Monbiot

George Monbiot, of a journalism background, does not attack the issue of climate change from a lyrical, poetic standpoint. He is, in fact, quite direct and attempts to cater to and counter the possible arguments of the variety of people and viewpoints for which the book is written. In the beginning of his introduction to Heat, he openly admits that he had not thought of what such a drastic (80%) carbon reduction would actually look like played out in real life. This is a hugely practical question that anyone pondering solutions to climate change would most likely stumble upon. Pointing to our freedoms, our comfort, and the luxuries, like taking a shower, which we often embrace as expected and normal, he recognizes that these things are possible at least in part because of the use of fossil fuels. Most readers, when confronted with such a radically high goal of reducing greenhouse gases by 80% (and later 90%), will respond emotionally, with blubbering “buts,” protesting for the continued way of life with which they have become so content. Monbiot takes care of these anticipated responses as he presents reason, planning to explain how this is ‘feasible’, in the sense that it’s “[compatible] with industrial civilization.” By calming the reader’s initial qualms, he helps his audience to begin to hear him out on his arguments. Again, he points to logos as he claims to present “methods that are cheapest, that have already been shown to work and that are most compatible with the lives we lead already.”

Compelling people to action is a difficult task, and Monbiot foresees the attitude that 'one person cannot fix the problem' and that 'those who spend their time advocating for the environment need to practice what they preach'. Yet he openly admits to his and others’ hypocrisy, relating himself to the reader and not trying to falsely set himself on a pedestal. This creats an element of ethos based on a sense of honesty as he gives hope that as individuals we can unite to “persuade the government to force us to change the way we live.” Monbiot, while an activist, is not a scientist. He never claims to be, although he seems to allude to the promise that he has done his homework on the subject and will search, with determination, for an answer to any question that arises. This is shown by example when he opposes the advertisement for the BedZed zero-carbon development and when he notes the difference between that which is merely aesthetically please and that which is factual. Hence, his appeal to ethos is primarily made through his honest intentions and his search for truth in a myriad of scientific knowledge and data.

Within the first chapter, he begins with the story of Faustus, drawing on the readers’ emotions as he draws parallels between Faustus selling his soul to the devil and our current use of fossil fuels. Throughout the selection, he uses imagery of extinction, danger, and immediacy, while mentioning specific beloved organisms like the coral reef and the polar bear, famous places like the Amazon, and staple foods like maize, rice and soybeans to evoke a pathos-centered response. These references are littered with facts, statistics, references, and quotations, not only appealing to logic (logos), but also attempting to support his authority on the topic. He uses this first chapter to draw on the necessity for change, and seems to have some success as I find myself appealing to his emotionally charged logic and sensing an urgency to prevent the devastating changes that through countless examples he claims will occur, unless we do something soon. Even the call to action presents itself in the form of a hurried, pressing feeling imposed on the heart. And as long as he’s telling the truth and his facts are sound, he reveals that drastic measures are indeed necessary.