Silent Spring (1962) was on of the defining books of the twentieth century, a title that brought light the dangers that agribusiness placed on the environment through the national use of insecticides a business that generated $300 million. What made Carson's work important, was the fact that it was written with the general public in mind rather than filling the paper with technical jargon. This enabled her voice to reach a wider audience, but in doing so it raised issues of validity, and issues of sexism. One of the tactics used by the pesticide industry was to label Carson as confused 'spinster'. The industry was definitely wary of her affect, as she emerged at a time when environmentalism reached a mainstream level.

1. James Jarvis HI796
Why was the chemical industry so fearful of Rachel Carson?
Rachel Carson, author of possibly the most influential piece of
environmental literature in the twentieth century and a product of its time
from the 1960s. Through Silent Spring – published in book form in 1962 -
Carson not only informed the public about the ills of general insecticides use
within the environment, she took it upon herself to challenge the big engines
of American infrastructure; the chemical industry, along with agribusiness,
academic researchers and governmental agencies. The chemical industry
was right to be fearful, their practices and credentials were under threat. By
aiming her writing style for an audience without strong scientific knowledge,
Carson was able to broaden her influence beyond the scientific base, which
in turn enabled her to widen her net of mobilised readers.
This thesis will analyse key aspects of Rachel Carson‟s affiliation to the
chemical industry. A basic outline of Carson‟s professional background will
displayed in order to understand what made Carson important, not only as
an astute researcher but also her role in a male dominated field. Key
aspects are the push for a “balance” in nature and her gifts as a writer
which allowed her to become a celebrity author.
The document in question, Silent Spring, will be analysed from a literal
and cultural perspective to portray why it had so much impact on a mass
audience during a time of cultural unrest of the Cold War era. Silent Spring
was literally unique through Rachel Carson‟s interweave of comprehensive
scientific fact, first-hand accounts, and vivid imagery which is evident inside
the introductory chapter “A Fable for Tomorrow”.
The reason as to why the chemical industry was so fearful about Rachel
Carson is significantly down to what they stood too loose or at least what
they perceived to loose. The three main subjects at risk were loss of sales
revenue, increased governmental regulation, and, most importantly,
credibility of a professional and moral issue.
The strategy and insistency of the counterattacks levelled against Carson
were representative of the apprehension on the part of the chemical
industry. This was understandable. However, what is of concern was the
apparent sexist nature of the antagonism directed at Rachel Carson.
Examples of these counterattacks will be explored.
To finish, a relevant outline of Silent Spring’s legacy will be defined. How
exactly it helped to bring about changes within the infrastructure of the
chemical industry, policy introductions, and its influence over bringing the
environmentalist movement in to the mainstream.
Rachel Carson can essentially be described as an author first and biologist
second, and that is the formula of her success. Born in Pennsylvania on
22nd May, 1907, Carson showed a talent for writing even at a young age and
1

2. James Jarvis HI796
she soon showed an interest in natural sciences of which her career focused
upon.1 Carson graduated from the Pennsylvania College for Women in 1928
which is the foundation of her educational credentials. She later achieved a
master‟s degree in zoology and taught at John Hopkins and the University of
Maryland. Finding work with a position with in the U.S. Bureau of Fishers,
now named the Fish and Wildlife Service, and brief work in the bureau‟s war
information office in Chicago, Carson combined her two interests as she
wrote articles and short publications for a scientific field. She eventually
worked herself to the position of editor in chief.2
Being employed for scientific governmental agencies would prove to be the
most fundamental part of Carson‟s strength against counterattacks from her
targets. It provided her with a strong base for defending her credentials by
demonstrating knowledge and experience in a respectable working
environment. Since it would turn out that the practices of government
agencies was one of her targets of Silent Spring.
Prior to the landmark literature, Rachel Carson published two books that
propelled her in to the public eye. The first, The Sea Around Us (1951),
afforded her the gravitas in the literally field. A book that discussed the sea
and its life became an instant best-seller.3 The title won the National Book
Award for non-fiction and Carson was received in to the Academy of Arts
and letters.4 The revenues from The Sea Around US afforded her the
financial security to pursue her writing full-time and hence resign from Fish
and Wildlife. Carson‟s next book, and second best-seller, The Edge of the
Sea (1955) secured her position as a celebrity author of the non-fiction
genre.5
Her prior professional successes and prestige have been integral in
affording her the backing of reputable publishers, serialization in the New
Yorker and Houghton Mifflin, since her next work provided a controversial
storm that was inevitably going to attack not only the title in question but
Carson herself.
Silent Spring focuses on Rachel Carson‟s concern for the future of the
environment under threat by the universal application of insecticides,
especially dichloro-dephenyl-trichloro-ethane (DDT). In reading Silent
Spring it is apparent that Carson‟s use of prose is extremely skilled. A key
and concurrent aspect of the title is the handling of factual information
while at the same time avoiding alienating neither the general readership
nor the scientific association. Accessibility is the big theme of this title, at
1
Linda Lear, ‘Introduction’, Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (New York: First Mariner Books, 2002) pp xi-xii
2
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring (Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press, 2001) p 20
3
Ibid., p 23
4
Linda Lear, ‘Introduction’, Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (New York: First Mariner Books, 2002) p xiv
5
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 23
2

