Monday, September 15, 2014

Coe and Coe

Sophie Coe and Michael Coe present our first text that seems to place the commodity itself at the center of the narrative.  In The True History of Chocolate the question is not the development of global capitalism, but instead how chocolate spread across the land.  This is not to say that chocolate has any sort of agency, it is certainly clear that people poses agency in this text.  Indeed, in some places of the book, chocolate seems to be a minor detail that ties together an agglomeration of vignettes on linguistics, botany, imperialism, aristology, religion, et cetera.
If the focus of the Coes is on the global spread of chocolate, rather than its movements in and out of various scholarly topics, then it is most clear in their attempts to establish when chocolate pierced a culture to become the célèbre of another court.  This seems to lead to many instances where The True History of Chocolate chronicles a series of firsts.  For example in discussing when chocolate was consumed in Italy the Coes present a few members of the nobility and a widely traveled merchant as the heroes.[1]  This seems particularly unimportant, not only because of the lack of evidence, but also because the first importation does not necessarily lead to wide consumption.  The credit, if there is any historical significance to that credit, I suspect, belongs to a nameless mariner.
The story of a first in a particular place seems to treat cultures a bounded entities.  This type of approach to culture is mutually exclusive with their earlier discussion of culture in general.  In this type of approach, creolization, is much more fluid and culture changes in its contact with other cultures.  The Coes use this creole metaphor to explain how conquistadores picked up a taste for chocolates in their contacts with Mesoamericans.  Although their argument is more deductive than anything; the approach is more coherent with my thought.  This more fluid, less anachronistic, notion of culture is reflected in the creative use of linguistic evidence, and I suspect that these multiple approaches are the result of a work written by two people.



[1] Coe, 141.

No comments:

Post a Comment