Take a photo of a barcode or cover
saxifrage_seldon's review against another edition
4.0
While I didn’t find this book as comprehensive or innovative as his other works, I do think it is a worthy complement to them. I place this book in the same realm as David Graeber and David Wengrow’s 2021 book, "The Dawn of Everything," which aims to restructure “big history.” Just like Graeber and Wengrow’s book, Scott pushes back against the idea that the transition into an agricultural society was not only a natural progression but also a desirable one. In fact, Scott spends most of the book outlining why sedentary agricultural states were extremely problematic for the plants, animals, and people living within them and notes that the only reason agricultural societies soon became dominant was due to their higher birth rate compared to non-agricultural states.
Another thing I enjoyed was Scott’s focus on the co-constitutive nature of the acts of landscaping and domestication. He first shows how fire was in fact the first landscaping tool. However, I found his echoing of Michael Pollan more poignant. Building off Pollan, Scott shows how in the act of domesticating a crop or animal, the person themselves are transformed, particularly in relation to something that now needs constant attention to survive.
Furthermore, I enjoyed Scott’s continued focus on the role of the state in all of this. His typology of what constitutes a state was both enlightening and enjoyable. For example, his emphasis on the state’s central focus on revenue collection and how walls were created not just to keep invaders out, but to keep taxable subjects in, was extremely interesting. Also, his focus on the concreteness of grain as a source of taxation due to its ease of transport, durability, and predictability in terms of its output and visibility in the field, as opposed to cassava or potatoes, which are underground and need to be dug up, was insightful. To build on this, as Scott notes, roaming armies can easily steal or burn a field of grain, but cannot do the same with root plants.
A final point of interest is Scott’s last chapter, which builds off his book "The Art of Not Being Governed," focusing on non-state people. These are people who not only seek to evade the state’s controlling mechanisms but may also actively resist, rebel against, or raid the state. He looks at the state and non-state people as being co-constitutive, and the different methods through which non-state people are incorporated by the state.
That said, there are some issues with the book, and I was extremely fortunate to be able to talk to a sociology graduate student at Binghamton University who had read it and pointed some out, further crystallizing my thoughts. The first thing he pointed out was the issue of causality: Was it agriculture that brought about the state, or was it vice versa? While this is a question that Scott focuses on, he seems to constantly switch his stance throughout the book. The second issue was the historical specificity of his case studies. Throughout the introduction, Scott notes that he will be focusing his analysis on the early states of Mesopotamia, namely Uruk, Ur, and Eridu. While he does focus on these states throughout, his argument at times becomes extremely general as he moves from the Americas to Asia, to Europe, and the Mediterranean. In other words, the book lacks historical specificity despite promising it.
Despite these problems, I would still recommend this book to those of you who are interested in both ancient history and “big history” and the debates surrounding them.
Another thing I enjoyed was Scott’s focus on the co-constitutive nature of the acts of landscaping and domestication. He first shows how fire was in fact the first landscaping tool. However, I found his echoing of Michael Pollan more poignant. Building off Pollan, Scott shows how in the act of domesticating a crop or animal, the person themselves are transformed, particularly in relation to something that now needs constant attention to survive.
Furthermore, I enjoyed Scott’s continued focus on the role of the state in all of this. His typology of what constitutes a state was both enlightening and enjoyable. For example, his emphasis on the state’s central focus on revenue collection and how walls were created not just to keep invaders out, but to keep taxable subjects in, was extremely interesting. Also, his focus on the concreteness of grain as a source of taxation due to its ease of transport, durability, and predictability in terms of its output and visibility in the field, as opposed to cassava or potatoes, which are underground and need to be dug up, was insightful. To build on this, as Scott notes, roaming armies can easily steal or burn a field of grain, but cannot do the same with root plants.
A final point of interest is Scott’s last chapter, which builds off his book "The Art of Not Being Governed," focusing on non-state people. These are people who not only seek to evade the state’s controlling mechanisms but may also actively resist, rebel against, or raid the state. He looks at the state and non-state people as being co-constitutive, and the different methods through which non-state people are incorporated by the state.
That said, there are some issues with the book, and I was extremely fortunate to be able to talk to a sociology graduate student at Binghamton University who had read it and pointed some out, further crystallizing my thoughts. The first thing he pointed out was the issue of causality: Was it agriculture that brought about the state, or was it vice versa? While this is a question that Scott focuses on, he seems to constantly switch his stance throughout the book. The second issue was the historical specificity of his case studies. Throughout the introduction, Scott notes that he will be focusing his analysis on the early states of Mesopotamia, namely Uruk, Ur, and Eridu. While he does focus on these states throughout, his argument at times becomes extremely general as he moves from the Americas to Asia, to Europe, and the Mediterranean. In other words, the book lacks historical specificity despite promising it.
Despite these problems, I would still recommend this book to those of you who are interested in both ancient history and “big history” and the debates surrounding them.
cutsajack's review
5.0
Wooo! This was a good one.
This text focuses on the agrarian cultures of Ancient Mesopotamia and ends with an examination of “Barbarian” cultures. It’s pretty accessible, and I’d say, that one doesn’t need a lot of background knowledge of Mesopotamia to take away the main points of this text (although it would help of course).
An easy 5/5.
Happy reading, everybody!
This text focuses on the agrarian cultures of Ancient Mesopotamia and ends with an examination of “Barbarian” cultures. It’s pretty accessible, and I’d say, that one doesn’t need a lot of background knowledge of Mesopotamia to take away the main points of this text (although it would help of course).
An easy 5/5.
