The research findings are divided into three thematic chapters with each three subsections. Chapter One details the portrayal of reciprocity and nurturing bonds across both plays and begins with a detailed analysis of the representation of Indigenous worldviews. The thesis utilizes the depiction of a hunt and the rituals that follow it to underscore the ways in which animals are portrayed as equal participants in the storyline. Next, the thesis explores how boundaries disappear in interspecies kinship when they are marked by reciprocal care. Then, the analysis shows that animals are positioned as superior moral teachers who intuitively relay messages of wisdom and forgiveness. By analyzing the conversational exchange of the hunt, the erasure of species boundaries in nurturing bonds, and the portrayal of the natural world as guiding teachers, this chapter illustrates the interconnectedness between the human and nonhuman world. Chapter Two researches the impact of systemic exploitation on the narrative and physical environment. It begins with a detailed analysis of the metonym ‘Harvey’ which stands for intersecting systems of power that profit from patriarchal violence and environmental decay. Next, the thesis focuses on the portrayal of British imperial forces and their respective world view that prioritizes mastery. Then, the chapter turns to the depiction of a dystopian, capitalist future that revolves around consumerism and profiting off the extinction of the Arctic environment. Through emphasizing the destructive influence of systemic injustices, colonial hierarchies, and capitalist extraction, this chapter underlines the thematic parallels that show ecological erosion as directly linked to the exploitation of women and marginalized communities. Lastly, Chapter Three delves into the an alysis of the shared interspecies process of migration across space and time which both Murphy and Bilodeau center as a crucial tool of survival. The following section shows that the nonhuman world is characterized and staged as possessing sonic agency and expands upon the significance of the breath and the song. Lastly, the thesis emphasizes how the plays evoke contrasting emotional resolutions in their final scenes. Overall, the analytical body clearly responds to the leading research questions and illumi nates the significant interconnectedness of human and nonhuman life. To conclude, this thesis, and its in - depth analysis, demonstrates how the two ecodramas The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys distinguish themselves among other ecotheatrical works as their impactful portrayals of animals, women, Indigenous people, and the Arctic environment substantially critique anthropocentric hierarchies and distil the crucial value of reciprocity and care within interspecies kinship. Thus, this Master's thesis has addressed a gap in scholarly research by drawing on the theoretical frameworks of ecofeminism, animal studies, ecodramas, and Indigenous studies to illum inate the ways in which the human and natural world are interconnected, animals are positioned as agentic characters, and the fates of women are mirrored in society's treatment of the environment.

Abstract

Key Words

1. Introduction

academic literature on both plays, which this thesis aims to fill. By foregrounding animals as active agents, depicting women as closely connected with e nvironmental changes , and Indigenous perspectives as essential to the narrative , this thesis argues that these plays a re more than just ecological fiction . This then leads to the guiding research questions: How do The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys depi ct the intrinsic connection between the human and natural worlds? In what ways are animals represented as full characters with agency, emotions, and ecological significance? And how do the experiences of women within these narratives mirror the broader tra nsformations of their environments? By addressing these questions, I aim to explore how ecodramas not only portray environmental crises but also urge us to assess our understandings of interspecies connectedness and future possibilities for our planet . 2. State of the Art While the scholarly landscape surrounding twenty - first - century ecodrama continues to evolve, academic analyses of Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole and Chantal Bilodeau’s No More Harveys remain sparse. Therefore, the following state of the art consists primarily of performance reviews and thematic summaries. Earlier receptions of The Breathing Hole praise Murphy's work and especially the portrayal of the polar bear Angu’řuaq. In a 2017 review for National Post, Robert Cushman underlines that “the bear is, in all his charms and majesty and significance, a triumph for the author's ambition and imagination.” Cushman further emphasizes that “what War Horse did for horses, The Breathing Hole does for bears” which highlights the importance of the polar bear and the effect he has on the audience. Overall, he describes Murphy's play as "uneven but, in its last moments, overwhelming” and praises the indigenous actors as “excellent” especially the portrayal of Hummiktuq by Jani Lauzon. However, he also argues that the characters in the play's opening scenes are “hobbled b y fake - primitive dialogue that seems inappropriate and rather demeaning.” The reviewer goes on to compliment the portrayal of Sir John Franklin by Randy Hughson as a “lovely performance, both funny and dignified.” Overall, he characterizes Act 2 and its di alogue as “wittier, more sophisticated” that resembles a “non - violent culture - clash” and describes the writing style in Act 3 as “descend[ing] [into] Ugly American cliché, far worse than the simplicities of the opening scenes which were at least an honest effort.” Despite these criticisms, Cushman insists that the portrayal of Angu’řuaq remains the play's

most vital element: “We first met him in a culture whose inhabitants revered all creatures, even while eating them. Now he has to contend with human fear, human brutality and human pollution.” Additionally, he highlights that “the final tableau, the previo usly immortal bear in an oil - drenched sea, is unforgettable” and despite his apprehension and best efforts to not fall prey to “Anthropomorphic sentimentality, it strikes deeper than that.” His final statements conclude that overall the play achieves what it hopes to set out: “There are plenty of plays that tell of climate change. This may be the first to find a way of showing it.” To conclude, Cushman’s review presents The Breathing Hole as an ambitious and emotionally powerful play whose striking depiction of Angu’řuaq ultimately outweighs its linguistic shortcomings and thus reinforces the play’s central critique of climate change and human impact on the Arctic. In a similar manner, Lauren Gienaw wrote in her review of the play for Broadway World in 2017, that the play is “an incredible piece of theatre that is both groundbreaking and deeply moving.” She describes the realization of the play as a “daunting task [which] is handled incredibly well by the playwright and the director” and further comme nts on it that “[t]his play tells many stories, but the one through - line is that of a special one - eared polar bear.” She underlines the dialogue between the British explo rers and the Inuit hunters in Act 2 as “lighthearted fun, but also an opportunity to reflect on the dangerous potential of people being misinterpreted and intentions being lost in translation” and, in addition, illuminates that “the [Arctic] becomes . . . another character in the play.” Here, the reviewer identifies an important element as she describes how the erosion of the Arctic the human characters’ loss of respect for the natural world: “Oil is in the water, icecaps are melting, breathing holes (Angu' juaq's way of hunting for food) are disappearing, etc. Also disappearing is the level of respect and gratitude from humans for the world around them.” The death of the polar bear is “hard to watch” as Murphy portrays “the rich elite . . . aboard a cruise s hip . . . quite literally laughing at the suffering of Angu’řuaq.” Finally, she comments that the playwright's message is to say: “‘ this is where we are going and what we are becoming...but we aren't quite there yet, so let's change course. ’” Describing Mu rphy's intentions as “a powerful message,” she states that this play is not just “something very special,” but that “you will laugh and cry and you will continue thinking about this theatre experience long after you leave your seat.” Therefore, this review emphasizes The Breathing Hole as a deeply emotional theatrical experience that combines storytelling with

ecological and social critique and highlights Murphy’s warning about humanity’s growing detachment from the natural world. Other reviews of the play echo these sentiments and the majority of them discuss positively the stage design and the large, intricate puppets with which Murphy decided to bring the polar bears to life in the play. Christopher Hoiler states in his critical review of the play for Stage Door, in 2017, that Bruce Hunter and Jani Lauzon, in the roles of the bears, surpass the rest of the cast: “The expressiveness of the bears’ movements and gestures really outshines the generally overempathetic performances of t he other actors and is a joy to watch in itself” (Hoiler). The Stratford Festival’s House Program includes Kenn Harper's review titled “A Confluence of Creatures and Souls,” which also appears in the introduction to the play. Harper gives some historical c ontext to the play which the audience might not be aware of otherwise and specifically remarks on the humane qualities of the polar bears, stating that “[l]ike the playwright, natives anthropomorphized the polar bear in their legends” (2017: 7). In additio n, his words further mirror the critique of the play directed at “modern, acquisitive man” (7) whose capitalist exploitation of the planet and increasing greenhouse emissions are the reason Angu’řuaq ultimately dies after 500 years. The House Program also features Indigenous director Reneltta Arluk who highlights the play’s Inuit engagement in every step of the creative process and criticizes society's refusal to listen and incorporate indigenous knowledge in larger climate debates: ”[W]e aren't listening t o Inuit who have called this ice and land home since time immemorial” (2017: 8). Murphy links multiple reviews on her website, including one particular by Karen Fricker, from 2017, who summarizes the play's emotional activism and its significance as “jolt[ ing] audiences to awareness of mutual responsibility in the predicament of all the Earth's creatures.” Taken together, these reviews demonstrate that The Breathing Hole was widely recognized not only for its innovative staging and powerful performances, bu t also for its successful integration of Inuit perspectives. Its urgent environmental message positions the play as a meaningful artistic and political intervention in contemporary climate debates. In later years, Murphy's play was revised and staged again, but this time much closer intertwined with the presence of the Inuit language. Lynn Saxberg, in her review for Ottawa Citizen , comments on the play's evolution by comparing the 2022 production with the original 2017 staging: “the spirit of it has been transformed.” In an interview with the Inuit director Renellta Arluk, Arluk emphasizes the

significance of this play being performed in a small dialect variant of Nattilingmiutut: “This dialect is only spoken in three very small communities in Nunavut so the fact that it’s left the region to come into contemporary life in the South is unpreceden ted” (Arluk qtd. in Saxberg: 2022). Arluk further emphasizes that the publication of The Breathing Hole and its subsequent translation into the Inuit language, makes it the largest published work ever to be written in Nattilingmiutut: “A lot of important l anguage work has been accomplished through this play” (qtd. in Saxberg). Saxberg describes Murphy's work as “an ambitious play” and remarks on the significance of having “the greatest number of Indigenous actors ever featured at Stratford.” Arluk and Saxbe rg agree on “the ‘impactful’ depiction of the climate crisis” in The Breathing Hole , however Arluk had voiced concerns “about its cultural authenticity” in the 2017 performances, “because Inuit peoples had not been consulted.” Following Arluk's criticism, the play was revised through a creative partnership with the Qaggiavuut Society, an Iqaluit - based performing - arts group that corrected several scenes depicting Inuit culture. Murphy herself remarks on these changes that she “had made many mistakes in [her] draft, like having the characters eat . . . raw polar bear meat, something that in reality would have killed everyone by the end of Scene One” (Murphy qtd. in Saxberg: 2022). Saxberg further emphasizes the play's “dire message on the effects of climate ch ange” and highlights that Murphy's work includes many moments of humor “including physical comedy.” Due to the play's revision since the first opening performances, Arluk underlines that future productions will transport audiences into “the heart and spiri t of this Inuit community,” as she is certain that “the show is a milestone” (Arluk qtd. in Saxberg: 2022). Thus, the revised version of The Breathing Hole was received as a more culturally authentic and collaborative production that strengthened the play’ s environmental message through the meaningful inclusion of Inuit language and other artistic contributions. Seeing as this later revised adaptation forms the basis of this thesis, the following analytical chapters will focus specifically on how Murphy’s r eworked play thematizes climate discourse, Indigenous representation, and interspecies collaboration. Adding the Inuit language and consulting artistic Inuit directors is further complimented in a review from 2022 , by Adam Shein for the apt613.ca website . Shein states that “this translation adds authenticity and depth to these key characters” and highlights that the audience is therefore exposed to “their connection to nature, and their bond with the ice.” He emphasizes that the costumes of the polar bears are “more than mere puppets” as the audience

witnesses a transformation of them throughout the play: “As the play proceeds, the costume of Angu’ruaq tears and darkens to mirror the disintegrating Arctic” overall creating “the stunning visuals, sets, music, and lighting . . . [on] the stage.” The revi ewer further highlights how this production of the play struck him with wonder as he found himself “captivated by these scenes and the cast as the play seemed to breathe onstage.” Moreover, the author emphasizes that Murphy's play is indeed a strong “call to action for the impending climate crisis that is unfolding across our planet” and additionally states: “What elevates this performance from play to activism is the depiction of the Nattilingmiut’s eventual cultural eradication, foreshadowed by an image o f black water mentioned by Hummiktuq in the play’s opening lines.” Thus, this play is more than just fiction as it is laced with a political wake - up call which comes across through the Arctic archetype of the polar bear “we can observe how colonialism and greed create this black water that eventually overtakes the northern seas and will seep southward.” The reviewer praises how the “play’s depiction of a polar bear living in the Arctic and caring for his Nattilingmiut family by providing them with enough food during scarce times stands in stark contrast to our own urban environment” and emphasizes that the degradation of the Arctic set on stage “suggests our cultural and ecological demise is imminent.” Overall, his words are full of praise as he concludes that the play “creates a space for all theatregoers to stand in and breathe ." To conclude, this review presents the 2022 adaptation of The Breathing Hole as a visually and politically influential production and emphasizes that the integration of the Inuit language and their worldviews are crucial elements that not only deepen the play's cultural authenticity , but also its environmental critique. Unfortunately, even less scholarly attention has been paid to Bilodeau's work No More Harveys . Nevertheless, there exist multiple internet reviews that have remarked on the clear parallelism that is constructed between the protagonist and the blue whale . Sonali Shukla McDermid contributed a brief summary and review of the play for goodreads in 2023 and award ed the published script three out of five stars . In addition, they highlight how the playwright thematizes social and environmental impacts of climate change. McDermid describes the play as “in turns funny, insightful, and moving” as Bilodeau's work “presents a world dominated by colonialism, capitalism, and patriarchy” and argues that the “problems that plague our communities, be we women or whales, [all] share the same gnarled roots” (McDermid). Author Aaron Thomas , in 2024 , also commented and reviewed the published script on goodreads and awarded it three out of five stars as well .

Characterizing No More Harveys as “a one - woman show,” he highlights how the play aims to reduce “the scale and . . . the scope of the climate crisis to the emotional life of a single woman” (Thomas). However, he critiques that this succeeds only “somewhat . ” He adds to this by stating that the strength of No More Harvey lies in the fact that it is “part of the [ Arctic Cycle ] rather than a play on its own” (Thomas). Overall, he asserts that “one - person shows have their drawbacks” but also compliments that the “improvised sequences with an Amazon Echo robot. . . [are] quite fun” (Thomas). To conclude, these limited reviews suggest that No More Harveys has primarily been received, and partly dismissed, as an emotional exploration of the climate crisis. Both reviews state that what makes Bilodeau's work unique is the way in which she connects human and nonhuman suffering by problematizing themes of social injustices and environmental degradation . In addition, a short review of the play, titled “The Whale's Song - No More Harveys,” for digitalculture by an unknown author from 2023, further emphasizes how the protagonist is aided on her journey by the presence of the natural world. The author illustrates the significance of the whale as they state that: “she is accompanied by . . . the thought of the wh ale, whose long evolutionary path of fifty million years inspires the heroine to put herself together and continue on her way” (Whale's Song). The author not only highlights the presence of the animal in the play but further demonstrates the essential qual ities of the whale song: “The music . . . serves as her guide” (Whale's Song). Overall, the y illustrate that No More Harvey “presents a world plagued by a distorted political system, social injustice and the effects of climate crisis” (Whale's Song). Therefore, this review reinforces previous interpretation s of No More Harveys as a play in which the natural world functions not merely as background scenery or a theatrical staging choice , but as an active guide of resilience and survival for the protagonist. By emphasizing the significance of the whale and its song, this review shows how Bilodeau connects human and nonhuman life forms . Bilodeau's website features some additional reviews where an anonymous audience member describes No More Harveys as: "Without a doubt . . . the best play you will see for years.” Their tone is highly positive as they characterize the overall experience of the performance as “magnificent and stunning” and the acting as “stellar” (Audience Member). However, it is uncl ear which year this originates from and which performance this audience member watched. Theresa May, author of Earth Matters on Stage, defines the play as Bilodeau inviting the audience on a “lyrical journey of healing.” Additionally, she asserts that the playwright urges us

to “confront the inexorable, yet seldom discussed, connection between domestic violence and ecological devastation” (May) . Her review therefore highlight s the play's central theme of interconnectedness between women's suffering and environmental degradation . Overall, these quotations further reaffirm No More Harveys as an emotionally powerful play that links personal trauma with ecological crisis through poetic and intimate storytelling. By emphasizing the parallel between domestic violence and environmental destruction, these reviews demonstrate how Bilodeau frames climate change not as an isolated issue, but as part of a broader system of harm that affects both human and nonhuman lives. In order to expand the state of the art surrounding No More Harveys , it is necessary to take into consideration reviews that were published on other plays by Chantal Bilodeau. This makes it possible to identify thematic parallels across the playwright's oeuvre. In a review from 2018, for Climate Depot , Marc Morano emphasizes the thematic similarities to Sila (2015) as it discusses broader themes of environmental collapse: “[ Sila ] deals with themes such as melting ice . . . [and] climate activism” (Morano). He foreshadows that Bilodeau's third play of the series, No More Ha rveys , “will deal with the themes of human and animal migration in the face of environmental change,” however, at that point in the writing stage, Bilodeau was “unsure exactly how the series will pan out” (Bilodeau qtd. in Morano: 2018). Like No More Harveys, Sila explores Indigenous representations and climate activism in the form of a scientist who wants to reverse “the damage that industrial developments could cause in the Arctic Ocean” (Morano). The reviewer highlights how Bilodeau criticizes that theat er works about climate change are often dismissed as an “issue - based” or “political” (qtd. in Morano) subgenre of theater. Bilodeau further compares ecodrama to “women’s theater,” arguing that “it used to be very separate . . . but the more women wrote pla ys, and the more writers write plays about climate change, the less it's going to be a niche category and it will become part of the mainstream” (qtd. in Morano). This review therefore underlines Bilodeau’s ability to “direct audiences away from the data a nd toward human stories” while encouraging the audience to engage emotionally with climate change. To conclude, Morano’s discussion of Sila and Bilodeau’s broader Arctic Cycle demonstrates that the thematic concerns later explored in No More Harveys are deeply embedded throughout the playwright’s oeuvre. In a 2014 review for Wicked Local, David Brooks Andrews describes Bilodeau's abilities as a playwright as “very smart” and further asserts that one of the great pleasures of her writing style is the way it immerses the audience in different

cultures and characters each time: “Bilodeau beautifully braids the characters and stories together. There are crisp lines, poetic imagery, spoken word poetry, occasional lines in French and Inuktitut, sophisticated humor, white - knuckle suspense, tragedy, and tenderness” (Andrews). However, he critiques that the actors could have portrayed their roles with more assurance: “more humility and poetic sensitivity rather than delivering it quite so much as a political declaration” (Andrews). Overall, he argues t hat Bilodeau's plays take “us into new territory that's both very stimulating and satisfying” (Andrews). This review therefore underlines that Bilodeau’s plays are consistently praised for their ability to intertwine environmental concerns with human narra tives. Scholarly work on Bilodeau's oeuvre is rare, but the existing literature highlights the thematic parallels across the playwright's creative endeavors. Written by Nassim W. Balestrini, the article titled “Sounding the Arctic in Chantal Bilodeau’s Climate Change Plays” comments on the importance of so unds that permeate the works Sila (2015) and Forward (2017). Balestrini emphasizes the significance of breath by stating: “These varieties of sounds and languages indicate the co - presence of cultural difference and of the possibility of communication, empathy, and collaboration across boundaries of cultures and even of species, if only the various creatures are willing to listen to one another” (2020: 69). Here, Balestrini emphasizes an essential theme in No More Harveys as he illuminates the importance of respectful interspecies kinship. In addition, his an alysis suggests that “the play's use of sound indicates that what we hear is neither noise nor purely individual self - expression, but . . . communication with others for the sake of survival” (69). Balestrini’s analysis provides a useful theoretical framew ork in relation to No More Harveys , where sound functions similarly as a mode of communication across species boundaries. Therefore, his emphasis on listening underscores how Bilodeau’s oeuvre constructs interspecies relations to encourage audience engagem ent with climate crisis narratives. In conclusion, the limited reception and scholarly literature on Murphy’s The Breathing Hole and Bilodeau’s No More Harveys emphasize that both ecodramas thematize the climate crisis, interspecies relations, and Indigenous perspectives. While the available literature remains mostly made up of performance reviews instead of academic analysis, it nevertheless illuminates the the matic patterns of environmental degradation across both works. The following analysis seeks to address this gap in the research by ex amining both plays through ecocritical, ecofeminist, indigenous, and interspecies frameworks.

