Reading Nature’s Resilience through an
Eco-horror and Ecofeminist Study of Boomika
(2021)
Dr. Bhawna Singh
Assistant Professor
Department of English
Chaudhary Charan Singh University
Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India
&
Prerna Bharti
Ph.D. Research Scholar
Department of English
Chaudhary Charan Singh University
Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India
Abstract: Anthropocentrism in the 21st
century is exposing the darkest side of human actions on nature and the
environment. Richard Walker, through his works, emphasizes that the real enemy
is not humanity itself, but capitalism, whose continuous exploitation of
(wo)man and nature is leading us toward the brink of the Earth (Walker). This
paper particularly examines the ecohorror, ecogothic and ecofeminism theories
through Boomika (2021), a film
directed and written by Rathindran R. Prasad. The study argues that the film
critiques humanocentrism and patriarchal exploitation of both women and the
ecosystem. Boomika is a teenage girl and nature lover who represents the
connection between nature and a woman as Mother Earth. The director, in his
personal interview, especially focuses on human arrogance, the Gaia hypothesis
and the comparison of Earth with the woman’s body, constructing a key framework
for critically analyzing the film. In the film Nature’s imagery, such as
Boomika’s wall paintings, the abandoned school engulfed by dense vegetation, and
the deep dark forest, further supports the theme of ecological resilience and
autonomy. By situating Boomika
within ecofeminist, ecohorror, ecogothic theories and Gaia hypothesis
philosophy, this article asserts that this film is not just a horror story but
an intense reflection on ecological justice. This paper demonstrates how, in
the film, both nature and women were unfairly exploited and made to “suffer”
under capitalist patriarchy, and how they both collaborated to erase these
injustices against them.
Keywords: Ecocinema, Ecohorror, Ecofeminism, Humanocentrism, Gaia Hypothesis,
Environmental Justice
Introduction
“Ecohorror may be the dominant
mode in which we talk to ourselves about the global climate crisis and the
real-life ecological horrors of our current Anthropocenic moment” (Tidwell and Soles 3).
The horror genre, conventionally connected with fear
of the unknown, here reconstructs the results of ecological damage. This
suggests that the real fear does not lie in ghosts but in human arrogance and
environmental neglect. The term “eco-horror” for the very first time appeared
or was popularized in a 2008 NPR article (Ulaby). Scholar Teresa Fitzpatrick in
The Rise in Ecohorror and Ecogothic Criticism argued that ecohorror and
ecogothic focus on the uneasy relationship between human and non-human world.
This relationship is not balanced and calm; rather, it is disturbed because of
human actions. As a result, the natural world is viewed as frightening or
“monstrous” (2). According to Our World in Data, over the past 10,000 years,
anthropogenic factors have led to the destruction of approximately one-third of
the world’s forests, an area twice the size of the United States (Ritchie).
There are many reasons behind the loss of forests: fuel harvesting, conversion
to agriculture, fires, and infrastructure such as roads, railways, dams, power
lines, etc. Deforestation threatens biological diversity, alters water cycles
and soil fertility, and also destroys the livelihoods of the people who live in
and around the forests. We can understand this theory through the Indian
Tamil-language horror and ecological thriller film Boomika (2021),
written and directed by Rathindran R. Prasad. This film engages deeply with the
ecological exploitation, humanocentrism, and capitalist patriarchy through a
distinctive synthesis of horror and ecofeminist themes. It resists a narrow
reading as a supernatural thriller. Instead, it situates itself within a
broader ecological philosophy, particularly the Gaia hypothesis, while
simultaneously engaging with the lived consequences of patriarchal domination.
This study aims to explore how Boomika positions women and nature as
interconnected agents victimized by violence, and how horror is applied as a
medium to both critique and resist ecological and patriarchal oppression. The
story of the film Boomika is about a young autistic girl named Boomika,
which is a Sanskrit word meaning “Earth” or “Soil”, whose deep attachment to
nature transforms her into a haunting embodiment of ecological resistance after
her tragic death. Later on, it is revealed that she committed suicide because
she was extremely disturbed by the ongoing infrastructure projects, which
threatened to destroy the nearby forest area. Her spirit haunts an abandoned
school and forest area and reclaims the environment to restore an ecological
balance. Through key dialogues, sounds, and imagery, such as roots overtaking
walls and wall paintings of a stable ecological system painted by Boomika,
which were converted into polluted ruins, the film highlights humans’
negligence towards nature. Paul Kennedy, in Vampire Capitalism (2016),
writes that modern global capitalism is the real villain because it not only
deepens social inequalities but also becomes a major contributor to climate
change. It feeds on both nature and weaker people, just like a vampire feeds on
its victims (202-235).
