Category Archives: Matter out of place

 

I believe that most people would agree that an apple core is waste. No one will eat the full apple and anyone who will doesn’t want just the core and the seeds. I think that Mary Douglas can help us with all the religious examples around food waste. Those people were afraid of getting sick and so when they would get sick from food it was then a spiritual reason. I don’t think people nowadays are spiritually afraid of apple cores but that people don’t want to get sick from it. It has other people’s germs all over it, and depending on how long it’s been sitting it might be molding or decomposing. It might be just me but there is also this cultural thing of not eating the core of an apple. I think that people find it odd or abnormal behavior. No one wants to be seen as abnormal in a bad way, so of course they aren’t going to eat the apple core if everyone else around them thinks of it as waste.

Matter Out Of Place

Wrappings; the thin filmy plastics, the cardboard boxes, everything I pull away or rip apart before I can get what I really want. This matter doesn’t fit neatly into a classification, into an action. When I hold it in my hand I don’t know what to do with it. I have no immediate use for it, I don’t see where it can fit; I haven’t been given a reason to care for it. Also, this object has served its purpose, it’s lived its life, it’s done what it was intended to do, so now it belongs gone. It was intended to protect an object, to keep an object pure and fresh for my consumption. Damn! Is that the point of packaging!? Well that’s disgusting. If someone talked about a human that way I would kill them! So why are objects allowed to be talked about like that? An object is not a person, but they are made by human hands, thought up by human minds, they are an extension of humanity. Why do I owe them less? AND it’s the thought itself that’s so disgusting. Ownership. There is no such thing. There should be no such thing.

Matter Out of Place – Kaiya

Resting on my desk is a damp paper towel, used to wipe the surface of the desk. The towel is still white in color, and not showing any signs of stains. Despite its clean appearance, the towel is deemed waste. This is based on the fact that the towel has served its single purpose. This mindset around waste is shown in the article. The idea of use and purity is something that is brought up in Mary Douglas’ definition of dirt, she also goes on to describe what we think of as ‘dirty’. Douglas explains that the way we think of dirt is based on classification and cultural aspects, she also talks about the context in which we think of waste and how it changes with the context of the object. The paper towel is a cleaning tool, something pure, it now holds the dirt that was once on my desk. The classification for the paper towel is now broken and it is therefore waste. The context of the paper towel is also taken into account when asking if it is dirty because it was sitting on my desk. If the paper towel was instead in the bathroom or on a counter would it still be waste? In what context would it not be perceived as waste?

Matter out of place

The object I chose was a fake eyelash tray. Each tray typically comes wrapped in cardboard and with a set of eyelashes lightly glued to the tray. I typically have one of these lying around on my desk, as the spot where unused pairs stay, and the current pair I wear for a couple of days is set until the next application. When all the pairs have been worn multiple times, and I have thrown them out, then I will throw away the tray. Upon looking at this item before I throw it away, I would not consider it dirty, but I would consider it trash or waste. If there was visible dirt on it, or if I was aware or could visually tell that it came in contact with another substance, such as pasta sauce, to give a random example, then I would consider the tray dirty.  I do consider the tray to be a part of the eyelash packaging, and in general, packaging overall feels safer to engage with compared to what is being packaged, mainly the item being packaged is likely being packaged for a reason. In this context with the tray, I would consider the eyelashes that were once on it more gross than the tray, as they have touched my eyes and have likely accumulated dust and dirt throughout the day. While yes, the tray could have done the same while sitting in my room, I wonder if my lack of physical presence in the second situation influences my perspective at all. The fact that the tray can no longer be used in the way I see fit is why I would consider it waste. If Mary Douglas describes dirt as being matter out of place, then maybe I would have to consider my item dirt, as at this stage of its existence, I do see it as matter out of place. However, I don’t entirely agree with Douglas’ definition and therefore willcontinue to refer to it as waste rather than dirt.

How Waste Can Fluctuate

A plastic bottle of soda that has been drunk is considered waste. It is an extremely common object that people pick up after every gas station trip or meal at the Bridge. You will find a plastic bottle in pretty much every trash can or recycling bin on campus. “Matter out of place” is how Mary Douglas defines dirt, in this case a plastic bottle would qualify. When it was full it was matter in the correct place but by the time it was empty it became out of place because it can no longer be used for its intended purpose. “Use” or “potential” is a better way of distinguishing what is dirty and what is not. That concept would also allow the ideas of dirty and clean to fluctuate and change based on perspective. When it comes to a plastic bottle it could be considered dirty or waste when you finish your drink but you could also wash it and use it again which would prevent it from being waste, or you could recycle it and it could become something new which would prevent it from becoming waste, or it could be tightly packed full of plastic and become an eco-brick to build a home and prevent even more waste.  

Matter out of place- Food packaging

A type of waste that I generally contribute a lot to is food packaging. I buy a lot of pre packaged meals and snacks in lieu of actually cooking, and the wrappers go straight to the trash. The wrappers are considered waste, in my opinion, because their original purpose has been served and they no longer have any use. Mary Douglas may say that this Trash is matter out of place because there is no correct place for the wrappers to be after they have served their purpose (other than in the trash can). I believe that they are also wasteful for another important reason- one that Mary Douglas doesn’t touch on but is increasingly relevant in our modern world- and that is the fact that this food packaging is very harmful to the environment as well as other people’s societies (landfills). Trash, especially plastic, isn’t biodegradable and ends up in the ocean and other natural habitats, harming animals. The production of plastics is also damaging to the environment. In my opinion, the positives of the convenience of food packaging don’t outweigh its negatives- making it waste. I do want to cut back on my consumption of these products, and I have gotten better with it recently.

Matter out of place – prompt

Something in my everyday life that’s generally considered to be waste are napkins. The average student here at Hampshire uses napkins for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and other snacks in between.  Mary Douglas’ conception of dirt being that it’s “a matter out of place ” aligns with napkins being waste. Though it can be transformed to fit aesthetics, its original usage makes it inherently out of place, something only temporary. It’s also very interesting how the value of a napkin could change in an instant; one minute it’s a sense of security to clean up a small mess, the next it’s thrown out and no longer important. Another idea from the text mentions that “saliva pollution can be transmitted through some material substances.” I wonder how these ideas/rules around cleanliness and pollution evolved to more modern day times. Where do reusable napkins/towels of all sorts fall on the clean/dirty scale? What would that conversation sound like? Whilst on the topic of reusable napkins, a new conception of waste can be applied to this idea. One of the google definitions of waste state that “use or expend carelessly, extravagantly, or to no purpose.” It’s intriguing because, after looking at this definition, I take a look around my dorm room and notice how many things have no purpose. Their only purpose is to be of no value.

Matter out of place – prompt

Choose an object in your everyday life that is typically considered to be waste. (Include a photo of it in your post.) In what ways does Mary Douglas‘ conception of dirt help us to understand why this object is waste? Are there other conceptions of waste that are more useful in explaining why we understand this object to be waste?

Readings used for this week:

Brekhus, Wayne. 1998. A Sociology of the Unmarked: Redirecting Our Focus. Sociological Theory 16(1): 34-51.

Douglas, Mary. “Secular Defilement.” In Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1966, 30-41.