3. Theoretical - Methodological Frame To address the research questions, this thesis employs an interdisciplinary methodology that combines close textual analysis with insights drawn from ecofeminism, animal studies, environmental theatre, and Indigenous studies. Close reading of The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys allows for a detailed examination of dramaturgical techniques, character development, and stagecraft, and will pay especially close attention to the representation of nonhuman actors and the positioning of women. These theoretical approaches provide the n ecessary lens through which to analyze these artistic choices and position them amongst ecological debates. 3. 1 Ecofeminism The first theoretical lens through which this thesis interrogates the interconnected systems of domination that influence relationships between human and nonhuman life is ecofeminism. This interdisciplinary framework exposes and criticizes structural and linguistic connections between the oppression of women and the exploitation of the natural environment. A key author of this theory, Karen Warren , argues in Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature , that the foundation of it lies in the understanding that “there are important connections between how one treats women, people of color, and the underclass on one hand and how one treats the nonhuman natural environment on the other” (1997: xi). This statement sets up the central criticism of ecofeminism which is that systems of power and exploitation operate across borders of both social and ecological form . Th e central concept of interconnectedness is explicated by her argument that “trees, water, animals, toxics, and nature language are feminist issues because understanding them helps one understand the status and plight of women cross - culturally” (4) . Thus, ecofeminism lays the foundation for the analysis by stating that environmental degradation cannot be separated from gendered injustice s . Language is a central device in ecofeminism as it reflects and reinforces patriarchal hierarchies. Karen Warren and Nisvan Erkal illustrate that “the language we use mirrors and reflects our conception of ourselves and our world” (1997: 12). The frequent use of metaphors in everyday language use that animalize women exemplifies this process, as “women [are] often described in language likening to animals,” which, in a cultural context where animals are viewed as beings that exist

“simply to be dominated or exploited,” serves to reinforce “women’s inferior status in society” (12). Moreover, language furthers these hierarchies by linking women and nature with irrationality, positioning “women and animals” as “less rational or nonrational,” while “bad reasoning” itself is described through sexist and domination - based metaphors (13). This mode of speaking not only devalues women and the natu ral world but also normalizes their subordination. Ecofeminism therefore calls for a critical int errogation of the everyday language that we use and emphasizes that acts of naming are inherently political which further amplifies the importance of transforming these linguistic structures in order to dismantl e the hierarchies that continue to prevail. In addition to its linguistic focus, ecofeminism includes debates on environmental degradation as they are mostly experienced by women that are pushed to the margins of society . The unequal distribution of ecological harm r is revealed by Warren and Erkal observ ing that women often carry the primary responsibil ity of procuring resources : “Trees and forests are intrinsically linked to rural households in third world countries which are almost exclusively run by women,” while “women and children perform the majority of water - collection and are exposed to much higher health risks compared t o men” (1997: 12). Furthermore, “women oversee and grow the majority of Third World’s food crops,” yet the introduction of technological interventions frequently “perpetuat[es] gender inequalities and worsen[s] the invisibility of women” (12). These conditions demonstrate that environmental degradation not only threatens ecological systems but also intensifies existing social inequalities by placing disproportionate burdens on those who are already marginalized. By highlight ing the injustice of poverty and systemic and noting that “women and children are disproportionately affected” (Warren and Erkal 1997: 12) the authors go on to explicate how environmental dangers often affect marginalized communities the most. This is reflected, for example, by the fact that “the nation’s largest hazardous - waste landfill, receiving toxins from forty - five states, is in Emelle, Alabama, which is 79.9 percent African American” (11) . It becomes clear therefore that the maltreatment of our environment is closely linked to the maltreatment and systemic oppression of marginalized communities . Therefore, by emphasizing these damaging patterns, Warren and Erkal reaffirm the significance of an ecofeminist lens which analyses e nvironmental problems through an intersectional lens and thus combines both the social and political.

Ecofeminism also vehemently criticizes larger capitalist systems, as their extractive worldview is widely recognized to be one of the main drivers of both environmental exploitation and oppression of certain communities . The main point that ecofeminist critique is c apitalism’s emphasis on profitable growth . This mindset has fundamentally changed human relationships with the natural world for worse and has reduced delicate ly balanced ecosystems to mere resources that can be exploited for economic gain. Andy Smith emphasizes this dynamic by stating : “Capitalist society tends to destroy our sense of meaningful connectedness with nature, with all creatures and all people, and to replace these relationships with commodities” (1997: 31). This illustrates the ways in which capitalism has destroyed the vital bond between human and nonhuman life . Ecofeminism thus calls for a restructuring of economic models toward that prioritize sustainability and challeng es the capitalist belief that progress must be measured by profit . Smith goes on to quote the article “Deep Ecology and Ecofeminism,” by Michael Zimmerman, who argues that “only by recognizing that humanity is no more, but also no less, important than all other things on Earth can we learn to dwell on the planet within limits that would allow other species to flourish” (Zimmerman qtd. In Smith 2009: 25). This statement encapsulates the ecofeminist vision of a more balanced and equitable relationship between humans and the natural world. To conclude, through its integration of moral and political perspectives, ecofeminism not only critiques existing societal systems, but also articulates a vision of a more just and sustainable world, based on respect for all forms of life. This notion is essential for the analysis of the plays, as they illuminate the link between the oppression of women and endangerment of nature . 3. 2 Animal Studies Secondly, the theoretical framework of animal studies is indispensable to this thesis, as it provides the tools that are necessary to recognize animals as agents w hich complement s the aforementioned ecofeminist emphasis on the interconnected ness of oppression. Susan McHugh emphasizes that although animals have long been present in literature, philosophy, and art, they have “only rarely... been the focal point of systematic literary study” (2009: 487). This deliberate disregard emphasizes broader anthropocentric assumptions that are embedded within Western literary traditions. Cary Wolfe illuminates this by stating

that animals have historically functioned as “a theme, trope, metaphor, analogy, representation, or sociological datum” (2009: 567), rather than as subjects . This tendency has significantly limited the demand for research of their roles and significance in literary works. However, the framework of animal studies challenges this dynamic by insisting on “the specificity of nonhuman animals [and] their nongeneric nature” (567). Wolfe emphasizes the need t o inspect literary animals as sentient beings with their own distinct perceptions of l ife, which reflects a broader “democratic impulse toward greater inclusiveness of every gender, or race, or sexual orientation, or — now — species” (568). Thus, animal studies are more than just aca demic theory as it positions itself as part of a larger real - life debate to expand categories of being. The distinction between human and animal life is a necessary binary to highlight for this thesis and which historically has been utilized to justify v arious forms of exploitation of the nonhuman world. Laurie Shannon’s analysis underlines this divide and notes that “before the cogito, there was no such thing as ‘the animal.’ There were creatures. There were brutes, and there were beasts. There were fish and fowl. There were living things” (2009: 474). Th is observation highlights th at the category of “the animal” is not a natural given but a social construct that emerged next to Cartesian philosophy, which emphasized a fundamental distinction between rational human subjects and nonrational animal bodies. As Shannon further explains, this distinction is reinforced through language, as “idioms invoke ‘a dualistic logic of human vers us/ and animal’” (474), wherein “humanity is characterized by a positive attribute, however slippery, and animality by a corresponding deficit or privation” (474). Literary wordings such as these define animals in terms of what they lack and additionally r eaffirm the superiority of human identity through contrast. Thus , the human - animal divide is represented as a mechanism of exclusion that has significantly influenced literary representations of the nonhuman world . The human - animal divide is particularly strong in the convention of utilizing animals as mere literary tropes . As Susan McHugh notes in “Literary Animal Agents,” animals in literature have often served “as a metaphor for the poetic imagination and voicing the limits of human experience” (2009: 487). This dynamic simultaneously elevates their symbolic significance but erases their agency and presence. The observation that “animals emerged as significant figures in English literature only in terms of metaphor” (488), suggests that their value has

historically been tied to their ability to represent something other than themselves. W ithin this argument , “the underlying value of animals in literature is [to] teach the human a lesson” (488) which position s them as instruments of reflection rather than as agents with their own knowledge . However, this employment of animals raises significant theoretical questions in relation to the concept of agency. McHugh provocatively urges us to ask ourselves: “Why is a metaphor unconsolable with agency?” (488 ) and points out that the reduction of animals to literary tropes limits their capacity to influence the narrative and furthermore reinforces anthropocentric assumptions that subordinat e their existence to humans. In response to these limitations, this field of theory aims to redefine animals as agents rather than mere literary figures. Traditionally , the concept of agency is portrayed as a property of rational human subjects, and has been closely linked to attributes such as language, intentionality, and self - awareness. However, this definition excludes nonhuman beings by design. As McHugh argues, it is necessary to “conceptualize agency as more than simply a property of the human subject form” (2009: 488 ) and to open up the possibility of recognizing diverse forms of action vs. interaction that do not conform to human models. This dynamic is further supported by the assertion that in the framework of animal studies, “animals are being reconceptualized as active participants in all sorts of cultural production, and that participation has material and methodological consequences for literary scholarship” (489). In this sense, animal agency is not understood as being identical to human agency but instead as a distinct form of being that challenges existing theoretical frameworks . Moreover, the recognition of animal agency complicates the relationship between humans and animals. McHugh emphasizes that “animal agency can never simply oppose human identity . . . [because] animal agents are never separate from human presences” (2009: 491) which highlight s the link between human and nonhuman lives. This interconnectedness is further explored through the concept of representation by Vanessa Robinson in “Poetry’s Language of Animals” who notes that : “we designate them through human language only, and in the process of naming we claim dominion over the other creatures who lack the power of nomenclature” (2015: 32) . Language is therefore portrayed as both a tool for understanding and a mechanism of control, as it significantly shapes the way that we view animals . Furthermore, she observes that “there is an animal experience that lies beyond the spoken or printed word” (34), which suggests that certain

elements in the existence of animal s remain utterly inaccessible to human understanding . Lastly, in addition to these debates , animal studies also discusses the status of the nonhuman and its role within human societies. Una Chaudhuri emphasizes that the field spans across a wide cultural territory encompassing disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, history, psychology, art history, cinema, literary studies, and performance studies. The l arge history of animal representations ranges from Aesop’s fables, across Beowulf, to Disney’s Mickey Mouse (2007: 8) whose broadness emphasizes the urgency to rethink animal representations. Furthermore, this urgency is reinforced by the observation that “98 percent of all animals with whom humans interact in any way... are farmed animals — that is, bred for human use” (10). This statistic highlights the extent to which human – animal relations are structured by systems of exp loitation “as their disappearance from modern life and extinction from the planet accelerates beyond denial” (9). In this context, the recognition of animal agency is not only a theoretical concern but a call to reevaluate the morals that govern human inte ractions with nonhuman beings. Thus, animal studies represent a crucial approach to understanding the place of animals within human society . It seeks to move beyond reductive representations and toward a more nuanced recognition of nonhuman agency which is a central concept in order to address the research question concerning how animals are portrayed as full characters with agency. In The Breathing Hole , for example, the polar bear is not merely a symbolic figure but a central character whose experiences and wisdom shape the narrative. Similarly, in No More Harveys , animal presence is intertwined with environmental and human concerns, challenging audiences to reconsider the boundaries between species. 3.3 Ecodrama/ Ecotheater The framework of ecodrama is central to this thesis because it situates The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys within a large theatrical movement that seeks to foreground ecological cris e s and challenge anthropocentric hierarchies . As the urgency of climate change intensifies, ecodrama is able to transform cultural anxieties into emotional and intellectual experiences. Downing Cless characterizes ecotheatre as works which expand from the personal to the collective and thus

address both regional issues and the roots of climate change (1996: 79) . This dual focus is evident in the plays that are analyzed in this thesis. Both works not only depict endangered ecosystems but also depict the human behaviors and power structures that contribute to their destruction which align s with my thesis’s central argument of the interconnectedness of human and natural worlds. At the same time, ecodrama remains a relatively underexplored field within theatre studies as Theresa J. May observes . She states that “theater’s absence from ecocritical discourse” (2005: 84) has historically limited scholarly engagement with ecological themes on stage. In addition, Una Chaudhuri argues that dominant modes of theatrical realism have “thrust the nonhuman world into the shadows” by prioritizing human narratives and social relations (1994: 24), which has pushed ecological concerns nearly into the invisible. Chaudhuri defines this anthropocentric bias as theatre’s complicity with “industrialization’s animus against nature” (24). In this context, ecotheatre can be understood as an attempt to recover what Chaudhuri describes as the “unattended garbage that accumulate[d] on the margins of the realist stage” (24) which critically reaffirms the obvious exclusion of ecological concerns from dominant theatrical representation. By adopting “a view from the garbage - dump” (24), she defines ecodrama as a genre that challenges the notion that theatre is primarily a medium for representing hegemonic human stories. Moreover, ecodrama is characterized by its emphasis on engag ing audiences not only intellectually but also emotionally and sensorially. R. Murray Schafer suggests that “in order to experience nature sometimes you just have to stand still” (2014: 37), highlighting that ecological awareness requires receptivity instead of control . He further argues that “you don’t go in and tramp all over it and wreck it,” but rather “deal with nature by letting it speak for itself and letting all of the things that you come across in any perf ormance happen” (37). This perspective aligns with ecodrama’s commitment to decentering the human and prioritizing the portrayal of nonhuman elements within a performance. By encouraging audiences to “let it teach us something” (37), he highlights that ecotheatre is grounded in listening and understanding. Therefore , ecodramas critique anthropocentric hierarchies and argue that environmental awareness ought to be grounded in attentiveness and respect for the nonhuman world. At the same time, ecodrama often seeks to address specific environmental issues , as Downing Cless notes, and operate on multiple scales as they combin e specific

environmental problems with criticism of the system s that contribute to these crises. Th erefore, th ese works are frequently grounded in community contexts, as “true to grassroots theatre, these works have a firm basis in community, either a particular place or groupings of people to whom the performance is oriented” (1996: 79). This emphasis on community mirrors ecodrama’s motivation to position environmental issues within very specific social and cultural contexts and thus resists generalizations . In addition , next to its focus on environmental issues, ecodrama also discusses questions of historical changes in relation to the continuously developing relationship between humans and the natural world around them . Chantal Bilodeau’s Arctic Cycle is described as a long - term project that “will take . . . at least two decades to write” (2020: 222) and thus creat es “a record of our evolving relationship with climate change” (222). This temporal element is significant, as it gives ecodrama s the ability to capture ongoing ecological processes, as well as the ways in which human understanding of these processes changes over time. Moreover, Bilodeau emphasizes that the project “stands as witness” (222), noting that “the Arctic is warming twice as fast as t he rest of the world” (222) and that “we’re running the risk of losing incredible riches, both natural and human, before we can fully appreciate them” (222). Thus , ecodrama functions as a witness to current environmental changes and their future developmen ts and consequences for our human world. Furthermore, ecodrama also wants to highlight the ways in which environmental changes are both caused by and impact human actions in the present moment on a regional scale. This perspective aligns with climate discourse by Francesca Pongiglione and Jan Cherlet, who note that “ [the] climate research and policy - making process downplay the social and behavioral dimensions of climate change” (2015: 383) which in turn limit s the public 's understanding of our planet's transformations . Through its portrayal of human behavior , these ecodramas aim to make environmental issues more tangible and relatable for the audience. T o conclude , ecodramas such as The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys exhibit a unique standing as they seek to offer new ways of understanding between the human and the natural world. Overall, ecodramas enlarge the possibilities of theatre through their criticism of anthropocentric hierarchies and prioritizing the depictions of the nonhuman.