Through the deeper study of the film, we can analyze
that the capitalist patriarchy is the main enemy of society, which not only
suppresses women but nature as well. Ecofeminism allows us to understand this
concept critically. In the introduction of The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks
in Literary Ecology, Glotfelty (1996) gives a clear explanation that
ecofeminism is a theoretical approach that examines the connection between the
suffering of women and the destruction of nature (xxiv). Scholars such as
Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies, in their work Ecofeminism, have argued
that “Ending violence against women needs to also include moving beyond the
violent economy shaped by capitalist patriarchy to nonviolent, sustainable,
peaceful economies that give respect to women and the Earth” (16). This
parallel between women and nature appears in the film powerfully, firstly, in
the beginning of the film (00:03:11), Krishna’s aggression toward his pregnant
wife, and secondly, Boomika, whose tragic past story and injustice were erased
by themale-dominated structures of capitalist patriarchy. On the other hand, at
(00:10:24), Gowtham’s and the minister's conversation mirrors how they
dismissed the environmental regulation for the sake of profit and took nature
for granted; both scenes highlight the rampant logic of domination. Similarly,
Boomika’s restoration of ecological space reverberates with ecofeminist
concepts of resistance, where women and nature challenge patriarchal domination
through their own agency. The alliance of Earth with motherhood is emphasized
by the writer and director of the film Rathindran R. Prasad in his personal
interview. At the end of the film, the viewer witness tears in Boomika’s eyes when
she cried loudly, this shows the frustration within herself. Moreover, as the director
emphasises that Boomika means Earth, the cry of frustration and agony can be
analyzed as the anguished cry of the Earth. Further, the film situates the
marginalization of women and the exploitation of nature.
The director in his interview asserts that there is a
core problem, and that is humanocentrism; he criticizes humanity’s arrogance
and supremacy in locating itself at the center of the universe while
underestimating the intelligence and strength of Earth. He argues that the
planet has suffered multiple extinctions and has the capacity to regenerate,
beyond human knowledge of time and scale. This enunciation echoes the Gaia
Hypothesis described by James Lovelock, which suggests that Earth is an active
and self-sustaining system. Boomika is not simply a horror film about a
young girl but a demonstration of Earth’s regulating force against the
exploiters. By mixing up the eco-philosophy with horror elements, the film
stresses that the exploitation of nature by humans is both frightening and unsustainable.
Additionally, the film’s dependence on natural light, atmospheric landscapes,
and haunting soundscapes plays a major role in the film. Prasad, in his
interview, asserts that cinematographer Roberto Zazzaro preferred natural
light, which heightened the authenticity of the captured scenes of nature and
which, without any artificial lights, told the original story of the film.
Every whisper of leaves, cry of birds, and creeping vine becomes part of the
film’s narrative language, which symbolizes nature’s everlasting presence and
its refusal to be silent.
This paper grounds its argument that Boomika is
an example of ecohorror that progresses with anecofeminist critique. In-depth
analysis of the film’s dialogues, visual imagery, and the director’s statement
examines how the film undermines anthropocentric and capitalist patriarchal
belief systems while drawing focus to the agency of nature and women. Through
this, the study reveals how Boomika surpasses its specific cinematic
setting to become a cultural engagement that warns of the environmental crisis
while visualizing resistance rooted in feminist and ecological harmony.
Objectives
·
To analyze the film Boomika as a cinematic text that merges
eco-horror with ecofeminist criticism, and explore the interconnection between
nature and women exploited by male dominance.
·
To investigate the function of horror elements in expressing ecological
concern with the help of sound, visuals, and atmosphere, which are positioned
to transform nature as an active force of resistance.
·
To interpret the film by applying the theory of eco-horror, ecofeminism,
and the Gaia hypothesis, framing its narrative in a wider discourse on
patriarchy, humanocentrism, and environmental justice.
