Environmentalism, like any other ideological cause, has often engaged in public awareness efforts and even propaganda to promote the agenda of its devotees. Although the goals of environmentalists differ enough to problematize generalizations of a single agendum, few would argue that discouraging pollution and the disruption of ecosystems are not major pet causes of the movement(s).
In the 1980s and especially the 1990s, Hollywood took special notice to environmentalism (and its market potential), and these causes became especially popular as the inspiration for myriad films and television programs. Science fiction films, comedies, action flicks, and any number of other genres embraced the fad, and the cinemas were flooded with environmentalist content of varying quality.
One of the favorite markets of the “socially-concerned” studio executives was the family film, specifically the animated children’s movie. Suddenly, the Rescuers were rushing in to stop poachers in Australia, and Pocahontas was educating the white settlers on the non-monetary value of the uncivilized New World. During this period, Disney went far beyond merely making hunters think twice before shooting Bambi’s mother.
Other studios followed suit, of course, and lesser fare appeared to mixed reviews. The backlash against the flooding of the kiddie flick market with eco-lecturing continues even today–no longer from the critics of the time, but rather from the very youth who were bombarded with the indoctrinating messages at the time.
As such, over-saturation of this content, no matter how noble the intentions of its producers were, has ironically created resistance to environmental causes within the now-twentysomething demographic who grew up with these movies and shows. Instead of taking up the cause themselves, many young people seem interested in silencing the stream of eco-friendly propaganda.
While part of this reaction undoubtedly comes from the mediocrity of much of these programs, another part likely stems from a typical generational rejection of the ideologies of the previous generation–a break away from the religion of the elders, if you will. By being so heavy-handed with the message, the makers of these films and shows have unintentionally established themselves as “The Man” whom the current batch of rebels without causes must defy.
Another potential cause of this backlash could be the unintended association of environmentalism with pre-adolescence and animation. As the current generation of young adults have grown up, so have their tastes, and they have discarded the simple, childish films with their simple, childish ideals. The thought of saving the Earth could be no different in many of their minds than the concept of Santa Claus.
The third source of disdain is clearly displayed in the online comedy videos of Doug Walker, also known as The Nostalgia Critic. His website, ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com, hosts a collection of parodic movie and television reviews of content familiar to those who grew up in the United States during the 1980s and 1990s. As such, these environmentalist animated films fall within his definition of “nostalgia.”
Walker criticizes the cartoons for the reasons listed above, but he also attacks them for their continued and almost unfairly simplistic vilification of human beings. His videos often mock the depiction of “Man” as an evil, heartless force seeking to wipe out poor talking animals and destroy every last inch of rainforest out of hubris. Since this depiction is often quite heavy-handed and somewhat dishonest, the Nostalgia Critic rejects the films’ concerns outright as self-loathing anti-human hate-mongering.
His view of the issue has become increasingly anti-environmentalist as the series has progressed (although, to be fair, he is admittedly engaging in comedic hyperbole and obviously would not seriously advocate some of his more extreme in-character anti-environmental suggestions). His first critique fell on the TV series Captain Planet and the Planeteers(http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/609-captain-planet), where his argument was essentially that the show runners lacked the skill to handle their social topics competently.
His Ferngully review from February of 2009 (http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/4191-ferngully) took the cynicism a step further, even sporting a logo for “Man” that included an accompanying image of a crying rabbit, and even though he gave the Sonic the Hedgehog TV series props for not overbearing the audience with its message, his subsequent videos have furthered the “Man” joke into a fake newsreel of environmental abuse with a voiceover announcer listing the cruelties of homo sapiens on the natural world.
One of his most recent videos, a review of the animated film Once Upon a Forest (http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/31156-once-upon-a-forest) reaches an even greater extreme, and Walker at one point says that the movie “makes me want to burn down five unprotected rainforests and smoke three endangered species just to even it out.” The rest of the video conveys the same sentiments in various forms.
Even though the Nostalgia Critic is just a character, Doug Walker is not, and ultimately, the viewpoint presented by his videos must reflect his perspective to some degree (and his audio commentaries have confirmed as much). His presentation of his issue with environmentalism is exaggerated ad absurdum, but the issue still remains, and a genuine resentment obviously exists. The comments on his videos and the contributions of other filmmakers on his site indicate that he is far from alone in this environmental backlash movement.
Is there a way to win back the Doug Walkers of this generation? Maybe the best way to proceed is to remind the populace that environmental concerns are more than just a fad and to emphasize that human beings must see themselves as part of the planet’s ecosystem and not at odds with it. Vilifying “Man” and glorifying “Nature” only seems to fuel the resentment, so perhaps the best approach would be to drop the cute animated, anthropomorphic animals altogether and remind the public of what environmental recklessness does to human beings, not just defenseless Gaia and the woodland critters.
No matter what approach works best, the need for a retooling of the public image of eco-friendliness is essential to encouraging the current young adult generation to further the work of stewarding the Earth rather than tossing such responsibilities aside as child’s play.