3. 4 Indigenous Studies Finally, in both The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys , the framework of Indigenous studies plays a crucial role as they foreground historical and contemporary Indigenous representations, especially of the North American Inuit . Andy Smith argues that ecofeminism intersects with anti - colonial frameworks and highlights that environmental justice cannot be fully realized without the histories and rights of Indigenous peoples (1997: 21). In The Breathing Hole , for example, Inuit representations highlight the violent impact of colonial exploitation on Arctic ecosystems and the communities that depend upon this specific habitat . An essential element of this framework is the insistence on the visibility and agency of Indigenous peoples in societies and debates that historically marginalized them. Marybeth Martello observes that: “Arctic indigenous peoples are becoming recognized as holders of specialized knowledge, which is crucial for identifying and understanding local manifestations of global environmental change and attendant nature - society interactions” (2008: 353) . Her argument c ritiques a history in which Indigenous communities were either excluded from scientific discourse or reduced to passive subjects of study. Indigenous knowledge systems are increasingly acknowledged as vital to understanding environmental processes reflected in their “histori es of adaptation, ingenuity, resourcefulness, community, spirituality, and strength” (358). Nevertheless, this growing recognition is accompanied by p roblems , as Indigenous peoples are often simultaneously constructed as “exotic, expert, and endangered” (3 53). Furthermore, in many instances, Indigenous communities are viewed as symbolic figures and become “representations and representatives of climate change” (353). Martello further illustrates that “the environment generally appears, like these indigenous peoples, as a victim, rather than an agent” (355). Her criticism underlines the tendency to view both nature and Indigenous communities in passive terms . Andy Smith further critiques that “mainstream society portrays Indians as people who had a romantic past, but people who have no place in modern society” (1997: 31) . This portrayal marginalizes Indigenous voices and erases their agency in participating in current contemporary issues. Indigenous studies therefore highlight the relevance of Indigenous knowledge in modern times and emphasizing their role in coming up with responses to global challenges such as climate change. Kyle Powys Whyte, in the article “Indigenous Women, Climate Change Impacts, and Collective Action,” emphasizes how the concept of collective responsibility is crucial

to combat the effects of climate change. Whyte argues that many Indigenous societies conceptualize climate change not merely as an environmental issue, but as a threat to their “collective continuance” (2014: 602), which he defines as a community’s ability to remain “adaptive in ways sufficient f or the livelihoods of its members to flourish into the future” (602). Consequently, climate change threatens Indigenous communities by disrupting relationships that ensure collective survival. Central to this worldview is the understanding that “to be in a relationship is to have responsibilities toward the others in the relationship” (602). Responsibility is therefore understood not as an individual choice but as a reciprocal and communal obligation grounded in interdependence. Whyte stresses the importanc e of maintaining “reciprocal . . . attitudes and patterns of behavior . . . within a community context” (603), emphasizing collective forms of care and reciprocity. More importantly, these responsibilities extend beyond human boundaries and encompass the n atural world as well. Whyte explains that “Humans, in turn, have responsibilities to care for and respect water; they must especially do things that encourage water’s life - giving force” (605), illustrating a worldview in which humans exist within networks of reciprocal dependence that crosses species boundaries. Furthermore, Rosemary Ruether’s ecofeminist critique in the article “Ecofeminism: First and Third World Women” also intersects with key concerns of Indigenous studies by challenging anthropocentric systems that position humans as separate from the natural world. She argues that contemporary society possesses unprecedented destructive capacity, warning that: “Human species power, actualized by a dominant class, has grown so great that it may destroy the planetary basis of life for all other humans, as well a s the non - human biosphere” (1997: 42). From an Indigenous studies perspective, this ecological crisis emerges from colonial structures that prioritize domination and individual ownership. Ruether therefore advocates the development of a “healing culture” ( 42) grounded in interconnectedness and collective responsibility. The scholar argues that such a worldview requires “letting go of overweening individualism, which releases an outflowing compassion for all sentient beings, [and] the harmonization of the di alectical forces at work in society and the cosmos” (42 – 43). This emphasis on reciprocity closely aligns with Whyte’s argument concerning respectful responsibilities toward both human and nonhuman life. Furthermore, Ruether observes that many " cultures of indigenous peoples . . . long scorned as ‘pagans,’ . . . created their own bioregional culture that sustained the local human group as part of a community of animals and plants, earth and sky, past ancestors and future

descendants” (43) and therefore resisted colonial or capitalist worldviews. Thus, rather than reducing Indigenous communities to mere symbols of sustainability, Ruether's perspective highlights their traditions of reciprocal relationships with the natural world. Finally, since both plays incorporate Indigenous knowledge systems rooted in North America, it is appropriate to provide brief contextual insight into Inuit culture and their sovereignty. The Breathing Hole incorporates a strong Inuit presence through the inclusion of the Inuit dialect, Nattilingmiutut, spiritual deities, and traditional tools of survival. To understand their significance, it is necessary to pay attention to Mary Simon's article “Canadian Inuit: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going.” She emphasizes that the location of the play, Nunavut, is not an empty or peripheral space but the “homeland of Canada’s Inuit” (2011: 87 9), who have existed there “since long before historical records” (880). Simon also underlines the histories of colonial violence and governance, describes Inuit relations with the British Crown as “grossly one - sided” (880) and highlights the devastating i mpacts of diseases and forced relocations. More importantly, Simon also underlines that Inuit today have become “the largest non - crown landowners in Canada by considerable distance” (882 ) . She challenges narratives that portray contemporary Inuit communities as politically inactive or systemically silenced (884) , and instead characterizes them as active participants in responding to environmental change, noting that the Inuit have been “ringing the alarm bell over climate change for decades” (890). Overall, while acknowledging these challenges, Simon’s analysis ma intains a cautiously hopeful tone by showcasing that “the old days of [the] Inuit being passive observers . . . are dead and buried ” (890). Thus, Simon's essay is significant to this thesis as it shows how Inuit people are equal participants nowadays when it comes to shaping the future of the Arctic. To conclude, it is vital to consult the theory of Indigenous studies as it provide s the necessary analytical tools to understand The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys a nd their Indigenous representations . Thus, this framework deepens the analysis by discussing how meaningful ecological awareness must be grounded in respect for Indigenous knowledge and the ir histories. 4. Analysis This segment of the thesis is divided into three thematic chapters with each three subsections which discuss in length the findings of the comparative analysis

of The Breathing Hole and No More Harvey s . Chapter 1 discuss es the significance of reciprocity and nurturing interspecies kinship through the depiction of an Inuit hunting scene, the reciprocal care between human and animal characters, and the importance of the nonhuman world as a moral teacher. Chapter 2 expands the findings by highlighting the intersection of various forms of systemic oppression. It does so by analysing the metonym 'Harvey,' the portrayal of colonial expansion , and lastly, the futuristic depiction of dystopian capitalism. Finally, Chapter 3 elaborates on the interspecies process of migration, the staging and sound design of both plays, and concludes in an analysis of the final moments of both plays. In addition, each chapter features a very brief conclusion at its end in order to summarize and compare the findings of each subsection. Through this structure the analytical body of the thesis aims to respond to the leading research questions and illuminate the significant interconnectedness of human and nonhuman life. 4.1 Reciprocity and Nurturing Bonds 4.1.1 The Hunt To begin, one of the most vital themes across both plays is reciprocity in interspecies relationships. Reciprocity is especially emphasized in representations of the hunt and allows the playwright to destabilize the boundaries between human and nonhuman wo rlds. Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole utilizes the portrayal of a hunt to emphasize the essential Indigenous belief of reciprocity. Therefore, this section will show how the hunt is portrayed not as a violent spectacle, but a sacred, conversational exc hange that focuses on mutual respect and the interconnectedness of all living beings. In The Breathing Hole , the opening quotation, titled "Souls," immediately establishes this framework through a quote by Knud Rasmussen, noting that "the greatest peril of life lies in the fact that human food consists of souls” (Murphy 32). This quotation foreshadows that the Arctic is not merely an empty wilderness but a rich world demanding respect and reciprocity in the play. It highlights that the lives and souls of animals and humans are spiritually intertwined and dependent on each other and, addition ally, that survival requires accountability. This is in line with Kyle Whyte's argument that responsibility in indigenous communities is valued highly and is situated as a communal obligation (2014: 603). The playwright emphasizes

this dynamic in Scene One (1535), where the Inuit tribe's interaction with a polar bear serves as a primary example of interspecies reciprocity. Following a successful hunt that saves the Inuit tribe from starvation, the shaman Avinngaq declares: We are grateful to the polar bear for allowing itself to be caught. Its life means that we are no longer hungry. We are thankful to you that you are the means of our life. Your strength on land and in the sky is felt by us, so if your spirit returns and yo u are a polar bear again, let it be that we may hunt you, as we are good humans. We thank you and we respect you. (Murphy 36) The phrase "allowing itself to be caught" is central to this analysis as it suggests that the bear is not a passive resource but a participating agent. By acknowledging the bear’s agency, the play destabilizes the human/animal divide that traditionally cha racterizes nonhuman beings merely as bodies or consumables (Smith 1997: 31). In addition, the repetition of expressing thanks and the use of the personal pronoun ‘we’ emphasizes the way in which the Inuit view human - animal relationships as reciprocal and i nterdependent, instead of merely hierarchical and exploitative. Following Avinngaq's speech, the community commences with the ritual of sharing the bear’s heart which further emphasizes the spiritual connectedness of the community with the natural world. A s the tribe members eat a piece of "Nanuq’s heart” (36) while "following the direction of the sun" (36), they symbolically incorporate the animal’s life into their own. This act serves not just as a means of survival but as a communal moment of respect to ensure that the bear's spirit returns and continues the human - animal relationship and reciprocity across following generations. The depth of this reciprocal relationship is further highlighted by the hunters, Nukilik and Higguk, retelling the story of the hunt as a dialogue. They recount whispering to the bear: "Nanuq . . . Let me live. I have many relatives and am the only food pr ovider" (Murphy 40). This conversation with the bear illustrates that hunting is not an act of violent conquest, but a negotiation based on mutual respect. By naming the polar bear “the Great Yellow One” (41), the hunters reflect the Indigenous worldview t hat positions animals as sentient beings with souls and identities (Whyte 605). The adjective ‘great’ emphasizes not only the bear's physical power, but its spiritual importance to the survival of the tribe, while ‘yellow’ establishes parallelism between t he bear and the sun. Where we normally assume that the sun makes all life possible, in the Arctic it is the polar bear who is the center of this world. The repetition of respect when conversing with the polar bear:

“We respect your powers,” “Will you respect my soul?” “We'll respect your soul,” “Do not disrespect me” (41) further highlights that the hunt is not merely a sport but a necessary means of survival that is executed with much respect for the natural world. By framing the hunt as a dialogue in which the bear responds and demands ethical treatment, Murphy presents the polar bear as a conscious, spiritually significant being who determines the fate of survival of the Inuit tribe. This conversational tone anthro pomorphizes the bear and underlines the way in which animals are portrayed as full characters with agency and vital significance to the play (McHugh 2009). The bear's sacrifice is seen as a gift instead of a conquest, which aligns with the dominant ecofemi nist critiques of capitalist models that reduce the natural world to commodities to be exploited and links with Cary Wolfe's critique of how historically animals have functioned primarily as “a theme, trope, metaphor, analogy, representation, or sociologic al datum” (2009: 567) in literary conventions. In addition, this analysis engages with McHugh's (2009) work by emphasizing that animals in Murphy's play are portrayed as beings with agency and are not just a literary trope. It is also important to consider the portrayal of the natural world outside of the tribe during this ritual: “Look... the sea is calm... the sky is bright” (42). While the Inuit community is happy and celebrates the hunt, the Arctic mirrors their emotions. The environment around them appears peaceful and content as well, as emphasized by the personification of the ‘calm’ sea. This description is vital as it further underlines the connection between the human and natural world and establishes that when humans respect all beings and show gratit ude for the polar bear's soul, the natural world will remain in harmony with them. Additionally, the children of the tribe express their happiness by imitating animals: "The meat gives me strength. I can fly like an ařgiq [long - tailed duck ]” ( 42). This sim ile illustrates that positive emotions and strength are expressed through the imitation of the natural world and thus the children's playful behavior underlines the significance of reciprocity in interspecies relationships. To conclude, this section has shown that the representation of the hunt in The Breathing Hole is a vital moment that illustrates the theme of reciprocity in interspecies relationships. By portraying animals as beings with agency who ‘allow’ or ‘give’ themselves, depending on human behavior, this play responds to the research questions regarding th e connection between the human and natural worlds, and the ways in which animals are portrayed as full characters. The portrayal of the Arctic as calm and peaceful in this section has also been able to respond to the research question in what way the natural world mirrors the

transformations and emotional processes of the human world. Murphy's play demonstrates that ecological survival is defined by upholding a shared, spiritual relationship of reciprocity which closely relates to scholarly literature by Whyte (2014). Lastly, t his section has provided a foundational lens through which to view the second chapter on systems of exploitation as it highlights the systems of the sacred interdependence that the "Harveys" of the world seek to destroy. 4.1.2 Nurturing Bonds While Section 4. 1.1 showed how reciprocity is an essential theme in the play via the representation of the hunt, Section 4. 1.2 delves into the nurturing spheres of interspecies relations. In both The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys , the divide between humans and animals is bridged through bonds that prioritize care over control. This section analyzes how Hummiktuq’s adoption of a polar bear cub, and the "Woman’s" inner and external transformation into a whale, criticize patriarchal and anthropocentric hierarchies. The s ignificance of human to animal relations is often dismissed in rational, Western worldviews as ‘sentimental’ or ‘overly emotional,’ however, both plays emphasize that these cross - species bonds are essential vehicles for recognizing animal agency. To commence, it is essential to state that in Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole , the adoption of the polar bear cub, Angu'řuaq, is situated not as an accident, but instead as a profoundly spiritual and emotional choice stemming from Hummiktuq’s unresolved grief. The very first character that we are introduced to in the play, Hummiktu q, is one of the elders of the Inuit tribe and the play focuses primarily on her and Angu'řuaq's perspectives throughout the storyline. She lost her family in a tragic hunting accident on the ice covered, and since then, the tribe members have disregarded and often dismissed her as a confused and depressed old woman. This separation becomes especially evident after the hunting ritual where Hummiktuq is characterized by an exist ential emptiness and a loss of purpose within her tribe: “( wails ) AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH . . . my spirit breath is weak, my voice barely a whisper” (Murphy 43). The onomatopoeia of her wail highlights that her suffering cannot be fully put into words and in stead is expressed as a raw, primal scream that goes beyond the reach of language. Her repetitions such as: “There is no one left to hunt and fish for me and I have no one left to care for. I have no more purpose in my life” (43) emphasize the hopelessness that has engulfed her and with which Hummiktuq regards her life. She feels she has no purpose and subsequently

has lost the will to live: “my spirit - breath is weak . . . my spirit - breath is dying” (43). This metaphor of the spirit breath not only illuminates indigenous beliefs but also signals that her existence in this world is weakening more and more. As a final plea, she looks for solace and guidance within the spiritual world and addresses Nuliajuk, the Inuit goddess who rules over the beings that live in the sea: “Mother of Sea Mammals, you took my husband and my two children. I do not blame you, but I have bee n left with nothing . . . and so, in desperation, I beseech you — you who have power over all the mammals of the sea, the power to release them to us, or to withhold them — help me” (43). Her plea emphasizes how desperate she is for meaning and purpose in her life and the personification of the goddess nods to the hierarchy of life in the Arctic. Humans are dependent on the natural and spiritual world around them and do not dare to disrespect it. Her explicit statement that she does not blame the goddess bu t rather asks for her help emphasizes the reciprocal human - nature relationship. The enumeration of rhetorical questions: "I have nothing. Where is my purpose? Why do I see the things I see? Nuliajuk, do I even have a place among these people? Or do I have no place?” (43) underlines that Hummiktuq is experiencing a complete crisis of social belonging and identity. Additionally, the fragmented sentence structure, ellipses, and rhetorical questions emphasize emotional exhaustion and reinforce her solitude. Thu s, this passage highlights that Hummiktuq's grief is not just personal but also existential as she has not only lost her family but also her sense of place within her community. Therefore, the arrival of the small polar bear cub on an ice floe is interpret ed by Hummiktuq as an answer to her plea to the goddess Nuliajuk: “[s]itting on a small ice floe, and bobbing closer and closer to shore is a polar bear cub” (43). The arrival of the cub creates a strong parallelism between the human and natural world as t he isolated, young polar bear mirrors Hummiktuq's feelings of loneliness and exclusion from her tribe. The use of the adjectives ‘small’ and ‘bobbing’ emphasize the fragility of both characters and the parallelism creates an emotional bond between the two characters which in turn collapses rigid species boundaries between human and animal. This is further expressed when Hummiktuq addresses the polar bear cub by saying: "Who is this? (calls to cub) Who is this?” (43). The use and repetition of the question w ord ‘who’ is significant here as it frames the polar bear cub as a presence with identity. The phrasing reflects the Inuit worldview that permeates the play, in which humans and animals exist within a spiritual and reciprocal system. Additionally, by askin g ‘who’ instead of ‘what,’ Hummiktuq recognizes the cub as being capable of connection and thus instinctively rejects the Cartesian view of the animal as an object (Shannon 2009). This wording is also an instance of

