Analysis Of Our Vanishing Night By Verlyn Klikenborg

Hazy Night Sky

Since the beginning of time, human beings were trying to find ways how to make their lives better. Technological improvements and inventions brought us a lot of benefits, but with benefits come consequences. Side effects are different types of pollution that we , as humans, are aware of. There are six kinds of pollution: land, water, noise, thermal, air, and light. The article "Our Vanishing Night," by Verlyn Klikenborg shows us the consequences of light pollution and completely neglects the positive aspects of artificial light. The author starts with a history lesson where he juxtaposes modern world to England in 1800. Back in the day, the most populated city in England, London, didn't suffer from light pollution since there

was no light on the streets. Nowadays, we are surrounded by the artificial light of streets and buildings. We can see the glow of light from space. Because of the glow, the sky seems empty as if there are no stars at all. Then, he moves on to the research provided by Travis Longcore and Catherine Rich. It provided the explanation of how wildlife is affected by artificial light. Changes in animal's behavior have been noticed all over the world. Klikenborg also makes a quick remark about how much easier it is to fix light pollution than any other kind of pollution. By making some changes and enforcement of regulations there are ways to minimize pollution and see the stars in the sky again. Darkness is still important to us and biological processes within us. Humans, just like any living creatures, are being affected by the lack of darkness and we lose our real place in the universe without seeing the night sky. Klikenborg's whole article leads us to his argument that consequences of usage of artificial daylight outweigh the benefits, and I got convinced by his evidence.
To begin with, the author divides his audience into two groups from the first paragraph: "..most of us don't think of ourselves as diurnal beings any more than we think of ourselves as primates or mammals or Earthlings." (240) One of them is anthropocentric which means that we think of ourselves as a center of the universe and existence.

Another group is biocentric that puts us on the same level with nature. It means that we are not above other living organisms that surround us. This presupposition does not leave that much room in-between. Artificial daylight gave us a lot of advantages. It increased our productivity, and we are so used to it, so we do not even think about the fact that we can't see the stars in the sky. On the other side, we can't be so egocentric. We got to care about the surrounding because it affects us. I am more on a biocentric side, so Klikenborg's argument is compelling to me.

Furthermore, the author uses pathos wisely and provides examples with animals to make his point appealing to his audience. "Nesting sea turtles, which show a natural predisposition for dark beaches, find fewer and fewer of them to nest on." (242) Beaches nowadays are covered with the glow of lamp posts, and it decreases the number of places for eggs of sea turtles and decreases the population of them. This shows us that we are affecting the life of creatures that surround us and it causes pity and sadness within the reader like

me.
In addition, Klikenborg uses logos to move his argument even further. He tells us that darkness is essential to us on a biological level. "The regular oscillation of waking and sleep in our lives—one of our circadian rhythms—is nothing less than a biological expression of the regular oscillation of light on Earth." (243) There are programmed, by nature, rhythms that artificial light ruins and in the long run, it will have a negative effect on humans. Also, Klikenborg provides a recent study. "At least one new study has suggested a direct correlation between higher rates of breast cancer in women and the nighttime brightness of their neighborhoods." (243) It shows that the harm of artificial daylight just becomes more prominent as time goes on. It shows that the harm of artificial daylight just becomes more prominent as time goes on, and we need to prevent more serious consequences. As a result, I was convinced by his evidence.
At last, the author finds a philosophical approach to his audience by making the statement that we do not feel insignificant without seeing the vastness of the night sky.

"... light pollution causes us to lose sight of our true place in the universe, to forget the scale of our being, which is best measured against the dimensions of a deep night with the Milky Way—the edge of our galaxy—arching overhead." (243) Since we do not see beyond the haziness of our polluted sky, we do not think of ourselves as a small particle or star dust. As I think about it, Klikenborg got the point. Back when I was in Ukraine, I lived in a small city that was not as polluted as Chicago. I was actually able to see starry nights that I miss from time to

time.
As I think about, I miss clear sky of the city I came from, but I would never trade the opportunities I have in my life right now for the ability to see the stars at night. Such simple invention of the past gave us an opportunity to work more and it allowed us to become who we are today. Big cities, like Chicago, look magnificent at night. The skyline of our city is something that can make anyone feel small and insignificant. As people drive into the city, they see that glow and they immediately feel welcomed and feel home. The artificial light is not pure evil, it is just the matter of us, as humans to minimize the negative effects such as light pollution.
In conclusion, Verlyn Klikenborg seceded in delivering his ideas to the readers of his article. Good usage of figurative and imagery language allowed the author to tell real life examples and make the audience sympathize with his point. Different methods of persuasion gave him an opportunity to capture a greater amount of audience. In regards to the issue in his article, light pollution is can be easily resolved in contrast to other kinds of pollution. "Of all the pollutions we face, light pollution is perhaps the most easily remedied. Simple changes in lighting design and installation yield immediate changes in the amount of light spilled into the atmosphere and, often, immediate energy savings." (242) Even though Klikenborg is making an argument how artificial daylight is harmful, we cannot get rid of it. It became a part of everyone's life. All we can do at this point is to minimize the consequences by finding solutions to new problems that come along with benefits.