December 03, 2003
Pastrami - Most Sensual of all the Salted, Cured Meats
An interesting review at National Review about an "ecofeminist" book called The Pornography of Meat. By Carol J. Adams, the author of The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory, it is about how the eating of meat and the objectification of women are actually two sides of the same (predatory, patriarchal) phenomenon.
The review is, as you'd expect from NRO, highly critical — and it seems to me, rightly so. I haven't read the book, but from the description and quotes it seems to fall into the common academic trap of explaining everything with a single ideology du jeur — in this case the never-dull, white male patriarchy explains everything. What could be an interesting subject area — the juxtaposition of food and sex, the erotic qualities of food, the common imagery used to sell food and sex, cultural symbols of "otherness" — turns into an ideological screed against modernity and men.
Things are always more complicated than a single theory of power relations would imply. Or rather, in most cases, their are a plurality of simple reasons that explain it — in this case, the fact that, hey, sometimes people just like to eat meat. But that never sells as well as one, over-arching theory of oppression.
One thing I'm very proud of The Wife for is that she's working very hard to avoid that trap in her dissertation. In her study of the roots of "shareholder democracy", she's eschewing the easy management/capital bad, labor good, class-warfare argument and going for a more nuanced approach. Yes, it's still about power relations and interest groups, but it's a much richer, and hopefully accurate, view than just slotting yet another historical moment into a nice, neat framework. Here's hoping it gets the good reception it deserves.
"common academic trap"!?!?! oh my word. you really have my blood boiling now!
oh wait, i finished reading your comment and you pay me lots of compliments, so my blood is cooled. ;)
anyhoo, carol j adams is no academic, unless you think having a master's in divinity and sometimes speaking on college campuses makes you an academic.
http://www.triroc.com/caroladams/#carol
i'm the only one falling into the academic trap here, in terms of methods -- exacting primary-source based research, theorized within the framework of disourse analysis and sociological analysis of power relations. but NO politically-minded hypothesizing before the facts! empirical getting to know my people and their institutions on-the-ground, understanding their full context.
true, there has been an "academic trap" of ignoring finance as a subject matter -- one informed somewhat by political agenda, but also by unfamiliarlity. But i am fully employing academic methods to close that gap. my story and my findings will be morally and politically complicated -- but that is what academia is all about!!
and i thought kate was "The Wife"
xoxo
Posted by: Julia Ott at December 3, 2003 07:34 PMObviously, both Brad and I use "The Wife" in a slightly eccentric indical sense.
Posted by: richard at December 5, 2003 01:57 AM