Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Making Sense of ‘Food’ Animals
  • 295 Accesses

Abstract

The introduction explains the question that underpins and guides this book, which asks why cows, pigs, chickens, sheep, and goats are not regarded as anything other than ‘food’ animals? Why do cartographies of meat dominate humans’ understandings of these animals’ lives and bodies, thereby normalising and supporting the intensification of environmentally harmful practices that demand the termination of millions of lives every hour? My point of observation is an entirely different and hypothetical territory, one that is perhaps quixotic—and that is a vegan pantopia. This pantopia is conceived in contrast to utopia, described by Foucault as “fundamentally unreal spaces”. Utopian imaginings conjure idealistic but also seemingly unattainable dreams. Pantopia is instead ‘the place of everywhere’, evocative of creative possibilities rather than impossibilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    As the animals that are overwhelmingly used for meat, above all others.

  2. 2.

    The cartographic gaze is a recognised topic of scholarly attention (Ellis and Waterton 2005; Jacob 2006; Wilson 2011).

  3. 3.

    Noske (1997) describes rather than defines the animal-industrial complex. Based on Noske’s account, Twine (2012: 23) offers the following definition: “a partly opaque and multiple set of networks and relationships between the corporate (agricultural) sector, governments, and public and private science. With economic, cultural, social and affective dimensions it encompasses an extensive range of practices, technologies, images, identities and markets”. Regarding the human-animal relationship, Noske describes it as “embedded in a web of exploitative practices, in which one type of exploitation is carried over onto another” (1997: 38).

  4. 4.

    The annual Islamic ‘Festival of sacrifice’.

  5. 5.

    A Hindu sacrificial ceremony held every five years.

  6. 6.

    An annual holiday marking the landing of the Mayflower in Cape Cod in 1620. The beginning of colonisation is celebrated by many, and is observed by others, including indigenous peoples, as ‘a national day of mourning’.

  7. 7.

    Australia Day marks the declaration of British sovereignty on 26th January 1788. As with Thanksgiving in the US, it is also known amongst indigenous peoples and their allies as ‘Invasion Day’. It was declared a national public holiday in 1994 and was quickly co-opted by Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) in a strategic advertising campaign associating eating ‘lamb’ with patriotism. The meat-centric Aussie BBQ has become synonymous with Australia Day, while not eating meat on this day is construed (by MLA) as Un-Australian.

  8. 8.

    Practices are not closed systems, and so all practices can be said to be related to greater and lesser degrees.

  9. 9.

    A multi-headed, serpentine water monster from Greek mythology. For every head that was severed, the monster was said to grow two or three more.

  10. 10.

    Although it is of course how these relationships are constituted and maintained that is being systemically reproduced across practices.

  11. 11.

    All animals, including microbes, in their ontological relation to humans, exist in a state of domination, in that their bodies are always justifiably available and their lives legitimately extinguishable. In this book, however, I am focusing only on animals commonly used for food, or ‘food’ animals for short.

  12. 12.

    Posthumanism is an increasingly diverse field of study, encompassing approaches based in techno-science, biology, philosophy, literature, art, the social sciences, the humanities, and many others. Within the social sciences, further distinctions are shaped by environmental, feminist, eco-feminist, cultural, and other perspectives. The strand of posthumanism I am referring to here is characterised by a largely eco-feminist, but also techno-science and environmental approach to posthumanism. It is characterised by notions of ‘becoming with’, ‘vibrant matter’, ‘hybridity’, and ‘mortal/vital/material entanglement’ (Haraway 2008; Bennett 2010; Whatmore 2002; Barad 2007; Braidotti 2013).

  13. 13.

    Notwithstanding the rise of plant-based ‘milks’ that are gaining increasing traction. It is not clear whether this is being shaped primarily by environmental, health, ethical, and/or other concerns.

