I just finished reading Paul Shepard's The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred
Game (1973).  There are a lot of interesting ideas in it, but I was
dissapointed with his conclusions and visions for the future.  The ideas in
the beginning of the book don't seem to lead to the ideas at the end.  The
basis of the book is the idea that humans evolved as hunter-gathers, and
then goes on to show how that has effected our biology and mental /
physical development.  He shows how culture based on agriculture goes
against our biology and recommends a tribal hunter-gatherer (emphasis on
the Hunter) culture, or cynegetic culture as he calls it.

At the end of the book where he descibes his vision of what this might look
like, he ignores the issues of high population as inevitible and goes on to
describe high density cities of people eating factory produced microbe
based foods grown on petroluem (Huh?), thus leaving the greater parts of
the interiors of islands and continents unpopulated and reserved for forays
by gatherers (women) and of course the spiritual / psyche building, male
bonding Hunt.  He some how managed not to worry about the source of all of
the material and energy necessary for the infrastructure of population
dense cities.  Not to mention that with many of the males off for months at
a time in the wilderness, who would be running all of the infrastructure.
He seemed to make an attempt to give women some important role in the
governing of social life, but failed to tie it all together.  It seemed
ironic that with the hunter gatherer structure being so important that both
hunting and gathering would be so separate from daily life.  Instead the
actual needs of the people would be met by a high tech infrastructure that
he barely mentioned.  

Still, there was much food for thought.  The desriptions of humans as a
species evolved to hunt and gather in the savanna, was quite good.  Also, I
like the correlations between agriculture and a culture based on it, and
hunter-gathering and its culture.  I was struck by the number of
similarities to Daniel Quinn's books (Ishmeal, etc.) right down to the use
of certain words and explainations.  I assume Shepard's book came first,
but he had a very extensive bibliography which may account for some of the
same information.

Overall, it's worth reading.


Eric Storm

Reply via email to