Xenoblade Chronicles 2 | Themes of Ecocriticism
This is quite of a different medium (a whole ass video game) but it does share similarities to the anime art style. Although there seems to be a lot of narrative arcs, I will be finding and focusing on the relevant ones that can be turned into an "eco-text" narrative with a theme to it, as well as referencing it from the lectures from the Japanese course professor. So this means I am going to focus on the cutscenes and look for themes of environmental issues.
In the world of Xenoblade Chronicles 2, a disaster has swiped the world, making most of the areas inhabitable. The humans have to live in small but constraint spaces in the world which is now a vast wasteland. Similarity to Nausicaä in the anime Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind, who thrives in the Valley of the Wind, while Xenoblade characters thrive on the backs of the giant Titan species functioning as land. However, the world becomes a vast wasteland as the Titans dies and nature starts deteriorating and sinks into the Cloud Sea, which becomes a threat (basically the Sea of Decay but with clouds and ocean, which is similar to worst man-made disasters like nuclear winter and rising sea levels due to climate change).
Thus, the main element of both stories are basically most of the world turning into a wasteland. Theres also a vision of a heaven-like place thats supposed to come at the end, where the wasteland is no more and nature fills the world (similar to most endings of ecological disaster media or films). However when the characters finally went there, they find that it's all dead and only an artificial space station is left. They went inside and met Klaus, who said his experiment accidentally destroyed his world, to the point nature cannot restore itself anymore (all humans, plants, animals, etc.). This is like how a thousand years ago in Nausicaä where there was war that destroyed nature, however in Xenoblade, there was no life left.
We also learn that nano-machines make up the Cloud Sea and they collect genetic lifeforms for Titans to grow and give new life. This leads to nature being restored artificially to bring back nature, which humans can now thrive on now.
Here is the point I want to mention regarding how nature is restored: it is purely artificial. The nanotechnologies are created by Klaus, a human, to restore nature on his own. Originally, philosophies tell us that nature will only restore on its own will without human interference or contributions. However, the destruction we see in the game is so bad that nature cannot restore itself and that humans need to actually do something to restore nature. This basically shows a debate on human reliance on nature and nature reliance on humans, that if one is gone, the other will also slowly die out.
The Issue Addressed In Japan & Beyond
Now we do not have nano-machines capable of recreating life just like in the game, however this theory can be applied worldwide and we can see attempts made by environmentalists and scientists in trying to actually help nature. Conservational places are crucial in preventing a species from going extinct so when there is no more of a important species left to keep a habitat going, conservation areas already created backups (artificially using human interventions) to release it back to the wild. Additionally, we have scientists creating breakthrough DNA manipulation to revive a species, so indeed it proves the existence of a debate of whether nature needs human's reliance and vice versa, or nature and humanity are and will always be separate.
Honestly, I thought humans are part of nature since they branched from other animals through evolution, however I can see why in most cases humans are treated as a different force, rather than being part of the force of nature itself. I am a human, and I'm pretty sure you and the audience are all humans (correct me if I'm wrong?), so as a human, I can see how we branch out of the force of nature due to our developments like technologies and exploiting or manipulating nature, something nature itself cannot do (we feel like gods and animals are inferior).
So, regarding the debate if nature relies on us humans and vice versa, I think that is a yes because we are not like fully integrated into the force of nature so if nature dies, we could still be alive and genius could figure out how to recreate nature artificially. On the other hand, the reason why humans would be recreating nature is that humans need resources like food and clean water or bio products for their survival. However, this is still quite of a debate and my opinions or perspectives here might not be compatible to the debate itself (this can also be an issue too).