·
To examine the importance of key dialogues, characters' interactions, and
the director’s insightful words during the interview and how Boomika’s haunting
presence exposes the structures of capitalist patriarchy and ecological
domination.
·
To contribute to the growing knowledge and research on Indian eco-cinema,
this paper shows how Boomika extends beyond the local cinematic
conventions to engage with global discussion on sustainability, feminist
resistance, and ecological philosophy.
Methodology
The present study utilizes a qualitative textual
analysis method to examine Boomika (2021) as a cultural critique that
blends eco-horror with ecofeminist theoretical lens. The film emerges as a domain
of socio-political and ecological discussion. Key scenes, dialogues, and
cinematic strategies such as the use of natural light scenes, repeated tree and
root imagery, pictures painted by Boomika, and the haunting setting of the
school are closely examined to disclose the symbolic representation of
nature-centered resistance and women’s power. The study relies on the
director’s statements, which focus on the Gaia hypothesis (the film also
revolves around the Gaia hypothesis, as several references to it appear
throughout the narrative), humanocentrism, and the emblematic connection of
Earth with the female body. These observations provide an interpretative
approach that enhances the textual analysis of the film.
The research is grounded in eco-horror and eco-gothic
theories of Christy Tidwell, Carter Soles, Simon C. Estok, and Dawn Keetley to
understand the behavior of nature. It is also rooted in ecofeminist theories of
Vandana Shiva, Maria Mies, Carolyn Merchant, and Val Plumwood, which plays a
major role in exploring the parallel exploitation of women and nature.
Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis is significant to examine the ecological philosophy,
as his central argument is that Earth is a self-regulating complex system.
Furthermore, this paper is prepared to critique anthropocentric pride and
environmental devastation. By integrating the analysis of film and the
director’s given statements with theoretical frameworks, this methodology
situates Boomika within the scholarly discussion of Indian eco-cinema,
drawing attention to its role as both a narrative articulation and a
philosophical critique of ecology and patriarchy.
Literature Review and Theoretical Framework
Stephen Rust, Salma Monani, and Sean Cubitt argue in Ecocinema
Theory and Practice (2023) that ecocinema studies analyze how films survive
and evolve through time as material artifacts and cultural expressions,
alongside the ecological, cultural and economic factors that shape the films’ travel
across history and geography before reaching audiences(6). The above argument
provides one of the most convincing approaches for analyzing Boomika, as
it says that ecocinema studies help us to comprehend that cinema is not
discrete from the world, it is a part of actual systems that affect nature,
society and the economy. This film also shows the real-life problems faced by
nature because of the pollution, deforestation, and other extractive activities
done by humans. Those characters who were involved in exploiting it eventually
face its revenge for their damaging actions. Elizabeth Parker in The Forest
and the EcoGothic: The Deep Dark Woods in the Popular Imagination (2020)
emphasized that recent years have witnessed heightened interest in the darker
and more disturbing aspects of humanity’s relationship with nature in both
critical and fictional writings (4). Yet the same author argues that “the Deep
Dark Forest is exactly that—deep and dark—and the exact source of its fears is
often mysterious, darkened, and barely visible” (2). Like in the film, the
forest seems mysterious and horrific, revealing the hidden truth inside the
dark forest and woods, which tells the harsh relationship between Earth and
human beings, where nature is submissive. Horror and Gothic studies further
deepen the understanding of the film’s approach. Teresa Fitzpatrick notes in The
Rise in Ecohorror and Ecogothic Criticism (2023) that:
The horror produced by such
spectacular natural phenomena serves to underline the message that things must
change to save not only the planet from environmental degradation, but the
fabric of society perceived as disintegrating in terms of conservative ideals.
Adopting an ecohorror approach to such texts focuses on this apparent mirroring
of nature and culture, shattering the illusion of separateness in demonstrating
how “natural” phenomena are rather the consequence of human negligence, in much
the same way as the estranged familial relations (3).
