The Edibility Approach, Chemical Ecology and Relationality. Methodological and Ethnobotanical Contributions

Iwa Kołodziejska, Monika Kujawska
{"title":"The Edibility Approach, Chemical Ecology and Relationality. Methodological and Ethnobotanical Contributions","authors":"Iwa Kołodziejska, Monika Kujawska","doi":"10.23858/ethp.2020.41.2009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper combines ethnographic and ethnobotanical fieldwork with the edibility approach (EA), chemical ecology and Ingold’s ontology of dwelling. The EA aims to “push harder onto and through the boundaries between edible plants and the human-animals that eat them to consider the outcomes produced as a result of these interacting materials” (Attala 2017, 130). This approach places ingestion in the light of multispecies entanglement. As proposed by Attala, this is still a philosophically “open” concept, of limited operational use in ethnographic (ethnobotanical) study. Our article argues for an expansion of the EA, based on this combined perspective and giving more attention to cross-species interactions placed in an environmental context. Our cases are about how people live with plants, exemplified by foraging practices of agriculturists in Ukraine, Daghestan and Argentina. The everyday social relations of our interlocutors are more-than-human interactions, and in these relations we pay a close attention to non-cultivated edible plants. We present two modes of writing ethnographies, in which we focus respectively on a single plant taxon or a group of plants, and where both people and plants are protagonists. We argue that incorporating the dwelling perspective and chemical ecology into the EA is one of the potentially fruitful approaches to the analysis of plant – people relations. The use of language and of the tools of ecology in an attempt to present different aspects of co-dwelling of people and plants, although it may seem anchored in Cartesian dualism, in fact allows for a deeper understanding of the relations among protagonists and their co-dwellers in the environment, and hence goes against dualisms. The relations and the ways through which organisms co-create their environment are the very essence of ecology. The close collaboration of anthropologists, ethnobotanists, ecologists and chemical ecologists is postulated in the article.","PeriodicalId":34666,"journal":{"name":"Ethnologia Polona","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnologia Polona","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23858/ethp.2020.41.2009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper combines ethnographic and ethnobotanical fieldwork with the edibility approach (EA), chemical ecology and Ingold’s ontology of dwelling. The EA aims to “push harder onto and through the boundaries between edible plants and the human-animals that eat them to consider the outcomes produced as a result of these interacting materials” (Attala 2017, 130). This approach places ingestion in the light of multispecies entanglement. As proposed by Attala, this is still a philosophically “open” concept, of limited operational use in ethnographic (ethnobotanical) study. Our article argues for an expansion of the EA, based on this combined perspective and giving more attention to cross-species interactions placed in an environmental context. Our cases are about how people live with plants, exemplified by foraging practices of agriculturists in Ukraine, Daghestan and Argentina. The everyday social relations of our interlocutors are more-than-human interactions, and in these relations we pay a close attention to non-cultivated edible plants. We present two modes of writing ethnographies, in which we focus respectively on a single plant taxon or a group of plants, and where both people and plants are protagonists. We argue that incorporating the dwelling perspective and chemical ecology into the EA is one of the potentially fruitful approaches to the analysis of plant – people relations. The use of language and of the tools of ecology in an attempt to present different aspects of co-dwelling of people and plants, although it may seem anchored in Cartesian dualism, in fact allows for a deeper understanding of the relations among protagonists and their co-dwellers in the environment, and hence goes against dualisms. The relations and the ways through which organisms co-create their environment are the very essence of ecology. The close collaboration of anthropologists, ethnobotanists, ecologists and chemical ecologists is postulated in the article.
可食性方法、化学生态学与关联性。方法论和民族植物学贡献
本文将民族志和民族植物学的田野调查与可食用性方法、化学生态学和英格尔的居住本体论相结合。EA旨在“更加努力地突破可食用植物和食用它们的人类动物之间的界限,以考虑这些相互作用的材料所产生的结果”(Attala 2017130)。这种方法将摄取置于多光谱纠缠的光线下。正如阿塔拉所提出的,这仍然是一个哲学上“开放”的概念,在民族志(民族植物学)研究中的操作用途有限。我们的文章主张扩大EA,基于这一综合视角,并更多地关注环境背景下的跨物种相互作用。我们的案例是关于人们如何与植物共存的,乌克兰、达吉斯坦和阿根廷的农学家的觅食实践就是一个例子。我们对话者的日常社会关系不仅仅是人类的互动,在这些关系中,我们密切关注非栽培的可食用植物。我们提出了两种书写民族志的模式,分别关注一个植物分类单元或一组植物,以及人和植物都是主角。我们认为,将居住视角和化学生态学纳入EA是分析植物与人关系的潜在富有成效的方法之一。使用语言和生态学工具试图呈现人和植物共同居住的不同方面,尽管这似乎植根于笛卡尔二元论,但事实上可以更深入地理解主人公和他们在环境中的共同居住者之间的关系,因此反对二元主义。有机体共同创造环境的关系和方式是生态学的本质。文中假定人类学家、民族植物学家、生态学家和化学生态学家的密切合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信