References

  • Adams, C. J. (2010). The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-vegetarian Critical Theory. London; New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arcari, P. (2018). ‘Dynamic’ Nonhuman Animals in Theories of Practice: Views from the Subaltern. In C. Maller & Y. Strengers (Eds.), Social Practices and Dynamic More-than-humans: Living Things, Unbounded Materials, and Automation. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham; London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, C., Cafaro, P., & Newholm, T. (2005a). Philosophy and Ethical Consumption. In R. Harrison, T. Newholm, & D. Shaw (Eds.), The Ethical Consumer (pp. 11–24). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, C., Cloke, P., Clarke, N., & Malpass, A. (2005b). Consuming Ethics: Articulating the Subjects and Spaces of Ethical Consumption. Antipode, 37(1), 23–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, C., Clarke, N., Cloke, P., & Malpass, A. (2005c). The Political Ethics of Consumerism. Consumer Policy Review, 15(2), 45–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2002). Society under Siege. Oxford; Malden: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2005). Living in Utopia. Presentation: London School of Economics. 27 October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham; London: Duke University Press Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bergqvist, J., & Gunnarsson, S. (2013). Finfish Aquaculture: Animal Welfare, the Environment, and Ethical Implications. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 26(1), 75–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beverley, J. (1999). Subalternity and Representation: Arguments in Cultural Theory. Durham; London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge; Malden: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braschel, N., & Posch, A. (2013). A Review of System Boundaries of GHG Emission Inventories in Waste Management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 44(April), 30–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. (2015). Fish Intelligence, Sentience and Ethics. Animal Cognition, 18(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvino, I. (1983). Mr Palomar. San Diego; New York; London: A Harvest Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, J. G. (2008). Think Locally, Act Globally: The Political Economy of Ethical Consumption. Research in Economic Anthropology, 28, 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castree, N., & Nash, C. (2004). Mapping Posthumanism: An Exchange. Environment and Planning A, 36(8), 1341–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemnitz, C., & Becheva, S. (Eds.). (2014). Meat Atlas: Facts and Figures about the Animals We Eat. Berlin; Brussels: Heinrich Boll Stiftung and Friends of the Earth Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, N., Cloke, P., Barnett, C., & Malpass, A. (2008). The Spaces and Ethics of Organic Food. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(3), 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comninou, M. (1995). Speech, Pornography, and Hunting. In C. J. Adams & J. Donovan (Eds.), Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations (pp. 126–148). Durham; London: Duke University Press Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, A. (2015, November 23). Global Egg Consumption to Rise Worldwide through 2024. WATTAgNet. Online. October 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, E. (2003). Environment and Society. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, E. (2005). Developing Ecofeminist Theory: The Complexity of Difference. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, E. (2011). Social Lives with Other Animals. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, E., & Hobden, S. (2014a). Civilisation and the Domination of the Animal. Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 42(3), 746–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, E., & Hobden, S. (2014b). Liberation for Straw Dogs? Old Materialism, New Materialism, and the Challenge of an Emancipatory Posthumanism. Globalizations, 12(1), 134–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, M., & De Cauter, L. (2008). Heterotopia and the City. London; New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, J., & Adams, C. J. (Eds.). (2007). The Feminist Care Tradition in Animal Ethics: A Reader. New York; Chichester: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckhardt, G. M., Belk, R., & Devinney, T. M. (2010). Why Don’t Consumers Consume Ethically? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 426–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisnitz, G. A. (2006). Slaughterhouse. New York: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R., & Waterton, C. (2005). Caught between the Cartographic and the Ethnographic Imagination: The Whereabouts of Amateurs, Professionals, and Nature in Knowing Biodiversity. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 23(5), 673–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2016). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Contributing to Food Security and Nutrition for All. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, 200 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1967). Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias. Architecture/Mouvement/Continuite (October), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1989). The Order of Things. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1994). Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth (P. Rabinow, Ed.). New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. K. (2004). Reading Fair Trade: Political Ecological Imaginary and the Moral Economy of Fair Trade Foods. Political Geography, 23(7), 891–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. K., Maye, D., & Holloway, L. (2010). Ethical Foodscapes?: Premises, Promises, and Possibilities. Environment and Planning A, 42(8), 1782–1796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, M. (2013). Labor and the Locavore - The Making of a Comprehensive Food Ethics. Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J. (2003). Fast Food/Organic Food: Reflexive Tastes and the Making of ‘Yuppie Chow’. Social & Cultural Geography, 4(1), 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J. (2008). Bringing Good Food to Others: Investigating the Subjects of Alternative Food Practice. Cultural Geographies, 15(4), 431–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halkier, B., Katz-Gerro, T., & Martens, L. (2011). Applying Practice Theory to the Study of Consumption: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(1), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, S. M. (2011). Exploring the ‘Ethical Everyday’: An Ethnography of the Ethics of Family Consumption. Geoforum, 42(6), 627–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (2008). When Species Meet. Minneapolis; London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hook, D. (2007). Foucault, Psychology and the Analytics of Power. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hui, A., Schatzki, T., & Shove, E. (2016). The Nexus of Practices: Connections, Constellations, Practitioners. London; New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Humphery, K. (2011). The Simple and the Good: Ethical Consumption as Anti-consumerism. In T. Lewis & E. Potter (Eds.), Ethical Consumption: A Critical Introduction (pp. 40–53). London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, C. (2006). The Sovereign Map: Theoretical Approaches in Cartography Throughout History. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. H. (2013). Solid Modernity, Liquid Utopia – Liquid Modernity, Solid Utopia. In A. Elliott (Ed.), The Contemporary Bauman (pp. 217–240). London; New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, M., & Phillips, L. J. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korzybski, A. (1958). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Englewood, NJ: Institute of General Semantics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, J., & Roney, J. M. (2013, June 12). Farmed Fish Production Overtakes Beef. Earth Policy Institutei. Online. February 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2008). Transforming Citizens? Green Politics and Ethical Consumption on Lifestyle Television. Continuum, 22(2), 227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2011). The Ethical Turn in Commodity Culture: Consumption, Care and the Other. sic: Journal of Literature, Culture and Literary Translation, Vol. 2. Online. March 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T., & Potter, E. (Eds.). (2011). Ethical Consumption: A Critical Introduction. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littler, J. (2008). Radical Consumption: Shopping for Change in Contemporary Culture. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lury, C. (2011). Consumer Culture. Cambridge; Malden: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maller, C. J. (2015). Understanding Health Through Social Practices: Performance and Materiality in Everyday Life. Sociology of Health & Illness, 37(1), 52–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meininger, H. P. (2013). Inclusion as Heterotopia: Spaces of Encounter between People with and without Intellectual Disability. Journal of Social Inclusion, 4(1), 24–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Memery, J., Megicks, P., Angell, R., & Williams, J. (2012). Understanding Ethical Grocery Shoppers. Journal of Business Research, 65(9), 1283–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micheletti, M., & Stolle, D. (2010). Vegetarianism - A Lifestyle Politics? In M. Micheletti & A. S. McFarland (Eds.), Creative Participation: Responsibility-Taking in the Political World (pp. 125–145). Boulder, CO; London: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Micheletti, M., Cheng, S.-L., Stolle, D., Olsen, W., et al. (2012). Habits of Sustainable Citizenship: The Example of Political Consumerism. In A. Warde & D. Southerton (Eds.), The Habits of Consumption (Collegium - Studies across Disciplines in the Humanities and Social Sciences) (pp. 141–163). Helsinki: Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nibert, D. A. (2013). Animal Oppression and Human Violence: Domesecration, Capitalism, and Global Conflict. New York; Chichester: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a Feminine Approach to Ethics & Moral Education. Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noske, B. (1989). Humans and Other Animals: Beyond the Boundaries of Anthropology. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noske, B. (1997). Beyond Boundaries: Humans and Animals. Montreal: Black Rose Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD-FAO. (2017). OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2017–2026. Paris: OECD Publishing. 142 pp. https://doi.org/10.1787/agr_outlook-2017-en.

