Oftentimes nature writing conjures up images of places that are out of reach to many of us; Thoreau’s On Walden Pond for instance, or marooned polar bears on melting icebergs. But the truth is, there’s nothing more accessible than the environment; it’s the air we breathe, and the ground beneath us–wherever we live, the natural world around us needs our attention and protection. The entries in this month’s environmental writing competition demonstrated this beautifully. We heard about deforestation for the sake of urbanization in the Philippines and one writer’s concerns about the effects of climate change on London’s typically mild weather. Today, Guest Judge Rasheena Fountain shares which of these eye-opening pieces stood out and earned the awards for Best Entry, Runner Up and Best Peer Review.
BEST ENTRY
“Seagull” by Girasol
Do gulls miss the ocean? How do they feel about the degradation of the planet? “And if the gull should cry, to scream out our sins, would anyone listen?” These are some of the existential questions explored in Girasol’s “Seagull” nature poem. It’s a poem of contemplation, where the writer connects with the seagull as a fellow being. As industrialization becomes more and more prevalent, they are together in their yearning to be connected to the sea and to live beyond the man-made structures that act as barriers. However, now, they are both pushed so far away from their natural habitat—from the sea.
I picked this as the winning entry because it thrived with wonderful sensory details and pleasing sonically-stringed together lines of purpose. The stanzas bled with care for the natural world, and the gull’s personification shows respect for the wildlife in a changing environment. “Seagull” exemplifies great empathy, which is a quality so vital in making this planet a better one. “Seagull” displays the interconnectedness of ecosystems and how we are all in this together—human and even gull.
RUNNER UP
“Ariel’s Gallery” by Ben Chipman
From the beginning, the word choice allows us to vicariously live through the writer’s gaze. “Ariel’s Gallery” is a beautiful glimpse at “Nature’s jewels” and the tragedy of losing those jewels forever. The intimate descriptions mixed with introspection convey a great sense of loss. I have never seen a coral reef in person, but because Chipman is able to describe the scene with such intentional sensory detail, I was able to also feel loss. Sadness and disappointment seep out of the descriptions. Thus, I am able to envision the breadth of witnessing the aftermath of the coral reefs’ “genocide” and how the juxtaposition of what now stands would be jarring. It’s also a very poignant rebuking toward humans who have failed to protect those jewels entrusted to them. It was a pleasure to read, and I respect the writer’s way with words and storytelling.
BEST PEER REVIEW
Oscar Locke’s review of “Through Green Tinted Glass” by Sofia Miller
As a writer, the peer review process can be intimidating. Yet, it is an important part of honing one’s writing skills and gaining an outside perspective that can do wonders for expanding concepts on the page. Oscar Locke’s review approached the author of “Through Green Tinted Glass” with respect not only for the words in front him, but respect for the author as a writer. It was a good tactic to start with what he saw to be the writer’s strongest stanza, followed by constructive criticism, and then subjective tips on what might work well in the piece. What impressed me most was the choice for Oscar to go beyond this one piece of writing and encourage the writer’s innate skill and talent. Also, the vocabulary used throughout the review is intentional, direct, and specific to various elements of creative writing. I thought it displayed a great amount of empathy and honest effort to help this writer improve the piece. He offers the writer permission to not take into account all of the suggestions—acknowledging some subjectivity.