Rhetorical And Sociological Analysis Of No Impact Man By Colin Beavan

Rhetorical and Sociological Analysis of No Impact Man In No Impact Man, Colin Beavan, the primary claimsmaker, conducts an “experiment” in which he spends a year creating “no'' environmental impact with his materialistic wife and his toddler. This experiment comes with very rigid and uncomfortable rules, such as no driving or subways, no trash, no electricity and no food from more than 250 miles away. His hypothesis in this experiment is that, by making such drastic changes and finding alternatives, he will understand what he can really do without, and then make the changes that are suitable and sustainable to his lifestyle. In this paper, I will rhetorically analyze Beavan’s argument for his method of sustainability and analyze how it connects

The most noticeable one is the elements of both Humanist and Protectionist views in Beavan’s ideas. Towards the end, Beavan has two main reasons for wanting to continue living a “no-impact” life. The first is a deep respect for nature — in accordance with the idea of sublime — that carries a spiritual undertone. Beavan at the beginning mentions how, living in New York City, there is often a disconnect between nature and the city, as if man and nature are completely separate, which was also seen in a lot of ideas of nature as “sublime” and “spiritual” (Cronon 1996: 22). However, by the end of the film he is able to combat it. He describes sustainability not as being deprived, “but rather as having a good life without waiting so much.” He seems much more connected with nature as he begins gardening himself and spends more time outdoors and he is no longer inside watching TV. He becomes more mindful of “the cycles of nature” and how “a year has passed and you can tell the earth has changed.” He summarizes the notion that nature and humans are interconnected bst when he says, “In the city we’re so disconnected from the natural rhythms. It’s a great pleasure to be