Allmark-Kent 162
received little serious
critical attention, these contradictions have been
overlooked for the most part. I argue that they require notice, however, as
evidence of the problematic task of writing zoocentric literature in a post-Nature
Fakers context.
As the title suggests, Bodsworth’s novel follows the ‘last’ Eskimo curlew.
Excerpts from a variety of historical
materials, each presented under the
heading “The Gauntlet,” separate chapters and provide a record of the Eskimo
curlew’s decline from one of the most prolific birds of the Americas to extinction
in less than two centuries. These extracts range from the “Philosophical
Tra
nsactions of The Royal Society of London” (Bodsworth 19) to “The
Proceedings of the Nebraska Ornithologists’ Union” (73). Their publication dates
span 1772 to 1955. Bodsworth’s combination of historical materials and fictional
biography describes the death of the curlew at the levels
of species and
individual simultaneously. Furthermore, his dual narratives demonstrate that, as
Dunayer
states, the “way we
speak
about animals in
inseparable
from the way
we
treat
them” (9, emphasis added). As the historical excerpts progress
chronologically, the reader witnesses the changing status of the curlew
correlating with its decreasing population: from prolific ‘new species’ to
abundant ‘game bird,’ followed by the gradual decline from ‘endangered’ to
‘extinct.’ The extinction of any species is
a tragedy, but it is the
individual
curlew
protagonist with his intelligent, passionate inner-life that lends the real
emotional
weight to the novel. Without the curlew’s heart-wrenching narrative of loneliness
and eventual loss,
Last of the Curlews
would be a dry collection of facts and
statistics. As such, Bodsworth’s message would no doubt fail to engage
readers’ sympathies for the curlew or concern for endangered species in
general.
Allmark-Kent 163
Each year Bodsworth’s protagonist, a five-year-old male Eskimo curlew
“flies the long and perilous migration from the wintering grounds of Argentine’s
Patagonia, to see a mate of its kind on the sodden tundra plains which slope to
the Arctic sea” (7). Each year he returns to the exact same patch by the
“familiar S-twist of the ice-hemmed river” (8) to claim his mating ground. This
behaviour demonstrates the curlew’s sophisticated ability to memorize and
recognize minute details of an apparently featureless territory. He “knew every
rock, gravel bar, puddle and bush” despite the fact that in the empty landscape,
“there wasn’t a thing that stood out sufficiently to be called a landmark” (12). It is
with seeming admiration, and perhaps respect, that Bodsworth describes how,
without an
y overt markers, “the curlew knew within a few feet where his
territory
ended” (12). The novel opens as the curlew completes his migration back to the
Arctic and experiences the “ecstasy of home-coming” (9). Bodsworth states that
the curlew “was drawn by an instinctive urge he felt but didn’t
understand to the
dry ridge of cobblestone with the thick mat of reindeer moss at its base where
the nest would be” (18). Whilst the drive to mate may be instinctual and the
choice of nesting ground could be based on instinctual needs
—shelter,
proximity to food, safety
—the
Dostları ilə paylaş: