!"#$!"#%&#'()*+$,'&-)'-&#$%.

$/)%+%0()*+$1#2%+-'(%34
5-'"%&6478$9*&%+:3$;#&)"*3'
,%-&)#8$/32(&%3<#3'*+$1#2(#=8$/1>$?%+@$AA>$B%@$C>$,D#)(*+$E44-#8$!"#%&(#4$%.$/32(&%3<#3'*+
F(4'%&:$6G(3'#&>$AHIJ7>$DD@$KLMNKJC
O-P+(4"#Q$P:8$R%&#4'$F(4'%&:$,%)(#':$*3Q$5<#&()*3$,%)(#':$.%&$/32(&%3<#3'*+$F(4'%&:
,'*P+#$S1T8$http://www.jstor.org/stable/3984135
5))#44#Q8$AHUVLUKVAV$AV8AV

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fhs.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Forest History Society and American Society for Environmental History are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Environmental Review: ER.

http://www.jstor.org
 The TheoreticalStructure
of EcologicalRevolutions
Carolyn Merchant

Environmentalhistoryhas reacheda point in its evolutionin which

explicitattentionto the theoriesthat underlieits variousinterpretations
is called for. The papersin this special issue on "Theoriesof Environ-
mental History" begin a dialogue about the merits and limitationsof
differingapproaches.Theoriesabout the social constructionof science
and nature that have emerged over the past decade in the wake of
Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions is one such ap-
proach.It acceptsthe relativiststancetowardscienceset forth in the first
edition of his book. (Kuhn backed away from that position toward a
view of the progressof knowledgein a second edition.) Marxisttheories
that attemptto understandhistoryas constructionsof the material-social
world existingin particulartimes and placesprovidea second influence.
The theory of ecological revolutionsthat follows draws on social con-
structionapproachesand uses New Englandas a case study.'
Two major transformationsin New England land and life took
place between1600and 1860.The first, a colonial ecologicalrevolution,
occurredduringthe seventeenthcenturyand was externallygenerated.It
resultedin the collapseof indigenousIndianecologiesand the incorpora-
tion of a Europeanecological complex of animals, plants, pathogens,
and people. It was legitimatedby a set of symbols that placed cultured
Europeansabove wild nature,otheranimals,and "beastlikesavages." It
substituteda visual for an oral consciousnessand an image of natureas
female and subservientto a transcendentmale God for an animistic
fabricof symbolicexchangesbetweenpeopleand nature.
The second transformation,a capitalistecologicalrevolution,took
place roughlybetweenthe AmericanRevolutionand about 1860. That
second revolutionwas internallygeneratedand resultedin the reintro-
ductionof soil nutrientsand native species. It demandedan economy of
increasedhumanlabor, land management,and a legitimatingmechanis-
tic science. It split human consciousnessinto a disembodiedanalytic
mindand a romanticemotionalsensibility.
My thesisis that ecologicalrevolutionsare majortransformationsin
human relations with non-human nature. They arise from changes,
tensions, and contradictionsthat develop between a society's mode of
productionand its ecology, and between its modes of productionand
reproduction.Those dynamicsin turn support the acceptanceof new
265
266 ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW WINTER