3. James Jarvis HI796
first published in a serialized form for the New Yorker and adding sources in
its book form.
Ultimately the aim, or „mission‟ as it can otherwise be called, of Silent
Spring was to first inform the public of the environmental dangers and
human costs of insecticide use while at the same time exposing the
irresponsible and indiscriminate practices and polices of the chemical
industry unchecked by government agencies, agribusiness and academic
researchers.6 Rachel Carson also criticised the American capitalism in to
what she saw as the reason behind pointless overproduction.7 Second,
Carson looked to bring into question the nature of human behaviour inside
the framework of naturalised environments. The final aspect of Silent Spring
was to mobilise the public by influencing their attitudes towards insecticide
products and therefore strive towards maintaining a “balanced”
environment.8
It is these aims that the chemical industry found Rachel Carson to be a
threat of the highest magnitude. However, these aims can only have the
highest potential if portrayed in a successful framework of writing skills of
the highest order while providing accomplished scientific knowledge to
effectively persuader her audience.
In referencing Lawrence Buell‟s work about techniques for effective
environmental literature, it is evident that Rachel Carson had used what
Buell described as environmental imagination; an effective method to
„reconnect‟ readers to nature through attitudes, feelings, images, and
narratives.9 Silent Spring opens with these elements in her introduction
titled „A Fable for Tomorrow‟. The metaphors used evoked strong imagery
that directly related to those fairy tale stories of old. Starting off by painting
an idyllic scene, “THERE WAS ONCE a town in the heart of America where
all life seemed to live in harmony with its surroundings”, Carson then uses
terms such as “evil spell” and “witchcraft” before ending with the poignant
sentence “The people had done it themselves” when referring to the silence
of nature.10
As Killingsworth and Palmer observed, Rachel Carson explicitly used such
„apocalyptic narrative‟ as a form of shock tactic technique in order to elevate
the problem at hand in the readers‟ minds. What Carson did with „A Fable
for Tomorrow‟ was not to paint a picture of the present but a future
scenario, a worse case scenario where agriculture died, human illnesses,
and sudden unexplained deaths. Throughout the book the language
6
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, pp 1, 29
7
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (New York: First Mariner Books, 2002) p 8-9
8
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, pp 1, 20-32
9
Lawrence Buell, Writing for an Endangered World: Literature, Culture, and Environment In the U.S. and
Beyond (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001) pp 1-2
10
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, pp 1-3
3