Murphy utilizing linguistic practices to resist dominant hierarchies as she addresses the animal the same that she would address a friend or family member (Warren and Erkal 1997). She further addresses the polar bear cub with: “I am here, little one . . . come, dear, come to me” (43). The use of affectionate names here convey her immediate, emotional attachment and creation of a bond between human and animal. Additionally, these terms of affection act as a meaningful moment of anthropomorphism of the cub as they establish an intimate relationship to him. Even when she gets told by other tribe members: “No - it's a polar bear, not a child” (44), she does not back down and instead tries to humanize the cub to the others: “He came to me on a small ice floe. Atu gaq, you can teach him to dance and Qiluniq can teach him to hunt” (44). This personification signifies that she has a strong desire to integrate the cub into Inuit society and imagines a relationship based on care. She further emphasizes this emotional bo nd by stating: “I appreciate with my whole heart that this cub came to me” (44) and “Nothing has taken my mind, but this little one has taken my heart” (44). The repetition of ‘heart’ and exaggeration of 'taking my heart’ highlight the depth of the emotion al connection between Hummiktuq and the polar bear. The character's intuitive understanding of compassion and the respect she shows to the being in front of her reverberates academic literature by Rosemary Ruether (1997) and Kyle Whyte (2014). However, whi le Hummiktuq and the bear appear to establish an almost instantaneous nurturing bond, the other tribe members are skeptical and even fearful of the bear and her behavior. Nukilik, the leader of the Inuit tribe, protests the most against her and even says: “None of us can be taught to act against our nature — let him go” (45). His generalization and hyperbole of ‘none of us’ suggests the idea that all beings, including humans are shaped by intrinsic natural characteristics. He insists that, despite Hummiktuq ’s emotional attachment, the polar bear cub remains fundamentally wild and cannot permanently live amongst the tribe. His statement: “His life is not our responsibility” (46) underlines this statement strongly as Nukilik's words of caution emphasize that i nterconnectedness does not mean sameness amongst species. As the argument between Hummiktuq and the rest of the community comes to a climax, she insists that she “received this bear as a gift” (47). A metaphor that expresses her clinging to the cub as a re placement for her lost family and as a source of renewed maternal purpose. When the shaman Avinngaq steps in and convinces the tribe to let her look after the bear for a little while, the repetition of this temporal limit acts as a moment of foreshadowing: “[O]nly for a little while” (48). This instance emphasizes the inevitability of an ending and foreshadows the separation between Hummiktuq and the polar bear cub

in Scene 2. As Scene 1 slowly comes to a close, Hummiktuq and the polar bear share an instinctive moment of human greeting and the cub is given a name. These instances of anthropomorphism of the bear are crucial as it foreshadows his role in the rest of pl ay and highlights the significance of inter - species relationships that permeate throughout. Hummiktuq names the polar bear by using irony: “You are so tiny, so I'll name you Angu'řuaq, which means ‘the big man’ ... but do not grow too big, too fast” (49). T his contrast of adjectives not only adds a humorous tone but also foreshadows the bear's significance in following Acts. The stage directions: " She touches his foreleg ” and “ She hugs him ” (49) create physical intimacy and break down the boundary between human and animal. When Angu'řuaq raises his foreleg to mirror this human gesture, his behavior establishes a nurturing bond. Hummiktuq’s final declaration: “I will be your anaana , your mother . . . your human mother” (49) is deeply significant as her possess ive and nurturing language allows her to reestablish purpose in her life and reclaim her identity as a caregiver. This moment of interspecies motherhood solidifies the ecofeminist dimension of the play as Murphy utilizes it to challenge traditional, Wester n logic. Similarly, in Chantal Bilodeau’s No More Harveys , the protagonist who is simply titled "Woman" utilizes the figure of a whale to navigate her own trauma and loss of agency. The Woman is the main narrator and focaliser of the story and thus collapses the plot into one consciousness divided into her inner and external world. The stage directions clarify that there is no fourth wall, which adds to the effect of realism, as the play establishes a clear parallelism between the Woman's journey across the North Am erican continent away from her abusive husband Harvey, and the migration of whales in the past to ensure their species’ survival. By likening the Woman’s personal journey to that of the 50 - million - year evolution of whales, Bilodeau positions the whale as a model of resilience and intuitive wisdom that the Woman desires to adopt into her own life to overcome her suffering. This connection is not merely metaphorical but a lived reality for the protagonist. While listening to whale songs the Woman drifts into an ‘inner world’ where the boundaries of herself begin to fade and she transforms throughout the play. In No More Harveys , the first time the audience encounters the Woman's inner world, a whale song plays in the background, and we are immersed in a beautiful underwater scenery: “Light filters through the surface above in long shimmering strands” (Bilodeau 11). Her detailed description and use of adjectives convey the image of her physically being present in the ocean alongsi de the whale who dances

“like a water ballet” (11). This simile emphasizes the beauty and elegance of the whale that the Woman relates to. The use of the personal pronoun ‘her’ blurs the boundaries between the Woman and the whale: “Bits of her soul shining in her unblinking eye” (11). Here, Bilodeau makes it impossible to distinguish if the Woman is talking about herself or the whale which illustrates not only the feeling of deep connection between the human and the natural world, but also reaffirms the stance that the Woman’s emo tional, inner world is reflected back to her in nature. The alliteration: “sounds . . . surface . . . shimmering strands” (10) mimics the s - sound of waves and conveys that the protagonist is completely immersed in the ocean setting which is further underli ned by the repetition of the phrase “up and down” (11) which emphasizes the motion of water. It becomes clear that her inner world and the presence of the whale within it is a source of calm and peace on her anxious journey to flee from her abusive husband . The Woman seeks solace in the whale song and the longevity of the presence of the animal: “Her song reverberating . . . Millennium after millennium she stays the course” (12). The use of personal pronouns ‘her’ and ‘she’ again underlines the interconnect edness of the Woman and the figure of the whale and more broadly speaking highlights the play's theme of the intrinsic bond between nature and women as both persevere across time despite larger, external forces endangering and exploiting them. At a later p oint in the play, as the Woman suffers from a panic attack, she again retreats into her inner world and a whale song manages to calm her down, emphasizing the nurturing presence and effect of the whale over the protagonist. When the Woman expresses a wish to ‘speak Whale,’ the animal is thus positioned as a being of higher intelligence and as possessing skills that the Woman wished she was capable of as well: “I wish I spoke Whale ... I’d ask them, ‘How did you know?’” (18). The use of personal pronouns ‘I vs . you’ address the whale as if it was in front of the Woman conveying a familial tone similar to that which one might use when conversing with a friend or relative emphasizing the intrinsic connection between the whale and the Woman. In addition, her desir e to feel more connected to the animal aligns with Karen Warren's argument that animals and the natural world are inherent feminist issues (1997). As she laments the consequences of patriarchal society, she makes use of multiple rhetorical questions: “Why didn’t we know? Why didn’t we migrate before it was too late?” (18). This retrospective action of looking back on her actions and those of other women illuminates not only her wish for a different outcome but also her desire to possess an intuitive type of wisdom that only whales exhibit. Bilodeau thus establishes a parallelism and simultaneous contrast to whales and situates them as more knowledgeable and adaptable to change: “But whales are

smart” (18). As the play continues, we witness the Woman transform into a whale more and more in multiple instances which situates the interspecies bond between the two beings as highly significant. Similar to Hummiktuq in The Breathing Hole , she describes herself as suffering from existential loneliness and longing for a sense of purpose: “The horizon vanishes . . . A lone wolf howls” (20). The metaphor of ‘the lone wolf’ signifies her solitude and highlights her desire for connection while the hyperbolic descriptions make clear that the connection between her inner world and the natural world around her is complete. The playwright further highlights the parallelism between the Woman's journey and the whale's migration by stating: “I think about the whale/ from fifty million years ago/ and wonder if she too is heading north” (20). The use of the present tense signals that the Woman relies on the whale in the present moment as a nurturing presence to give her strength on her journey across the sea. In additio n, the Woman's solitude is reflected back to her in the presence of the whale: “to spend hours in the dark/ to be alone” (21). The repetition of the infinitive form and the subsequent anaphora signals that the whale and the woman are intrinsically linked i n the present moment and that they both derive strength from this mutual and nurturing interspecies relationship. This bond eventually culminates in a literal physical transformation as the Woman morphs into a whale in her inner world: “[M]y body lengthens / What - each vertebra clicks - ow - as my spine draws up and/ back - ow,ow” (21). The ellipses and onomatopoeias expressing her pain signal that an external force has taken a hold of her as she witnesses her body's physical change. The rhetorical question : “What’s happening?” (21) emphasize that this transformation is out of her control. When the transformation is complete, she states: “I am a whale/ a great big whale from fifty million years ago” (21). The calmness with which she welcomes this transformat ion is emphasized by the repetitions of her own heartbeat: “thump, thump” (21) as she sinks deeper into the ocean. The stage directions: “( in slow motion, as if speaking underwater )” (21) signal that her speech and heartbeat have slowed down significantly which not only emphasizes the complete transformation into a whale but also underlines the nurturing and calming presence of the animal on the protagonist. Before, she was ridden w ith anxiety, fleeing from her abuser across the continent, whereas now she l iterally slows down in her actions, speech, and emotions: “Everything is calm/ steady/ . . . the way everything should be” (21). The Woman appears here as being at peace with her life and journey as the presence of the whale and her own transformation into one has allowed her to cross species boundaries and feel stronger and calmer. This portrayal links to Vanessa Robinson's theory that “there is an animal experience that lies beyond the spoken

or printed word” (2015: 34) as it accentuates the significance of the Woman's transformation as a gateway to access previously silenced knowledge. Lastly, the nurturing presence of the whale reappears towards the end of the play when the Woman is overcome by grief. Consumed by feelings of loss at the death of her friend and the pain of all beings who suffer under the consequences of capitalist and pa triarchal exploitation, the stage directions signal: “ She listens. Her inner world and the present merge ” (30). This merging of two worlds emphasizes that in the final stages of the play the intrinsic connection with the natural world is pushed into the li melight. While looking towards the horizon, the use of the personal pronoun ‘her’ when she sees the whale signals familiarity: “Oh my god, it's her!” (31) and the protagonist greets the whale as her friend who she has known for a very long time: “She's her e” (31) emphasizing the closeness of the two characters and illuminating the caring nature of their bond. This closeness is emphasized repeatedly by the stage directions: “She waves to the whale” (31) and by the casual register: “She has come to say, ‘I’m here, bitches!’” (31). The whale is anthropomorphized and staged as a being to which the Woman feels closely connected which marks the climax of the play's theme. The anthropomorphism of the ocean itself: “I am there with her/ right there in the breathing ocean” (31) illustrates how the natural world has become a being into which the Woman is entirely immersed. The enumeration of active verbs in the present progressive tense: “following, jumping, falling” (31) signal that the woman has morphed into a whale again and is now next to the whale that has accompanied her on this journey throughout the play. The description: “Blowing plumes of rainbow water in the sun” (31) creates a vivid, beautiful scene and invokes an image of light, magical beauty and iridescen t colors. The slower pace in this line emphasizes the dreamlike wonder of the Woman at the transformations that are taking place around her and inside of her. The hyperbole: “together we ride to the edges of the world/ we ride to the edges of time and bac k” (31) emphasizes that their journey spans across time and space, illuminating the longevity and strength of the intrinsic connection of human and natural world. Additionally, their journey feels intimate and trusting, signaling that their bond has existe d for a long time: “delighting in each other’s presence/ body pressed against body/ skin against skin” (31). Bilodeau uses a juxtaposition to underline the beauty and importance of interspecies connection: “speckles in the vastness of the universe/ but gia nts in this moment of connection” (31). By contrasting speckles and giants she shows that meaning in life is not won through exploitation or power but from species - crossing connections and nurturing

relationships that enrich each other’s lives. This uplifting portrayal is further emphasized when the Woman states: “I hear them/ the other whales . . . my community” (31). Here, the enumeration highlights the power of community and inter - species connectio ns to combat loneliness and feelings of alienation which is further illuminated through the personification of the whale songs around her: “our songs reaching out for each other/ illuminating the inner workings of our bodies” (31). The whales use their son gs to transmit their emotions and inner world as the articulation of these is vital to feel closer to other members of the community. This analysis connected closely to Ruether's advocacy for the development of a healing culture that is marked by an “overf lowing compassion for all sentient beings” (1997: 42). Additionally, the fact that the other whales are intrinsically perceived as part of her community by the Woman further underscores her intimate relationship with nature. Her repetition: “How we are fee ling/ how we are faring” (32) creates a gentle, caring atmosphere and highlights the sense of comfort, protection, and physical closeness that she experiences among the animals. The safety and comfort of this nurturing interspecies bond is further elaborat ed by the Woman describing how the community of whales “Wrap[s] [her] in the intimate sensation of being heard/ of being known” (32). The use of the verb 'wrap’ evokes the image of being wrapped in a warm blanket of understanding thus highlighting feelings of protection, safety, and physical closeness. This passage presents interspecies connection as deeply intimate and sacred as it explores how community allows people to recognize, understand, and comfort one another. Overall, the final lines of the play signal collective inter - species consciousness, connection, and communication and thus underline one of the main themes across both plays. In conclusion, both plays utilize these maternal, intimate bonds to critique capitalist and patriarchal systems that value domination and exploitation relationships. In The Breathing Hole , the adoption of Angu'řuaq by Hummiktuq demonstrates that their bond is one of mutual desire for connection rather than human ownership. Likewise, in No More Harveys , the figure of the whale in the protagonist's inner world and the calming effect of the whale songs offer a nurturing presence for the Woman. Moreover, Sectio n 4. 1.2 has demonstrated that interspecies bonding in these ecodramas is essential for addressing the research questions. By forming interspecies connections that center care rather than control, practiced by Hummiktuq and the Woman, these plays suggest that e cological awareness is the foundation upon which to grow meaningful cross - species unions. The existence and significance of these bonds prove that animals are indeed full characters with

emotions and agency, and that the lives of women are intrinsically linked to the natural world. 4.1.3 Natural World as Moral Teacher Building upon the previous discussion about the significance of reciprocity and nurturing bonds, Section 4. 1.3 examines the ways in which animal characters are utilized as a form of moral teachers. Within the methodological framework of animal studies, the traditional literary role of the animal has often been reduced to a metaphor intended to teach the human a lesson while erasing the animal’s own subjectivity and identity (McHugh 2009). However, The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys radically disrupt thi s dynamic. Instead of serving as passive symbols for human reflection, the nonhuman characters in these plays are portrayed as active moral agents whose characteristics such as forgiveness provide the ethical guidance that some of the human characters fail to find within themselves. By centering the animals as moral teachers these ecodramas disrupt anthropocentric hierarchies and suggest that ecological survival depends upon a respectful participation in a shared world (Whyte 2014). In The Breathing Hole , the moral agency of the polar bear, Angu'řuaq, reaches its zenith during Scene 2 in Act 1 where Nukilik, driven by a crisis of masculine identity and a fear of being replaced as the tribe’s provider, attempts to secretly assassinate the bear. He struggle s with feelings of uselessness: “I'm no longer a strong hunter because we don't need to hunt as much - that damn bear has become our hunter! (abruptly gets to his feet and points to the bear) He's the reason why Nukilik - the once great hunter - is losing his greatness” (52). The use of third - person narration underlines that he struggles to accept the fact that he is aging and losing his physical strength. It further dramatizes his wounded pride and declining status in the Inuit community. By speaking of hi mself almost ceremonially, he clings to a former identity that was built upon physicality. The bear Angu'řuaq functions as both rival and replacement. Nukilik’s bitter declaration personifies the animal as an active social participant who has displaced him within the tribe’s social structure. Murphy also employs irony in this instance because although the bear’s hunting benefits the community, Nukilik perceives his presence as a threat and personal diminishment. When Nukilik returns from his attempted murde r of the bear he does so in a defeated way as he appears covered in blood and unable to walk. He then

goes on to tell the tribe how he tried to kill Angu'řuaq but instead the bear defended himself and saved Nukilik from drowning despite the attempt on his life: Well, I . . . I saw Angu’řuaq, so I snuck up behind him, trying to harpoon him. He turned around and slapped the harpoon out of my hands, but I picked it up and went after him — and then I slipped . . . and the next thing I knew, there’s a seal swimming ar ound my head. I was under the ice and couldn’t breathe, couldn’t find the breathing hole — then I had no more breath . . . and I saw Angu’řuaq’s black nose and teeth and suddenly I’m flying through the air like a bird and landed on the hard ice. (Murphy 64 ) The irony in this scene is crucial as it illuminates how even though Nukilik attempts to kill the bear, the bear saves his life. This reversal destabilizes the hierarchical assumption that humans dominate animals (Warren and Erkal 1997) and instead reinfor ces the play’s theme of reciprocity and mutual care. Additionally, this scene serves as a moral and spiritual revelation for the character Nukilik as his near - death experience has transformed him into a more grateful and humble man. Nukilik's vivid descrip tion of being trapped under the ice and unable to breathe metaphorically reflects his earlier moral blindness and disrespect of the natural world. Angu’řuaq saving him from suffocating is simultaneously a literal rescue and an act of moral awakening. Furth ermore, Nukilik’s fragmented speech and ellipses convey shock, pain, and emotional vulnerability which contrasts sharply with his earlier aggressive pursuit of the bear. Murphy utilizes this scene to showcase Angu'řuaq’s moral restraint and superiority ove r the human character. Despite having been hunted and disrespected, the bear demonstrates forgiveness and mercy by pulling Nukilik to safety. By acting as a moral teacher who possesses a higher ethical understanding than Nukilik, Angu’řuaq's characterizati on aligns with Vanessa Robinson's literature that emphasizes the existence of animal knowledge beyond human conceptions (2015). Angu'řuaq’s moral wisdom is further emphasized when he returns to the Inuit tribe to give back the harpoon with which Nukilik at tempted to murder him. The stage directions explain how “ the bear drops the harpoon near Nukilik. Nukilik gives Angu'řuaq a sign of respect ” (Murphy 65) which is an instance of clear anthropomorphism and display of human behavior as the bear does not exhibit any anger or frustration towards Nukilik. On the contrary, this scene symbolizes reconciliation and the restoration of balance between h umans and the natural world. Even though the harpoon was previously used as a weapon of violence and attempted domina tion, it is now transformed into an object which is returned peacefully. By dropping it near Nukilik instead of retaliating, the bear exhibits compassion and mercy. Nukilik's behavior has transformed as well as he