Dawn Keetley and Matthew Sivils assert that applying gothic ecocritical
approach presents the fear, anxiety, and terror, which helps us to understand
the relationship between human and nonhuman that is unbalanced because of
human-centered practices (3). Noel Carroll in The Philosophy Horror, Or,
Paradoxes of the Heart (1990), writes, "Horror, as a category of ordinary
language, is a serviceable concept through which we communicate and receive
information" (13). By engaging with his philosophy of horror, the argument
becomes clearer and more nuanced as his theory allows us to understand the
hidden meaning of Boomika, where horror plays an important role to
communicate with the audiences and provide them the awareness of ecological
crisis.
Ecofeminist theorists Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies (2014) have noted that:
What modern machine-man does
to the earth will eventually be felt by all; everything is connected.
'Unlimited Progress' is a dangerous myth because it suggests that we can rape
and destroy living nature, of which we are an integral part, without ourselves
suffering the effects. As White Man has for centuries treated nature like an
enemy it seems that now nature is hostile to us (144).
The analysis of Greta Gaard indicates that “ecofeminism's basic premise is
that the ideology which authorizes oppressions such as those based on race,
class, gender, sexuality, physical abilities, and species is the same ideology
which sanctions the oppression of nature” (1). Ecofeminist scholars have argued
that the domination of ecology is inseparable from the oppression of women, as
both are treated as passive resources within capitalist and patriarchal
frameworks, whether it is domestic violence or the destruction of the natural
world. Carolyn Merchant, in The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the
Scientific Revolution (1980), traces the roots of the present ecological
crisis and its connection with scientific progress and the economic system,
which further necessitates a revaluation of the scientific framework that for
so long has legitimised the control and exploitation of nature and women
(xxi).The film also portrays Boomika herself as a spectral presence rooted in
the forest, becoming a figure of resistance who represents the reclamation of
silenced women and ecological agency. This alignment reflects Val Plumwood's
(2003) argument that society has long associated men as rational and women as
connected to nature, while recent views portray men as aggressive and powerful
and women as submissive and domestic, reinforcing male supremacy (20).
The film’s director, Rathindran R. Prasad,
specifically proclaims humanocentrism as the primary driver of ecosystem
collapse. Humanocentrism is the idea that humanity lies at the center of the
universe and neglects the vital force of non-human entities. Prasad
interrogates this superiority, stating that political and religious organizations
alike revolve around the survival of humanity while avoiding “Earth’s own Wit
and Resilience.” His responses connect with James Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis,
which defines the Earth as a self-regulating complex system able to
self-stabilize without anthropogenic participation. In Boomika,
Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis is conceptualized visually through the scenes of the
abandoned school engulfed by roots, vines, and trees, which symbolize Gaia’s
capability to regenerate and recover spaces once misused by humans. Prasad
emphasizes in his interview that Earth has already survived multiple
extinctions and will recover once again, a lens that challenges anthropocentric
assumptions and reveals the constraints of human intelligence.
The cinematographer Roberto Zazzaro’s decision to rely
on natural light portrays the authenticity of the narrative. Prasad himself
noted that Zazzaro refused artificial lighting to preserve the film’s organic
beauty. Key dialogues and scenes in the film provide additional assistance for
this reading. Like Gayathri’s explanation of the Gaia hypothesis and Dharman’s
statement that “Boomika is Earth (Bhoomi)" it makes clear the film’s
symbolic identification of Boomika, a girl, with the Earth itself. This film
illustrates the intersection of eco-horror, ecofeminism, and Gaia philosophy.
The horror thus serves an epistemic function; it demands the audience’s
attention to reframe scale, the flow of time, and moral responsibility. Where
anthropocentrism thinks of human dominance, the film stages planetary
self-governance.