4. James Jarvis HI796
conjured the „fear of the end of the world‟ and thus placed urgency to the
masses in what could have been a stale and wholly academic writing.11
However, it is wrong to wholly summarise Silent Spring due to the
interpretation of the introducing chapter. Rachel Carson reigned in her
creative ability and focused on the matter at hand: to develop a persuading
case study of the highest quality while at the same time maintaining
credibility. Not blighted with an exclusive scientific discourse, Silent Spring
explained, with accessibility, the problems relating to DDT through
numerous principle sources. Priscilla Coit Murphy considered the fifty-five
pages of reference material provided Carson the legitimating needed for her
argument.12 It made it much harder for to centre counterattacks on a
collective than an individual.
Among the sources, however, was the efficient use of personal accounts in
order to maintain a human connection to the reader was used liberally
throughout Silent Spring. For instance in the chapter „And No Birds Sing‟ a
housewife‟s letter was quoted in order to illustrate the despair of the
situation, as “After several years of DDT spray, the town is almost devoid of
[prior abundance of] robins and starlings”.13 Personal accounts helped to
provide an „environmental awakening‟ for readers in a physical environment
that has increasingly been composed by geopolitics, technology, and
capital.14
It is clear that Silent Spring had a rhythm of an investigative, journalistic
style.15 The framework seemed to set a pattern starting with anecdotes and
dramatic themes such as “[man] has written a depressing record of
destruction”. Then it is supported in the middle through a charge of source
material and accuracy before concluding with some form of philosophical
commentary, “Confusion, delusions, loss of memory, mania – a heavy price
to pay”.16 Each chapter in this book followed the format of drama, fact, and
philosophy.17
Rachel Carson indeed used contemporary topics in order to arouse
significant and relating attitudes. In part with the „apocalyptic narrative‟ the
constant reference to the Cold War was used, in particularly the radioactive
compound Strontium 90 that was an integral part of the controversial
atomic bomb tests in Nevada and New Mexico. In fact, Carson went so far
11
Jimmie Killingsworth and Jacqueline S. Palmer, ‘Millennial Ecology: The Apocalyptic Narrative from Silent
Spring to Global Warming’, Carl G. Herndl and Stuart C. Brown (eds.), Green Culture: Environmental Rhetoric in
Contemporary America (Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1996) pp 49
12
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, pp 1, 29
13
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, p 103
14
Lawrence Buell, Writing for an Endangered World: Literature, Culture, and Environment In the U.S. and
Beyond, pp 5, 18
15
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 10
16
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, pp 85, 198
17
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 10
4

5. James Jarvis HI796
as to do an outline of the possible symptoms of radiation, a “cell uncoupler”
for one and off course cancer. Another Cold War theme found in Silent
Spring is the sense of “escalation”. It directly relates to the Arms Race that
saw the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. trying to best each other with weapons of
dangerous potential. The escalation of DDT to combat evolving pests is
deemed by Carson as “a central problem equal to nuclear extinction”.18 In
associating the anxious consciousness towards atomic energy, the book
effectively translated those concerns to the emerging world of chemicals.
Through a meticulous writing style Carson had managed to bring about
the message of insecticide as a dangerous agent in nature‟s environment.
However, Silent Spring was somewhat fortuitous since it had the advantage
of emerging during a tumultuous time in American history, namely the
Cultural Revolution. The notion that humanity would be better served living
in “simpler circumstances” emerged. For the first time, a universal concern
for the consequences of human activity found itself in scholarly discourse
and popular culture during the 1960s. Environmentalism as a movement
amassed momentum that eventually took form in cultural protests.
Environmental costs had succeeded in entering mainstream politics.19
Other noted works that was published during this decade were Paul
Ehrlich‟s Population Bomb and The Tragedy of the Commons by Garrett
Harding, both published in 1968.
It would be foolish to suggest that Silent Spring started the Environmental
Movement of the 1960s, however it is not a stretch to propose that the book
did accentuate it or at the very least helped bring it into the limelight. After
all, like Rachel Carson‟s The Sea Around Us, Silent Spring created a “national
sensation” and made cemented her place as a literally celebrity.20 National
success coupled with her aims, the accessibility of her writing, numerous
sources to highlight her credentials, and the fact it arrived on the cusp of
the Cultural Revolution that saw many changes that fractured the
conservative order in America, the chemical industry had much to fear and
loose.
The first risk for the chemical industry, and the least, was the potential
loss in sales revenues from the often-quoted “$300-million pesticide
business”. The fact of the matter was, that there were no good alternative
from the established commercial agricultural pesticides. Over sixty percent
of retails sales went to famers, an established base for which the industry
had secure revenue from and on a mass stock, even if individual home
owners decided to avoid purchasing the pesticides. However, there is still a
18
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, pp 8, 203, 234
19
Hal k. Rothman, The Greening of a Nation? Environmentalism in the United States Since 1945 (New York:
Harcourt Brace & Company, 1988) pp 83-5
20
Ibid., p 88
5

