Of Fish Feces, Shamanic Bowls and Chimpanzee Scraps: Extension vs Precision in the Concept of Waste

Zsuzsa Gille

doi:10.5334/wwwj.22

Abstract

Joshua Reno’s article is an inspiring call-out to Discard Studies. I thank him for the provocation and hope he takes my response in the spirit of a friendly polemic between fellow travelers in waste studies—which is what we are.

Highlights

While he admits that labor can become work when it’s done out of necessity, there is no consideration for the socially circumscribed ways in which labor is conducted
Shamanic bowls, fish feces and chimpanzees may be alluring armchair examples, but nuclear waste, chemical by-products, fly-ash from incinerators won’t lend themselves to such a thought experiment. It is in these examples that Reno would do well answering his own opening question: “who are the we?” Who thinks wrappers, shamanic bowls, fish feces, and chimpanzee-generated scraps are “our” biggest waste problems? Who determines what the measure of ‘good’ theories of waste should be?
Let me return to the goal of the article, namely broadening our attention to other senses of waste

Summary

Introduction

While he admits that labor can become work when it’s done out of necessity, there is no consideration for the socially circumscribed ways in which labor is conducted. The thought exercise at the end of the article in which the putative observer zooms out from a piece of food wrapper to larger and more distant cultural, economic and social causes and contexts confirms exactly this importance of the sociomaterial embeddedness of the three Arendtian waste-generating activities.

Results

Conclusion