Rating: 
Summary: Agriculture Creates (Bad) Government
Review: An important book that sheds light on human evolution, the evolution of agriculture, and therewith the evolution (and forcible extinction) of most life on the planet. The upshot of this evolutionary odyssey is clear: agriculture has never had anything to do with nutrition, culinary flavor or food security. On the contrary, it has had everything to do with the commodification of food and the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a small minority. Readable, quotable, and packed with information, this books is sure to please everyone - unless you are an unforgiving vegetarian. For Manning is clearly a hunter, or perhaps hunter-gatherer is a better term. As he says, "Food is about a great deal more than nutrition. It, along with sex, forms the pathway that connects our species to the future." Yet again: "We must hunt for food and sex. This is our obsession, our drive, the focus of our senses and our sensuality, so ingrained as to define our humanity. These drives are our essence." And yet, Manning does not suggest, or even believe it is possible, to revert to the lifestyle of our by-and-large neurosis-free hunger-gatherer forebears. We have already colonized too much of the planet to support our growing population; so how could six billion people survive as foraging hunters? The solution, as he and I both see it, is "something approaching permaculture" - that is, a perennial polyculture based on local production and consumption. Manning also praises the Slow Food Movement and farmers markets. All together a remarkable book. Some related readings include: "Coming Home to Eat" by Gary Nabham and "The Food Revolution" by John Robbins on the subject of food. For great discussions on agriculture, see "The Fatal Harvest Reader" by Andrew Kimbrell and "A Green History of the World" by Clive Ponting. (Ponting, especially, should not be overlooked by anyone wanting to understand the failure of complex civilizations in general and large-scale agriculture in specific.) For more on human evolution, I recommend Diamond's "The Third Chimpanzee." On the fascinating subject of permaculture, see "Permaculture: A Designer's Manuel" by Bill Mollison or "Permaculture: Principles and Pathways" by David Holmgren.
Rating: 
Summary: Questioning Common Wisdom*
Review: I received this volume for review at the same time that Manning's article, Super Organics: Inside the New Science of Smart Breeding, appeared in the May 2004 issue of "Wired" magazine (1). In the article, Manning describes the ability of scientists to tag genetic elements which have been identified as yielding desirable traits. This innovation allows one to more effectively carry out conventional breeding on an accelerated time-table, giving more certainty as to outcome and none of the concerns of the possibility of the claim of creating "Franken Foods" which has plagued the genetic engineered crops. Given Manning's concerns regarding human footprints on the environment, one can almost hear a sigh of relief and feel the hope that this technology might foreshadow a kinder and gentler approach towards agricultural practices, globally, as well as herald the loosening of the economic grip which many believe the multinational agri-business firms hold on the world's food supply. Manning is part of a growing cadre of non-academic public intellectuals whose presence is being felt, not just in conventional venues, but even more so on the Internet via web pages, blogs, email lists, and similar electronic venues. Many of these articles, books and electronic materials are researched with the same care and documentation found within the scholarly art. Others, including, "Against the Grain", are lightly and selectively researched and adopted, often lacking in thorough documentation, and anecdotally argued. It takes little research to raise questions with the intellectually underpinnings of Manning's thesis once one rubs the romantic patina off the surface. "Against the Grain" is one of these pieces, more eloquent than reasoned, and more thoughtful than grounded in substance, though giving the appearance of being researched in a scholarly manner. Manning, in his response to his own question, "Why Agriculture?" says, (the question) is so vital, lies so close to the core of our being that it probably cannot be asked or answered with complete honesty. Better to settle for calming explanations of the sort Stephen Jay Gould calls 'just so stories'." What Manning would have us believe is that the calming stories of agriculture are those of conventional wisdom which tell of human progress due largely to the ability of society to grow because of agriculture. "Against the Grain", he believes is a counter perspective which demonstrates that agriculture, in many ways, is hostile to both the quality of life for humans and, also, the very fabric of the planetary ecosystem. The author finds it perplexing that hunter gatherers would want to give up the life of leisure, gamboling through the ecosystem, picking berries in season and killing a choice animal for meat as needed, or desired. He builds a case for sedentary life coming before agriculture, largely around water, rich with easily obtainable aquatic protein. This sedentary life allowed for the tilling of the soil and the planting of crops, the curse of God on Adam and Eve when expelled from the Garden. "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground." Manning sees grains (wheat, corn, rice) as the cross that the planet must carry. Storable, tradable, commodities are controllable. Rulers can use them to subjugate farmers, build armies, and conquer free persons and their properties and enslave them. Sedentary populations under rulers could be commanded and humbled. Yesterday, it was the armies of the Greeks and Romans, and today, the giants of the international grain trade and their agribusiness partners. Manning is a "hunter" who believes that humans are constructed to thrive on protein, red meat from the "kill"; and the cultivation of grains, a storable, fungible commodity is not only detrimental to human health but allows wealth in grains, like precious metals, to be