gives a sign of respect to the bear and gesture of peace to Hummiktuq. Where earlier, he viewed the bear as a rival and threat, he now recognizes Angu’řuaq as a being which deserves dignity and gratitude. Hummiktuq’s statement, “I taught you well . . . and now you teach me,” (65) introduces a role reversal. Although she raised the bear like a son, Angu’řuaq's forgiveness and emotional wisdom teach her and the tribe a lesson. Overall, this instance argues in accordance to Mc Hugh's theory that animals are mo re than mere metaphors (2009) as the play constructs Angu'řuaq as a subjective agent. This reversal highlights the play’s stance of challenging anthropocentric hierarchies by suggesting that humans can learn ethical behaviour from animals. Consequently, th e bear is no longer a symbolic figure but very much a central character whose agency dictates the moral tone and human behaviors of the play. Similarly, in No More Harveys , Chantal Bilodeau utilizes the blue whale and the natural world as an emotional and moral teacher for the protagonist’s journey. Throughout this journey, the Woman continuously gets harassed by her abusive husband who repeatedly attempts to call or text h er. The stage directions: “Her phone rings. Again. And again. And again” (Bilodeau 16) illustrates the relentlessness with which her abuser keeps harassing her and the repetition highlights further the stress and trauma which t he protagonist has suffered and continues to do. Her panic becomes very evident whenever he tries to contact her through repetitions and short phrases which emphasize her state of panic and helplessness: “There. See? It stopped. We’re good. No need to pani c. Everything is fine. I’m here. We’re here. We’re all fine. It was just ... unexpected, that’s all” (17). This passage illustrates that she spends a large amount of time and energy having to convince herself that everything is fine which creates a strong co ntrast between the whales and the Woman. A story about an indigenous community illuminates how whales in the play have the power and authority to directly demand good moral behavior and respect from humans: “One night, a whale visited her father in his dre ams. The whale taught him a chant and told him that if the hunters showed good behaviour and respect, she would give herself to them” (16). This story about how a whale saved an indigenous village positions the animal as possessing the intrinsic ability to give or take life. Through this ability the whale acts as a teacher for the village and reminds them of the values of respect and reciprocity (Whyte 2014). The anthropomorphism that permeates this anecdote serves as a teaching for the protagonist as well. In the beginning of the play, she is not able to demand good behaviour from her abuser, however, this changes dramatically throughout

the story. After her initial transformation into a whale, she returns to the external world with a newly won confidence and trust in herself: “It doesn’t mean that we don’t have a choice in how we respond. It doesn’t mean that we don’t have responsibilitie s. But it does mean that we shouldn’t let them put all the blame on us” (22). Bilodeau creates a strong contrast in this passage as the woman has transformed internally and gained much more courage and bravery to face her personal Harvey. This newfound cou rage is expressed by her when she dictates a single text message back to him: “Stop calling, period. I’m not coming back, period” (22). The use of short, fragmented phrases signals a succinct and confident tone and highlights her newfound confidence and inner strength. She then asks Alexa, her robotic sidekick, about the difference between migrating and fleeing, underlining her transformation and illuminating the fact that she is no longer running away from her abuser but instead migrating towards a better future. The second time that she speaks to her husband on the phone she speaks to Harvey in sentence fragments: “Listen - no. I mean it. I meant it. I’m not coming back ... don’t - Harvey, stop ... Stop! If you don’t stop, I’m going to hang up ... I’m going to h ang up now ... I’m hanging up” (Bilodeau 27). This illustrates her anger but also her newly won assertiveness and the repetitions of ‘Stop’ and ‘hang up’ underscore the finality of this last conversation between the two. Her address to the audience: “He punc hed me in the face ... Who does that? Who – and now he can’t handle me saying it out loud? Doing it is OK but telling the story is not? But it's my story. It’s my reality and I get to shape it with my own words” (27) is filled with rage and the repetition of ‘my’ truly strengthens the portrayal of a protagonist who has won not only her freedom but the courage and voice to tell her own story the way she sees fit. The last instance of the natural world actin g as a teacher of morality takes place in the final moments of the play as the Woman describes how she arrived at the ocean to seek solace and strength: “On a beautiful afternoon, I drove to a bluff overlooking the ocean. The sun was warm on my skin. I cou ld feel the ocean breathe. I opened up my chest and breathed with it” (30). The hyperbole of opening her chest emphasizes that she metaphorically opens herself up to nature to merge with it and underlines that she has reached a state of calm and peace at t he end of her journey. This inner tranquillity is mirrored back to her in the natural world around her as she describes the beautiful, sunny ocean. She further states: And the more I breathed, the more I started to feel. Tiny ripples at first, then waves and waves of emotions. Sadness. Deep sadness. For me. For Teri. Then, anger and fear and rage. Also regret. Confusion. And then ... grief. A swell of grief for the billions of creatures who inhabit this world.

Grief for all the unnecessary suffering. Grief for the harm done and the lives lost. Grief for what’s been taken and what will never be. (30) The natural world around her acts as a teacher and facilitator to access all of her emotions and to let them move through her without being able to stop them. The metaphor of the wave signals that once she allowed nature to touch her inner world, the effec t is all - encompassing as she is engulfed by the wide bandwidth of her emotions and, additionally, the repetition of grief signals the depth of this emotion. Therefore, Bilodeau presents the natural world and the blue whale as transformative moral guides wh ose lessons of emotional truth and self - worth empower the protagonist to reclaim her voice. In conclusion, Section 4. 1.3 has demonstrated that both plays position animals and the nonhuman world as characters with subjective agency whose emotional and moral wisdom challenge anthropocentric hierarchies on stage. By presenting animals not as passive metaphors but as active, moral teachers, The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys suggest that human survival depends on moving away from systems of domination and moving toward humility and respectful coexistence with the natural world (Whyte 2014). Moreov er, this section has answered the first research question by demonstrating that both plays portray humans and the natural world as deeply interconnected through moral transformations. In addition, it addresses the second question by presenting animals such as Angu'řuaq and the whale as agents whose emotional and moral guidance directly shapes the human characters and their development. Finally, this section responds to the third question through the protagonist’s transformation in No More Harveys , where her emotional liberation from abuse mirrors the healing and transformative abilities of the natural world. 4.1.4 Chapter Conclusion Chapter 4.1, and its three subsections, analyzes themes of reciprocity and nurture within interspecies bonds and portrays the nonhuman world as a source of moral authority. Section 4.1.1 establishes the concept of reciprocity where animals are recognized as active agents and provides the groundwork for Section 4.1.2, which transitions into the nurturing spheres of interspecies adoption and bonding. By analyzing Hummiktuq’s maternal relationship with Angu'řuaq, and the Woman’s physical transformation into a whale, this section underlines how kinship cente red around care erases the human - animal divide. This chapter culminates in Section

4.1.3, which adds to the discussion of reciprocal and nurturing dynamics by portraying animals as active moral teachers. Rather than serving as passive metaphors, the bear and the whale are shown to possess superior restraint and wisdom. Combined, these su bsections argue that interspecies bonds are a sophisticated system of mutual recognition and guidance. 4.2 Systems of Exploitation 4.2.1 Harveys The systems of exploitation and violence that are thematized heavily across these two plays are wide - ranging and yet at its core they can all be distilled into the fundamental concepts of domination and discrimination. In No More Harveys , Chantal Bilodeau utilizes the title as a metonym for intersecting systems of oppression and thus bridges the divide between gendered violence and environmental catastrophe. In the preface, the playwright notes that the origin of her work lies in the para llel occurrence of Hurricane Harvey and the emergence of the #MeToo movement’s allegations against Harvey Weinstein (Bilodeau 18). This intersection is not coincidental but instead serves as the play’s strongest point of ecofeminist critique which is that the systems which s ustain the power and privilege of wealthy men are intrinsically linked and identical to the structures that enable the exploitation of women, natural resources, and marginalized communities (Warren 1997). By pluralizing Harveys, Bilodeau suggests that the exploitation of the natural world and the oppression of women are not isolated incidents but are instead continuous symptoms deeply entrenched in society. The play’s protagonist, known only as "Woman," serves as a vessel through which these complexities are explored. Her lack of a specific name or defined ethnicity allows the audience to project their own experiences into her narrative and thus universalizes the Harvey threat as a condition that affects every woman. This aligns with Karen Warren’s ecofeminist framework, which states that environmental and social injustices are deeply entangled, and that understanding the status of nature helps one understand the status of women (1997). The linguistic element of domination is a central component of the Harvey dynamic, especially the ways in which it animalizes women to justify their subordination. During the Woman’s bus journey, an encounter with a man serves a s a micro example of patriarchal

privilege. Her statement: “There's always a guy” (8) serves as a warning and the subsequent repetition of “Do not make eye contact” (8) make it appear as if the protagonist is fearfully warning herself to avoid men. The stage directions: “She makes herself small to make room for the man, who immediately manspreads” (9) exhibit a sarcastic tone but also exemplify the underlying criticism directed at the benefactors of patriarchal systems and this encounter is symbolic of the unjust distribution of power and privilege. When the man remarks, "I bet you’re a fox behind that mask," (10) he employs animalistic language in an objectifying manner. This linguistic example mirrors the ecofeminist observation that animalizing language is used to reinforce a woman's inf erior status and positions her as a being that exists to be dominated or exploited. Therefore, by reducing the Woman to a "fox," the man asserts a hierarchical system that parallels the ways in which industrial societies categorize and commodify nature. Th is criticism aligns with Warren and Erkal's work on how using animalizing language to describe women reinforces their inferior status (1997) and Andy Smith’s critique of capitalism, which "destroys our sense of meaningful connectedness" and “replace[s] the se relationships with commodities” (2009: 31). Thus, this encounter highlights that Harveys are a system of entitlement in which those who benefit from the patriarchal system take up more space than those who they exploit. At a later stage in the play, the protagonist experiences another encounter with a man, but this time at a ferry terminal. The parallelism to the previous conversation is striking as the man asks her almost identical questions and says the same objectifying statement: “I bet you’re a fox behind that mask” (19). The repetition and identical structure of both encounters emphasize that the harassment the Woman experiences is systemic. By repeating the same dehumanizing language, Bilodeau suggests that the concept of Harveys extends beyond ind ividual men and instead reflects the broader social structure that normalizes the discrimination of women. Another important aspect of the play is the inclusion of Teri and Sonya; two Indigenous women whose stories parallel the Woman’s own experiences of suffering and survival. While Sonya’s life is destroyed by an abusive husband: “[H]er Harvey had shattered her self - esteem, gotten her addicted to drugs, and made her homeless” (12 ), Teri's life is endangered by cancer: “Her Harvey came from upriver, from a place she had never been to where they decided to dump toxic waste into the water” (12). The similarities between their experiences emphasize that each woman is harmed by a diffe rent manifestation of the Harvey system. The protagonist further highlights this by stating: “A Harvey is a Harvey is a Harvey no

matter what name you give it. It’s fed and fattened by money and power and preys on vulnerable people. Especially women” (13). The repetition in the statement “A Harvey is a Harvey is a Harvey” echoes Gertrude Stein’s famous line “Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose” illustrating the idea that things are fundamentally what they are. Through this linguistic structure, Bilodeau universalizes the concept of the Harvey and highlights that even though oppression can manifest itself in different forms, it always r emains rooted in the same systems of exploitation. Through these parallel narratives, Bilodeau illustrates how patriarchal and capitalist structures inflict both physical and emotional violence upon women, particularly those on the margins of society. This aligns with ecofeminist criticism on how women on the margins of society are “disproportionately affected” by systemic discrimination (Warren and Erkal 1997: 12). In addition, No More Harveys is a play that is permeated by poetic monologues of systemic critique targeting racial injustice and ecological crisis. The first instance of this being in the beginning of the play and self - titled by the protagonist as “A Slice of America” (8). Here, the Woman intertwines societal criticism with climate criticism and points out how in capitalist societies no life should be more valuable than the other: An America where not every life is worth the same where one gender is worth more than the others where one race is worth more than the others where one sexual orientation is better than the others where good health is reserved for the few where good education is reserved for the few where disasters affect some more than others. (8) The repetition of the opening words and similar fragmented sentence structure creates a rhythm that emphasizes the systemic nature of inequality and oppression within capitalist society. The enumeration of various forms of discrimination such as unequal ac cess to healthcare or education illustrates how social and ecological injustices are deeply connected. The anaphoric repetition of ‘where’ reinforces the fact that structures of domination permeate every aspect of society which strengthens the ecofeminist critique that the exploitation of marginalized communities and the natural world originate from the same hierarchical systems (Warren 1997). The word ‘slice’ in the title evokes the image of cutting or dividing a cake. However, ‘slice’ hints at the fact th at the portion is very small, emphasizing that discriminated against members of society do not profit from capitalism. Only

Harveys do. In addition, it symbolizes that the Woman's monologue can only offer a miniscule glimpse into a national condition that is so broad and deeply entrenched in US society. The climax of these critical monologues symbolizes a literal and metaphorical suffocation produced by the pressures of systemic exploitations. It takes place after the Woman remarks that: “You know, it took me eighteen hundred miles to understand. To start to get a glimpse of the web that the Harveys have woven around us. Eighteen hundred miles and eight states” (17). This metaphor of a web portrays patriarchal and capitalist oppression as an expansive and interconnected system that stretches across geograp hical boundaries. The image of the ‘web’ emphasizes the concept of entrapment and highlights how these structures permeate everyday life. The mention of the physical distance of her journey reinforces again the fact that the Harvey system is not isolated t o individual experiences but intrinsically embedded within society. This is followed by her inner world delivering a poem with the same repeating segments at the end: “Climate change: I can’t breathe/ COVID - 19: I can’t breathe/ Police brutality: I can’t br eathe” (17). The anaphoric refrain is a reference to the final words of Eric Garner and George Floyd who died from suffocation at the hands of the police force. Their last words "I can't breathe” are used in many global contemporary protests that condemn t he violence of the police. Furthermore, each following line expands the scale of oppression which further reinforces the argument that these crises are not separate but structurally linked. The increasing speed of the list mimics a building panic attack as described in the stage directions which is further emphasized by the repeating sentence fragments: “I can’t breathe, I can’t/ breathe, I can’t – ” (17). This creates a vivid image of suffocation and symbolizes that the Woman's overwhelming trauma is a dire ct mirror of the exploitation of the planet and marginalized communities. Therefore, through these monologues, Harveys are depicted as privileged beneficiaries of capitalist systems who place destruction onto others, especially women and communities on the margins of society. In conclusion, Section 4. 2.1 establishes that in No More Harveys , Harveys represent a deeply entrenched system of patriarchal and capitalist exploitation that treats both women and the natural world as resources and commodities (Smith 1997). By analyzing this dynamic, this section has demonstrated how the play answers the main research question of the thesis by consistently presenting human systems of domination as deeply interconnected with the natural world. Violence against

women, Indigenous communities, and the environment originates from the same structures (Warren 1997). It also answers the third research question by linking the protagonist's panic attack to the escalating crisis of the environment and therefore aligning i ndividual female trauma with planetary suffocation. 4.2.2 Colonial Hierarchies Expanding upon the systemic exploitations that were analyzed in the previous section, Section 4.2.2 focuses on the representation of colonial mastery in Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole . By transitioning from the spiritual, Indigenous worldview of Act 1 into the colonial history of Act 2, Murphy highlights a fundamental shift in how the Arctic is perceived and treated. Through the British explorer Sir John Franklin and his crew, the play illustrates how scientific rationalism and imperial arrogance funct ion as tools of erasure. This colonial mindset mirrors the Harvey dynamic found in Bilodeau’s play, as both worldviews perceive the natural world and its inhabitants not as equals, but as resources to be mastered, and exploited (Smith 1997). The opening of Act 2 begins with a quote from a report by the British Admiralty documenting a mass grave found in the Arctic and the evidence of cannibalism among those remains. This quotation foreshadows the irony and critique that permeates the following Act in which the supposedly civilized explorers are revealed to be desperate failures. In Scene 1, the arrival of the British explorers on the HMS Erebus marks the introduction of a rigid colonial hierarchy that stands in stark contrast to the communal re ciprocity of the Inuit tribe in Act 1. They are described to be carrying the British flag as they exit their technologically advanced ship, and when met with the beauty and wonder of the aurora borealis they instantly attempt to make scientific sense of th e phenomena: “God mixed with the interaction of solar wind and Earth’s magnetosphere, but we’re going to unlock the secret of the earth’s magnetism” (70). Wicker's technical language reflects the colonial impulse to classify, explain, and master nature int ellectually. In addition, his declaration of ‘unlocking the secret’ constructs a metaphor of conquest and possession which highlights that the Arctic is no longer viewed as a living environment with spiritual significance. Furthermore, it becomes evident t hat hierarchies are of vital importance to the British as they state that: “The captain will settle this compass business once and for all” (70) which reflects their belief in rigid colonial authority. Sir John Franklin is presented as the embodiment of th is authority who serves as

both a military and spiritual leader and believes it is his duty to navigate and master the Northwest Passage. Additionally, Murphy utilizes scientific Latin diction to highlight the explorers’ impulse to control the environment through naming. For example , Wickers insists on using Latin classifications: “You’ll see a Bubo scandiacus — that’s a snowy owl — and imagine, Bean, imagine seeing a real live Ursus maritimus ” (71). This act of naming is not a neutral scientific endeavor but an act of possession whi ch aligns with Vanessa Robinson's literature on how the act of naming animals can be a mechanism of control (2015). Furthermore, the play uses the symbolic failure of raising the British flag to illustrate the instability of colonial power when faced with a living landscape. In this scene, the explorers attempt to plant the Union Jack in the ice which breaks and swallows the flagstaff and flag itself: “ Wickers plunges his mitted hands into the frigid water and grabs for the sinking flagstaff. Bean reaches o ut to help Wickers, inadvertently letting go the folded flag, and it too falls into the hole” (72). It appears that the Arctic itself resists this act of territorial possession and the use of irony through the characters’ frantic movements and coarse language: “Bollocks, bollocks” (72) highlights that the Arctic cannot be easily claimed by such an imperial symbol. The location of the breathing hole thus acts as an agent of resistance as it literally swallows this symbol of British authority. This connects c losely to Una Chaudhuri's criticism of theatrical realism that has “thrust the nonhuman world into the shadows” (2007: 24) as this instance denies human conquest and emphasizes the influence of the nonhuman on the storyline. In addition, Franklin's colonia l arrogance and that of his crew is incredibly prominent when in contact with the Inuit people. Franklin assumes that the Inuit people are inherently fascinated with European explorers: “Sometimes they come just to stare at us — Ross told me of the time a woman Esquimaux walked sixty miles with her newborn baby just to catch a glimpse of him. (calls) Qey - gwid [Come here] ” (74). This scene reveals his limited understanding of Inuit culture and eurocentric worldview. While he positions Indigenous presence as a passive backdrop he in turn elevates himself and his own narrative to that of a heroic conqueror. The use of the te rm “Esquimaux” is also significant. This is an outdated colonial label for Inuit people and the use of it in this play highlights how the E uropean explorers seek to control the Inuit through their own language and assumptions. Additionally, this scene echoes criticism by indigenous scholars Mary Simon and Marybeth Martello who both stress the visibility and agency of Indigenous people in cont emporary society to overcome these portrayed one - sided historical relationships (2011, 2008).

