ABSTRACT
Though we may be accustomed to our “flush-and-forget” system of disposal, excrement was not named “human waste” until 1863. Before the mid-to-late 1800s, excrement was a commodity, a valuable fertilizer collected by scavengers and bought by farmers. As it transitioned to waste in the ensuing decades, human excrement became tainted with social fissures of the Long Progressive Era. That is, during the time when the U.S. went through a notable sanitary revolution, white Americans used excrement and pseudoscience to reinforce their feelings of racial superiority over both Native Americans and darker-skinned peoples they encountered in newly acquired territories after 1898. Examining excrement as a rich source of historical analysis reveals its position at the nexus of many Progressive Era threads, including a transition to modern artificial fertilizer, a greater presence for women in the public sphere, imperialism, and virulent racism. The consequences of revaluing excrement as a waste during this period are extensive and, by-and-large, tragic and avoidable.
Acknowledgments
Many thanks are owed to Janet M. Davis at the University of Texas for guiding this research in its early stages. She was tireless in her assistance and always brought enthusiasm to the project. I am also indebted to Michelle Yates, Andrew Rotter, and Rachel Vaughn for providing valuable feedback and camaraderie in this pursuit of excrement as a serious topic of academic inquiry. The entire group of Edible Feminisms workshop participants, but especially Hiʻilei Hobart and Michelle Yates, also generously offered advice and support. And special thanks so Rachel Vaughn and Sarah Tracy for curating an eclectic, positive, and vibrant group of scholars for this project.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Other manuals that used the passage in Deuteronomy to compel women to clear include the following: Samuel Treat Armstrong, “Hygiene,” in In Sickness and in Health: A Manual of Domestic Medicine and Surgery, Hygiene, Dietetics, and Nursing (New York: D. Appleton and Co., n.d.), 1896., 355–375; S.W. Johnson, “The Earth Closet,” North American Journal of Homoeopathy 17 (1869), 575; Charles John Ellicott, An Old Testament Commentary for English Readers: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel (Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co., 1883), 64; F.L. Dibble, “Hygienic Teachings of the Great War,” in Proceedings of the Connecticut Medical Society .. (the Society, 1867); George Waring quotes from it in Earth-Closets, 37, in order to support earth closet use as well; Frederick Charles Krepp, The Sewage Question (Longmans, Green, and co., 1867); Wilshire S. Courtney, The Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Manual (E. B. Treat, 1869); Michigan. Dept. of Health, “Disposal of Waste and Excreta in Holland,” in Proceedings and addresses at a Sanitary Convention..under the direction of a committee of the State Board of Health.. (Robert Smith and Co., 1891), 51; George Jenkins, “Hygiene in the Rural Districts,” Journal of the American Medical Association 17, no. 7 (August 15, 1891), 248–249.
2. See Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Sociology (D. Appleton and Company, 1882), 662–671.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Daniel Max Gerling
Daniel Max Gerling is an assistant professor of English at Augustana University in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. He received his Ph.D. in American studies from the University of Texas in 2012.