I thought Soluri's Banana Cultures was a pretty good commodity history that I would include in my syllabus. I think the strongest part was the incorporation of the environment into the commodity's history as well as the environment's effect upon history in general. I thought it was especially good how Soluri explained the role of pathogens in the development of the banana industry and how the monoculture practiced by the bigger plantation style growers fostered the spread of banana disease that harmed smaller growers. Soluri explains how the cost to spray plants was too much for small growers, so many of them lost money and large amounts of plants due to disease. Moreover, one grower might be very careful about his plants and eradicating the disease, but you have to look at the entire area. If one grower gets rid of the disease, but then his neighbor doesn't, the disease will easily migrate and infect the "clean" banana plants. An emphasis on the nature not of just one grower, but the system of growing is very important to Soluri's story.
The structure of the book gave me problems because I think the chronological approach to commodity history is somewhat difficult. I prefer "thematic" approach along the lines of a Mintz in which the story of the producers, consumers, etc. are told separately in ways. Jumping back and forth from consumption, production, science, and politics got a little messy at points. I think the consumption parts could have been fleshed out more, but I was very interested in the idea of bananas entering the US market on both the elite and lower class levels. The fruit became an item consumed by an elite but it also entered the lower classes as the fruit that was damaged or couldn't be sold to upper class consumers was sold for cheap at local markets. This was interesting to me because it showed how the fruit could enter different classes with different uses simultaneously. I think I oftentimes look for it to enter through one class, gender, or ethnic group, but bananas seemed to have entered at multiple points. The banana seemed to be liked most by immigrant groups which were increasing in huge numbers in America in the 1890s and early twentieth century, and this was the same time the banana was entering the market and becoming more desirable.
Having discussed Wallerstein and core/periphery, I liked how this book gave us a picture of how a core area can extract raw materials out of a periphery. Though many Hondurans invited foreign companies into the country in order to help modernize and bring in money, Soluri explains how the banana companies became entrenched powers once they set up infrastructure. Control over banana fleets, railroads, and other technology helped these companies control more than just bananas, and it empowered them to gain land and other concessions. That said, Soluri is arguing that United Fruit did not dominate the country as part histories might explain nor did it bring in ideas of modernity. For Soluri, Hondurans were having discussions about politics, economics, and ideas of modernity before United Fruit so their dominance did not usher in a complete change or break with the past but rather capitalized on the thinking and made alliances with friendly business/political leaders in Honduras to set up their banana empire.
The structure of the book gave me problems because I think the chronological approach to commodity history is somewhat difficult. I prefer "thematic" approach along the lines of a Mintz in which the story of the producers, consumers, etc. are told separately in ways. Jumping back and forth from consumption, production, science, and politics got a little messy at points. I think the consumption parts could have been fleshed out more, but I was very interested in the idea of bananas entering the US market on both the elite and lower class levels. The fruit became an item consumed by an elite but it also entered the lower classes as the fruit that was damaged or couldn't be sold to upper class consumers was sold for cheap at local markets. This was interesting to me because it showed how the fruit could enter different classes with different uses simultaneously. I think I oftentimes look for it to enter through one class, gender, or ethnic group, but bananas seemed to have entered at multiple points. The banana seemed to be liked most by immigrant groups which were increasing in huge numbers in America in the 1890s and early twentieth century, and this was the same time the banana was entering the market and becoming more desirable.
Having discussed Wallerstein and core/periphery, I liked how this book gave us a picture of how a core area can extract raw materials out of a periphery. Though many Hondurans invited foreign companies into the country in order to help modernize and bring in money, Soluri explains how the banana companies became entrenched powers once they set up infrastructure. Control over banana fleets, railroads, and other technology helped these companies control more than just bananas, and it empowered them to gain land and other concessions. That said, Soluri is arguing that United Fruit did not dominate the country as part histories might explain nor did it bring in ideas of modernity. For Soluri, Hondurans were having discussions about politics, economics, and ideas of modernity before United Fruit so their dominance did not usher in a complete change or break with the past but rather capitalized on the thinking and made alliances with friendly business/political leaders in Honduras to set up their banana empire.
No comments:
Post a Comment