Cocaine: Bruce Robbins approved?

Gootenberg’s book is an important part of literature, not only on commodities but also on the history of narcotics. One of the most interesting aspects of this book is how cocaine as a commodity is presented especially in comparison to the other commodities we’ve learned about. As Jim points out, “this might be the first substance we have seen that has become a commodity because people were actively trying to make it one.” I’m not sure how sold I am on that argument yet because one can always argue that sugar, bananas and chocolate were commodities that did not have any value in Western markets until merchants decided that these were the new products that they were going to introduce to the market to make money. I think cochineal is probably the only one that was in demand prior to being ‘discovered’. However, it could be argued that cocaine itself did not have value in Peruvian culture other than what recognition it could bring to Peru as a nation and its ability to move Peru into modernity and bring it on par with the North America and Europe. The coca leaf is what had more value to Peruvians. “Coca…in the high selva region of the eastern Andes…has been embraced by indigenous peoples for thousands of years as a ritual and workaday stimulant.” (9) Gootenberg’s focus on cocaine as modern national subject that was claimed by an elite scientific nationalist (15/16) places cocaine on a different level of commodity in my eyes. I think Gootenberg manages to describe cocaine in terms of human manipulation (commodity chains) like no other author has. Other commodities have seemed to have a life of their own that have magically manipulated or even created the commodity chain process. I think this is the kind of commodities history that Bruce Robbins would approve of.