As The World Burns: 50 Simple Things 

You Can Do To Stay In Denial 

 
From Derrick Jensen and Stephanie McMillan, comes the bold
satire which mainly  focuses on environmental policies in the year of
2007. The graphic novel, following different plot lines that interact
with each other from time to time, tells the stories of two little
girls thoroughly discussing the causes and the suggested -but
meaningless and in vain when compared with the root of the
problems- solutions to save our -not so slowly- dying world; the
adventure of the one eyed rabbit who saves other animals from the
vivisection labs; various animals discussing their life qualities and
decides to form an army of sort; aliens deciding that the world is
quite easy to conquer since the human race gives up on nearly
everything for their ‘waste’ and call it ‘gold’ and they already have
the right kind of facilities working for the destruction of earth; the
president of United States who seems to believe that he rules the
world and have a right to decide on behalf of other countries ‘below’;
‘greenies’ who try so hard to set up campaigns and collect signs from
people in order to make changes in the system that harms the
environment but their big achievements does not help the
environment at all and corporations holding power even higher than
the president and have great roles in destroying the world they live
in, in order to keep living in the luxurious life they established.  
 
The graphic novel, published in 2007, has a black and white
simple and iconic art style that makes the reader easily follow the
plot without getting distracted by a complex, realistic art beside the
crowded speech bubbles. Thus, the book can be rated as an ‘easy
read’, with easy to follow plot lines, easy on the eyes art and pretty
self-explanatory narrative. The subtlety is near to none in the way
characters speak and describe what has been going on in the world
according to their perspective. 
The events happen fast in the gutter and with action to action
transmission between the panels. This helps the authors deliver the
point they wanted to make effortlessly, since it is pretty clear even
in the first pages of the book that there is a message that needs to
be conveyed. The message is clear in a way that, after holding a
mirror to the reader by showing them the bright and hopeful
Pollyanna-esque girl who reads lists and watches movies on world
pollution and what do to against, they are faced with her friend, who
is darker in both appearance and thoughts on the same matters. She
declares these small efforts inconclusive when compared to the
-growing- size of the problem, and has responses to every little
solution her friend suggests. 

However, after making the reader think about how little these
so-called solutions can affect the actual problem, the authors are
not able to suggest an alternative way. Maybe these little acts only
help people to clear their conscience and make them think they are
capable of changing things, but what do the authors suggest? Surely
not bombing facilities and factories which causes the mass pollution.
They already crossed over foundations and their campaigns by
showing how useless they are too. They painted a picture for the
reader, showing them even a mass amount of people could gather
after getting educated on the topic, and voice their opinions by
writing letters and signing campaigns, nothing will change at all. 

Authors’ approach to environmental issues being faced

currently doesn’t seem to offer a valid practical solution other than
a slight suggestion to harm the relevant property or free the
animals. The possible downside of this kind of a near radical
approach may be an indorsement to the arguments individuals’ use
when they consistently refuse to take responsibility for their own
actions. As we all witness and know, excuses are people in the
comfort zone’s best friend and this feeling of vanity may help giving
up and waiting for a mass cultural mover a.k.a. a hero or a savior.
Even though one of the girls’ explanation for not eating meat while
she was not a believer of small things that can create change, is
good enough; it is not emphasized enough to generate a mass
organized behavior. She says she didn’t claim that there’s no point in
living responsibly but she did not let herself be deluded by believing
these individual acts could stop the system from destroying the
planet by their own. Here, the problem she has realized and tried to
point out lies in the huge difference between the velocity of human
behavior change and the velocity of sources getting dried by the
system humans’ created. The system destroys everything we need to
exist in such a momentum that the idea of us having no time for
waiting for everyone to change their day to day habits or diets
makes sense. But again, the downside of the argument is the
possibility of a belief striking in humans’ minds that it is not us
common people minding their own business who should question their
motives and outcomes while making a decision but only the people
who are able to effect a big amount of lives should check
themselves.

Authors are also pointing out the deficiencies of the mental

health care system, which serves and supports a productivity-based
lifestyle, we all have interiorized to some degree. The aim seems to
be to evoke the anger towards the injustice made against other life
forms and ultimately to us humankind. The health care provider’s
attitude is exaggerated and taken to an extreme to clearly
demonstrate the insufficiency and absurdity when it comes to
defining what is normal and “functional”. She implies that in order to
feel “happy” we need to sacrifice our “soul” and attend to our fellow
citizens in contributing to the system by getting rid of our ups and
downs which could potentially lead to a protest behavior. The
dialogue exposes very important questions we should all ask
ourselves: To what end we crave “happiness”? Are we putting enough
value and give ear to the other emotions -which are equally
evolutionally functional- rising inside of us?

      Overall, the authors’ work presents the reader a new angle to

tackle the environmental issues, the gravity of the subject
accompanied with childish, crude scrabbles and seemingly juvenile
storytelling befitting for children’s books, the contrast perhaps
signifying absurdity of the situation. The lack of seriousness in the
tone also helps to prevent the work from being too didactic or
condescending. The narrative accompanied with sarcasm, mockery
and irony helps the authors on their goal of highlighting the
absurdities and contradictions in both official narratives and
mindset of populace. The concept of being complicit, is one of the
keystones of the narrative. The author’s message is that being a
passive Mitläufer to current pop-culture environmentalist
movements are dangerous, especially falsely finding disproportionate
values in trivial activities even more so. The real problem is the
fundamentally dysfunctional, at least for a sustainable future,
system and human supposedly rational actors abusing it for short-
sighted self-interest. As the author shows how the system, the
deliberate self-destruction of humanity’s own world, is exploited by
the aliens and their cronies’ behavior is mocked by even the aliens
themselves the authors try to provide a sense of wider picture to
the reader. A refreshing take compared to other environmentalist
works, this graphic novel succeeds in being a critic of both anti-
environmentalism and also many current environmentalist movements
as well.

Cemile Eslem BAKKAL

2016108057
Sözüm Dila METİN
2012202108
Kurtbay Hakan ŞENAY
2018201138