I lectured today on technology and progress in my big-lecture class (the main thrust being: in what way is technology progress, and who says so, and why). Just before I'd watched a documentary, Our Daily Bread (and here), about the modern industrial agriculture process. It pairs very well with another documentary, Manufactured Landscapes, and in that way ties into the recent thread of "landcsape" images at the site (the West, fences, and bombs). In discussing technology and progress, the lecture was built with commentary on mechanization and the values of technical rationality. That got me to thinking of the "disassembly" line as the antecedent to the assembly line. Which leads me here to offer two images, one from 1869 that I got from Mechanization Takes Command by Siegfried Giedion, the other from Our Daily Bread.
You should see the other images available at the Our Daily Bread website, if you haven't seen the documentary itself. Try this other one of hog processing; and this one of chickens; and this one of cows. If you've seen No Country for Old Men, what you're missing in the cow slaughter image is the next scene when the guy comes by and stuns the cow in the skull with that thing the guy in No Country used.
How far have we come?
- Log in to post comments
It is my understanding that in the industrial pig biz, the size of the pig is very important. The pigs are fed at troughs that weigh the pig and determine if it gets food, and how much. At the end of the cycle, all the pigs planned for a particular run to the slaughter house (via truck or train) have to be standard size. Larger or smaller pigs don't fit in the machine, essentially, and are thus slaughtered by hand. That costs more.
But let us never forget the words of Homer Simpson: "Oh, right, some magical animal that produces ham, bacon, AND pork... A likely story.."
Greg is right - size matters. Of course, the industry would like to do more than just have an automated kill process. They'd like to be able to "process" the whole animal, too. Butcher it up into the hams and the pork butts and the ribs and the like. But they haven't been able to engineer the animal that closely to arrange their insides to be uniform (even with cloning - stupid environment).
And, how far have we come? Well, the assembly line worker above IS wearing ear protection. And we'd be even farther if nogoodnicks like Geyrhalter and Byrtynsky would just keep that stuff invisible. (I forget, does sarcasm come across in blog comments? Probably not.)
As Homer has also said, "What's Maggie ever done? Nothing for nobody."
Hmmmm. "It's all about the pork products..."
Is this the final final final clue to Puzzle Fantastica #3 in disguise?
Yup - we kill things and eat 'em. *dis*gusting, and it out to made illegal. While we are at it, we orta make defecation illegal, because that's disgusting, too.
You and me, baby, we ain't nothing but mammals, and the particular mammals we are eat meat.
You and me, baby, we ain't nothing but mammals, and the particular mammals we are can eat meat.
You and me, baby, we ain't nothing but mammals, and the particular mammals we are can eat meat.
Well played, Paul! You managed not to get even the slightest bit of it. Plus, yeah for Palinesque folksiness.
Choreographed disassembly.
Absolutely necessary if we are to feed how many million people daily?
Your problem with feeding the masses?
The alternative (a realistic alternative, now)?
the simple fact of the matter is that these animals owe their very existences to the fact that they exist for human consumption. a short existence, all else being equal, is better than no existence whatsoever.
Besides which, we will eventually be able to engineer the intelligence out of them, in which case they will literally be "meat machines", of no intrinsic value whatsoever.