economic ‘isms’ enough to disagree. In general, I do not believe that the author had any
intention of telling the story other than from the history of a plant. Certainly, Laveaga has a
different perspective than Gootenberg and Topik, and more akin to Greenfield and Soluri.
Perhaps what Laveaga has done is an examination of a specific commodity that had a short
run in the international pharmaceutical trade which has underpinnings of science and
technology fall out in Mexico.
Politics and economics are relegated to the back seat here, and more questions may
come into the reader’s mind than answers, yet this is a readable, well researched and well
written book. As with all of the books we have read so far, each author has these qualities
as well as a passion about the subject. And again, the view of poverty, ‘exploitation’,
government are brought to light, the emphasis is the history of a particular commodity.
The dichotomy of ‘the pill’ is a worthwhile discussions in forums of gender, medicine,
business and agricultural histories. Barbasco is a foundational work for searching for power
constructs in local agency, over time against national and international bombast. The story
is one that is rich in human history with interviews, biographies of national scientists and
locals.
The history of a Dioscorea mexicana Guilen had not been written. Although it may
be more about the quest of synthetic hormones, the work is a clear, concise and easily
manageable work for most readers. As a high school teacher, I know my students would
have read and discussed this commodity with bravado. It is a primer in many respects, yet
not to be dismissed as unscholarly.
Can the history of a commodity be written to incorporate all perspectives? And should
the history of a commodity have completely balanced views throughout a scholarly study,
examination in order for it to be rendered worthwhile?
No comments:
Post a Comment