). Metaphor, nation, and the Holocaust: The concept of the body politic. London, Routledge.
–––. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London, Bloomsbury Academic.
–––. (2020). National conceptualisations of the body politic: Cultural experience and political imagination. Singapore, Springer.
Nerlich, B. (2010). “ClimateGate”: Paradoxical metaphors and political paralysis. Environmental Values, 14 (9), 419-442. DOI: 10.3197/096327110X531543
Romaine, S. (1996). War and peace in the global greenhouse: Metaphors we die by. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 11 (3), 175-194. DOI: 10.1207/s15327868ms1103_1
Ross, N., Eyles, J., Cole, D., & Iannantuono, A. (1997). The ecosystem health metaphor in science and policy. The Canadian Geographer, 41 (2), 114–127. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0064.1997.tb01152.x
Shaw, C. & Nerlich, B. (2015). Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: A study of international policies, 1992–2012. Ecological Economics, 109, 34-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.11.001
Sorce, G. & Dumitrica, D. (2021). #fighteverycrisis: Pandemic shifts in Fridays For Future’s protest communication frames. Environmental Communication, Online first. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2021.1948435
Steen, G.-J. et al. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins
Tognini Bonelli E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
Appendix.
URLs of the extracts presented in the paper (Data available at: Greenpeace.org and Rebellion.earth)
2. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/44577/alice-braga-food-commodities-deforestation/
3. https://extinctionrebellion.uk/event/we-want-to-live-summer-rebellion-east-of-england/
4.- https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/45047/demand-climate-justice-europe/
5. - https://extinctionrebellion.uk/event/blood-on-your-hands-global-action/
7. https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2020/04/29/uk-newsletter-14-no-going-back/
8.https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/45047/demand-climate-justice-europe/
9. https://extinctionrebellion.uk/event/letter-for-our-future/
10. - https://rebellion.global/blog/2020/07/30/lockdown-emissions/
[2] The sources of the extracts presented here can be found in the Appendix.
accepted March 22, 2022]
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Anaïs Augé
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2016. All Rights Reserved | Interface | ISSN: 2519-1268