concentrated in the hands of a few who then control the larger population. The land, Nature's precious soils, are scared by the plow and insulted by rubbing agri-chemicals into the wounds while precious top soils pollute the waters, the source of life. Unsustainable agricultural practices are subsidized to produce unnecessary surpluses of primary grains, wheat, corn, and rice. Of course, land ownership also restricts hunters and their natural prey. Yet, Manning realizes that because of agriculture, populations have risen, perhaps, in his mind, not as healthy as hunter/gatherers. Manning suggests that human physiology has suffered because of the restrictive grain diets and the subjugation via economics and physical coercion once agriculture dominated the arena of food production. Since we can't return to Manning's Eden of innocence and the idyllic life of the hunter/gather, what are realistic alternatives to continued abuse of the land for production of tradable grains controlled by multinationals? Manning suggests that we return to locally produced foods, animals raised humanely and vegetables produced on community support agriculture operations. Permaculture gets a passing nod as does the "Slow Food" movement which not only suggests that we take more time to appreciate what we eat but also how we obtain it. Do we live to eat or eat to live? Perhaps, Manning suggests, that we should stop to smell the roses, concern ourselves more with appreciating the world around us and less time trying to expedite our consumption of the necessary basics for our biological engines. The reader identifies with the author's point of view which tends to draw one in while reducing the critical eye of a more academic analysis. Jared Diamond's, now almost classic, Guns, Germs and Steel, (2) represents the opposite end of the public intellectual spectrum. Rather than seeing Manning's work as providing new insights, historic perspectives, or cogent intellectual arguments for sustainability, one needs to yield to this volume as to one might to a historical novel. 1)Manning, Richard, Super Organics, Wired Magazine, May 2004, pp 176-180,215.
2)Diamond, Jared, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1997 *Abridged from a review in The Journal of Sustainable Agriculture (in press)
Rating:
Summary: Deceptively easy-to-read book on a complex topic
Review: In many ways Manning has written a remarkable book. The basic thesis, very gently stated by the author, is that the advent of agriculture has caused the loss of what it means to be human by replacing our ancestral senses of the many flavors and varieties of nature with the dull security of industrial monoculture based overwhelmingly on just three crops. It has also heralded the breakdown of social egalitiarianism, led to vast numbers of malnourished poor worldwide, and is ultimately unsustainable on its current scale. In making his argument, Manning wanders through numerous disciplines: cultural anthropology, archaeology, evolutionary biology, climatology, cognitive science and ecology, even religion. He begins with an explanation of how agriculture developed and spread despite its apparent disadvantages to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle (worse nutrition, less leisure-time) and then develops these disadvantages more fully, surveying the prevalence of famine in agricultural societies throughout history and moving through the detrimental social and ecological effects of industrial agriculture such as how it enabled the feeding of high concentrations of cheap labor. `Against The Grain' hits a weak spot in looking at modern agricultural corporations, in particular ADM. At this point, he draws less from his apparent strengths as a writer and person - his awareness and appreciation of nature and his solid understanding of the historical breadth and scope of agriculture's effects - and loses his effectiveness as his underlying anger is displayed. Fortunately he leaves himself time to recover and does so in discussing the formation and driving force behind the modern industrial agricultural diet, arguing that its intention is more to promote efficient (and profitable) agriculture than good nutrition. He ends with a plan for reversing the worst of agriculture's effects through small steps - advocating the patronage of farm stands that are now prevalent in most urban centers (including my Chicago suburb), and giving us a glimpse of how he himself practices food sustainability. Any book treating a subject as complex as the effects of agriculture on human society, even one with such a narrow focus as this one, could fill volumes of plodding data and cite vast numbers of bibliographical sources. Instead, Manning treats the subject nimbly, almost dancing through his arguments with a sense of precision and conciseness. He uses the term `gracile' in his book to denote speed and quickness while making a point about antelope, but the term could just as well apply to the book itself. Nevertheless, while I find many of his conclusions convincing, and the ideas themselves both engaging and thought-provoking, I found myself often wishing for more substantial backup for his assertions or a better system of citation. I have read a few books tangential to this material (particularly Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond which alludes to similar conclusions) and am familiar with many of the facts and events used by Richard Manning in developing his ideas, and still it seemed a little light. Someone reading this book without having read anything similar or related might well walk away unconvinced of his credibility or even his earnestness, and that would be a shame. The book is deceptively easy to read. Despite Manning's obvious passion for the topic, he thankfully doesn't beat you over the head with his rhetoric. But I found that I needed to re-read some sections in order to catch the subleties of his argument (and as I write this I'm wondering when, with the stack of books I keep adding to, I'll have time to read it again). If you read 'Against The Grain' you may find you agree or disagree with Manning's conclusions, but regardless, you should feel that it was worthwhile.
