2025, Robert Macfarlane’s is a lyrical exploration of the "Rights of Nature" movement, advocating for a radical shift in how humanity views and legally protects waterways.
Summary of "Is a River Alive?"
- The Central Thesis: The work argues that rivers should be recognized as living, rights-bearing entities in both imagination and law, rather than mere "natural resources" for human extraction.
- Three Global Journeys: Macfarlane chronicles travels to three distinct river systems facing different threats:
- Ecuador: The cloud forests and mountain streams of Los Cedros, protected from gold mining by landmark legal rulings.
- India: The "wounded" creeks and lagoons of Chennai, heavily polluted by industrial effluent yet defended by local activists.
- Canada: The wild Mutehekau Shipu (Magpie River) in Quebec, which was granted legal personhood to prevent its destruction by hydroelectric dams.
- The Personal Thread: These global travels are braided with the story of a fragile chalk stream near Macfarlane’s home in Cambridge, England, serving as a localized reflection on the changing state of water over time.
- "Grammar of Animacy": Macfarlane adopts the term from Robin Wall Kimmerer, shifting his language to refer to rivers as "who" (persons) rather than "it" (objects) to foster a deeper moral connection.
- Collaborative Voices: The narrative is "lit by other voices," including Indigenous leaders, mycologists like Giuliana Furci, and environmental activists like Yuvan Aves.
Relevance in 2026
This work is highly relevant as 2026 sees a critical period of global environmental litigation. It addresses the "Eremocene" (the age of loneliness), arguing that sustainable existence requires moving beyond anthropocentric thinking to solve the global water crisis. By late 2025 and into 2026, the book has become a "clarion call" for environmentalists seeking legal personhood for ecosystems as a tool against industrial exploitation.
Strong and Weak Points of the Work
Strong Points
- Immersive, Lyrical Prose: Macfarlane is widely praised for his "glittering" and "dazzling" style, which transforms a dense legal and philosophical topic into a sensory, deeply moving experience. Reviewers highlight his ability to place readers in "immersive contact" with nature.
- Scholarly Depth: Despite its poetic nature, the book is underpinned by rigorous research, featuring over 30 pages of notes and a detailed glossary that spans law, history, and philosophy.
- Blending the Personal and Political: By alternating between high-stakes international battles and the quiet history of his local chalk stream, Macfarlane makes the abstract concept of "river rights" relatable to the reader’s own backyard.
- Actionable Framework: The work moves beyond mere observation to promote a tangible legal movement, providing successful examples (like the Magpie River) where these philosophies have already been encoded into law.
Weak Points
- Pretentious and Portentous Language: Critics have noted an abundance of "awkward pseudo-poetic statements" that can feel exaggerated or unnecessary. Some reviewers found his epiphanies so "portentous" and "windy" that they created a distance from the reader.
- Scientific Tension: Some readers from a scientific background find that the book stretches the metaphor of "aliveness" beyond its breaking point, potentially alienating those who prefer a purely biological or objective approach.
- Sentimentality: The work is occasionally dismissed as "mawkish" or "sentimental," particularly in its epilogue where Macfarlane imagines his children scattering his ashes, which some argue detracted from the more rigorous political arguments.
- Ventriloquism Concerns: There is an inherent philosophical struggle regarding "who speaks for the river," with critics questioning whether granting rights to nature merely creates "human proxies" who might misinterpret or exploit the river's perceived "will" for political gain.