In the excerpt “Good to Eat: People Eating,” author H. Marvin explores the complex topic of cannibalism and its implications. Published in 1985, this excerpt provides an anthropological perspective on how different cultures have practiced cannibalism throughout history despite having other protein alternatives. The author acknowledges that different societies practiced cannibalism during emergencies, such as when a siege was laid on a city and during wars where soldiers were forced to feed on the corpses of their colleagues as a sole means of survival. However, in this excerpt, the author presents an account of socially sanctioned cannibalism through peaceful means, such as rituals performed on the diseased.
In the beginning pages of the excerpt, Marvin admits that the primitive people engaged in cannibalism for different reasons. The opening statement indicates that the author will be presenting a case for why people are involved in cannibalism and, in this case, socially sanctioned cannibalism. The author posits that earlier communities peacefully practiced cannibalism through socially sanctioned rituals. For instance, when a relative died, there were two forms of rituals practiced. In the first instance, the body of the diseased would be burnt over a flame. After the flames had consumed the flesh, “the ashes were often collected and kept in containers to be finally disposed of by ingesting them-usually mixed by beverages” (Marvin 200). The beverages would only be consumed mournfully by relatives of the diseased, ensuring that they did not pour out. The author gives credibility to this practice by providing an eyewitness account of an anthropologist from the people of Guiaca, South America. The anthropologist states that “the relative would put some of this powder into a large calabash half full of plantain soup and drink the mixture accompanied by lamentations” (201). The eyewitness account supports the author’s notion that cannibalism was socially sanctioned.
The second form of ritual involved the burying of the disease and exhumation of the corpse after a certain period. Here, the author uses the Fore people of the highlands of New Guinea as an example. The community buried the dead and “exhumed the corpse after only two or three days and began to eat the entire body” (203). The author gives credibility to this notion by highlighting the scientific findings of Nobel laureate Gajdusek. The Fore people had for long suffered from a disease known as kuru, which Gajdusek discovered was a “consequence of the Fore’s unusual mortuary rituals handling of the partially decomposed corpse and the consumption of its flesh” (203). Such an account demonstrates that cannibalism was morally sanctioned in such a society.
As discussed above, it is evident that primitive communities practiced cannibalism that was socially sanctioned and acceptable. Marvin uses the eyewitness account of an anthropologist and a research finding from a Nobel Prize-winning researcher to give credibility to the notion, which is highly successful. Ultimately, Marvin argues that attempts to understand cannibalism should be rooted in grasping its significance to cultures over time rather than reacting in horror. For modern readers skeptical about cannibalism, this anthropological analysis encourages thoughtfulness and nuance instead of hate.
Works Cited
Marvin, H. (1985). Good to Eat: People Eating. PDF
write