The Taste For Civilization Janet Flammang Summary

Janet Flammang wrote, “The Taste for Civilization: Food Politics, and Civil Society”. She emphasizes on the term civil and its dual usage: the status of a citizen and their civil rights and the behavioral side, as being civilized and well-mannered. She speaks on how civility can be reformed through social structures and everyday life activities throughout her text. Although both Flammang and another writer, Gregory Orr both speak of civility, whether indirectly or directly, throughout their text, they both connect to the term civility in different ways. Flammang connects and understand the term through social ethics. Where she feels a though civility can be built by participating in more social structures with one and other. Orr on the hand …show more content…
I am not saying it is okay to disturb the peace of society, but what I am saying is, sometimes using you citizen rights to express and act upon your own personal civil behavior is necessary in order to open societies eyes to bigger issues. Flammang sees conversation amongst society is the answer to all of societies issues. She states, “Democratic speech and behavior can be practiced at the table and as we spend less time in common meals, we are losing an opportunity to learn and teach the art of conversation so essential for civil society and democratic practice” (112). She sees societies issues as things that can be talked out and talked through over a common meal. But, while Flammang sees society as being able to talk through there issues while enjoying a common meal and time together, Gregory Orr shows how much more impactful actually taking action and campaigning and marching, can be on all of society. How that can bring much more of a change and get more people see issues at hand. Gregory Orr sacrificed himself in order to get arrest, flood the jails, and prove a point to the government. While walking for the under paid workers in Bolivar County, Orr assembled with others and marched the street. Orr stated, “Our leaders told us we’d be stopped by the police and warned we could no parade without a permit. At that point, we would have to choose to be arrested or to disperse. We were urged to let ourselves be arrested—the plan was to fill the jail to overflowing and apply the steady pressure of media and economics (they’ll have to feed and how us at city expense)” (219). He knew that getting arrested would put them in a situation where they would have to support them at their own expense. Making it clear to the government that, if you want to arrest citizens for bringing certain issues to the light, believing what they want, or being who they are, it is