Analysis and Discussion
Boomika’s dialogues and the director’s statements together create a seamlessly
interconnected structure: the film’s audio and visual (forest soundscapes,
machine’s noise, aggression of Boomika); its narrative moments (tree cutting,
moving wall pictures, bhoomi puja, school reclaimed by nature); and the
director’s direct intent combine a sole assertion that anthropocentrism and
patriarchal arrogance build ecological violence, and the horror can present
nature’s restorative agency. Horror is the core of this film, it shows
the dark side of human beings. It presents an eco-critical narrative that
reveals multiple threats to the ecosystem caused by human actions like
urbanization and commercial development, deforestation and ecological
destruction, human greed and capitalist exploitation, silencing of ecological
resistance, disruption of natural-spiritual balance, and anthropocentrism. The
film strongly exposes the capitalist patriarchy and nature’s revenge against
its enemies with the help of Boomika’s spirit by killing them. The combination
of ecology with supernatural power threatens all the humans who are exploiting
it and creates eco-horror elements in the film. When the film starts, it evokes
terror in audiences with the forest’s mysterious imagery and suspenseful
sound. Elizabeth Parker (2020) emphasizes that, “though our forests may
be increasingly out of sight, they are not out of mind” (12). The line suggests
that in the modern era, although we are far away from nature because of
urbanization and commercial development, we cannot fully detach ourselves from
it because our survival is dependent on nature. Christy Tidwell and Carter
Soles (2021) write that, in the Anthropocene, ecohorror depicts a
terraformed planet as terrifying rather than hopeful and reflects both present
horrific realities and possible future disasters (3). Anthropocene is dangerous
not only for the non-humans but for the humans as well. In the film, Boomika
and nature together were not just killing their enemies, but, by doing so, they
were saving the lives of non-humans and humans as well. The film’s most
horrifying dialogue delivered by Dharman: Our Earth…is communicating with us
every minute. It is making itself very clear. Guess what it is telling us? “I
know how to save myself. If you can, you should try saving yourself from me!” (Boomika1:32:06). Dawn Keetley and
Matthew Wynn Sivils argue that ecogothic and ecophobia are inherently linked,
not because of fearful and horrific elements of nature representing the gothic
mode, but also because ecophobiais born out of human failure to dominate both
existence and environment (3).
In an earlier scene of the film, Krishna’s domestic
threat is not a minor scene of spousal conflict but a key opening into the
film’s ecofeminist critique. At (00:03:11), Krishna was talking to his pregnant
wife over the phone and telling her about the construction deal in the nearby
forest area. During this, Krishna’s wife says, “If you don’t mend your ways,
I’ll name our kid after someone else.” Krishna reprimands her aggressively: “If
you say that again, I’ll hit you!” After this scene, he dies in a car accident.
His aggression is not just about domestic vulnerability, but it also shows his
ignorant behaviour towards nature because through the construction deal, he was
going to exploit a large area of the forest. There is another scene where the
minister dismisses ecological regulations when Gowtham raises concern:
GOWTHAM: Sir, the Pollution
Control Board and the forest department are giving us a hard time. Please do
something about that.
MINISTER: Not even the common
man respects the Pollution Control Board these days. They’re inconsequential to
people like us! Don’t worry, I’ll take care of it (Boomika00:10:24).
The narrative purposely shows the connection between these two exchanges,
one inside the domestic setting and the other in the power structures. Capitalist
Patriarchy (1979) highlights that patriarchy and capitalism are not
separate; they are interrelated and assist each other to exploit and suppress
women. The author calls this relationship “capitalist patriarchy” (Eisenstein).
By this argument, it can be concluded that capitalist patriarchy is the base of
anthropocentrism. Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies, in Ecofeminism, argue
that the future of both the planet and human beings depends on how we interpret
human effects on the environment. If we persist in the traditional model of
capitalist patriarchy, relying on a machine-centred worldview, a capital and
industrial-focused economy, and a system of domination and environmental
carelessness, we will face a dramatic escalation in climate change, species
extinction, economic breakdown, and social injustice and inequality (17). In Boomika,
Krishna’s threat of physical violence and the minister’s bureaucratic
neglect both emerge from the same logic of control. By breaking down domestic
and political domains, the film suggests that the abuse of women and nature are
continuous forms of patriarchal oppression, strengthening the central
ecofeminist argument that rule over nature and women are not separate. At
(1:58:05) Dharman says, “If you still want to continue living on this Mother
Earth… then you ought to drop your arrogance, shut up and start listening to
what she has to tell you.” The director asserts this connection by saying that
“the beginning of destruction and patriarchy go hand in hand… and we can
associate Earth with the female”. The film shows a pure connection between
Boomika (a girl) and Earth. The first look of her room reveals a green bedsheet
and walls covered with paintings related to nature. At (1:08:08), the first
dialogue delivered by her is “To the tree! I want to go to the tree!” This
shows her deep connection with nature as she used to spend her time sitting
under a huge tree where she also took her own life. The exploiters came to chop
down the huge tree when the sound of the machines and sheer cruelty towards the
environment triggered Boomika into committing suicide. Here, Barbara Creed’s
theory of the monstrous-feminine may be quoted as she asserts that “the phrase
‘monstrous-feminine’ emphasizes the importance of gender in the construction of
her monstrosity” (33). We can understand this theory by connecting it with
Dharman’s statement in the film: “When a child starts to eat their mother’s
breast instead of just having the milk that will be the day the mother turns
into a monster!” (Boomika1:58:47).
