Why Bother Michael Pollan Analysis

“It’s the end of the world as we know it.” In addition to being the lyrics to a very popular song, these words represent the beliefs that Michael Pollan expresses in his article, “Why Bother?” Michael Pollan is an award-winning American journalist who maintains quite a passion for the climate crisis that seems to plague our news. In addition to writing many books on environmental conservatism, he teaches journalism at the University of California - Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism. Sadly, in this article, it seems as if Pollan gives in to his own titular question and surrenders to the force of climate change.

Michael Pollan does an excellent job at conveying the seriousness of this issue to his audience. However, it is unclear whether he wants the audience to take action against climate change or if he merely wants to inform them about how no action they could take would yield success. In addition to this, it seems as if Pollan begins to diverge from the greater problem of climate change in order to cover more trivial topics. For example, in the final paragraph of this article, Pollan elects to write about the “sweeter reasons to plant that garden …” (Pollan 6). By doing so, Michael Pollan falls victims to the very criticism he gave about Al Gore earlier in this very same article. Instead of

introducing a worthwhile solution to put an end to climate change, he falls prey to giving suggestions that have an “immense disproportion between the magnitude of the problem … and the puniness of what he was asking us to do …” (1).
Pollan continually expresses his detestation for climate change by using parallels; for example, the environmentally-conscious person is contrasted to the “evil twin” with an enormous carbon-footprint.

It is obvious from the tone of this report that Michael Pollan really wants to stop climate change; he just doesn’t know how to make a lasting effect. Even so, he never ceases to pull at the readers’ heartstrings. The author does a great job at coercing the readers to jump on board; the only problem is there is no destination in mind. So, instead of inciting his readers to act out against this problem, Pollan leaves them dumbfounded and uncertain on how to

proceed.
Perhaps if this argument were to have as much factual content as it did emotional content, it would have come closer to a viable solution. The only sources that Pollan seems to utilize is a series of unnamed studies about the carbon found in food from New Zealand and a few claims about how long we have until global warming catches up to us. Despite these few exceptions, Pollan relies too heavily on common sense and, like I said, emotional arguments. It is impossible to come to a solution without knowing the circumstances around the problem. Pollan, however, appears to be unconcerned with informing the readers of the origins of climate change or even a simple definition of it. It is almost as if he has blindfolded us, given us a broken thermometer, and then said “fix it.”
Overall, Pollan’s comprehensive dream, putting an end to climate change, is admirable. However, it takes much more than passion to achieve a dream. Writing “Why Bother?” was a good step in the right direction, but inspiration is only the first step. If he hopes to gain any headway in this race against climate change, then Pollan must think of a solution that is comparable to the magnitude of this problem. To conclude, without any worthwhile solutions, we will remain exactly where we are now, stuck on the road to nowhere.