forms of consciousness,ideas, images, and world views. The course of

the colonial and capitalistecologicalrevolutionsin New Englandmay be
understoodthrough a descriptionof each society's production, repro-
duction, and forms of consciousness,the processesby whichthey broke
down, and an analysisof the new relationsbetweenthe emergentcolonial
or capitalistsocietyand non-humannature.
Two frameworksof analysisoffer springboardsfor discussingthe
structureof such ecological revolutions. In The Structureof Scientific
Revolutions (first edition), Thomas Kuhn approachedmajor transfor-
mations in scientific consciousnessfrom a perspectiveinternal to the
workingsof scienceand the communityof scientists.
One of the strengthsof Kuhn'sprovocativeaccount is its recogni-
tion of stableworldviews in sciencethat exist for relativelylong periods
but are rapidlytransformedduringtimes of crisis and stress. One of its
limitationsis its failureto incorporatean interpretationof social forces
externalto the dailyactivitiesof sciencepractitionersin theirlaboratories
and field stations. Social and economic circumstancesaffect internal
developmentsin scientifictheories, at least indirectly.A viewpointthat
incorporatessocial, economic, and ecological changesis requiredfor a
morecompleteunderstandingof scientificchange.
A second approachto revolutionarytransformationsis that of Karl
Marxand FriedrichEngels. Accordingto their base/superstructurethe-
ory of history,social revolutionsbeginin the economicbase of a particu-
lar social formation and result in a fairly rapid transformationof the
legal, political, and ideological superstructure.In the most succinct
statementof his theoryof history,Marxwrote:
At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of
society come in conflict with the existing relations of production.... Then begins
an epoch of social revolution. With the change of the economic foundation the
entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed.2
One weaknessof that approachis the determinismMarxassignsto
the economic base and the sharp demarcationbetweenbase and super-
structure.But its strengthlies in its view of society and change. If a
society at a given time can be understood as a mutually supportive
structureof dynamicallyinteractingparts, then the processof its break-
down and transformationto a new whole can be described.Both Kuhn's
theoryof scientificrevolutionand Marx'stheoryof social revolutionare
startingpoints for a theoryof ecologyand history.
Science and history are both social constructions. Science is an
ongoing negotiationwith non-humannaturefor what counts as reality.
Scientistssociallyconstructnature,representingit differentlyin different
historical epochs. Those social constructionschange during scientific
revolutions. Historians also socially construct the past in accordance
with conceptsrelevantto the historian'spresent.Historyis thus a contin-
uing negotiationbetweenthe historianand historicalsources.Ecologyis
1987 CAROLYNMERCHANT 267

a particulartwentieth-centuryconstruction of nature relevant to the

concernsof environmentalhistorians.
A scientificworldview answersthreekey questions:
(1) Whatis the worldmadeof? (the ontologicalquestion)
(2) How does changeoccur?(the historicalquestion)
(3) How do we know?(the epistomologicalquestion)
World views such as animism, Aristotelianism,mechanism,and
quantumfield theory constructanswersto these fundamentalquestions
differently.
Environmentalhistoryposes similarquestions:
(1) Whatconceptsdescribethe world?
(2) Whatis the processby whichchangeoccurs?
(3) How does a societyknowthe naturalworld?
The conceptsmost useful for this approachto environmentalhistory
are ecology, production, reproduction,and consciousness.Because of
the differencesin the immediacyof impactof production,reproduction,
and consciousnesson non-humannature, a structured,leveled frame-
work of analysis is needed. This frameworkprovides the basis for an
understandingof stabilityas well as evolutionarychange and transfor-
mation. Althoughchangemay occur at any level, ecologicalrevolutions
are characterizedby major alterationsat all three levels. Wideningten-
sions between the requirementsof ecology and productionin a given
habitatand betweenproductionand reproductioninitiatethose changes.
Those dynamics in turn lead to transformationsin consciousnessand
legitimatingworldviews. (SeeFigure1.)
Since the ScientificRevolutionof the seventeenthcentury,the West
has seen natureprimarilythroughthe spectaclesof mechanisticscience.
Matter is dead and inert, remainingat rest or moving with uniform
velocity in a straight line unless acted on by external forces. Change
comesfromoutsideas in the operationof a machine.The worldis a clock,
adjustableby humanclock makers;natureis passiveand manipulable.
An ecological approachto history asserts the idea of nature as a
historicalactor. It challengesthe mechanistictraditionby focusing on
the interchangeof energy,materials,and informationamong living and
non-livingbeings in the naturalenvironment.Non-humannatureis not
passive, but an active complexthat participatesin changeover time and
respondsto human-inducedchange. Natureis a whole of whichhumans
are only one part. We interactwithplants, animals,and soils in waysthat
sustainor depletelocal habitats,but throughscienceand technology,we
have greaterpowerto alterthe whole in a shortperiodof time.
But like the mechanisticparadigm, the ecological paradigmis a
socially constructed theory. Although it differs from mechanism by
taking relations, context, and networks into consideration,it has no
268 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WINTER

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework for Interpreting
Ecological Revolutions

/
Reggion ~~~~~~~~.
. .:.::-..
. . . . . ..