The above theorization of Barbara Creed about women shown as monsters is not
just about being scary or unnatural; it is deeply formed by her gender (being
female). On the other hand, Dharman’s reference reveals the parallel between
women and nature, both are pure beings, who love to feed their children, but
once they are attacked or harmed, they can become monsters to protect
themselves.
Key dialogues in the film further support this study. The Gaia hypothesis,
voiced in Gayatri’s commentary, “Now, the whole environment is her space. Boomika
did not let anyone go there in the last eight years. She reclaimed the
environment and restored an ecological balance. The human beings are the real
evil, who broke into the area to cause destruction. She will not allow anything
to disturb that space” (Boomika
1:52:42).
To understand Gayatri’s
exposition, we must understand Lovelock’s concept of Earth as a self-regulating
system. Dharman also proclaims in the film, “Boomika is none other than…the
Earth itself. She has no boundaries! If you think of changing her as per your
needs, it won’t work! You all are crazy!” James E. Lovelock and Lynn Margulis, in
Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: the gaia hypothesis
(1973) emphasize that “If life has merely a passive role in cycling the gases
of the air then the concentrations will be set by equilibrium chemistry; in
fact they most certainly are not. If life actively cycles the gases then we ask
how could such a system be stable in the long run without homeostasis?”(9) This
idea resonates strongly with Boomika, where nature appears as an active,
responsive force. The film’s eco-horror emerges from the disruption of this
homeostatic balance, suggesting that when humans violate ecological limits, the
Earth system itself reacts, producing horror through environmental instability.
In the film, there is a scene where Gawtham performs ‘Bhumi Puja’ as a
spiritual practice to ward off Boomika’s spirit before starting the project,
which symbolically shows deep respect for nature by worshipping it. This is
ironical as the project itself contributes to the exploitation and destruction
of nature. This scene can be analysed through The Influence of Sacred Beliefs in Environmental Risk Perception and
Attitudes(2017), that when people
treat elements of nature as sacred, they may lead individuals to ignore or
minimize environmental risks that damage both humans and the sacred natural
entity (Sachdeva).At the end of the movie, Gowtham saw the wall paintings
painted by Boomika based on the ecosystem, and through these pictures,
Boomika’s spirit exposed the cruel side of humans, who, for the sake of their
profit and power, destroy nature. Initially, the wall paintings showed a lively
ecosystem where trees, lakes, fish, animals, etc., seemed happy, but later
those pictures converted into a disaster. After witnessing the pictures for the
first time, the audience saw the fear within Gowtham, and at last, Boomika’s
spirit appeared in front of him and showed her aggression by crying so loudly,
indicating that she was about to kill Gowtham. There is one additional
significant scene in the film where Dharman expresses a poignant dialogue about
his past life: “We belong in the forest. It has been that way for generations!
It was only a few years ago that we were chased out of the forest. When I was a
kid, the government built us a small home. But we never liked that. Also,
people would break into the forest and ruin it! We didn’t like that either” (Boomika1:30:17). Timothy Morton, in The
Ecological Thought (2010), argues that modern economic systems have
extremely harmed the environment. At the same time, they have had an equally
harmful effect on thinking itself (4). Dharman’s recollection of migration from
the forest to the urban area can be read through Morton’s argument, where he
emphasizes that the modern economy, human greed, and materialistic thinking are
damaging the environment, where the capitalists are only focusing on how to get
wealth and profit in this world even if it is destroying any human life or
wildlife, and Dharman’s words solidify this concern.
