Nature and Fictitious Capital: The Historical Geography of an Agrarian Question

Capitalism is produced in part through its own production of nature, but it has been argued that nature also poses certain obstacles to capitalist development. Political economists and rural sociologists have argued that in certain instances agriculture, as a form of production based in nature, has proven resistant to capitalist transformation. The Mann–Dickinson thesis still stands as one of the best such formulations. This essay argues for turning the Mann–Dickinson thesis on its head so as to ask how it is that an obstacle for one set of capital comprises an opportunity for other capitals. The essay therefore examines agriculture as a nexus of nature and circulating capital. It argues that what has been construed as a primary obstacle (the disunity of working and production time and the cumulative effects thereof) has been poorly appreciated as comprising a distinctive opportunity for capitalist investments and appropriations through the credit system. Credit, by no means an exogenous or anachronistic force, develops along with production and constitutes a social relation of production along with other such relations. These contentions are borne out in a critique of the nature-as-obstacle argument and then in a discussion of late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century agriculture in the United States, especially in California. In the latter discussion, I focus on the role of credit as the system that mediates the relations between nature and capital in and between different space–times. Credit, I argue, was necessarily constituted spatially and was contingently tied to the rise of agrarian formations in the American West.     

All hyped up and no place to go

In this paper we think about the performance of sexual identities in space, and try to explore the notions of transgression and parody implicit in recent queer theory, particularly in the work of Judith Butler. To do this, we take a long hard look at two current dissident sexual identities—the hypermasculine ‘gay skinhead’ and the hyperfeminine ‘lipstick lesbian’. We describe their evolution as sexual‐outlaw styles of the 1990s, and assess the effects of their performance in spaces which are, we argue, actively constructed as heterosexual. Although we are ultimately unsure and unable to agree about what kinds of trouble these identities cause, and for whom, and where, we want to share our unease, our questions, our own troubles.     

Island Archaeology,Model Systems,the Anthropocene,and How the Past Informs the Future

The use of islands as ‘model systems’ has become particularly relevant for examining a host of important issues in archaeology and other disciplines. As papers in this special issue of the Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology demonstrate, islands can serve as critical and ideal analytical platforms for observing human populations in the past and their evolutionary histories within complex and insular human ecodynamics. In this paper we address the issue of how islands are also important models for future sustainability and as corollaries for the survival of humans generally. In a sense, island cultures and ecosystems can be seen as microcosms of the issues we have faced as humans, and provide important insights for understanding the fate of our species, particularly as it pertains to the exploration and colonization of new worlds.     

The Archaeology of Aquatic Adaptations: Paradigms for a New Millennium

Although aquatic resources are often seen as central to the development of post-Pleistocene cultural complexity, most models of human evolution have all but ignored the role of aquatic or maritime adaptations during the earlier stages of human history. When did aquatic resources, maritime adaptations, and seafaring first play a significant role in human evolution? I explore this fundamental question by (1) reviewing various theories on the subject; (2) discussing a variety of problems that prevent archaeologists from providing a clear answer; and (3) examining the archaeological record for evidence of early aquatic resource use or seafaring. I conclude that aquatic resources, wherever they were both abundant and relatively accessible, have probably always been used opportunistically by our ancestors. Evidence suggests, however, that aquatic and maritime adaptations (including seafaring) played a significantly greater role in the demographic and geographic expansion of anatomically modern humans after about 150,000 years ago. Another significant expansion occurred somewhat later in time, with the development of more sophisticated seafaring, fishing, and marine hunting technologies.