: H
/Cosmology ml1|piQq?dLanguage\

aggion s(costaus

Plants Bactria, Fung

(producers) (decomposers)
Ecokgical.
.Exogenous Additons
*;,n.e
,.*
nrals jand * s ,.*
Withdrawals
+.,+ ;: \
.Bogeochamicd Cydes
Domeatio roonomy Energy Exchanges Polittoal Eoenomy
Human Produo:tOons Games
Extraction, Processing, Exchange

Speoes Subsivtemc \ mer .:: Governance, Law

(Womb) 4." (State)

Humun Reiroda())on
Morals Dance
Daiy Life Sociabzation
(Household) (Community; Family)

Taboos Festvals
\ / Rituals

o F
TrandaUon P tpreuiuore IntoBehvAvir
1987 CAROLYNMERCHANT 269

greateror lesserclaim to ultimatetruththan do earlierparadigms.Both

mechanismand ecology constructtheir theoriesthrougha sociallysanc-
tioned process of problem identification, selection and deselection of
particular"facts," inscriptionof the selected facts into texts, and the
acceptanceof a constructedorderof natureby the scientificcommunity.
But laboratoryand field ecology mergethroughthe replicationof labo-
ratoryconditions in the field. Farm, field, and forest are viewed as an
ecological whole that includes both non-humannature and the human
designer. The ecological approach of the twentieth century, like the
earliermechanisticone, has resultedfrom a socially constructedset of
experiencessanctionedby scientificauthorityand a set of social practices
and policies.3
Production is the human counterpartof "nature's" activity. The
need to producesubsistenceto reproducehumanenergyon a daily basis
connectshumancommunitieswith their local environments.Production
for subsistence(or use) from the elements(or resources)of natureand
the productionof surplusesfor marketexchangeare the primarywaysin
which humans interact directly with the local habitat. An ecological
perspectiveunites the laws of nature with the processesof production
through exchanges of energy. All animals, plants, and minerals are
energyniches involved in the actual exchangeof energy, materials,and
information. The relation between human beings and the non-human
world is reciprocal;when humans alter their surroundings,"nature"
respondsto those changesthroughecologicallaws.
Productionis the extraction,processing,and exchangeof nature's
parts as resources. In traditionalculturesexchangesare often gifts or
symbolicallianceswhile in marketsocieties they are exchangedas com-
modities. For much of Western history, humans have produced and
barteredfood, clothing, and shelterprimarilywithin the local commu-
nity to reproducedaily life. But when commoditiesare marketedfor
profit, as in capitalistsocieties, they are often removedfrom the local
habitat to distant places and exchangedfor money. Marx and Engels
distinguishedbetween use-value production, or productionfor subsis-
tence, and production for profit. When people "exploit" non-human
nature, they do so in one of two ways: they either make immediateor
personal use of it for subsistence, or they exchange its products as
commoditiesfor personalprofit or gain.
New England is a significant historical example because several
types of productionevolved withinthe bounds of its presentgeographi-
cal area. Native Americansengagedprimarilyin gatheringand hunting
in the north and in horticulturein the south. Colonial Americanscom-
bined mercantiletrade in natural resources with subsistence-oriented
agriculture.The marketand transportationrevolutionsof the nineteenth
centuryinitiatedthe transitionto capitalistproduction.Historicalbifur-
cation points within the evolutionaryprocess can be identifiedroughly
between 1600and 1675(the colonial ecologicalrevolution)and between
1775and 1860(the capitalistecologicalrevolution).
270 ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW WINTER

