Arnold J.

Bauer examines the material culture of Latin America through the analysis of the
historical changes and the influences of power in commodities such as food, clothing and shelter.
For this, he divides his argument in six historical periods: pre-Columbian, European invasion,
colonial-civilization, modernization, development and neoliberalism. The question that guides
Bauer’s argument is the following: why we do acquire the things we do? Therefore, what he is
trying to find is the meaning of consumption: "the value we attribute to an object may be largely
determined by what it means to us" (Bauer, 2001, p.3). Bauer shows that meanings are always
changing through time, due to the influence of power relations.

At first instance, he presents the importance of goods in the development of the Aztec and
Inca Empire, leaving out of his analysis the Amazon and the South of Chile and Argentina. Both
civilizations -despite their differences- applied state tributes through coercion or forced labor of
the inhabitants belonging to lower strata. In addition to the latter, he explores the gender
relations involved in the production and processing of food, where he describes for instance the
laborious work of Mexican women in the production of tortillas.

With the establishment of colonies Christianity is consolidated, creating a new order of

time and rituals. Bauer, argues that the main project of civilization of the Spaniards is the "Buena
policía" which involves a series of customs related to the clothing, food, hygiene and other, which
govern primarily the life in urbanity. Logically, the cities were built according to architectural
models of European planning. Regarding goods: culinary regimes were hybrid, and clothing -
highlights Bauer- was the fundamental category which gave identity and status.

The production and consumption of wheat, is set as the civilizing food by the Europeans.
A large part of the wealth obtained by the Spaniards was due to the production of wheat with low
operating costs; mainly native population’s poorly paid work. Also, the consumption tax regimes
were established to the natives, which determined the occupations and daily activities.

Towards the end of the colonial period, capitalist production broke into the economy by
the influence of the markets of northwestern Europe. This meant that once again status and
power in society was determined by the foreign consumption patterns, this time from France and
Great Britain. Bauer points out, the appearance of the Manual de Carreño, directed toward the
middle sectors, as a modernizing instrument.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the national independences were followed by an
increasing demand of regional products, which permitted elites increase their income. The latter
resulted in an increase of importation of goods, mainly clothes, following their desire to be
distinguished from the lower classes. The period of national development at the end of this
century, was marked by the economic, social and political instabilities of the 1920s. This led to
national governments to develop independent economies focused on industrial development.
Decades later, some states gave course to nationalization and expropriation of companies and
services that until then were in possession of foreign capital. This did not mean substantial
changes in the composition of capital and the Latin American capacity to produce machinery and
manufacture locally.
 Far from the populist policies of the 1950s and 1960s, during the 1980s the new face of
liberalism was opened to international trade and the privatization of enterprises and public
services. This of course meant an excessive consumption of imported goods, a growing economic
inequality, high unemployment, and poverty.

Latin American consumption -argues Bauer- has never had the proportions that in this last
period (neoliberalism). He illustrates very well the characteristics of the economic system through
the analysis of the U.S. industries of soft drinks (Coca-Cola) and burgers (McDonalds). Toward the
end of his book, Bauer presents the characteristics of the current global economic order.

As final comments I would like to emphasize that culture and identity are not static and
that this is very clear in the whole argument of Bauer concerning the change in the patterns of
consumption and possession of goods.

In a second instance, his work lacks analysis of the indigenous perspective, for example the
meanings indigenous people give to nature and its associated goods, and how the relation with
nature shifts towards the imposition of colonial domination against it. Similarly, Bauer fails in
giving an account of the meanings and relations concerning the material culture of the natives he
mentions were outside of the conquest spaces, which resisted and preserved their culture without
major changes. In relation to this, the author does not include in its argument the documentation
produced in the Latin American region, carried out by the same native or later, mestizos. Bauer
loses a big part of the data by ignoring the local-native gaze and its relation with the goods and
power relations arising from the contact, civilization, modernity and development.

By Catalina Mendoza Leal

References:

Bauer, Arnold. (2001). “Goods, power, history: Latin America’s material culture.” Cambridge:
University Press.