Paolo Bacigalupi? He’s not GreenPunk.

GlenH says:

“Given Paolo Bacigalupi’s views on the likelihood of a technological fix for future ills(see his blog and scroll down to find the link to an EcoGeek essay) and his pervasive pessimism I highly doubt that his forthcoming novel would fit into your GreenPunk movement.”

I’ve not identified it as such. A blogger did, right?

For the purposes of discussion, I believe that your definition of a “technological fix” and my definition of such may be different. Reclamation and re-purposing of existing technological detritus on a micro-scale (individual, homestead, village, city) rather than a macro-scale (nation, globe) is what I’m envisioning, whereas I think (and I may be putting words into your mouth) that what you’re imagining-and feeling rightly skeptical about-are things like alternative fuels and solar power that will allow us to continue what we currently conceive of as modern civilization. On this count, I believe that you and I are in agreement, because I don’t really think that this is ultimately going to happen. Life will continue, and it will be due to individual tinkerers and thinkers that some of us survive and discover a new way of life-Maybe even a better one. This is the optimism that I imagine.

Is Paolo Bacigalupi GreenPunk? I really don’t know. I’m not especially interested in labeling him. He’s a brilliant writer, for sure. People are more than encouraged to interpret and react to the GreenPunk concept in the way that makes sense to them: claim it, reject it, ignore it.  I encourage you, Paolo, and everyone else to do so. Consider GreenPunk a jumping-off point for both a dialogue about “movements” and also the environmental issues this one raises, rather than an end to itself.