To continue over time, life must be reproducedfrom generationto

generation.The habitatis populatedand repopulatedwith living organ-
isms of all kinds. Biologically, all species must reproducethemselves
inter-generationally.For humans, reproductionis both biological and
social. Each adult generationmust maintain itself, its parents, and its
offspring so that human life may continue. And each individualmust
reproduceits own energyand that of its offspring (intra-generationally)
on a daily basisthroughgathering,growing,or preparingfood. Socially,
humansmust reproducefuture laborersby passingon family and com-
munity norms. And they must reproduceand maintainthe largersocial
order through the structuresof governanceand laws (such as property
inheritance)and the ethical codes that reinforce behavior. Thus, al-
thoughproductionis twofold-oriented towardsubsistenceuse or market
exchange-reproduction is fourfold, having both biological and social
articulations.
Reproductionis the biological and social process through which
humans are born, nurtured,socialized, and governed. Throughrepro-
ductionsexualrelationsarelegitimated,populationsizes and familyrela-
tionships are maintained, and property and inheritancepracticesare
reinforced.In subsistence-oriented economies,productionand reproduc-
tion are united in the maintenanceof the local community. Under
capitalismproductionandreproductionseparateinto two differentspheres.
Claude Meillassoux'sMaidens, Meal, and Money (1981) best ex-
plainsthe necessaryconnectionsbetweenbiologicaland social reproduc-
tion in subsistenceeconomies. Production,he argues,exists for the sake
of reproduction;the productionand exchangeof humanenergyare the
keys to the reproductionof human life. Food must be extractedor
producedto maintainthe daily energyof producingadults, to maintain
the energy of the children who will be the future producers,and to
maintainthat of the elders, the past producers.In this way reproducing
life on a daily (intragenerational)basis throughenergyis linked directly
to the intergenerational reproduction of the human species.4
Althoughthe biologicalreproductionof life is possibleonly through
the necessaryconnectionsbetweeninter-and intragenerational reproduc-
tion, the communityas a self-perpetuatingunit is maintainedby social
reproduction.In addition,the political,legal, or governmentalstructures
that maintainthe mode of productionwill play the role of reproducing
the socialwhole.5
Whereas Meillassoux was interested primarilyin the concept of
reproductionin subsistencesocieties, sociologist Abby Peterson exam-
ined the gender-sexdimension in politics to formulate an analysis of
reproductionin capitalist societies. Under capitalism, the division of
labor betweenthe sexes has meant that men bear the responsibilityfor
and dominate the productionof exchangecommodities,while women
bear responsibilityfor reproducingthe work force and social relations.
Petersonargues:
1987 CAROLYNMERCHANT 271

