ABSTRACT
Self-defined “commercial author” Karen Traviss has written a provocative six-volume series of novels that address gender identity, speciesism, anthropogenic environmental change, ecocide, ecological restoration, and sustainability reconfigurations. Ecocritic Heather Sullivan has cogently argued that “Traviss thus shrewdly undermines the notions of balanced nature and bounded bodies by constantly erasing genetic and species boundaries; one cannot really speak of balance, after all, if the boundaries are always shifting through time and space.” Through such representations, these novels demonstrate repeatedly the law of unintended consequences whenever one species attempts to address the environmental overreach or biotic colonization of another species or inhabit a new ecological niche by establishing a “balance” based on preconceptions and prejudices. Blame for unsustainable imbalances is squarely placed on a variety of actors, who are not rendered anthropomorphically but do demonstrate behaviors that clearly parallel human environmental interactions here on Earth. At the same time, another series of actors attempt to engage in a variety of environmental mitigation and restoration activities that have both positive and negative results, often with the best of intentions producing the worst consequences not foreseen by the altruistic.
Through an ecofeminist dialogical approach to the series, I will demonstrate how Traviss presents internally persuasive arguments for the actions of the hero and other apparently well-meaning and positive characters and then upends any utopian impulse by readers to expect a clear-cut resolution of the ecological crises being addressed. I will also argue in support of Sullivan’s primary thesis quoted above about the series, while challenging her claim that the series treats technology simplistically. Finally, I wil l demonstrate how the series through challenging static notions of nature and balance also encourages an anti-teleological environmental ethic.