Happy reading, everybody!
pc953's review against another edition
3.0
Patrick Wyman's deep-diving podcast, "Tides of History" has been covering the rise of humanity from its very origins through the complete habitation of the planet for the past year. "Against the Grain" by James C. Scott is used as a reference point in this grand narrative whose concept really clicked with me.
"Against the Grains" central argument is that the creation of the state radically changed and brought to ruin the way humanity had lived for millennia. The book displayed this theory in a direct way with a ton of examples. I honestly buy the argument and can see the ripples of this radical change in our way of living today.
However, it took me forever to finish this book. Maybe it's because I listened to this podcast far quicker than I read, but I found this argument had reached its conclusion about halfway through its 256 pages. Those remaining pages continued the natural progression of the argument, laying out many well-researched examples further on the point. But for me, I no longer needed that. If you are doing a research-oriented or extremely thorough deep dive, then I give this book a must-read recommendation. However, if you are like me and more of just a casual undereducated reader, then I would still recommend it, but I would recommend the podcast "Tides of History" more.
Either way, it is fascinating to continue to look back and see the ripples of this change and wonder what we have lost along the way.
"Against the Grains" central argument is that the creation of the state radically changed and brought to ruin the way humanity had lived for millennia. The book displayed this theory in a direct way with a ton of examples. I honestly buy the argument and can see the ripples of this radical change in our way of living today.
However, it took me forever to finish this book. Maybe it's because I listened to this podcast far quicker than I read, but I found this argument had reached its conclusion about halfway through its 256 pages. Those remaining pages continued the natural progression of the argument, laying out many well-researched examples further on the point. But for me, I no longer needed that. If you are doing a research-oriented or extremely thorough deep dive, then I give this book a must-read recommendation. However, if you are like me and more of just a casual undereducated reader, then I would still recommend it, but I would recommend the podcast "Tides of History" more.
Either way, it is fascinating to continue to look back and see the ripples of this change and wonder what we have lost along the way.
payment0strongman0blazing's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
5.0
An informative and at times chilling exploration of the pre-historic world
theciz's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.25
A short history considering the development and social structures of the earliest states and the emergence of settled agriculture. Somewhat scattered and lacking cohesion at times, it is nonetheless all pretty interesting stuff.
One thing that struck me while reading is that many of the same points are covered in Graeber and Wengrow’s The Dawn of Everything (and they were both consulted for this book), but something about this is much more convincing. I wonder if that, in acknowledging that he is not an expert in the fields covered, Scott is more careful in his scope and approach, clearly stating conjectures. Graeber and Wengrow’s book has an arrogance and ideological aggressiveness to it, which is absent here. Some commentary is obviously filtered through Scott’s political views, but not to the overall detriment of the material, and I think that ultimately is what makes this the superior read for me, even though it has many of the same narrative problems.
But in the end, I don’t think Scott really makes a convincing case for why agrarian settlements and states are inferior to non-states, albeit he raises some interesting points about the problems early states experienced. It never really explains why states kept being established over and over throughout history if all people really wanted to do was escape them.
One thing that struck me while reading is that many of the same points are covered in Graeber and Wengrow’s The Dawn of Everything (and they were both consulted for this book), but something about this is much more convincing. I wonder if that, in acknowledging that he is not an expert in the fields covered, Scott is more careful in his scope and approach, clearly stating conjectures. Graeber and Wengrow’s book has an arrogance and ideological aggressiveness to it, which is absent here. Some commentary is obviously filtered through Scott’s political views, but not to the overall detriment of the material, and I think that ultimately is what makes this the superior read for me, even though it has many of the same narrative problems.
But in the end, I don’t think Scott really makes a convincing case for why agrarian settlements and states are inferior to non-states, albeit he raises some interesting points about the problems early states experienced. It never really explains why states kept being established over and over throughout history if all people really wanted to do was escape them.
furaleii's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
5.0
Read for my anthropology of food class. Definitely not something that I would have normally chosen to read (history is not my favorite genre is non-fiction is rare enough for me tbh), but i LOVED this. This, along with Eating to Extinction (the other book we were assigned to read throughout the semester), have entirely changed my outlook on, well, everything.
It changes my outlook not only on food, but on culture, capitalism, states, and the world. A large part of our lectures is discussing whether we'd live without a state today-- we couldn't, because we've lost all knowledge of it, and if one state disappears, another is going to come along to snatch the land up before it's ever free. He discusses the good outcomes of the state as well, but after reading this and Saladino's work (mentioned above), there barely are any. His ironic uses of the term "barbarian" is phenomenal and petty while continuing to be educational, analytical, and purely research based.
This book and Saladino's Eating to Extinction are the only two books that I've read page to page and genuinely enjoyed throughout the entirety of me being in school-- and I'm graduating college in a month. I'm keeping my school copy of both of them and can definitely see myself reading it again in the future.
It changes my outlook not only on food, but on culture, capitalism, states, and the world. A large part of our lectures is discussing whether we'd live without a state today-- we couldn't, because we've lost all knowledge of it, and if one state disappears, another is going to come along to snatch the land up before it's ever free. He discusses the good outcomes of the state as well, but after reading this and Saladino's work (mentioned above), there barely are any. His ironic uses of the term "barbarian" is phenomenal and petty while continuing to be educational, analytical, and purely research based.
This book and Saladino's Eating to Extinction are the only two books that I've read page to page and genuinely enjoyed throughout the entirety of me being in school-- and I'm graduating college in a month. I'm keeping my school copy of both of them and can definitely see myself reading it again in the future.