Family & Relationships

A poignant look at empathetic encounters between staunch ideological rivals, all centered around our common need for food.

While America's new reality appears to be a deeply divided body politic, many are wondering how we can or should move forward from here. Can political or social divisiveness be healed? Is empathy among people with very little ideological common ground possible? In A Decent Meal, Michael Carolan finds answers to these fundamental questions in a series of unexpected places: around our dinner tables, along the aisles of our supermarkets, and in the fields growing our fruits and vegetables. What is more common, after all, than the simple fact that we all need to eat?

This book is the result of Carolan's career-long efforts to create simulations in which food could be used to build empathy, among even the staunchest of rivals. Though most people assume that presenting facts will sway the way the public behaves, time and again this assumption is proven wrong as we all selectively accept the facts that support our beliefs. Drawing on the data he has collected, Carolan argues that we must, instead, find places and practices where incivility—or worse, hate—is suspended and leverage those opportunities into tools for building social cohesion.

Each chapter follows the individuals who participated in a given experiment, ranging from strawberry-picking, attempting to subsist on SNAP benefits, or attending a dinner of wild game. By engaging with participants before, during, and after, Carolan is able to document their remarkable shifts in attitude and opinion. Though this book is framed around food, it is really about the spaces opened up by our need for food, in our communities, in our homes, and, ultimately, in our minds.

A Stanford University Press classic.

Examining the AIDS pandemic and Japanese A-bomb literature, this book asks the question of how the experience of unimaginable and unrepresentable loss affects the experience and constitution of the social and the discourses of history. It argues that those objects which are presumptively given to thought under the rubrics of “AIDS” and “Hiroshima/Nagasaki” pose an essential threat, in their existentiality, to conceptual thought and, ultimately, to rationality altogether. It therefore argues that any serious thinking about AIDS and nuclear terror must think the essential insufficiency of thought to its putative objects—the insufficiency of “society” to think sociality, the insufficiency of “history” to think historicity.

The author first attempts to think the incapacity of every invocation of historical consciousness (or, indeed, of “history” itself) to think the existential historicity of that event which is presumptively not only its object but its ground. Readings of works by Nishida Kitaro, Ota Yoko, and Takenishi Hiroko written in the aftermath of Hiroshima and Nagasaki attempt to mark the limit of historical consciousness. The author then considers erotic sociality in the time of AIDS, specifically as articulated in texts by David Wojnarowicz, focusing on the themes of vulnerability, anonymity, the erotic, and nomadism.

Historians have paid little attention to divorce in Japan, even though until the mid-twentieth century Japan had one of the highest divorce rates in the world. This book shows that the high prevalence of divorce was made possible by a regulatory framework condoning consensual divorce. Spouses and their families were usually free to negotiate dissolution with little interference from public authorities. Only in the rare cases of intractable conflict did parties seek legal adjudication, a situation that holds true to this day.

Despite the institutional and ideological continuities over four centuries, the perception and practice of divorce have been transformed in adapting to new social roles for men and women, changing views of marriage and parenting, and changes in intergenerational relations. Married couples across all social groups have more control over initiating and terminating their marriage than ever before. Wives now have the same legal rights to sue for divorce as their husbands. The author shows, however, that not all changes have been to the women's advantage, nor were traditional practices as detrimental to women as is often assumed.

In the aftermath of the French Revolution, “freedom” came to have a host of meanings. This volume examines these contested visions of freedom both inside and outside of revolutionary situations in the nineteenth century, as each author explores and interprets the development of nineteenth-century political culture in a particular national context.

The common focus is the struggle in various countries to define, advance, or delimit freedom after the French Revolution. The introductory chapter evokes the problematic relationships between reform and revolution and introduces themes that appear in subsequent chapters, though each chapter is a free-standing interpretive essay. Among the issues addressed are the growth of the public sphere and associational movements; battles over constitutionalism, parliamentary institutions, and the franchise; the role of the state in inhibiting or expanding citizenship and the rule of law; the resort to violence by parties of order or parties of change; and the intrusion of new social questions or ethnic conflicts into the political arena.