Climate change has been one of the most important global issues for over the decade now. There is no doubt that it is happening, although there is still a lot of debate going on whether global warming is real. Monica Hesse and Michael Pollan bring up the important points about the environment, causes of climate change, and possible solutions in their essays “Greed in the Name of Green” and “Why Bother?”. The moods of the two essays are clearly different. Hesse’s sarcastic tone, derides and decries our misinterpret attitude towards solutions of the climate problem, therefore, showing us the ways we can change it, in the hope that we will consider altering the ways we live. With the same intentions Pollan, with hopeful and encouraging tone, makes
…show more content…
The good thing is that people realized that the climate issue is real, but there is nothing being done right to change it. In fact, our actions make the climate situation even worse. We misinterpret the term “going green”, by consuming too much of “green” products: switching from old non-organic towels and bed sheets to Eco-friendly ones, thinking that this will solve the Global Warming issue, leaving our mind guilt-free. We are used to buying and consuming so much, that we “seek our spiritual satisfaction” (248) in it. Hesse quotes Josh Dorfman saying: “Buying stuff is intrinsically wrapped up in out identities” (249). In other words, it flows in out blood, it is essential for humans to consume, the more the better. There is no need to replace everything in a household to Eco-friendly products; this will bring you satisfaction about yourself being “helpful” to the Mother Nature, when in reality, it only causes harm. However, if we do decide to buy something new, it is always better to consider a “green” alternative. In this essay Hesse shows how damaging our lifestyle can be, and to make any changes to the environment we have to change ourselves first. There are a few suggestions on how to do it, hidden behind the sarcastic tone of Hesse’s essay: going green means consuming less – “the greenest products are the ones you don’t buy” (249); make smart choices about food that we eat, paying …show more content…
It will not make any difference if one will start biking to work, or will buy a hybrid car, go meatless or plant a garden, while his neighbor is doing the exact opposite. Just as Hesse, Pollan suggests a few solutions to climate change problem. Going “green” is one of them. He doesn’t talk about organic Eco-friendly USDA sealed products unlike Hesse. Going “green” does not mean “buying” in his interpretation. It is more like completely changing our life styles, something that Hesse also wants her readers to understand. Going “green” is having less: biking instead of driving, planting a garden instead of buying processed foods, paying attention to the ingredients and start thinking about consequences. Pollan focuses on the idea of specialization as a “disease of the modern character” (253), which prevents us from thinking outside of the box, so to speak, out of the range of our intellectual limits. Here, similar to Hesse, Pollan shows how powerless we are in terms of making our own decisions, living it to professionals (economists, marketing, or meteorologists). We are used to passive thinking. Professionals will do it, because this is not our
The good thing is that people realized that the climate issue is real, but there is nothing being done right to change it. In fact, our actions make the climate situation even worse. We misinterpret the term “going green”, by consuming too much of “green” products: switching from old non-organic towels and bed sheets to Eco-friendly ones, thinking that this will solve the Global Warming issue, leaving our mind guilt-free. We are used to buying and consuming so much, that we “seek our spiritual satisfaction” (248) in it. Hesse quotes Josh Dorfman saying: “Buying stuff is intrinsically wrapped up in out identities” (249). In other words, it flows in out blood, it is essential for humans to consume, the more the better. There is no need to replace everything in a household to Eco-friendly products; this will bring you satisfaction about yourself being “helpful” to the Mother Nature, when in reality, it only causes harm. However, if we do decide to buy something new, it is always better to consider a “green” alternative. In this essay Hesse shows how damaging our lifestyle can be, and to make any changes to the environment we have to change ourselves first. There are a few suggestions on how to do it, hidden behind the sarcastic tone of Hesse’s essay: going green means consuming less – “the greenest products are the ones you don’t buy” (249); make smart choices about food that we eat, paying …show more content…
It will not make any difference if one will start biking to work, or will buy a hybrid car, go meatless or plant a garden, while his neighbor is doing the exact opposite. Just as Hesse, Pollan suggests a few solutions to climate change problem. Going “green” is one of them. He doesn’t talk about organic Eco-friendly USDA sealed products unlike Hesse. Going “green” does not mean “buying” in his interpretation. It is more like completely changing our life styles, something that Hesse also wants her readers to understand. Going “green” is having less: biking instead of driving, planting a garden instead of buying processed foods, paying attention to the ingredients and start thinking about consequences. Pollan focuses on the idea of specialization as a “disease of the modern character” (253), which prevents us from thinking outside of the box, so to speak, out of the range of our intellectual limits. Here, similar to Hesse, Pollan shows how powerless we are in terms of making our own decisions, living it to professionals (economists, marketing, or meteorologists). We are used to passive thinking. Professionals will do it, because this is not our