Women'sresponsibility for reproduction includesboththe biologicalreproduc-

tion of the species(intergenerational reproduction)and the intragenerational
reproduction of the workforcethroughunpaidlaborin the home.Heretoo is
includedthereproduction of socialrelations-socialization.6
Undercapitalistpatriarchy,reproductionis subordinateto production.
Meillassoux'sand Peterson'swork offers an approachby whichthe
analysisof reproductioncan be advancedbeyonddemographyto include
daily life and the communityitself. The sphereof reproductionis four-
fold, havingtwo biological and two social manifestations:(1) the inter-
generationalreproductionof the species(both humanand non-human),
(2) the intragenerationalreproductionof daily life, (3) the reproduction
of social normswithinthe family and community,and (4) the reproduc-
tion of the legal-politicalstructuresthat maintainsocial orderwithinthe
communityand the state. The fourfold sphereof reproductionexistsin a
dynamicrelationshipwith the twofold (subsistenceor market-oriented)
sphereof production.
Productionand reproductionare in dynamictension. When repro-
ductive patterns are altered, as in population growth or changes in
propertyinheritance,productionis affected. Conversely,when produc-
tion changes,as in the additionor depletionof resourcesor in technolog-
ical innovation, reproductivestructuresare altered. A dramaticchange
at the level of either reproductionor productioncan alter the dynamic
betweenthem, resultingin a majortransformationof the socialwhole.
Socialist-feministshave furtherelaboratedthe interactionbetween
production and reproduction. In a 1976 article, "The Dialectics of
Production and Reproductionin History," Renate Bridenthalargues
that changesin productiongive rise to changesin reproduction,creating
tensionsbetweenthem. For example,the changefrom an agrarianto an
industrialcapitalisteconomy-one that characterizedthe capitalisteco-
logicalrevolution-can be describedin termsof tensions,contradictions,
and synthesis within the gender roles associated with productionand
reproduction.In the agrarianeconomy of colonial America,production
and reproductionwere symbiotic. Women participatedin both spheres
becausethe productionand reproductionof daily life were centeredin
the household and domestic communities. Likewise, men working in
barns and fields and women working in farmyardsand farmhouses
socializedchildreninto production.But with industrialization,the pro-
duction of items such as textiles and shoes moved out of the home into
the factory,while farmsbecamespecializedand mechanized.Production
becamemore public, reproductionmore private, leadingto their social
and structuralseparation.For working-classwomen, the split between
productionand reproductionimposed a double burdenof wage labor
and housework;for middle-classwomen, it led to enforced idleness as
"ladiesof leisure."7
In New Englandthe additionaltensionsbetweenthe requirementsof
intergenerationalreproductionand those of subsistenceproductionin
272 ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW WINTER

ruralareasalso stimulatedthe capitalistecologicalrevolution.A partible

system of patriarchalinheritancemeant that farm sizes decreasedafter
three or four generationsto the point that not all sons inheritedenough
land to reproduce the subsistence system. The tensions between the
requirementsof subsistence-orientedproduction (a large family labor
force)and social reproductionthroughpartibleinheritance(all sons must
inheritfarms)helped createa supplyof landlesssons, wage laborersfor
the transitionto capitalistagriculture.The requirementsof reproduction
in its fourfold sense, therefore,came into conflict with the requirements
of subsistence-oriented (use-value)production,stimulatinga movement
towardcapital-intensivemarketproduction.
Consciousnessis the totalityof one's thoughts,feelings,and impres-
sions, the awarenessof one's acts and volitions. Groupconsciousnessis a
collectiveawarenessby an aggregateof individuals.Both environments
and cultureshape individualand group consciousness.In differenthis-
toricalepochs, particularcharacteristicsdominatea society's conscious-
ness. Those formsof consciousness,throughwhichthe worldis perceived,
understood, and interpreted,are socially constructed and subject to
change.
A society's symbols and images of nature express its collective
consciousness.They appearin mythology,cosmology, science, religion,
philosophy, language, and art. Scientific, philosophical, and literary
texts are sources of the ideas and images used by controlling elites,
whereas rituals, festivals, songs, and myths provide clues to the con-
sciousnessof ordinarypeople. Ideas, images, and metaphorslegitimate
human behaviortoward nature and are translatedinto action through
ethics, morals, and taboos. According to Charles Taylor, particular
intellectualframeworksgive rise to a certainrange of normativevaria-
tions and not others, because their related values are not accidental.
Whensufficientlypowerful,world views and their associatedvaluescan
overridesocial changes.But if they are weak, they can be undermined.A
tribe of New England Indians or a communityof colonial Americans
may have a religiousworldview that holds it togetherfor many decades
whileits economyis graduallychanging.But eventuallywith the acceler-
ation of commercialchange, ideas that had formerly existed on the
periphery,or among selectedelites, may become dominantif they sup-
port and legitimatethe new economicdirections.8
For Native Americancultures,consciousnesswas an integrationof
all the bodily senses in sustaininglife. In that mimetic consciousness,
culture was transmittedintergenerationallythrough imitation in song,
myth, dance, sport, gathering,hunting, and planting.Aural/oral trans-
mission of tribal knowledge through myth and transactionsbetween
animals, Indians, and neighboringtribesproducedsustainablerelations
between the human and the non-human worlds. The primal gaze of
locking eyes between hunter and hunted initiated the moment of or-
dained killing when the animal gave itself up so that the Indian could
1987 CAROLYN MERCHANT 273

