-
9: Expanding the Feast: Food Preparation, Feasting, and the Social Negotiation of Gender and Power
- University Press of Colorado
- Chapter
- Additional Information
221 Expanding thE FEast Food Preparation, Feasting, and the Social Negotiation of Gender and Power arthur a. Joyce It was only a few years ago that Brian Hayden (2001: 23–24) lamented the lack of attention to feasting by archaeologists and cultural anthropologists . In less than a decade, however, research on feasting has exploded as a topic of great theoretical and methodological interest in archaeology (e.g., Bray 2003a; Dietler and Hayden 2001a; Junker 1999; LeCount 2001; Mills 2004; Pauketat et al. 2002; Potter 2000; Spielmann 2002). Research on feasting has ranged from considerations of haute cuisines and culinary equipment (Bray 2003b, 2003c; Hastorf 2003; Joyce and Henderson 2007) to the role of feasting in the social construction of identity (DeBoer 2001; Pauketat et al. 2002; Smith 2003), the mobilization of labor (Cook and Glowacki 2003; Dietler and Herbich 2001; Pollock 2003), and the construction of value and meaning (Spielmann 2002; Weissner 2001). Archaeologists have considered methodological problems in the archaeological identification of feasting practices (Adams 2004; Brown 2001; Clarke 2001; Turkon 2004; Wills and Crown 2004) and have developed typologies through which to classify feasting and relate it to broader aspects of social complexity (Hayden 1995, 2001; Perodie 2001) or to varied social, symbolic, and political fields (Dietler 1996, 2001). Archaeologists have debated the definition of feasting (Dietler 9 222 arthur a. JoycE and Hayden 2001b: 3–4), the nature and role of feasting in particular times and places (Phillips and Sebastian 2004), and the theoretical perspectives through which feasting should be understood (Dietler and Hayden 2001b; Hayden 2001). Research has most often focused on the political dimensions of feasting, or what Michael Dietler (2001: 75) terms commensal politics. Studies of commensal politics usually focus on two contrasting and often conflicting aspects of feasting. Whereas feasting establishes and maintains a sense of social affiliation at a variety of scales, it also often contributes to the reproduction or transformation of social distinctions, especially hierarchies (e.g., Bray 2003a; Clark and Blake 1994; Dietler 1996; Hayden 1995; Junker 1999, 2001; Pauketat et al. 2002; Phillips and Sebastian 2004; Rosenswig 2007). This book exemplifies recent trends in feasting research, particularly the focus on commensal politics. The importance of feasting is nicely shown by the diversity of topics and regions in this volume, ranging from Mesopotamia to Mesoamerica, the Andes to Southeast Asia. As discussed by Elizabeth Klarich in her introductory chapter, the most important contribution of the volume is shifting the focus of feasting studies from food consumption to preparation. By focusing attention on the food-preparation side of feasting and the relations among food preparers, participants, and sponsors, the authors expand understandings of the social and political significance of feasting. Since practices related to food are usually highly gendered, this volume also adds to a growing body of literature (e.g., Bray 2003b; Gero 1992; Hastorf 1991) on how gender relations are represented, reproduced, and transformed through feasting (see chapters by Isbell and Groleau, Junker and Niziolek, and LeCount). The volume also underscores that suprahousehold food preparation and consumption are not always a product of feasting but can be the way in which ordinary meals are carried out (see chapters by Klarich, and Goldstein and Shimada). In this chapter, I consider several issues and themes that emerge from the volume that engage feasting studies with broader theoretical issues, especially involving gender and power. I begin with a more basic consideration of how feasting should be analytically approached. Defining the Feast As discussed by Klarich, this volume critiques the common assumption that suprahousehold food preparation and consumption are necessarily indicative of feasting, which reflects broader disagreements about how feasting should be defined (see Stein and Yaeger 2004). Archaeologists have disagreed over whether feasting must always involve ritual aspects (Dietler and Hayden 2001b: 3–4) and the degree to which feasts are communal and engage people beyond the household or family (cf. Dietler and Hayden 2001b: 3–4; Kirch 2001: 169; Spielmann [54.146.154.243] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 13:58 GMT) 223 Expanding thE FEast 2002: 197; Wills and Crown 2004: 154).The most general definitions of feasting require only that feasts differ from normal meals (Hayden 2001: 28), although in particular cases even this distinction may not be self-evident (Stein and Yaeger 2004). Normal everyday meals can have ritual elements, such as when Christians say grace or when the people of Zuni Pueblo invoke the ancestors prior to eating (Cushing 1920: 574–575). Special meals can also be...