Conclusion
Boomika appears
as a cinematic text where ecohorror and ecofeminism coincide to critique both
patriarchal violence and anthropocentric arrogance. By comparing Krishna’s
household threat with the minister’s indifference to the ruling system, the
film shows how oppression in the private sphere mirrors domination over nature.
This link is long underscored by ecofeminists Vandana Shiva, Maria Mies, and
Carolyn Merchant. The Gaia hypothesis, enunciated by Gayathri and defended by
Prasad (the director), redefines the ghost as the Earth’s corrective agency
rather than a supernatural anomaly. Key dialogues such as “Boomika is none
other than Earth itself” embody this connection by reshaping the horror genre
into a philosophical contemplation on human weakness and nature’s resistance.
At the end of the film, Boomika’s spirit shows Gowtham the harsh reality of
human activities through wall painting, where a balanced ecology turns into
ruins, and ultimately, planet Earth is left burning. The film disrupts
patriarchal stereotypes and reframes monstrosity as justice. Thus, Boomika
coerces its audience to face a haunting reality: that the Earth will tolerate
beyond human exploitation and that horror lies not in ecological counterforce
but in humanity’s own harmfulness.
Works Cited
Boomika. Horror/Drama. Directed by
Rathindran R. Prasad, 2021.
Eisenstein, Zillah R., editor.
Capitalist Patriarchy and the Case for Socialist Feminism. Monthly
Review Pr, 1979. Women’s Studies, Political Science.
Fitzpatrick, Teresa. The
Rise in Ecohorror and Ecogothic Criticism. Edited by Simon Bacon, Rowman
and Littlefield, 2023, pp. 259–74. e-space.mmu.ac.uk,
https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781793643391/The-Evolution-of-Horror-in-the-Twenty-First-Century.
Gaard, Greta. Ecofeminism:
Women, Animals, Nature. 1993. Temple University Press.
Keetley, Dawn, and Matthew
Wynn Sivils, editors. Ecogothic in Nineteenth-Century American Literature.
Routledge, 2018. Routledge Studies in World Literatures and the Environment 2.
Kennedy, Paul. VAMPIRE
CAPITALISM: Fractured Societies and Alternative Futures. Palgrave Macmillan
, 2017, http://pombo.free.fr/kennedy2017.pdf.
Lovelock, James E. The
Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning. Basic Books, 2009.
Lovelock, James E., and Lynn
Margulis. ‘Atmospheric Homeostasis by and for the Biosphere: The Gaia
Hypothesis’. Tellus, vol. 26, nos 1–2, Feb. 1974, pp. 2–10. DOI.org
(Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01946.x.
Merchant, Carolyn. The
Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution. Harper
& Row, 1989.
Mies, Maria, et al. Ecofeminism.
Bloomsbury Academic, 2022. Critique Influence Change 05.
Morton, Timothy. The
Ecological Thought. 1. Harvard University Press paperback ed, Harvard
University Press, 2012.
Parker, Elizabeth. The
Forest and the Ecogothic: The Deep Dark Woods in the Popular Imagination.
Palgrave Macmillan, 2020. Palgrave Gothic.
Ritchie, Hannah.
‘Deforestation and Forest Loss’. Our World in Data, Feb. 2021. ourworldindata.org,
https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation.
Rust, Stephen, et al.,
editors. Ecocinema Theory and Practice 2. Taylor & Francis, 2023.
Sachdeva, Sonya. ‘The
Influence of Sacred Beliefs in Environmental Risk Perception and Attitudes’. Environment
and Behavior, vol. 49, no. 5, June 2017, pp. 583–600. DOI.org (Crossref),
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516649413.
Tidwell, Christy, and Carter
Soles. Fear and Nature: Ecohorror Studies in the Anthropocene. the
Pennsylvania state university press, 2021. AnthropoScene.
Ulaby, Neda. ‘“Eco-Horror”:
Green Panic on the Silver Screen?’ NPR, 14 June 2008. Movies. NPR,
https://www.npr.org/2008/06/14/91485965/eco-horror-green-panic-on-the-silver-screen.
Walker, Richard. ‘Value and
Nature: Rethinking Capitalist Exploitation and Expansion’. Capitalism Nature
Socialism, vol. 28, no. 1, Jan. 2017, pp. 53–61. DOI.org (Crossref),
https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2016.1263674.