  • Parry, J. (2010). The New Visibility of Slaughter in Popular Gastronomy. Masters Thesis, Cultural Studies: University of Canterbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellandini-Simanyi, L. (2014). Consumption Norms and Everyday Ethics. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pickles, J. (2004). A History of Spaces: Cartographic Reason, Mapping and the Geo-Coded World. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Postill, J. (2010). Introduction: Theorising Media and Practice. In B. Brauchler & J. Postill (Eds.), Theorising Media and Practice (pp. 1–33). New York; Oxford: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2016). Practices and Their Affects. In A. Hui, T. Schatzki, & E. Shove (Eds.), The Nexus of Practices: Connections, Constellations, Practitioners (pp. 114–125). London; New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S. (1996). The Cartographic Eye: How Explorers Saw Australia. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. R. (1996). Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. R. (1997). Practices and Actions: A Wittgensteinian Critique of Bourdieu and Giddens. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 27(3), 283–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Practice Theory. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E., & Spurling, N. (Eds.). (2013). Sustainable Practice: Social Theory and Climate Change. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes. London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, J. J., & Hawkins, R. (2014). I’m Not Trying to Save Fish, I’m Trying to Save Dinner’: Media, Celebrity and Sustainable Seafood as a Solution to Environmental Limits. Geoforum, 84(August), 218–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocum, R. (2007). Whiteness, Space and Alternative Food Practice. Geoforum, 38(3), 520–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G., & Mol, A. (2008). Greening Global Consumption: Redefining Politics and Authority. Global Environmental Change, 18(3), 350–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., et al. (2006). Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations. 416 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strengers, Y., & Maller, C. (Eds.). (2014). Social Practices, Intervention and Sustainability: Beyond Behaviour Change. New York; London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. J. (2011). Understanding Consumption as Political and Moral Practice: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(2), 139–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twine, R. (2012). Revealing the ‘Animal-Industrial Complex’ - A Concept & Method for Critical Animal Studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 10(1), 12–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, B. (2011, July 7). The End of the Line. Time Magazine - Science and Space. Online. March 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whatmore, S. (2002). Hybrid Geographies: Natures Cultures Spaces. London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilk, R. (2001). Consuming Morality. Journal of Consumer Culture, 1(2), 245–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. W. (2011). ‘Training the Eye’: Formation of the Geocoding Subject. Social & Cultural Geography, 12(4), 357–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paula Arcari .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Arcari, P. (2020). Introduction. In: Making Sense of ‘Food’ Animals. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9585-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9585-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-9584-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-9585-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics