In “Getting Down to the Meat: The Symbolic Construction of Meat Consumption,” Heinz and Lee analyze an archive of “50 texts related to meat consumption” collected over two years (88). Drawing on Marx and others, they show how meat is a fetishized commodity that hides modes of production. Additionally, they use Kenneth Burke’s concept of “cluster analysis” to “reveal the predominance of certain cultural values” associated with meat (89): “product (consumption, technology) and food (taste, entertainment) [… ,] meal, tradition (religion, patriotism), masculinity (power), and health (nutrition, safety)” (90). Of particular interest, I think, is their claims that “Meat is not just one of many available food ingredients; it is the one that makes a meal” and “Eating meat is understood as both pious and patriotic” (91). They conclude by asking, “If high levels of meat consumption are socially undesirable, what strategic choices does our critique suggest for those interested in persuading consumers to decrease the amount they eat?” (97). They answer by pointing to marketing of fruits, vegetables, and grains, by criticizing the overall commodification of animals, and by calling for more critique of symbolic constructions using the methods they used (97-98).
Heinz, Bettina, and Ronald Lee. “Getting Down to the Meat: The Symbolic Construction of Meat Consumption.” Communication Studies 49.1 (Spring 1998): 86-99.