6. James Jarvis HI796
potential forty percent loss that the chemical industry faced when Silent
Spring still appeared.21
A second risk that the chemical industry faced was the possible loss of
millions in revenue from government programs. The amount of government
purchases was never stated due to the unpredictability of the programs that
were subject to bids. Nevertheless, government expenses would have
represented a fair portion of the estimated chemical use which was with in
the region of $700 million and $1 billion per year. 22
The third risk was worries over the loss of prestige and credibility since
the chemical industry portrayed itself as the parties which were concerned
with public welfare. If pesticides were to be banned then the high regard of
an established sector would be at endangered.23 This is in turn related to
the era of the 1960s antiestablishment and therefore brought a sense of
reality to these beliefs among the hierarchy of the chemical industry.
However, the greatest risk to the industry was the presumption of
increased oversight, control, and regulation from outside the borders of the
chemical industry and its friendly governmental agencies. The potential for
new regulations was forecasted to be more costly than the decline of
revenues and loss of public relation legitimacy. The concern was that
legislation could become so restrictive that it would take the profit out of
research efforts into new products.24
These four risks that concerned the chemical industry justified there
efforts in counterattack Silent Spring through costly public-relation
expenditures in order to preserve there commercial standing in American
agriculture. The campaign can essentially be split into two camps; first, to
criticise the book in terms of content and research and, second, to discredit
Rachel Carson‟s character. The industry spent over a quarter of a million
dollars in order to win the fight against Silent Spring, thus representing their
fears in their actions.
A logical assessment of Silent Spring was that it was wholly biased and
presented only one case rather than formulating the apparent advantages of
synthetic pesticides.25 The chemical industry‟s official approach was to
proceed in the „positive offensive‟ avenue by lauding the benefits and
necessity of pesticide use, proclaiming its safety, and reassuring the public
that research was thorough.26 This is a direct challenge to one of Carson‟s
21
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 96
22
Ibid., p 96-7
23
Ibid., p 97
24
Ibid., p 98
25
Hal k. Rothman, The Greening of a Nation? Environmentalism in the United States Since 1945, p 88
26
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 99
6

7. James Jarvis HI796
attacks on an industry which she accused of denying any environmental
losses and only dealing with half-truths.27
The booklet, Fact and Fancy, by the National Agricultural Chemicals
Association (NACA) claimed that Silent Spring was grounded only in
accusations without fact.28 A parody of the chapter „A Fable for Tomorrow‟
was released by Monsanto, titled The Desolate Year used the „apocalyptic
narrative‟ technique in its favour to give disturbing imagery of a world
without insecticides.29
The method of Carson‟s approach to scientific material was also in
question with criticisms that a book about science should be targeted to an
audience of the scientific field. Federick Stare put forward the idea that
“Miss Carson writes with passion and with beauty, but with very little
scientific detachment”.30 Essentially Silent Spring could be deemed to little
more than propaganda. Another criticism levelled at Rachel Carson was the
questionable use of numerous sources. Her critics provided the idea that
she was „name-dropping‟ in order to divert attention away from her lack of
scientific validity.31 The book seemed to depend too much on informants
rather than Carson‟s own research.32 Yet when sources were checked a new
claim emerged, the sources were out-of-date and did not represent the
modifications that have developed since publication.
Another counter attack approach by the chemical industry, as mentioned,
was to discredit Rachel Carson as a person, yet such criticisms were sexist
in nature. The gendered language used represented the times where women
were seen to be „innately more connected to the natural world‟. All attacks,
from trade journals to popular news magazines such as Chemical and
Engineering and Time, respectively, were almost all written by men. They
were suspicious of Carson who was an independent scholar who approached
the scientific field in an unaccustomed way, namely targeting a mass
audience.33
Michael B. Smith highlighted the most sexist review of Silent Spring
appeared in the Chemical and Engineering News magazine in October 1962.
William Darby‟s, “Silence Miss Carson!” said that Rachel Carson “was a
uniformed woman was speaking of that which she knew not”, she was
voicing her opinions in a „man‟s world‟ and that female silence was
27
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, pp 86
28
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 99
29
‘The Desolate Year’, Monsanto Magazine (October 1962) pp 4-9
30
Frederick J. Stare, ‘Some Comments on Silent Spring’, Nutrition Reviews (January 1963) p 1
31
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 104
32
Jimmie Killingsworth and Jacqueline S. Palmer, ‘Millennial Ecology: The Apocalyptic Narrative from Silent
Spring to Global Warming’, Carl G. Herndl and Stuart C. Brown (eds.), Green Culture: Environmental Rhetoric in
Contemporary America, p 31
33
Michael B. Smith, ‘“Silence Miss Carson” Science, Gender, and the reception of “Silent Spring”’, Feminist
Studies, Vol.27, No.3 (Autumn, 2001) p 735
7

