UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Trans-Species Hauntology and Relational Being in Amitav Ghosh’s Ghost-Eye: From Ecological Memory to Rights of Nature

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.66376/criterion.v17.n4.11

Auteurs

Sahabuddin Ahamed · Praveen Toppo

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.966757+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-10T16:58:51.471772+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Pandit Sundarlal Sharma Open University

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

IN

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

This article reads Amitav Ghosh's Ghost-Eye (2025) in the light of relationality, challenging and disrupting anthropocentric assumptions.Starting with the uncanny scene of a child remembering the taste of fish from a past life, the novel unfolds as a complex meditation on memory, reincarnation, environmental crisis, and multispecies entanglements, in which human identity is revealed as emergent through its relations with animals, environments, spirits, and histories.Through the intersection of postcolonial ecocriticism, hauntology, and Indian philosophical ideas such as ethical responsibility, reciprocity, and cosmic continuity, this article investigates how the novel challenges the binary distinctions of human and nonhuman, nature and culture, self and other, and past and present, by building a world where consciousness, matter, and memory are intermingled.Nature, here, is not passive but active: trees call forth snakes, rivers have memory, and ecological systems retaliate against human violence with ethical force, while spectrality and sensory memory show that the past haunts both bodies and landscapes.The novel's postcolonial dimension highlights how environmental harm is intertwined with the legacies of empire, inequality, and epistemic violence, thereby linking ecological crises to global injustice.Additionally, the novel integrates spiritual ontology with current legal and ethical discussions on nonhuman rights, advocating for an ecological-ethical approach that emphasises interdependence and responsibility.Ultimately, this article argues that Ghost-Eye does not merely represent interconnectedness of humans, nature, and ecological systems; it enacts it philosophically, inviting readers to understand reality as an interdependent network of life.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7204992890

DOI

10.66376/criterion.v17.n4.11

OPENAIRE

doi_________::3aaf6c360d579bce81ed0ad698e9b332

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

Article · article

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Fleuve / rivière · Espèce · Paysage

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAIRE · Document 1

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.66376/criterion.v17.n4.11
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7204992890

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1981826719 · CITES
• openalex:w2062060348 · CITES
• openalex:w2499890193 · CITES
• Can Rights of Nature Make Development More Sustainable? Why Some Ecuadorian lawsuits Succeed and Others Fail · CITES
• Creating legal rights for rivers: Lessons from Australia, New Zealand, and India · CITES
• openalex:w3173385049 · CITES
• openalex:w4233063746 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.