Sweetness and Power

In Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History, Sydney Mintz examines how sugar formed a dietary revolution, specifically effecting the working class during the Industrial Revolution in England. In his first chapter, Food, Sociability and Sugar, Mintz describes the changes we see in European culture with the introduction of sugar colonies. He mentions that “the sources of sugar involve those tropical and subtropical islands that were transformed into British colonies, and so we must examine the relationships between such colonies and the motherland, also the areas that produced no sugar but the tea with which it was drunk, and the people who were enslaved in order to produce it” (6).  This popularization of mercantilism took hold of England and commercialized the necessity of sugar.  Mintz discusses the shift of sugar from an elite luxury, where they created sculptures out of sugar for amusement, to an essential dietary need. With this shift, it’s interesting to think about how commoners viewed this change. Sugar was only accessible to those who could afford it, but now that it was cheap enough, pretty much anyone could afford it. Does this mean commoners felt some kind of power or freedom in being able to afford something that was once only available to the rich? I think Mintz would conclude that, yes, commoners did feel a sense of power with this newly accessible item. Over the next two centuries, England saw a change in its economic realm, with the nation suddenly becoming a huge consumer of imported goods.

Sweetness and Power is a great anthropological study of the social and economic effects sugar had on Europe’s rise to modernity. Mintz focuses almost exclusively on sugar consumption in England. I can understand why Mintz would specifically choose England as it was here that the first mass market for sugar originated. However, I think it would have been helpful had Mintz included other countries where sugar had a major impact as well, just to broaden the range. I do applaud Mintz’s use of social history in order to convey his argument. Like the other essays we read last week, Mintz relies on anthropological studies to examine non-elite behavior (ie using cook books to gain how sugar became a staple in the English commoner’s diet). We need to be careful how we interpret data in this fashion. Mintz admits several times that he had to speculate in order to come to a conclusion of causes of sugar empowerment, but this is not too concerning. In fact, to me at least, these types of studies open doors for other historians’ interpretations on the subject, allowing for more opinions to be introduced.