We present an ecocritical analysis of Haide-Ene Rebassoo’s book of nature writing Botaanilisi kilde 17 Hiiumaa suvest [Botanical Fragments from 17 Summers in Hiiumaa]. The dynamic tripartite model of nature writing is applied on the source material for advancing ecocritical theory, as well as for demonstrating the relevance of ecocriticism in the study of previously under-conceptualized texts often considered popular science. On the basis of the analysis, it is concluded that our source text features scientific, belletristic, and pragmatic dimensions of nature writing, with the main emphasis on botanical scientific knowledge.
Branch, M. & Slovic, S. (eds). 2003. The ISLE Reader: Ecocriticism, 1993–2003. University of Georgia Press, Athens and London.
Buell, L. 1995. The Environmental Imagination. Thoreau, Nature Writing and the Formation of American Culture. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge and London.
Eilart, J. 1976. Inimene, ökosüsteem ja kultuur. Peatükke looduskaitsest Eestis. Perioodika, Tallinn.
Finch, R. & Elder, J. 2002. Nature Writing. The Tradition in English. W. W. Norton & Company, New York and London.
Garrard, G. 2009. Ecocriticism. Routledge, London and New York.
Glotfelty, C. & Fromm, H. (eds). 1996. The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology. University of Georgia Press, Athens and London.
Kukk, T. 1999. Eesti taimestik. Teaduste Akadeemia Kirjastus, Tallinn.
Kull, K. 1998. Semiotic ecology: different natures in the semiosphere. Sign Systems Studies, 26, 344–371.
Lotman, K. & Lepik, I. 2004. Coastal meadow as a habitat. In Coastal Meadow Management. Best Practice Guidelines, pp. 8–25. Ministry of the Environment of the Republic of Estonia, Tallinn.
Love, G. A. 2003. Practical Ecocriticism: Literature, Biology, and the Environment. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Lyon, T. 1996. A taxonomy of nature writing. In The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology (Glotfelty, C. & Fromm, H., eds), pp. 276–281. University of Georgia Press, Athens and London.
Maran, T. 2010. An ecosemiotic approach to nature writing. PAN: Philosophy, Activism, Nature, 7, 79–87.
Murphy, P. D. 2009. Ecocritical Explorations in Literary and Cultural Studies. Lexington Books/ Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham.
Nöth, W. 1996. Ökosemiotik. Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 18, 7–18.
Rebassoo, H.-E. 1967. Hiiumaa floora ja selle genees. Valgus, Tallinn.
Rebassoo, H.-E. 1975a. Botaanilisi kilde 17 Hiiumaa suvest. Valgus, Tallinn.
Rebassoo, H.-E. 1975b. Botaaniliste objektide looduskaitsest Eesti väikestel meresaartel. In Eesti loodusharulduste kaitseks (Kumari, E., ed.), pp. 104–113. Valgus, Tallinn.
Slovic, S. 1996. Nature writing and environmental psychology: the interiority of outdoor experience. In The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology (Glotfelty, C. & Fromm, H., eds), pp. 351–370. University of Georgia Press, Athens and London.
Tüür, K. 2004. Nature writing and intersemiosis. In Intertextuality and Intersemiosis (Grishakova, M. & Lehtimäki, M., eds), pp. 151–167. Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, Tartu.
Tüür, K. 2007. Looduskirjanduse määratlus. Acta Semiotica Estica IV, 73–96.
Tüür, K. & Maran, T. 2005. Eesti looduskirjanduse lugu. In Eesti Looduskultuur (Maran, T. & Tüür, K., eds), pp. 237–270. Eesti Kirjandusmuuseum, Tartu.
