Similarities Between Wordsworth And Yusef Komunyakaa

Yusef Komunyakaa and William Wordsworth both describe nature in the most pure of human methods: through direct observation. However, there is a very different perspective in which these two poets are describing their experiences. Wordsworth exudes a sense of nostalgia describing nature as pure and utterly beautiful. Komunyakaa, on the other hand, is reminded of the horrors in nature, particularly due to pollution and what its effects were. For such contrasting experiences of nature, there seems to be an injustice in play here, which seems to contribute to these very contrasting differences on the environment. Based on the definition of environmental justice, Wordsworth and Komunyakaa provide evidence to display the idea of environmental injustice

He states that it “The environmental justice movements illustrate not just a concern with recognition, participation, and capabilities in addition to equity issues, but that this movement also shows us the possibility of employing a variety of notions of justice simultaneously in a comprehensive political project” (Schlosberg 46). Environmental injustice, in this case, is the lack of the equality and participation that is presented in communities. More likely than not, there is not a sense of environmental justice throughout communities. There is a wide variety of reasons for this disparity. This disparity could be caused by race, time periods, or where the location of the community. Despite these reasons, the idea that there is a lack of environmental justice within communities does not flow well in terms of a communal service. It highlights the word injustice to a core, and displays a feeling of anger due to the unfairness presented. William Wordsworth and Yusef Komunyakaa present both sides of the spectrum of the quality of the environment, with the idea of environmental injustice being highlighted throughout their

This discrimination begins from the very beginning in the youth, where lower economic societies are condemned to “taste the chemicals in the air” (Komunyakaa 106). Compared to the typical pastoral environment that those who were well endowed were able to experience this toxic environment evokes emotions of helplessness and sorrow, as even youth, who are supposed to enjoy their time outside, are living in visible chemical waste. These chemicals are the ones “that turn workers into pulp” (Komunyakaa 106). These chemicals became so distinct in the air that societies felt like “a Phantom ship outside Gaul” due to the “scabrous residue hunkers down under sulfur and dioxide” (Komunyakaa 106). There is a firm statement from the Bogalusa Heart Study where “autopsy studies show lesions in the aorta, coronary vessels, ad kidney relate strongly to clinical cardiovascular risk factors, indicting atherosclerosis and hypertension begin early in life”; where “environmental factors are significant and influence dyslipidemia, hypertension, and obesity” (Komunyakaa 107). Komunyakaa brings about the point that “the disparity in economics is at the center of the radical and cultural divide that influences environmental politics” (Komunyakaa 107). This disparity introduces the larger issue of injustice between white