Another crucial moment is the first encounter between the explorers and the polar bears, Angu’řuaq and his mate Ukuannuaq. Instead of engaging with the bears in a respectful manner as was highlighted in Act 1, Franklin and the crew's behavior exhibit colon ial and eurocentric arrogance. The bears in this scene are portrayed as observant and dominant as they initiate the encounter by offering a seal to the group of explorers: “Angu’řuaq stops in front of Bean and offers him the dead seal” (74). Angu’řuaq offe ring Bean the dead seal is deeply symbolic on multiple levels. Firstly, it transforms the Arctic from a passive setting into an active force within the play. Rather than being hunted or controlled, Angu’řuaq and Ukuannuaq physically approach the men and in itiate contact through this offering. Secondly, Murphy uses the devices of role reversal and dramatic irony in this scene to destabilize colonial assumptions of human dominance. The British settlers believe they are the observers, yet here they become the objects that are being observed. Therefore, the bears function as active characters with intention and are not reduced to mere symbolic scenery (McHugh 2009). In addition, the playwright makes use of a juxtaposition in this moment in which she contrasts th e bears’ calm confidence with the settlers’ fearful stillness. The crew's response: “Over here, boy, over here” (75) highlights their attempt to categorize the bears within familiar and controllable systems of classifications (Robinson 2015) as they try to converse with the bears the same way that they would converse with a domesticated dog. As Bean is chosen to approach the bear and take the seal as an offering, the Northern Lights intensify signaling the importance of this inter - species encounter: “ A huge display of vivid colors erupts across the sky. The men strain to not look up and risk distracting the bears ” (76). The beautiful image of the intensifying Northern Lights symbolizes the Arctic world becoming actively present during this encounter between humans and bears. Nature is not passive but instead responds to and heightens the moment. When Angu’řuaq refuses to leave, Bean pats the bear on the head similarly to the gesture of Hummiktuq: “‘Please don’t stare at me like that . . . what do you want?’ Not sure what else to do, Bean reaches out his shaking hand and pats the bear on the head like he would a dog. ‘You’re a good bear . . . good bear’” (78). This moment of interspecies communication appears to attempt to master the bears and subjugate them, h owever, the bears still maintain the upper hand. Bean’s ‘shaking hand’ emphasizes fear and vulnerability, while his dialogue exhibits fear and unease. The bear’s gaze exerts power over him, and he thus remains a being with agency (McHugh 2009).

Following this encounter, the British meet the two Inuit hunters, Ařgiaq and Paningajak, however this scene is marked by miscommunication and misrecognition as Franklin attempts to speak the Inuit language: “‘I'll wish them good evening.’ ( calls ) ‘Oo - noo - coot. Oo - noo - coot. [Good evening?]’” (81). His mispronunciation fails to deliver the desired message as Ařgiaq remarks: “He’s trying to say you should have a good time in the evening. Why, I wonder?” (82). The British continue to look down on the Inuit: “I wish I could make out their gibberish” (82), Holloway looks at the hunters’ polar - bear fur pants. Holloway: Those are funny looking trousers — pantaloons. Carter: Maybe the French got here ahead of us. There’s laughter from the crew. (83) The use of derogatory language and satire signals that the encounter is marked by distrust and disregard for the Native Inuit people. Instead of respecting the Arctic and its inhabitants, Franklin and his crew exhibit colonial arrogance and distaste for th e local culture. Simon remarks on this dynamic by stating that historically, the majority of Inuit relations with the British crown were always “grossly one - sided” (2011: 880). When the hunters spot the seal that the bears brought to the crew they immediat ely cut it open so as to not let the meat spoil and while they offer some of it to the British explorers, Holloway remarks: “Savages, sir — right ungodly savages” (91). His dismissive reaction reveals an entrenched colonial gaze that frames Indigenous peop le as inferior and unintelligible (Ruether 43). The repetition of ‘savage’ crystallizes this ideology by explicitly linking cultural difference to moral judgment which in turn was used to justify Indigenous domination. Overall, the scene exposes how langua ge becomes a tool of imperial power that reinforces hierarchical distinctions which dehumanize the Inuit and legitimize colonial entitlement in the Arctic space. To build on top of this, the crew attempts to domesticize the Inuit by teaching them British t raditions: Crew #1: (to the hunters) ‘The cup sits on the saucer like this . . . ‘ Crew #1 pours the beads out of the cups — much to the hunters’ consternation — then pours tea for Ařgiaq and Paningajak and tries to help them hold their cups and saucers orrectly (92). This instance of irony exposes the colonial impulse to reshape Indigenous practices according to British norms (Simon 2011) and to reduce cultural differences to something that must be corrected or civilized. The crew’s insistence on teaching the hunters h ow to use a cup and saucer positions British etiquette as inherently superior, however, the Inuit's reaction highlights the absurdity of these imposed standards. Rather than fostering mutual understanding and acceptance of

differences, this interaction reinforces a hierarchy in which Indigenous identity is treated as deficient (Simon 2011). The explorers' arrogance and attitudes take a drastic turn when they reappear in Scene 2 of Act 2. The crew is sick, starving, and delirious as we witness the death of two of the explorers throughout the scene. Earlier the captain reproduced poetic myths about his journe y through the Arctic whereas now his growing frustration symbolizes the collapse of imperial and masculine authority. When Angu’řuaq appears to seemingly help the dying explorers, Captain Franklin appears to have gone completely mad and runs at the bear sc reaming: I will eat you, do you understand — I will tear your heart out of your chest with my bare hands and I will eat and eat and eat until there’s nothing left of you but teeth and bones then I will smash your teeth and crush your bones and I will boil them and sup on them and piss them out onto this godforsaken tundra. (115) Murphy utilizes repetitions, hyperboles, and animalistic imagery to highlight the primal hunger and rage that the British exhibit. Ironically, while Franklin attempts to assert dominance over the bear, his own behavior is far more savage than that of the a nimal. Earlier, the bears even initiated peaceful coexistence by offering food, while Franklin now responds only with aggression. This symbolizes that the Arctic has stripped the British explorers of their revered civilized manners as their identity comple tely collapses under the pressures of starvation and illness. In addition, where in Scene 1 the British ridiculed the Inuit's culture, now, in Scene 2, they are desperate and beg the two hunters Ařgiaq and Paningajak for help: “Sir, sir — please, dear God in Heaven, we beg you stay with us” (117). This plea of desperation emphasizes that the explorers admit defeatedly that they are incapable of mastering the Arctic. This complete breakdown of the explorer's formerly civilized identity reaches its climax whe n one of the crew returns with a chunk of meat and the crew transforms into a bloodthirsty mob as they devour the food like animals: “Selfish fuckin’ bastard, give it give it,” “Gimme that, ya fuckin’ nothing,” “It’s mine mine, ya bleeding whore” (120). Th e use of coarse language and repetition of ‘mine’ paints them in a strong contrast to the explorers from Scene 1 as it becomes evident that the crew has lost their manners and traditions. Unfortunately, this scene gains an even more horrific layer as it tu rns out that the chunk of meat they are eating is the polar bear Ukuannuaq. As the crew impale her head on the flagstaff and raise it above the group triumphantly, they repeat the statement: “To the victor go the spoils. To the victor go the spoils” (122). This repetition, mimicking that of a

mantra, underlines how Act 1's emphasis on reciprocity has been replaced by that of a primal logic of conquest. It appears that the British adhere to a principle that whoever wins has the right to take and kill. Thus, the playwright sharply criticizes and condemns the British behaviour and aligns with the literature of Rosemary Ruether who emphasizes that the only way to establish compassion for the natural world is to let go of “overweening individualism” (1997: 42). In addition, Murphy constructs irony he re because even though the phrase suggests triumph, what is ultimately shown in this scene is the moral collapse of the British explorers. While the crew goes on to parade bear's head: “ Faces and hands covered in blood and drunk with having something warm in their bellies, the men stumble, carrying chunks of meat, with Crew #2 holding high Ukuannuaq’s head on the flagstaff “ (123) and sing “God save the Queen,” the former superior and well - mannered explorers are now characterized as a mindless and violent mo b. This final scene of Act 2 is significant in multiple ways. Firstly, throughout the play, the bears have been positioned as social agents (McHugh 2009) with close ties to the Inuit community. Killing and consuming Ukuannuaq is more than just procuring su stenance but instead symbolizes a devastating breaking point in what was previously a respectful interspecies relationship. Secondly, singing an imperial praise song while consuming her body shows that the crew's colonial identity is seemingly most defined in a moment of grotesque violence in which all former restraint and civilized behavior is gone. This creates a deep sense of irony as the explorers triumphantly celebrate a moment of ecological exploitation and extractive violence. In conclusion, Section 4. 2.2 has demonstrated that colonial mastery in The Breathing Hole prioritizes conquest over reciprocity. Thus, the explorers enact a Harvey - like dynamic that leads to their own destruction. This analysis confirms that the systems of domination in Bilodeau’s play are structurally identical to the driving forces of coloni al expansion in Murphy’s work. This section answers the first research question by demonstrating that The Breathing Hole portrays the Arctic not as a passive backdrop but as a living environment that actively resists colonial domination. This is illustrate d through the bears’ agency, the symbolism of the breathing hole, and the explorers’ eventual physical and psychological collapse. Moreover, this section responds to the second research question by portraying the polar bears, Angu’řuaq and Ukuannuaq, as ac tive participants within the narrative. Both bears repeatedly demonstrate agency and the emotional weight attached to Ukuannuaq’s death emphasizes that their exploitation is symbolic of the wider

collapse of respectful interspecies coexistence. In response to the third research question, this section has illustrated how the British explorers’ descent into madness parallels their violent exploitation of the Arctic ecosystem. This destruction of prev iously respectful interspecies bonds reveals how ecological violence and human decline are fundamentally connected. 4.2.3 Capitalist Extraction While the previous section analyzed the roots of colonial arrogance, Section 4.2.3 examines the final stage of this process, which is the transformation of the Arctic into twenty - first - century dystopian capitalism. In Act 3 of The Breathing Hole , Murphy shifts the setting to the 2030s, where the sacred interspecies bonds of Act 1 have been entirely replaced by shallow consumerism. Therefore, this section argues that modern capitalist exploitation is characterized by moral blindness and prefers ar tificiality over authentic ecological reality. In The Breathing Hole , the transition from exploration to extraction is symbolized by the arrival of the Circumpolar Oil Platform at the end of Act 2. This industrial presence signifies that the colonial drive for discovery and mastery has reached its logical conclusion which is the exploitation of natural resources for economic gain driven by a capitalist emphasis on profit (Smith 1997). The entrepreneurs, led by figures such as Mrs. Griffith - Thomson, treat the Arctic not as a living homeland or a fragile ecosystem, but as marketable real estate: “Close your eyes and imagine a sleek ship weaving through four thousand years of history — Inuit ceremonial grounds, the graveyards of Ross and Franklin . . . it’s so beautiful . . . so tranquil” (128). Language us e such as ‘tranquil’ erases the harsh reality of climate change and death of the Arctic landscape and instead romanticizes the environment for profit. Historical sites are commodified as tourist attractions and become marketable destinations for the cruise , while reducing Inuit presence to passive scenery. One of the Oceanus Adventures members recounts having a dream of a dead polar bear cub lying in the crib of her son: “when I looked in the crib, I saw a bear cub . . . the cub was dead and I was relieved” (130). This creates an ominous moment of foreshadowing as the dead cub anticipates the extinction of Angu'řuaq. The fact that the bear was a young cub symbolizes the vulnerability of the Arctic and constructs a parallelism between the human and animal wor ld. Furthermore, the company's plans of introducing artificial ice blocks illustrate dystopian satire: “We’re also developing ice replacement, huge floating white solar reflectors to

deflect the sun’s rays from the water . . . the reflectors can be remodelled or remotely folded up in the event of severe weather” (136). The symbolism of this ‘fake ice’ is striking. In previous a cts , ice was a sign of the natural Arctic ecosystem being in balance. Now, it highlights that technological artificiality is more profitable. The Arctic therefore becomes reduced to a staged replica of itself. Oceanus Adventures also guarantees polar bear sig htings: “we plan to build remote - controlled robotic bears — a mother and two cubs — then position them on ice - replacement sectionals” (144). Murphy shows a world where ecological collapse has advanced so far that even wildlife must be artificially staged f or tourist consumption. While real bears are nearly extinct, the entrepreneurs' only concern is how to make a profit off it. Thus, technology is utilized to sanitize a natural world that the capitalist system has actively destroyed. This trend reverberates Smith's criticism of capitalist society replacing meaningful interspecies relationships with commodities (2009) and also satirizes the anthropogenic arrogance of the tourist by highlighting Michael Zimmerman’s claim that humanity mu st recognize it is "no more, but also no less, important than all other things" (2009: 25). The systemic violence of this capitalist era in Act 3 is also characterized by the marginalization of Indigenous people and labor. Tuutalik, an Inuit security guard working for the oil company, debates with the biologist Qi’ngaqtuq and justifies his employment by stating: “ Akłuřut atqunariaqa’mata annaumařřutikšatuinnarnut akłuittullu ihumakšurniqšau’mata. [The poor are forced to compromise for their basic needs, while the rich have choices]” (139). This instance not only echoes class criticism but also showcases how due to colonial and capitalist structures Indigenous people become economically dependent on the very same industries that damage their land and culture (Smith 1997). Additionally, this creates a parallelism to the polar bear’ extinctio n that was thematized in the dream. Similarly to how the animals struggle to survive in the collapsing Arctic ec osystem, the Inuit struggle to survive in a societal structure of capitalist extraction. Qi’ngaqtuq's warning: “ Pittauřumik aturahugiřutit kihianik tammaumařutit. Inuuhikšammari’nik hagviqtukšaruravit. [Tuutalik, you may think you have found something, but you have lost something again — perhaps you’ve lost yourself]” (139) illustrates that by participating in this system, Indigenous people run the risk of losing their identity and history which emphasi zes that spiritual and cultural loss are an automatic b yproduct of capitalist exploitations (Smith 1997).

Murphy's criticism of systemic exploitation under capitalism reaches its climax in the final scene of the play. Its opening denotes opulence and celebration: The Steward enters with a buffet overflowing with delicacies and sweets, an ice sculpture of a dancing bear as its centrepiece. The Steward organizes a tray of champagne and glasses, as well as a basket of colourful cones and tiara party hats and noisemakers . (149) This creates a strong juxtaposition to the scenes witnessed before which were characterized by starvation and primal desperation. While the Arctic ecosystem has entirely collapsed in 2034 and all the ice and animals have vanished, the language of excess de scribing the buffet emphasizes the contrast between abundance and environmental demise. Furthermore, the guests on board completely lack a sense of appreciation for the natural world: “I’ve seen so many killer whales on this trip I don’t ever want to see a nother one as long as I live” (153), “They sure don’t look like the northern lights in our brochure — colours are kind of faded” (155). This use of dismissive language illustrates that the guests on the cruise are entirely numb to the wonders of nature (Sm ith 1997). Moreover, the faded aurora mirrors the destruction of the Arctic itself. The natural world no longer possesses the brilliance it once had as it has been diminished under the capitalist system. Finally, Angu'řuaq appears: “ Angu’řuaq is old and sk eletal . . . but desperate hunger has given him the strength to climb up the rungs of the ship. Painfully he tries to pull himself up onto the deck as the black water pours off of him. People scream ” (161). The description of the bear as ‘old’ and ‘skeletal’ highlights the physical consequences of climate change and species extinction. His presence forces the guests to confront the consequences of their behaviour as he crosses the boundaries between the natural world and capitalist spaces. The tourists’ rea ctions are a grotesque mix of comedy and horror which reveals their complete lack of empathy and respect for the natural world. Rather than being emotionally moved and expressing care or compassion they react with numbness or aggression: “It doesn't look l ike the polar bear in the brochure,” (162) “Maybe it’s a giant skunk or something,” (162) “this guy could eat a car!” (162), “ Ainsworth throws his champagne at the bear ” (162). These absurd reactions construct satirical humour and further emphasize humanit y's emotional detachment from real suffering. When they finally kill the polar bear with a lifeboat and triumphantly declare: "Bull’s eye!" (168), Murphy portrays humanity's violent execution of the natural world. The guests' immediate return to the party creates a juxtaposition between horror and celebration and highlights the easiness with which ecological tragedy is simply forgotten without furthe r reflection. This dynamic is further exaggerated when the guests spot the

artificial robot bears that were introduced in Scene 1: “Quick, everyone — come to the starboard side near the bow — there’s a mother and two cubs standing on an ice floe” (169). Immediately after killing a real starving polar bear, the guests enthusiastic ally rush over to watch the artificial bear mother and her two cubs. Murphy utilizes juxtaposition here to emphasize the moral emptiness of the guests. Overall, this scene presents a dystopian nightmare where humanity destroys the real natural world and th en comforts itself with artificial replicas. To conclude, this section has proven that Murphy portrays late - stage capitalism as the final evolutionary stage of colonial extraction. Here, the destruction of nature is normalized and replaced with artificiality designed to profit off of nature's extinct ion. Through this collapse of nurturing and reciprocal interspecies connections, The Breathing Hole criticizes a dystopian society that values economic gain over interspecies kinship (Smith 1997). Moreover, this section answers the first research question by illustrating the intrinsic connection between the human and the natural world through their shared suffering under capitalism. In addition, it addresses the second question by portraying Angu'řuaq as a sentient and emotionally significant character (McH ugh 2009 ) whose physical decline and death symbolize the destruction of balance between the human and nonhuman world. Finally, this section responds to the third question by demonstrating how the displacement of Indigenous people parallels the collapse of the Arctic environment which proves that transformations in the lives of humans mirror the degradation of the natural world under capitalist extraction (Smith 1997). 4.2.4 Chapter Conclusion The three subsections of Chapter 4. 2 all discuss systems of exploitation that stem from the same extractive worldview. While Section 4.2.1 establishes the Harvey metonym as a representation of environmental and gendered violence, Section 4.2.2 contrasts t his by examining the historical failure of colonial domination. The chapter culminates in Section 4.2.3, which analyzes the final evolution of these systems in the future. This stage is defined by moral blindness and the total replacement of natural realit y with artificiality and dystopian consumerism. Together, these sections demonstrate that control and commodification are favored above reciprocity and responsibility in kinship.