Rating:
Summary: Deceptively easy-to-read book on a complex topic
Review: In many ways Manning has written a remarkable book. The basic thesis, very gently stated by the author, is that the advent of agriculture has caused the loss of what it means to be human by replacing our ancestral senses of the many flavors and varieties of nature with the dull security of industrial monoculture based overwhelmingly on just three crops. It has also heralded the breakdown of social egalitiarianism, led to vast numbers of malnourished poor worldwide, and is ultimately unsustainable on its current scale. In making his argument, Manning wanders through numerous disciplines: cultural anthropology, archaeology, evolutionary biology, climatology, cognitive science and ecology, even religion. He begins with an explanation of how agriculture developed and spread despite its apparent disadvantages to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle (worse nutrition, less leisure-time) and then develops these disadvantages more fully, surveying the prevalence of famine in agricultural societies throughout history and moving through the detrimental social and ecological effects of industrial agriculture such as how it enabled the feeding of high concentrations of cheap labor. 'Against The Grain' hits a weak spot in looking at modern agricultural corporations, in particular ADM. At this point, he draws less from his apparent strengths as a writer and person - his awareness and appreciation of nature and his solid understanding of the historical breadth and scope of agriculture's effects - and loses his effectiveness as his underlying anger is displayed. Fortunately he leaves himself time to recover and does so in discussing the formation and driving force behind the modern industrial agricultural diet, arguing that its intention is more to promote efficient (and profitable) agriculture than good nutrition. He ends with a plan for reversing the worst of agriculture's effects through small steps - advocating the patronage of farm stands that are now prevalent in most urban centers (including my Chicago suburb), and giving us a glimpse of how he himself practices food sustainability. Any book treating a subject as complex as the effects of agriculture on human society, even one with such a narrow focus as this one, could fill volumes of plodding data and cite vast numbers of bibliographical sources. Instead, Manning treats the subject nimbly, almost dancing through his arguments with a sense of precision and conciseness. He uses the term 'gracile' in his book to denote speed and quickness while making a point about antelope, but the term could just as well apply to the book itself. Nevertheless, while I find many of his conclusions convincing, and the ideas themselves both engaging and thought-provoking, I found myself often wishing for more substantial backup for his assertions or a better system of citation. I have read a few books tangential to this material (particularly Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond which alludes to similar conclusions) and am familiar with many of the facts and events used by Richard Manning in developing his ideas, and still it seemed a little light. Someone reading this book without having read anything similar or related might well walk away unconvinced of his credibility or even his earnestness, and that would be a shame. The book is deceptively easy to read. Despite Manning's obvious passion for the topic, he thankfully doesn't beat you over the head with his rhetoric. But I found that I needed to re-read some sections in order to catch the subleties of his argument (and as I write this I'm wondering when, with the stack of books I keep adding to, I'll have time to read it again). If you read 'Against The Grain' you may find you agree or disagree with Manning's conclusions, but regardless, you should feel that it was worthwhile.
Rating: 
Summary: Food for Thought
Review: The first part of the book develops a thesis which readers of Daniel Quinn's *Ishmael* and *The Story of B* will recognize: that 7,000-10,000 years ago, when our hunter-gatherer forbears discovered how to tame the annual grasses and created agriculture, they opened the doors to economic stratification (wealth and poverty), famine, war, organized religion, overpopulation and pretty much everything that's wrong with the world today. The rest of the book expands on information presented by a number of other authors that take current agriculture to task. At times Manning's polemic style carries these ideas over the top: "We did not create (agriculture)...plants domesticated us." At other times it bludgeons its way into novel insights: "The goal of agriculture is not feeding people; it is the creation of wealth." His writing, like his thinking, runs hot and cold. A brilliant sound byte may be followed by a sentence that falls one draft short of comprehensibility. After a bookful of woes, the chapter upliftingly entitled "A Counteragriculture" is a disappointment. After thoroughly building the pemise that totalitarian agriculture has put us in deep global doo doo, Manning devotes a single sentence to the overpopulation problem and narrows his focus onto farmers' markets--a delightful development to be sure, but as an answer to the woes he has enumerated, it's like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Besides, if these farmers were ever to snag enough of the market to threaten Archer Daniels Midland or its corporate brethren, they would be terminated with extreme prejudice. *Against the Grain* is a thoroughly-researched book, well-documented with science and statistics. With its lively journalistic tone and trove of ascinating facts, it's non-intimidating for the lay reader.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Book on Agriculture
Review: The labels on the packages of the food we eat include vital nutrition information. However, Richard Manning in his book, Against the Grain, contends that the nutrition labels leave out much important information. Large corporations such as Archer Daniels Midland are primarily to blame here. Manning believes that the carbohydrate rich crops of wheat, corn and rice are actually bad for us. He is a devotee of the Atkins Diet that preaches that carbohydrates should be avoided as much as possible. Manning also opposes the way that agricultural concerns "farm the government." This is a provocative and well-written book.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Book on Agriculture
Review: The labels on the packages of the food we eat include vital nutrition information. However, Richard Manning in his book, Against the Grain, contends that the nutrition labels leave out much important information. Large corporations such as Archer Daniels Midland are primarily to blame here. Manning believes that the carbohydrate rich crops of wheat, corn and rice are actually bad for us. He is a devotee of the Atkins Diet that preaches that carbohydrates should be avoided as much as possible. Manning also opposes the way that agricultural concerns "farm the government." This is a provocative and well-written book.