8. James Jarvis HI796
expected.34 Other terms used against Carson was that she was a woman
out of control, a “spinster”, and hysterical.35
Despite her detractors, Silent Spring and Rachel Carson had an
achievement and a legacy that will be associated, despite how brief the
influence was. President John F. Kennedy investigated Carson‟s claims as
soon as he read her thesis, in particularly the subjected residents of aerial
spraying, which in turn cumulated in the eventual domestic ban of DDT
production six years after Carson‟s death in 1964.36 Readers were
compelled to write letters in their numbers, Carson had succeeded in her
aim to mobilise the public.37 Initially environmentalism experienced a boom
in mainstream politics at the turn of the 1970s with numerous legislations;
such as the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act, the 1972 Water
Pollution Control Act, and the 1976 Toxic Substances Act. However, by the
end of the 1970s, environmentalists faced a hostile mainstream culture and
were labelled as pathological crisis-mongers, apocalypse abusers, and false
prophets.38
Fundamentally, despite decades of awareness and environmental protests
the reduction of the use of pesticides has still yet to take effect. Therefore,
in the bigger picture it could be deemed that the appropriate fears towards
Rachel Carson by the chemical industry were ultimately a false one.
Nonetheless, it is integral to recognise the enormity that one person had
succeeded an individual who dared to face the corporate world and created
enough leeway to influence initial changes.
34
Michael B. Smith, ‘“Silence Miss Carson” Science, Gender, and the reception of “Silent Spring”’, Feminist
Studies, p 738
35
Linda Lear, ‘Introduction’, Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (New York: First Mariner Books, 2002) p xiv, xvii
36
Ibid., xvii-iii
37
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, p 99
38
Federick Buell, From Apocalypse to Way of Life: Environmental Crisis in the American Century (New York:
Routledge, 2004) p 10, 34
8

9. James Jarvis HI796
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Rachel Carson, Introduction by Linda Lear, Silent Spring (New York: First
Mariner Books, 2002).
Priscilla Coit Murphy, What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of
Silent Spring (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2001).
Lawrence Buell, Writing for an Endangered World: Literature, Culture, and
Environment In the U.S. and Beyond (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press, 2001).
Jimmie Killingsworth and Jacqueline S. Palmer, „Millennial Ecology: The
Apocalyptic Narrative from Silent Spring to Global Warming‟, Carl G.
Herndl and Stuart C. Brown (eds.), Green Culture: Environmental Rhetoric
in Contemporary America (Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press,
1996).
John M. Steadman, „Chaucer‟s Eagle: A Contemplative Symbol‟, PMLA, Vol.
75, No.3 (June 1960) pp 153-59.
Hal k. Rothman, The Greening of a Nation? Environmentalism in the United
States Since 1945 (New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1988).
„The Desolate Year‟, Monsanto Magazine (October 1962).
Frederick J. Stare, „Some Comments on Silent Spring‟, Nutrition Reviews
(January 1963) 1-4
Michael B. Smith, „“Silence Miss Carson” Science, Gender, and the reception
of “Silent Spring”‟, Feminist Studies, Vol.27, No.3 (Autumn, 2001) 733-
752.
Federick Buell, From Apocalypse to Way of Life: Environmental Crisis in the
American Century (New York: Routledge, 2004).
9