survive. (The very meaning of the gaze stems from the intent look of
expectancywhen a deer first sees a fire, becomes aware of a scent, or
looks into the eyes of a pursuinghunter.) For Indians engaged in an
intimatesurvivalrelationshipwith nature,sight, smell, sound, taste, and
touch were all of equal importance,integratedin a total participatory
consciousness.9
When Europeanstook over Native Americanhabitats during the
colonial ecological revolution, vision became dominant within the mi-
metic fabric. Although imitative, oral, face-to-face transactionsstill
guided daily life for most colonial settlers and Indians, Puritan eyes
turnedupwardtoward a transcendentGod who sent down his word in
writtenform in the Bible. IndividualProtestantslearnedto read so that
they could interpretGod's word for themselves.The biblical word in
turn legitimatedthe imposition of agricultureand artifact in the new
land. The objectifying scrutiny of fur trader, lumber merchant, and
banker who viewed nature as resourceand commodity submergedthe
primalgaze of the Indians.Treatiesand propertyrelationsthat extracted
land from the Indians were codified in writing. Alphanumericliteracy
became central to religious expression, social survival, and upward
mobility.'?
The Puritan imposition of a visually oriented consciousnesswas
shatteringto the continuationof Indiananimismand ways of life. With
the commercializingof the fur tradeand the missionaryefforts of Jesuits
and Puritans,a societyin whichhumans,animals,plants,and rockswere
equal subjectswas changedto one dominatedby transcendentvision in
whichhumansubjectswere separatefrom resourceobjects. That change
in consciousnesscharacterizedthe colonialecologicalrevolution.
The riseof an analytical,quantitativeconsciousnesswas a featureof
the capitalist ecological revolution. Capitalistecological relations em-
phasizedefficient managementand controlof nature.Withthe develop-
ment of mechanisticscienceand its use of perspectivediagrams,visuali-
zation was integratedwith numbering.The superpositionof scientific,
quantitativeapproachesto nature and its resourcescharacterizedthe
capitalistecological revolution.Througheducation, analyticconscious-
ness expandedbeyond that of dominantelites to includemost ordinary
New Englanders.
Viewedas a social construction,"nature"(as it was conceptualized
in each social epoch-Indian, colonial, and capitalist)is not some ulti-
mate truththat was graduallydiscoveredthroughthe scientificprocesses
of observation, experimentation,and mathematics. Rather, it was a
relative,changingstructureof humanrepresentationsof "reality."Eco-
logicalrevolutionsare processesthroughwhichdifferentsocietieschange
their relationshipto nature. They arise from tensions betweenproduc-
tion and ecology, and betweenproductionand reproduction.The results
are new constructionsof nature, both materiallyand in human con-
sciousness.
274 REVIEW
ENVIRONMENTAL WINTER

