Mintz, Sidney Wilfred. Sweetness and power. New York: Viking, 1985. Pp. xxx+274; illustrations, notes, bibliography, index. $20.00.
Sugar is one of the central elements
of the global food basket, but its widespread consumption is a relatively
recent phenomenon.
While the idea of sweetness has existed since ancient times, its transformation
into a necessity reflects the evolving meanings associated with sugar, as well
as shifts in economic and social conditions. It is worth exploring how sugar
became a staple across all social classes. Yet, this inquiry is not merely
about sugar as a material object but rather about the essence of sweetness in
the social world.
Taste is socially determined. While
physiological factors, such as the body’s need for certain minerals, play a
role in shaping preferences, the availability of multiple food items with
similar tastes makes the popularity of certain foods a historical and
anthropological question. From a historical perspective, changing patterns of
food consumption reflect broader cultural transformations. Anthropology, on the
other hand, examines how these shifts permeate different social strata through
meanings and motives. Drawing from anthropological insights, social history has
emerged as a discipline that explores patterns of social change through
everyday objects like food.
In contemporary anthropological
studies, food habits serve as a powerful lens for understanding social
structures and community life. Our dietary choices are influenced by social,
geographical, and biological factors, while also signaling distinctions related
to age, gender, status, culture, and occupation. Sydney Mintz, in Sweetness
and Power, provides a detailed account of sugar’s integration into the
British diet, treating sugar as a cultural object that acquired different
meanings across social classes. He also links the rise of capitalism to the
increased production and consumption of sugar. In this work, Mintz employs the
concepts of "power" and "meaning" to trace sugar’s
transformation from a luxury item to a medicine, a decorative commodity, and
eventually a necessity. The book is divided into five chapters: "Food,
Sociality, and Sugar," "Production," "Consumption,"
"Power," and "Eating and Being." Mintz shifts the
analytical focus from production to consumption, addressing a gap in food
studies, which have traditionally emphasized production processes.
Mintz also challenges the Eurocentric
narrative of technological advancements by highlighting the technical
contributions of the Arab world. While Western scholarship often emphasizes the
aesthetic and monumental aspects of non-European civilizations—such as the
pyramids, the Sun Temple, or the Great Wall—Mintz underscores the technical and
economic innovations brought by the Moorish conquest of Spain, which was as
much a military and religious event as it was an economic and political one.
Historically, sugar was known in
ancient India before spreading to the Mediterranean region. Mintz focuses on
the Mediterranean as the starting point of large-scale sugar production,
tracing its expansion to Spanish colonies and later to the Caribbean, where
sugar production became central to capitalist economies. Early historical
accounts often distinguished between sugar production in Christian regions and
in Muslim-controlled areas, particularly regarding the use of slavery. Yet,
Mintz provides evidence that slavery was already integral to sugar production
in Morocco and East Africa, as documented in records of slave revolts in these
regions. He argues that Spain adopted the model of slave labor in sugar
production from the Muslim world.
Spain's attempts at sugar cultivation in the Americas were largely unsuccessful due to a chronic lack of capital and an exploitative economic model centered on tribute-taking and inefficient labor use. The Spanish conquest of Mexico and the Andes further diverted focus from sugar production, as the pursuit of precious metals became a higher priority. Meanwhile, the Mediterranean sugar industry declined due to poor local administration, which led to the deterioration of irrigation systems and inefficient labor allocation. Despite this decline, sugar production persisted in some Mediterranean regions, with Sicily serving as a notable example.
After the decline of the sugar
industry in the Mediterranean and Spanish colonies, British industry faced no
significant rivals, leading to a period of continuous growth in sugar
production in British colonies. Sidney Mintz, in this context, engages in a
debate about the mode of production in the sugar industry during this early
phase of industrialization. He differentiates between the "New World"
and the "Old World," referring to the transfer of sugar production
from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic islands. Additionally, he investigates
whether the plantation system should be classified as agricultural, industrial,
or a hybrid of both. The increasing use of machinery and division of labor
rendered plantation agriculture a synthesis of field and factory. The labor
force in the industry comprised both enslaved and wage laborers. Since the
enslaved laborers were not free to sell their labor power, many scholars argue
that this industry was not fully capitalist. However, Mintz compares it to
modern "agro-industries" and identifies certain capitalist features
in the sugar industry, such as centralized plantation and processing, labor
organization based on skill levels and production goals, time-conscious
systems, separation of production from consumption, and the worker’s detachment
from their tools.
Despite recognizing these capitalist
traits, Mintz ultimately argues that the sugar industry was not fully
capitalist. However, this conclusion is problematic when examined through the
broader functioning of capitalism. The mere freedom of laborers to sell their
labor power does not solely define capitalism, as the concept of
"freedom" in this context is often illusory. A more critical
criterion for assessing capitalism lies in the separation of workers from the
means of production. Sugar plantations in the New World operated with the
singular motive of profit accumulation and wealth expansion for estate owners.
