Never forget us

Maggie Harry
4-27-09
Never Forget Us
“Because we don’t think about future generations, they will never forget us.” This statement by Henrik Tikkanen clearly affirms the impact of humans on the environment. The authors of “God’s Grandeur,” and “Front Lines,” both see this provocative subject through similar eyes, however, their opinions vary in response to natures ability to triumph despite human existence. In order to relay their contentions, both authors employ literary elements to convince their readers that they “speak the truth.”
The demolition of the planet through the existence of man is an evident issue in past centuries as well as the modern world. In both “God’s Grandeur” and “Front Lines,” the authors use diction to produce the element of imagery to emphasize the immanent destruction of the environment. Hopkins states in “God’s Grandeur” that the earth “wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell.” His decision to utilize diction such as “smudge” and “smell” produces a vivid illustration of the putrid landscape that now covers this planet. Statements such as these help emphasize the negative impact of humans on the environment and how this alleged impact is continuing out of control. In “Front Lines,” the author describes the “skinned-up bodies of still-live bushes.” Similar to Hopkins, “Front Lines” uses dynamic language to invoke a sense of responsibility for aiding in the devastation of nature. Assertions such as these make it clear that nature is not merely dying, it is being murdered by man, and they should therefore have a stronger sense of remorse. Both writers utilize their diction assets to help produce vivid imagery of the massacre of the environment.
Although both authors agree on the initial quandary, there is a vital difference between the two works. “God’s Grandeur” concludes with the idea that despite man’s infectious behaviors, nature--being God’s creation--is always going to endure. Hopkins believes that “nature is never spent.” He trusts that “God’s Ghost” is always going to be there to protect the landscape, therefore it will persevere regardless of man’s ignorant destruction. The overall mood instilled within “God’s Grandeur” is, in retrospect, positive. Although it begins with a negative connotation, it finishes with the progressive idea that nature is never exhausted.
On the contrary, the author of “Front Lines” believes that “we must draw our line,” meaning that nature is at the mercy of man and has no control over its own fate. Although he agrees that humans are the cause of the endangered landscape, he disagrees that the natural world will be able to survive on its own. He expresses strong belief that humans must stop their detrimental behavior on their own in order to preserve the environment. This idea creates a very different ambiance from that of “God’s Grandeur.” It continues to build off its initially negative mood to produce a clear, precise tone--pessimism. “Front Lines” fails to recognize any positive outcome to the current situation, creating a very negative spirit.
Regardless of whether the two artists agree on the overall current and future state of the environment, it is clear that they both use the literary elements of diction, imagery, and tone to argue their perspectives. Components such as these help authors to articulate convictions within their writing and ultimately produce effective arguments before the readers.