Notes

'Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 2d ed. (Chicago, 1970). The
theoryand illustrationspresentedhere are drawnfrom my forthcomingbook, Ecological
Revolutions:Nature,Gender,andSciencein New England.
2KarlMarx,"Prefaceto A Contributionto the Critiqueof PoliticalEconomy," (1859)
in KarlMarxandFriedrichEngels,SelectedWorks(NewYork, 1968),182-83.
3ElizabethAnn R. Bird, "The SocialConstructionof Nature:TheoreticalApproaches
to the History of EnvironmentalProblems,"EnvironmentalReview 11 (Winter 1987);
KarinD. Knorr-Cetinaand MichaelMulkay,eds., ScienceObserved,Perspectiveson the
Social Studyof Science(BeverlyHills, 1983);and KarinD. Knorr-Cetina,TheManufac-
tureof Knowledge:An Essayon the Constructivistand ContextualNatureof Science(New
York, 1981).
'ClaudeMeillassoux,Maidens,Meal, andMoney:Capitalismand the DomesticCom-
munity(1975;Englishtrans., Cambridge,1981).Critiquesof MeillassouxincludeBridget
O'Laughlin,"ProductionandReproduction: Meillassoux'sFemmes,Grenierset Capitaux, "
Critiqueof Anthropology2 (Spring1977),3-33;andMaureenMackintosh,"Reproduction
and Patriarchy:A Critique of Claude Meillassoux,Femmes, Grenierset Capitaux,"
Capitaland Class2 (Summer1977),114-27.
'Meillassoux,Maidens,Meal, andMoney,36, 39.
'Abby Peterson,"The Gender-SexDimensionin SwedishPolitics," Acta Sociologica
27, no. 1 (1984), 6, 3-17. Peterson'sfourfold taxonomyof politicalinterestsincluded(1)
Issuesrelatedto the interestsof intergenerational reproduction;(2) Issuesrelatedto the
interestsof intragenerational reproductionin the family;(3) Issuesrelatedto the interests
of intragenerational reproductionin the publicsector;and (4) Issuesrelatedto the interests
of reproductionworkers(women),i.e. so-calledwomen'sliberationissues. Petersonalso
appliedher taxonomyto the politicsof reproductionin the Swedishenvironmentalmove-
ment. See Abby Petersonand CarolynMerchant,"'Peace With the Earth':Womenand
the Environmental Movementin Sweden,"Women'sStudiesInternational Forum9 (1986),
465-79,esp. 472-74.
'Renate Bridenthal,"The Dialecticsof Productionand Reproductionin History,"
RadicalAmerica 10 (March-April1976),3-11. For a feministanalysisof reproductionin
Americanculture,see Women'sWorkStudyGroup,"Loom, Broom,andWomb:Produc-
ers, Maintainers,and Reproducers,"RadicalAmerica10 (March-April1976),29-45;and
VeronicaBeechley,"On Patriarchy,"FeministReview10(March-June1980),169-88.
'CharlesTaylor,"Neutralityin PoliticalScience,"in Alan Ryan,ed., ThePhilosophy
of SocialExplanation(London,1973),139-70,seepp. 144-46,154-55.
9Onmimetic,participatoryconsciousness,see MorrisBerman,TheReenchantment of
the World(Ithaca, 1981);Eric Havelock,Preface to Plato (Cambridge,MA, 1963);and
Max Horkheimer,The Eclipse of Reason (New York, n.d.), 92-127. On the gaze, see
Compact Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. "gaze": "said of a deer, also of persons,
especiallyin wonder, expectancy,bewilderment.""The hart, stag, buck, or hind when
bornein coat-armour,lookingaffronteeor full facedis saidto be at gaze . .. but all other
beasts in this attitudeare called guardant."WilliamBerry,EncylopediaHeraldica,s.v.
"gaze." On the KoyukonIndianversuswhitemethodsof huntingthe deer,see RichardK.
Nelson, "TheGifts," in DanielHalpern,ed., Antaeusno. 57 (Autumn,1986),117-31,esp.
122. On imitationof animalsby humansin hunting,see RandallL. Eaton, "Huntingand
the GreatMysteryof Nature," UtneReader(January/February 1987),42-49.
'?Onthe dominanceof visionin Westernconsciousnesssee Hans Jonas, "TheNobility
of Sight," Philosophy and PhenomenologicalResearch 14 (1954), 507-19; Evelyn Fox
Kellerand ChristineGrontkowski,"The Mind'sEye," in SandraHardingand MerrillB.
Hintikka, eds., DiscoveringReality (Dordrecht,Holland, 1983), 207-24; James Axtell,
"The Powerof Printin the EasternWoodlands,"Williamand MaryQuarterly44 (2) 3rd
ser. (April1987),300-9.