Mintz himself notes that the discipline of slavery was eventually replaced by
the discipline of hunger, compelling "free laborers" to remain in the
workforce with little alternative. While one might argue that free laborers had
the option to leave, the reality of economic constraints meant that their
choices were severely limited.
The sugar production process was
intricately linked with consumption, designed to maximize profits. The British
developed two triangular trade systems in the 17th century, which matured in
the 18th century. The first triangle connected Britain to Africa and the New
World: manufactured goods were sold to Africa, enslaved Africans were
transported to the Americas, and American sugar was shipped to Britain or its
importing neighbors. This system operated within the mercantilist model. The
second triangle, which emerged in contradiction to the first, originated in New
England, where rum was exported to Africa, enslaved people were sent to the
West Indies, and molasses returned to New England to produce more rum. The only
"false commodity" in these trade circuits was human beings, as
enslaved individuals were treated as objects despite their intrinsic humanity.
The wealth generated in these transactions was ultimately appropriated by
Britain and its colonial enterprises. As sugar consumption increased in the
18th century, resource scarcity led people to shift towards starch-based foods,
while mechanisms of power were used to further embed sugar into British
society.
One of the earliest strategies to
integrate sugar into daily life was its acceptance in religious practices.
Unlike spices, which were traditionally prohibited during religious fasts in
Britain, sugar became the first exception. Legal and economic policies were
also manipulated to reduce the price of sugar, making it more accessible to the
masses. Political leaders, religious figures, judges, physicians, military
officials, and business elites all extolled the virtues of sugar, influencing
British legal and economic systems. Combined with heightened labor
productivity, shifting economic conditions, and the expanding capitalist ethos,
sugar transitioned from a luxury to a necessity across all social classes. The
shift in sugar’s role—from medicine to spice to an essential dietary
component—illustrates how power structures shape cultural meanings.
The medicinal use of sugar in
18th-century Europe was highly contested, partly because of its historical
association with Arab medical knowledge. Efforts to assert European superiority
in medical advancements led to exaggerated claims, such as those by Slare, who
suggested that sugar powder could be used to treat eye ailments. However, by
the late 18th and early 19th centuries, sugar’s role as medicine diminished, as
it became primarily a sweetener, preservative, and calorie source.
Concurrently, tea became a household staple in Britain, replacing cold beer as
the primary beverage. The addition of sugar to tea made it more palatable and
satisfying, contributing to increased sugar consumption. The East India
Company’s exploitation of Indian tea workers enabled the large-scale production
of Indian tea, drastically reducing its price. As a result, tea became more
affordable than coffee and chocolate, cementing its place in British
households. However, the rising popularity of tea was not the sole factor driving
sugar consumption; its increased use in pastries, sweetened custards, and
creams also played a significant role. Consequently, the English diet became
increasingly intertwined with global trade networks, particularly those
involving the colonies.
Cultural diffusion within hierarchical
societies is influenced by wealth, authority, influence, and power. Mintz
explores these dynamics in the upward and downward movement of sugar
consumption across social classes in Britain. Initially a preserve of the
aristocracy, sugar gained legitimacy as a preservative, medicine, and
decorative element before becoming a staple. Mintz introduces the notion of
"aspiration" to explain sugar’s growing presence in middle-class
diets. However, this argument overlooks regional variations and class
disparities in sugar consumption. Without addressing these dimensions, it would
be a generalization to assume that sugar was universally accessible across
Britain. While Mintz examines gendered consumption patterns, he neglects two
key aspects: the reasons behind lower caloric intake among women and the role
of women in capitalist development through their participation in sugar-related
industries.
The increasing consumption of sugar
among the working class demands further analysis. It was not merely a matter of
imitating elite consumption patterns; rather, the meanings attached to sugar
evolved over time. The concept of "intensification" helps explain
this phenomenon—once tea became entrenched as Britain’s national drink, sugar
consumption surged, transforming it into a primary source of calories for the
working class. Thus, sugar’s role extended beyond status symbolism. However,
power dynamics played a crucial role in this process. The ruling elite ensured
sugar’s availability at low prices to maintain demand and sustain profits.
Control over the internal meanings of cultural objects, coupled with the
regulation of food availability, exemplifies mechanisms of social domination.
Sugar prices were heavily influenced by government-imposed duties. The British
government strategically reduced these duties to encourage consumption and
boost production. With the end of protectionist policies, sugar production and
consumption increased further as Asian and African nations entered the market.
A significant shift during this period was the rise of beet sugar, which eventually
surpassed cane sugar production worldwide.
Two critical transformations occurred
during this era: first, sugar became an essential commodity, and second, the
production of sugar, molasses, and rum became central to British economic and
political power. However, as Britain encountered rival markets in the global
economy, it adopted a "free trade" policy to compete with emerging
economic powers. Mintz’s emphasis on elite power structures in shaping sugar’s
meaning within the working class is problematic. He argues that British
political and economic elites actively facilitated sugar consumption through
economic policies, but an alternative perspective emphasizes resource scarcity.