Rating:
Summary: We Are What We Eat
Review: Think of this book as a cross between "Guns, Germs & Steel" and "Fast Food Nation." What Manning outlines is an emerging view that challenges the agrarian mythos of civilization; that is, contrary to what we've all been taught, agriculture was not an "advance" per se, but a faustian bargain with managed catastrophe. Agriculture thrives on the disruption and destruction of natural processes. The ensuing chaos, while manageable in its nascent forms, is very hard to stuff back into the box once industrial agriculture takes root, so to speak. Manning then moves on to discuss the social and health ramifications of putting all of our nutritional eggs into the compact grain basket. Corn has proven to be especially egregious in its full manifestations. There is also a very thorough treatment of the political strategies for foisting cheap and destructive grains on the developing world and on our own populace. We always hear about those famous "subsidies" for agriculture, and Manning takes us through exactly what that means. As with most social criticism, this book is long on description and relatively short on prescription. Manning leaves most of the preaching implicit, with an occasional simple but revolutionary suggestion like, 'stop eating sugar and fat.' But he is clear that our salvation does not lie with more green revolutions from the top down. It will take a bottom-up food revolution, made up of organic farming, nutritional education, the rejection of soda beverages, local farmers markets, etc. Manning's book is a great contribution to the struggle.
Rating:
Summary: We Are What We Eat
Review: Think of this book as a cross between "Guns, Germs & Steel" and "Fast Food Nation." What Manning outlines is an emerging view that challenges the agrarian mythos of civilization; that is, contrary to what we've all been taught, agriculture was not an "advance" per se, but a faustian bargain with managed catastrophe. Agriculture thrives on the disruption and destruction of natural processes. The ensuing chaos, while manageable in its nascent forms, is very hard to stuff back into the box once industrial agriculture takes root, so to speak. Manning then moves on to discuss the social and health ramifications of putting all of our nutritional eggs into the compact grain basket. Corn has proven to be especially egregious in its full manifestations. There is also a very thorough treatment of the political strategies for foisting cheap and destructive grains on the developing world and on our own populace. We always hear about those famous "subsidies" for agriculture, and Manning takes us through exactly what that means. As with most social criticism, this book is long on description and relatively short on prescription. Manning leaves most of the preaching implicit, with an occasional simple but revolutionary suggestion like, 'stop eating sugar and fat.' But he is clear that our salvation does not lie with more green revolutions from the top down. It will take a bottom-up food revolution, made up of organic farming, nutritional education, the rejection of soda beverages, local farmers markets, etc. Manning's book is a great contribution to the struggle.
Rating:
Summary: We Are What We Eat
Review: Think of this book as a cross between "Guns, Germs & Steel" and "Fast Food Nation." What Manning outlines is an emerging view that challenges the agrarian mythos of civilization; that is, contrary to what we've all been taught, agriculture was not an "advance" per se, but a faustian bargain with managed catastrophe. Agriculture thrives on the disruption and destruction of natural processes. The ensuing chaos, while manageable in its nascent forms, is very hard to stuff back into the box once industrial agriculture takes root, so to speak. Manning then moves on to discuss the social and health ramifications of putting all of our nutritional eggs into the compact grain basket. Corn has proven to be especially egregious in its full manifestations. There is also a very thorough treatment of the political strategies for foisting cheap and destructive grains on the developing world and on our own populace. We always hear about those famous "subsidies" for agriculture, and Manning takes us through exactly what that means. As with most social criticism, this book is long on description and relatively short on prescription. Manning leaves most of the preaching implicit, with an occasional simple but revolutionary suggestion like, 'stop eating sugar and fat.' But he is clear that our salvation does not lie with more green revolutions from the top down. It will take a bottom-up food revolution, made up of organic farming, nutritional education, the rejection of soda beverages, local farmers markets, etc. Manning's book is a great contribution to the struggle.
|