4.3 Temporal Migrations and Sensory Encounters 4.3.1 Migration as a Strategy of Survival In both of the ecodramas, No More Harveys and The Breathing Hole , migration is positioned as a crucial interspecies process which goes beyond mere physical movements across land or sea. Bilodeau, by shifting the focus from ‘fleeing’ to ‘migrating’ frames the act of moving as a necessary tool to fight for what you need in order to survive. Murphy, on the other hand, stresses that migration serves as a bridge between different temporal planes which allows both humans and animals to adapt to the external oppressive forces. In Chantal Bilodeau’s No More Harveys , the protagonist embarks not only on a physical journey across the North American continent, but also on an inner transformation, from victim of abuse to self - assured woman. The first time she defines ‘migration’ is after her initial retreat into her inne r world in which she contemplates the pain and trauma of her abuse: “My cheekbone hurts/ My heart is beating loudly/ Thump - thump/ Thump - thump” (7). The repetition of ‘thump’ highlights the stress that she feels after ha ving left a physically and mentally abusive relationship and is now embarking on a solitary journey into the unknown. She further states that: “Harveys are very clever. By the time you realize what they’re up to, it’s too late and your only option is to ge t out. Or, as I like to call it, to migrate” (8). Here, the protagonist redefines migration as a vital step of self - preservation. She further adds to this by asking her virtual voice assistant, Alexa, to give her a definition and antonym of the word ‘migra te:’ “The verb ‘migrate’ is usually defined as “to go from one country, region, or place to another” (8), “Antonyms for ‘migrate’ include ‘to stay’ or ‘remain’” (8). These definitions reinforce the protagonist's changing perception of the process of migrat ion while her inquiry into the antonym of the verb emphasizes that a lack of movement means continuous entrapment. The Woman emphasizes these interpretations when she further states: “To stay or remain ... Do not remain. Under any circumstances. Because you can’t fight a Harvey. Look at what happened in Texas. Look at what happened in Hollywood. Look at what happened to me” (8). Her warning to herself and others in similar positions constructs an image where immobility is associated with severe danger and hav ing to face life - threatening forces. Thus, migration is reframed as an essential strategy of survival. Through the repetition of ‘look at’ she

links her personal experience of gendered violence to bigger social and political issues. Warren's argument is in accordance with the protagonist's mindset as they both emphasize that the way women are treated in a society directly reflects the way that th e natural environment is treated (1997: 4). Overall, this linguistic shift from ‘fleeing’ or ‘escaping’ to ‘migrating’ is crucial as it implies that she transforms from a passive victim to an active agent journeying towards a future destination. This analysis of migration being a shared interspecies process of survival is further aided as the play unfolds and we witness the protagonist establishing a clear parallelism between her journey and the migration of animals, more specifically the blue wha le. Their migration however is not just a travel across seas, but much more a mythical journey across time: “not just across land, sometimes they migrate across time” (10). Her use of hyperbole illuminates how behaviors and cycles of nonhuman life repeat o ver and over and link different temporal planes. She further shares that the causes of animal migration are almost identical to those for humans: “local climate, availability of food, the season of the year, or the need to mate” (10). This parallelism illu minates that the human and natural world share similar motives for spatial and temporal transformations which further emphasizes the interconnectedness between them (Warren 1997). In regards to whales, the protagonist says: “Fifty million years ago, they h ad four legs and huge teeth. Then the ice sheets melted, the oceans rose, and when it became clear there wasn’t going to be enough land for everyone, the big mamas were like, ‘We’re outta here’” (10). This elevates migration to a process across evolutionar y time and species boundaries. The Woman explicitly compares her own 1,800 - mile journey with the fifty - million - year evolution of whales which emphasizes that adaptation is a crucial element for survival in the face of external pressures. This analysis conn ects back to the theory by Kyle Whyte and his concept of “collective continuance” (2014: 602) as it emphasizes how Bilodeau makes use of migration as an adaptive strategy for survival into the future. The protagonist goes on to explain that as the ice melt ed and sea levels rose in the distant past, whales adapted both their bodies and their methods of communication in order to survive. She further remarks that “some of that migrating was tricky: they had to move their nose up to the top of their head, devel op a communication technology that would work under water, and grow baleen for filtering food” (18). Thus, the process of migration is represented not only as a movement across space, but as a physical transformation of the body. In the following scenes wh ere the audience witnesses the protagonist's transformation into a whale in her inner world (21), she therefore takes on the whale's ability to

physically adapt. Overall, the playwright establishes an essential parallel in her play between the ancient evolution of whales and the ways in which the protagonist attends to migrate away from patriarchal and systemic violence. A similar mechanism of temporal migration in Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole is established through the endurance of the polar bear Angu'řuaq and Hummiktuq’s iřgak (sun goggles). Both of these serve as witnesses to 500 years of Arctic history. Angu'řuaq migrates across centuries as an active witness to human intrusion and erosion of his Arctic homeland, and where in the beginning of the play polar bears are revered as “The Great Yellow One” (41), by the end of the play the bear is described as “old and skeletal” (161). This contrast emphasizes the deterioration of the bear's body and highlights the consequences of environmental destruction and human exploitation which repositions Angu'řuaq into a living archive across time. Another physical element that persists across hundreds of years is Hummiktuq's iřgak which, despite being damaged and repeatedly misunderstood by outsiders, underlines the resilience of Indigenous cultural memory. When the British crew finds the sun goggles, they do not understand the tool's purpose: “Looks like a spoon” (102), and in similar manner when the entrepreneurs from Oceanus Adventures hold the tool in their hands they comment: “Looks like a . . . spoon” (142). This continuity illustrates that the sun goggles are demoted from a tool of survival to a misunderstood useless object. Finally, in Scene 2 of Act 3 the goggles are repurposed as a rare fashion item: “ Ainsworth enters wearing the original iřgak, now inlaid with diamonds. Mrs. Griffith - Thomson: ‘Ainsworth! I so wanted to buy that but we missed the auction’” (152). The tourists’ attitudes illuminate how in 2034 the dominant extractive capitalist worldview has transformed indigenous tools of survival into luxury commodities for the elite. Through this depiction, Murphy agree s with Marybeth Martello's criticism that Indigenous communities in contemporary society are often exoticized and positioned as symbolic figures (2008: 353). Where Simon underlines that Inuit people nowadays are active participants in national and regional politics (2011: 884), Murphy portrays a future in which their presence is entirely erased. Overall, it becomes clear that the bear and the iřgak are intrinsically linked across time. Both endure a similar fate of colonial and capitalist degradation and find themselves transformed into exploited commodities. The Breathing Hole's significance of migration across time is punctuated by pivotal moments at the conclusion of Act 1 and Act 2. In these moments, the characters

witness the next temporal plane emerging on the horizon into their current reality. At the end of Act 1, Hummiktuq and the shaman Avinngaq perceive a "very large narwhal" (66) in the distance. Hummiktuq states: “This creature makes me afraid, for it herald s the beginning of the end and the end of the beginning” (67). Her prophetic statement foreshadows not only the arrival of the British settlers on the HMS Erebus, but also the collapse of the Inuit worldview and interspecies bonds that will be replaced by first colonial and later capitalist exploitative forces. Her elaboration that she sees: “Time... not in the shape of a circle, but in the shape of a line” (67) is especially significant. This marks the transition from Inuit perceptions of time as being cycli cal and seasonal, to the Western emphasis on linearity and chronology. As the Inuit characters “vanish into the mist of time” (68), their departures emphasize the symbolic erasure of indigenous temporal and interspecies understandings. Similarly, at the en d of Act 2, Franklin contemplates the endlessness of time and space around him: “there’s always something just beyond the next hill — a rock, a river, an observation — there’s a world beyond us, beyond even what we can imagine” (123). His statement foresha dows the eventual collapse of imperial explorations and on another level anticipates the failure of his own expedition and the deaths of his crew. The repetition of ‘beyond’ alludes that the horizon is unreachable and the endeavors of the British empire en dlessly futile. In addition, Murphy constructs a parallelism to the end of Act 1 as the crew make out the shadows of the next temporal plane on the horizon: “ Wickers reads. Wickers: Cir Cum Polar Oil Plate Farm. Circumpolar Oil Platform” (124). This instance symbolizes that capitalist extraction eventually replaces colonial systems of power and emphasizes that this new worldview will continue to exploit the Arctic. The descr iption: “the two explorers vanish into the mists of time” (124) emphasizes the cycli cal structure of time in the play. Overall, through the usage of these mirrored temporal transitions, Murphy positions migration across time as a cyclical process. The final scenes are crucial to the play's theme of migration as they illustrate how both hu mans and animals are repeatedly forced to navigate and adapt to continuous waves of colonial and capitalist endeavors. In summary, Section 4. 3.1 has shown that both plays redefine migration as an interspecies and historical process of survival. Through this movement across time, space, and physical form, humans and animals are able to continuously adapt to ecological, colonial, and patriarchal systems of oppression. This section has addressed the first research question by demonstrating that migration is a shared interspecies process of survival which erases the boundary between the human and

nonhuman world (Warren 1997). In response to the second research question, this section has established that both the polar bear and whale act as long - term witnesses to ecological and societal changes. Moreover, they embody historical memory and endure acr oss centuries which positions them as active participants in the narrative (McHugh 2009). 4.3.2 The Breath and the Song The breath and the song share essential significance in the ecodramas The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys as they transcend being mere stage effects and become symbolic markers of interspecies harmony and collapse. By centering the act of breathing and the melodic agency of the song, Murphy and Bilodeau show the intrinsic connection between the human and nonh uman world (Warren 1997). The symbolism of the breath in The Breathing Hole is highlighted in the Act 3 epigraph by David Suzuki which describes every breath as a: "sacrament, an affirmation of our connection with all other living things" (126). The playwright incorporates this quotation to reaffirm the symbol of the breath repre senting a shared interspecies existence. The description: “Our breath is a part of life’s breath, the ocean of air that envelopes the earth” (126) is vital as it links the act of breathing directly to the si gnificance of the breathing hole. In Act 1, the breathing hole not only secures survival of the Inuit and the animals, but it is also the place where Hummiktuq receives a prophetic vision: “I did see something . . . a white creature struggling in the black water, its foreleg reaching to me. I heard it call out to me, not out loud but in here ( points to her head ) and in here ( points to her heart ) I heard it calling to me” (18). This instance of foreshadowing of Angu’řuaq's death positions the breathing hole as a gateway between the past, present, and future. However, the breathing hole also symbolizes resistance. In Act 2, it serves as a site of colonial failure as it swallows the British flag (72) and emphasizes that the Arctic resists being owned or categor ized. It also becomes a burial sight in Scene 2 for the British crew member Bean: “ Carter sings Mendelssohn’s ‘O for the Wings of a Dove’ as Franklin helps Wickers slide Bean’s body into the hole and push it under ” (111). This adds an additional layer of m eaning to the symbolism of the breathing hole. Where in previous scenes it was a sight of survival and spiritual connection, it now functions as an archive of human history in the Arctic. In the final Act 3 of the play, the breathing hole has almost entire ly disappeared: “ Angu’řuaq enters. Old, hungry, his fur yellowing, he walks around what was once the breathing hole, though in this temperature it is more ‘slush’ than ‘hole’ ” (127). The remnants of

this location symbolize the irreversible destruction of the Arctic environment due to climate change and capitalist exploitation. In addition, its transformation highlights the both moral and environmental decay of the planet under contemporary capitalism (Smith 1997). Furthermore, the staging of the polar bears in the theatre adds another layer of complexity to this element. Represented on stage through large - scale puppets, operated by human actors, the polar bears physically symbolize the interconnectedness between species. In addition, this staging choice is aided by the audible inclusion of the bears’ breath: “When the bear s are on stage it is important for the audience to hear their breathing, grunts, and yelps. The sound of their breathing should fill the theatre” (11). Murphy's directions explicitly demand that the sounds are not only audible but take up space on the stag e and in the theatre. Despite not having their own speech, the playwright ensures that the animals are still able to be heard, therefore elevating them from passive backdrop to active animal agent (McHugh 2009). Murphy's depiction of the bears aligns with Una Chaudhuri's scholarly work that emphasizes the importance of ecotheatre portraying those who have been previously overlooked or marginalized (1994: 2004). Moreover, the bear's gradual worsening of breath, and eventual suffocation in the final scene, em phasizes that Angu'řuaq represents the erosion and literal death of the Arctic world itself. The sounds of the bears connect to R. Murray Schafer's suggestion that “in order to experience nature sometimes you just have to stand still,” (2014: 37) highlight ing the idea of simply listening and understanding. Similarly, Bilodeau’s No More Harveys utilizes the breath in an identical manner as her play uses the motif of suffocation. The climax of the play utilizes multiple anaphoric repetitions of the phrase: "I can’t breathe" (17) which creates a vivid image of environmental, political, and bodily oppression. By repeating the final words of Eric Garner and George Floyd, Bilodeau links the oppressive pressures of racial and gendered injustice to the suffocation o f our planet (Warren 1997). Thus, the loss of breath in Bilodeau’s play is not merely a biological failure but much more a symbol of the erosion of ecological and social conditions necessary for survival. Overall, the absence of breath in No More Harveys m irrors the gradual disappearance of the breathing hole in Murphy's play. Together, they highlight that when the balance between the human and natural world is disrupted, breath becomes a site of death instead of life.

While the breath of the animals and humans represents their shared vulnerability (Warren 1997), the whale song functions not only as a symbol of emotional refuge and intuitive wisdom but as a site of interspecies communication. This positions the whale as an active agent in the play as it displays vital influence on the protagonist's internal journey (McHugh 2009). In the final scene of the play this becomes especially evident. Throughout the play, the protagonist listens to whale songs to calm herself down and to allow herself to enter her inner world. At the end of the play the whale song allows the woman to join both her external and inner world into one: “And then, a sound. Very faint. She listens. Her inner world and the present merge ” (30). This positions the whale song as a bridge between her internal journey and the external reality. Moreover, through the whale song, she is able to feel deeply connected: “our songs reaching out for each other” (31). The personification of the whale ‘reaching out’ to o ther beings elevates it to a tool that erases any hierarchy between animals and humans. In addition, the whale song symbolizes the interdependence of species in the play as it highlights that human survival is intrinsically linked to our ability to listen and understand the natural world (Schafer et. al 2014). Moreover, the play also includes various intermedial references to popular songs such as “I Will Survive” by Gloria Gaynor. This multimedial integration underlines the emotions that are being portraye d as Gaynor's track functions as a feminist and eco - critical symbol of resilience. “I Will Survive” reflects the protagonist’s determination to escape the abusive relationship but also encompasses broader themes. Through linking this anthem to whales and their evolutionary adaptability, the playwright connects personal trauma to ecological crisis and thus reaffirms the parallels between the survival of women and the environment (Wa rren 1997). Furthermore, the staging of the whale that accompanies the protagonist adds to the symbolism of sounds in the play. Represented by a large and colourful papier - m â ch é statue and audible via repeating whale songs that fill the theater, the animal is defined by its nurturing and guiding presence in the work. While the bear is defined by the physical rhythm of breath, the whale is defined by its song, which functions as a sophisticated system of interspecies communication and a source of intuitive w isdom. To conclude, Section 4. 3.2 has emphasized that both the breath and the song reveal the fragile balance between human and nonhuman life. Through the significance of the whale song and the disappearance of the breathing hole, Murphy and Bilodeau emphasise that interspecies harmony is defined by reciprocal care (Whyte 2014). In addition, the staging of the two animals reinforces the plays’ eco - critical

messages, as the playwrights make use of sound and embodiment to dissolve boundaries between humans and nonhuman species. This section answers the first research question by showing that both plays utilize the breath and song as audible bridges of interspe cies connection. In relation to the second research question, animals are portrayed as active agents through their capacity to produce sounds which characterizes them as agentic guides of emotional intelligence (McHugh 2009) and possessing the ability to c ommunicate across species boundaries. Finally, the third research question is addressed by showing how changes in the human world are mirrored in the erosion of natural systems (Warren 1997). 4.3.3 The End: Tragedy vs. Hope The last moments of The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys represent two very different approaches to future visions. While both plays utilize the theater to address ecological crises, the endings cause opposite emotional responses: Murphy's final images of Angu’řuaq evoke grief, and function as a prophetic warni ng, whereas Bilodeau's ending is characterized by hope and includes a direct appeal to the audience. Angu’řuaq's death takes place shortly after the dinner party on the cruise ship has violently thrown him overboard and turned their attention to the artificial bear mother and her robotic cubs floating on a piece of simulated ice. The stage directions desc ribe the scene as follows: Then Angu’řuaq — terribly wounded and shaking — is finally seen in the darkness, gasping for breath, gasping and gasping as he tries to stay afloat in the black, oily water. He hears something and cocks his one ear, hoping to hear Hummiktuq’s voice on the wind . . . then he raises his foreleg as if reaching for help . . . but there is no help. Gasping mightily for breath, Angu’řuaq tries to hold up his head but has no strength left . . . struggling for life, he takes his last breath, and dies. (170) The repetition of ‘gasping’ emphasizes the erasure of the breathing hole and the absence of that which once gave life to the inhabitants of the Arctic environment. Murphy also constructs a parallel to the first encounter of the bear seeing as that in both scenes he is portrayed as vulnerable, solitary, and connected to the sea. His gesture of ancient human - animal connection goes unanswered highlighting the total erasure of interspecies bonds at the hands of future capitalist exploitation (Smith 1997). Thus, when comparing the beginning and the ending of the play, it