Clifford Geertz posits that human beings are "caught in webs of
significance they themselves have spun," suggesting that cultural meanings
are not passively accepted but actively interpreted through pre-existing social
conditions. Similarly, working-class sugar consumption in Britain was shaped
not solely by elite-driven narratives but also by material constraints and
economic realities.
Eric Hobsbawm (1999) argues that
neither economic theory nor early industrial capitalism relied on the
purchasing power of laborers, whose wages remained near subsistence levels.
Consequently, workers sought the most affordable calorie sources, making sugar
an attractive option. Additionally, sugar’s integration into religious
practices reinforced its legitimacy. Mintz attributes low sugar prices to elite
policies designed to stimulate consumption, yet Britain’s reliance on
protectionist policies was a strategic necessity. Without them, British sugar
production risked the same fate as failed Spanish sugar enterprises. Later,
when Britain faced competitive pressures, it embraced free market policies,
leveraging its superior resources. Future research should examine how
fluctuations in "necessary goods" shaped the consumption of sugar in
18th-century Britain, rather than assuming its transition into a staple was
inevitable.
Further, Mintz’s focus on power is
also one-dimensional. He adopts a Foucauldian approach, as he primarily
examines the discourse of the elite. However, people often resist dominant
narratives imposed by other groups, which is why not all discourses from the
ruling class become hegemonic in society. Mintz does not address the resistance
to the dominant discourse on sugar. He neglects discussions of revolts,
protests, or strikes by enslaved laborers in the Caribbean sugar industry,
despite the extreme scale of exploitation they endured. Historical parallels
can be drawn to British India, where tea plantation workers protested in
various ways, even staging hartals in solidarity with nationalist movements.
Mintz also overlooks the resistance of colonized Caribbean islanders against
the destruction of alternative industries and means of subsistence. While he
attempts to move away from a Eurocentric history, he ultimately reproduces it
by focusing on European expertise while failing to acknowledge the labor and agency
of Caribbean workers.
The idealized notion of modernity
often assumes a singular perspective on historical change, ignoring the
counter-currents that emerged alongside the modernist project. Many
anthropologists and historians argue that the abolition of slavery was not
merely an outcome of progressive republican values and capitalist forces but
also a strategic move to transition into a capitalist economic system. W. E. B.
Du Bois, for instance, contends that enslaved people were the protagonists of
their own emancipation in the United States and played a decisive role in
determining the outcome of the Civil War. He describes their resistance as a
"general strike" involving nearly half a million people. This
perspective underscores the idea that while slavery may induce what Orlando
Patterson calls "social death," enslaved individuals remained alive
through their resistance.
Mintz also argues that tobacco, tea,
and sugar were among the first commodities within capitalism that suggested one
could transform oneself through consumption. However, viewing food as merely an
economic behavior is overly simplistic. While economic systems influence
dietary habits, they are not the sole determinant. For instance, in India, food
behavior is more profoundly shaped by cultural constructions than by economic
systems alone. The McDonald's food chain in India is adapted to local cultural
sensibilities, as reflected in its policy of not serving beef. Despite
operating within a capitalist framework, McDonald's adjusts its offerings based
on cultural, religious, and political influences, demonstrating that food
consumption is not dictated by economy alone.
Food plays a crucial role in shaping
identity within society. The notions of "being" and
"becoming" influence how cultural objects acquire new meanings. Food
is deeply embedded in rituals associated with birth, life, and death. In India,
rice is used in tilak ceremonies to symbolize prosperity, and sweets are an
integral part of celebrations, as reflected in the phrase "Mooh meetha
karwao" (sweeten the mouth), which underscores the cultural significance
of sweetness. At the beginning of his book, Mintz explicitly states that his
investigation centers on "sweetness" rather than sugar itself, but he
ultimately becomes ensnared in his own web of signification, shifting his focus
to sucrose. While he briefly acknowledges variations in sugar consumption—such
as Americans' preference for coffee over tea and France's lower sugar
consumption compared to Britain—he does not provide a comparative analysis to
explain why sugar acquired different cultural meanings in these regions.
This book offers valuable insights
into the socio-historical development of sugar production and consumption, the
mechanisms that facilitated its popularization, and the social meanings
attached to it. It addresses critical questions concerning the evolution of the
sugar industry and its relationship to economic transformations, social
structures, and power dynamics. As the narrative unfolds, Mintz skillfully
illustrates the machinations of capitalism in exploiting both Caribbean labor
and British consumers’ craving for sweetness. One of the most significant
takeaways from this book is its use of consumption as a lens for examining
social change. It lays the foundation for the concept of "new
consumerism," a framework that contemporary scholars continue to build
upon. As Miller (1995) argues, the modern global economy perpetuates new forms
of exploitation, where the "First World wife" acts as a
"dictator" over Third World producers.
Comments