becomes clear that Angu’řuaq’s life arc is symbolic of a gradual disintegration of interspecies relationships. Where there were once reciprocal bonds of caring nature between the Inuit and the natural world, now there is capitalist exploitation, and the Arctic has morphed from a shared world into one of prioritising individual profit. Murphy's criticism here is palpable as she joins Ruether's condemnation of “overweening individualism” (1997: 42). In addition, his death is framed as the "exact vi sion Hummik tuq foresaw in her dream five hundred years ago” (84). This brings Hummiktuq's prophecy to a dramatic closure and underlines how time functions in a tragic cycle in the play. The profound grief that this scene evokes is emphasized by the inclusion of the s ong "Weep, O Mine Eyes," by John Bennet, which is blended with Inuit drumming. The final line of the play: “That I may drown me in you” (84) mirrors the bear's death and functions as a warning as it confronts the audience with a world in which the human - an imal bond has been entirely erased. On the contrary, Bilodeau's play concludes with a plea for community and optimism. Where Murphy constructs a solitary death, Bilodeau portrays an interspecies chorus in which the protagonist and the whale join together in a song. Their shared performance of “Amazing Grace” underlines a n urturing interspecies bond and conveys a hopeful tone of empowerment. In addition, the song's message of forgiveness and holding out for a better future reflects the personal transformation that the Woman has undergone throu ghout the play. Where in the beginning of the play she was fearful and had no vision of the future or her journey's destination, she is now at peace with her past and looks forward to telling her story in her own words. The final image of the Woman “blowin g plumes of rainbow water in the sun” (31) stands in stark contrast to the “black, oily water” (84) at the end of The Breathing Hole . The protagonist's final plea: “No more Harveys, OK? For me. For Teri and Sonya and the whale. For all of us and the planet . Please. No more Harveys” (33) makes use of repetitions to emphasize that the play condemns Harveys and all the larger societal systems which they stand for. The protagonist's expansion outward, from the individual, across marginalized communities to nonh uman life, reflects the play's overarching themes (Warren 1997), while the use of ‘please’ signals Bilodeau's rejection of finite closure and instead transfers responsibility to the audience. This direct address of the audience in the final moments connect s to the academic literature by Rosemary Ruether that advocates for the development of a “healing culture” (1997: 42) grounded in collective

responsibility. Thus, No More Harveys aims to bring the audience closer and underlines that they too carry responsibility for future generations. In conclusion, the contrast of these plays’ final impact lies in their opposing messages of despair vs hope. By comparing the portrayal of Angu’řuaq's death alongside the Woman's hopeful path towards the future, these works emphasize the importance of havi ng the courage to resist exploitative and oppressive forces. Additionally, Section 4. 3.3 addresses the first research question by demonstrating that Angu’řuaq’s death in the polluted Arctic waters symbolizes the future destruction of once respected ancient interspecies bonds. Similarly, in No More Harveys , the final chorus of the Woman and the whale emphasizes that the survival of one depends upon the wellbeing of the other and thus echoes the literature by Kyle Whyte on collective continuance (2014). In response to the second research question, this secti on has illustrated that animals are portrayed as full characters by situating Angu’řuaq’s death as the emotional climax of The Breathing Hole . Likewise, the whale's guidance in No More Harveys grants the animal emotional and transformative influence (McHugh 2009). Finally, this section addresses the third research question by showing how in The Breathing Hole , the destruction of ecological balance parallels the moral decline of human society under capitalist exploitation (Warren 1997; Smith 1997). In contrast, No More Harveys suggests that the protagonist's personal healing and environmental restoration are interconnected processes. Through these parallels, both plays demonstrate that changes in the human world reflect transformations within the natural world (Warren 1997). 4.3.4 Chapter Conclusion Chapter 4. 3 moves from the process of survival, across sensory experiences of the plays, to a conclusion that emphasizes the contrasting resolutions of the two plays. Section 4. 3.1 defines migration as a shared interspecies process across time and space for both women and animals to resist oppressive forces. Building on this, Section 4. 3.2 utilizes the breath and the song as symbolic and audible markers that present this interdependence as tangible. Finally, Section 4. 3.3 utilizes these themes by highlighting the contrasting responses of each play’s conclusion. While The Breathing Hole portrays a prophetic closure of ecological grief, No More Harveys utilizes an interspecies chorus to offer a vision of communal hope.

5. Conclusion To conclude, it has been extensively demonstrated how the two ecodramas The Breathing Hole and No More Harveys are impactful literary works that uniquely challenge anthropocentric hierarchies in interspecies kinship. Overall, the theoretical frameworks of ecofeminism, animal studies, ecodramas, and Indigenous studies all come together to aid in the analysis of the se two plays to provide the scholarly foundation to illuminate the ways in which the lives of women, North American Indigenous communities, and the natural state of our planet are all structurally intertwined and dependent on each other. After having established in the introduction that the global climate crisis is gaining more and more speed and significance as it instills global anxieties for the future, the thesis went on to map out the current state of the art surrounding the two plays and the playwrights’ oeuvre. Following this, the theoretical frameworks and methodology illustrated the foundational knowledge and scholarly work necessary for the writing of the analysis on both ecodramas. The most essential and most referenced theory fo r this thesis was that of ecofeminism as defined by Karen Warren and her collaborative work Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature (1997). Her argument that systems of exploitation affect all living and sentient beings, across species borders, built the crucial foundational stance for this thesis that the human and natural world are deeply interconnected thereby underlining that the protection of the environment is inherently a feminist concern. The framework of animal studies and animal agency, as defined mos t prominently by Susan McHugh in “Literary Animal Agents” (2009), was indispensable for the research and analysis of the two ecodramas. Her criticism that historically animals have been represented only as metaphors or part of the passive landscape in hege monic literary works illustrates the importance of elevating animal characters and recognizing their influence and guidance on narratives. Thirdly, Indigenous studies provided the scholarly background to emphasize the importance of reciprocity and collecti ve responsibility for the natural world (Whyte 2014). By illuminating how traditionally, Indigenous communities prioritized care and respect for ecological life around them, Whyte's work highlighted the intersection of ecofeminist and Indigenous worldviews in their shared endeavor to resist anthropocentric systems that seek to separate the human and nonhuman. Lastly, even though the theory of ecotheater was used less than the other frameworks in the main body of the analysis, it was vital to understand how it portrays previously marginalized people and lives (Chaudhuri

1994). Especially Schafer's text, which emphasized the significance of simply listening to and understanding nature (2014: 37) intersected profoundly with claims by Indigenous scholars. Combined, the ecofeminist and interspecies perspectives illustrated ab ove allowed for an in - depth analysis on how both ecodramas thematize the environmental exploitation of endangered habitats, the interdependence between the human and natural world, and the link between exploitative systems of oppression with ecological lif e. To summarize the research findings, this thesis has successfully addressed the three core research questions and incorporated the theoretical frameworks upon which it bases its analysis. In response to the first research question, the analysis has underlin ed the significance of reciprocal and nurturing interspecies bonds across both texts, that portray human and animal lives as intrinsically connected. The second research question is primarily answered through the analysis of the portrayal and significance of the polar bears Angu’řuaq and Ukuannuaq, and the blue whale, who are consistently portrayed as active participants and moral teachers across both plays. Rather being reduced to mere literary tropes, as McHugh's theory criticizes, the animals exert meani ngful influence over the plot and other characters. Lastly, the third research question is addressed by the analysis’ demonstration that human trauma, especially that of women, is mirrored and paralleled in environmental degradation. Most notably, this is presented through the intuitive kinship between the Woman and the whale and the portrayal of the death of the Arctic as a consequence of colonial and capitalist endeavors. Therefore, every section of this thesis has responded to one or multiple of the guid ing research questions and has illustrated the link between human and nonhuman life. One can clearly argue however, that the most influential moments of the plays are their final ending. Murphy and Bilodeau's texts portray many similarities both in themes and staging choices, however, their closing scenes stand in contrast to each other. W here the death of the beloved polar bear Angu'řuaq evokes shock and grief, Bilodeau's work ends on a beautifully hopeful tone. To end this thesis, I would like to build on top of the latter's optimism and refer to the following quotation by Michael Zimmerm an: “only by recognizing that humanity is no more, but also no less, important than all other things on Earth can we learn to dwell on the planet within limits that would allow other species to flourish” (Zimmerman qtd. in Smith 2009: 25). This sentiment s uccinctly articulates the strong ecofeminist tone of this thesis as it envisions a future in which the human and natural world can coexist in

a harmonious manner. More importantly, this quote crystallizes the most significant takeaway of both ecodramas: Only by having the courage to resist the Harveys of this world and the humility to position ourselves as equal to the nonhuman, can we create mu tually reciprocal kinships with it.

6. Works Cited Andrews, David Brook. “Theater Review: 'Sila' at Central Square Theatre Takes Us Far.” Wicked Local , Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2014. https://eu.wickedlocal.com/story/cambridge - chronicle - tab/2014/05/04/theater - review - sila - at - central/37432565007/ . An Inconvenient Truth . Directed by Davis Guggenheim, Paramount Classics, 2006. Arluk, Reneltta . “If Every Step You Took Was Marked, What Would You Leave Behind?” Stratford Festival , Ontario, Canada, 2017. https://cds.stratfordfestival.ca/uploadedFiles/Whats_On/Plays_and_Events/ Plays/2017/The - Virgin - Trial(1)/About_The_Play/9400%20 - %202017%20House%20Program_BRE_BC_p29.pdf . Audience Member. Comment on No More Harveys . Chantal Bilodeau , Canada, https://www.cbilodeau.com/no - more - harveys . Balestrini, Nassim W. “Sounding the Arctic in Chantal Bilodeau’s Climate Change Plays.” Nordic Theatre Studies , vol. 32, no. 1, May 2020, pp. 66 – 81, https://doi.org/10.7146/nts.v32i1.120408 . Bennet, John. “Weep, O Mine Eyes.” UK, 1599. Bilodeau, Chantal. Forward . Talonbooks, Vancouver, Canada, 2017. Bilodeau, Chantal. “Hit Me Where It Hurts: The Intersection of Theater and Climate Change.” Extraordinary Partnerships: How the Arts and Humanities Are Transforming America , Lever Press, 2020, pp. 215 – 32. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.11649046.17 . Bilodeau, Chantal. No More Harveys . Talonbooks, Vancouver, 2023. https://biblio.vub.ac.be/opac/3/2747086 . Bilodeau, Chantal. Sila . Talonbooks, Vancouver, Canada, 2015. Chaudhuri, Una. “‘There Must Be a Lot of Fish in That Lake:’ Toward an Ecological Theatre.” Duke University Press, North Carolina, USA, 1994. https://www.scribd.com/document/905883149/There - Must - Be - a - Lot - of - Fish - in - That - Lake . Chaudhuri, Una. “(De)Facing the Animals Zooësis and Performance.” TDR (1988 - ) , vol. 51, no. 1, 2007, pp. 8 – 20. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4492732 . Cless, Downing. “Eco - Theatre, USA: The Grassroots Is Greener.” TDR (1988 - ) , vol. 40, no. 2, 1996, pp. 79 – 102. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1146531 . Cushman, Robert. “What War Horse Did For Horses, The Breathing Hole Does For Bears.” National Post , Canada, 2017. https://nationalpost.com/entertainment/theatre/the - breathing - hole - review - what - war - horse - did - for - horses - this - does - for - bears . The Day After Tomorrow . Directed by Roland Emmerich, 20th Century Fox, 2004.

Don't Look Up . Directed by Adam McKay, Netflix, 2021. Fricker, Karen. “Gasp at Emotional Depth of Breathing Hole at Stratford Festival.” Press, Colleen Murphy , Canada, 2017. https://colleenmurphy.ca/work/theatre/03 - the - breathing - hole.html . Gaynor, Gloria. “I Will Survive.” USA, 1978. Gienaw, Lauren. “Review: The Breathing Hole at The Stratford Festival Offers Beautiful Design and Compelling Storytelling.” Broadway World , Toronto, Canada, 2017. https://www.broadwayworld.com/toronto/article/BWW - Review - THE - BREATHING - HOLE - at - the - Stratford - Festival - Offers - Beautiful - Design - and - Compelling - Storytelling - 20170923 . “God Save The Queen.” UK, 1745. Harper, Kenn. “A Confluence of Creatures and Souls.” Stratford Festival , Ontario, Canada, 2017. https://cds.stratfordfestival.ca/uploadedFiles/Whats_On/Plays_and_Events/ Plays/2017/The - Virgin - Trial(1)/About_The_Play/9400%20 - %202017%20House%20Program_BRE_BC_p29.pdf . Hoile, Christopher. “ The Breathing Hole .” Stage Door , Stratford, Ontario, 2017. https://www.stage - door.com/Theatre/2017/Entries/2017/8/29_The_Breathing_Hole.html . International Foundation for Animal Welfare. “Which Animals Were Most Impacted By Climate Change in 2024.” 2025. https://www.ifaw.org/international/journal/animals - most - impacted - climate - change . IPCC. “Summary for Policymakers.” Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report , 2023, pp. 1 – 34, doi:10.59327/IPCC/AR6 - 9789291691647. Karen Warren and Nisvan. Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature . Indiana University Press, 1997. https://biblio.vub.ac.be/opac/3/1886787 . Martello, Marybeth. “Arctic Indigenous Peoples as Representations and Representatives of Climate Change.” Social Studies of Science , vol. 38, no. 3, 2008, pp. 351 – 76. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25474584 . May, Theresa. Comment on No More Harveys . Chantal Bilodeau , Canada. https://www.cbilodeau.com/no - more - harveys . May, Theresa J. Earth Matters on Stage: Ecology and Environment in American Theater . Routledge, 2020. May, Theresa J. “Greening the Theater: Taking Ecocriticism from Page to Stage.” Interdisciplinary Literary Studies , vol. 7, no. 1, 2005, pp. 84 – 103. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41209932 . McDermid, Sonali Shukla. “No More Harveys.” goodreads , 2023. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/89624593 - no - more - harveys . McHugh, Susan. “Literary Animal Agents.” PMLA , vol. 124, no. 2, 2009, pp. 487 – 95. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25614289 .

Mendelssohn, Felix. “O For The Wings of a Dove.” Germany, 1844. Morano, Marc. “Canadian Playwright Features Arctic Climate Change, a Poet, a Goddess, and Two Talking Polar Bears.” Climate Depot , Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 2018. https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/07/10/canadian - playwright - features - arctic - climate - change - a - poet - a - goddess - and - two - talking - polar - bears/ . Murphy, Colleen. The Breathing Hole . Playwrights Canada Press, Toronto, 2020. https://biblio.vub.ac.be/opac/3/2747089 . Newton, John. “Amazing Grace.” UK, 1779. Nichols, Dudley. “Theatre, Society, Education.” Educational Theatre Journal , vol. 8, no. 3, 1956, pp. 179 – 84. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3204112 . Pongiglione, Francesca, and Jan Cherlet. “The Social and Behavioral Dimensions of Climate Change: Fundamental but Disregarded?” Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie , vol. 46, no. 2, 2015, pp. 383 – 91. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44113607 . Robinson, Vanessa. “Poetry's Language of Animals: Towards a New Understanding of The Animal Other.” The Modern Language Review , vol. 110, no. 1, 2015, pp. 28 – 46. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.5699/modelangrevi.110.1.0028 . Ruether, Rosemary. “Ecofeminism: First and Third World Women.” American Journal of Theology & Philosophy , vol. 18, no. 1, 1997, pp. 33 – 45. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27944009 . Saxberg, Lynn. “How a Play Called The Breathing Hole Has Transformed to Reclaim Language and Model Indigenous Pathmaking.” Ottawa Citizen , Ottawa, Canada, 2022. https://ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/how - a - play - called - the - breathing - hole - has - transformed - to - reclaim - language - and - model - indigenous - pathmaking . Schafer, R. Murray, et al. “Eco - Theatre.” PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art , vol. 36, no. 1, 2014, pp. 35 – 44. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26386662 . Shanahan, Mike. Talking About a Revolution: Climate Change and the Media . International Institute for Environment and Development, 2007. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep01410 . Shannon, Laurie. “The Eight Animals in Shakespeare; Or, Before The Human.” PMLA , vol. 124, no. 2, 2009, pp. 472 – 79. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25614287 . Shein, Adam. “Review: The Breathing Hole/Aglu Foreshadows Humanity’s Cultural and Ecological Demise.” apt613 , Canada, 2022. https://apt613.ca/review - the - breathing - hole - aglu - foreshadows - humanitys - cultural - and - ecological - demise/ . Simon, Mary. “Canadian Inuit: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going.” International Journal , vol. 66, no. 4, 2011, pp. 879 – 91. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23104399 .

Smith, Andy. “Ecofeminism Through an Anticolonial Framework.” Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature , Indiana University Press, 1997. https://biblio.vub.ac.be/opac/3/1886787 . Thomas, Aaron. Comment on No More Harveys . goodreads , 2024. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/89624593 - no - more - harveys . “The Whale's Song - No More Harveys.” digitalculture , Samos, Greece, 2023. https://digitalculture.gov.gr/2023/08/the - whales - song - no - more - harveys - theatre - of - the - ancient - city - of - samos - wooden - theatre/ . Warren, Karen. Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature . Indiana University Press, 1997. https://biblio.vub.ac.be/opac/3/1886787 . Whyte, Kyle Powys. “Indigenous Women, Climate Change Impacts, and Collective Action.” Hypatia , vol. 29, no. 3, 2014, pp. 599 – 616. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24542019 . Wolfe, Cary. “Human, All Too Human: ‘Animal Studies’ and the Humanities.” PMLA , vol. 124, no. 2, 2009, pp. 564 – 75. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25614299 . Zimmerman, Michael. “Deep Ecology and Ecofeminism.” Reweaving the World , San Francisco, 1990.