|


 |
|
W.L. Rathje
|
By
W.L. Rathje
Every year,
thousands of new words, such as "incentivize"
and "dumbing down," fight for that place in
the word limelight we call the dictionary. But attaining
"dictionary-worthiness" isn't easy. In
fact, out of every thousand newly minted words, only
a handful survives.
Imagine,
then, my surprise when a word coined in the late 1970s
to describe the work of the Garbage Project became enshrined
in the 1990s in that thoroughbred of dictionaries, the
Oxford English Dictionary. The American Heritage
Dictionary followed suit, and half a dozen more
have piled on since.
The entry
itself usually looks something like this: gar·bol·o·gy
n. [GARB(AGE) + LOGY.] gar·bol´o·gist
n.; and the definition is "The study of
a society by examining or analyzing its refuse."
OK, just
about every noun seeking respect has dressed itself
up in the starched suffix ology; for example,
"hamburgerology." But most of these endeavors
don't get as far as the New Yorker cartoon
spoof with the word "cantaloupology" below
a man looking intently at a cantaloupe. Why, then, did
garbology make the prime cut?
Simply put,
the word was right for the times. It epitomizes the
way garbologistsgarbage people like you
and mehave made a difference because we
deal with garbage dilemmas in a systematic and scientific
manner. But more important, it epitomizes a positive
way our society has come to look at itself today
garbage and all.
The new vision
of garbage began creeping into the American consciousness
on the first Earth Day in 1970, with its mantra that
extolled recycling. Soon industry was touting incineration
in the same glowing terms. During the next decade, sources
as authoritative as Science magazine proclaimed
there was "Gold in Garbage." The problem was
perceived as rapidly growing mountains of discards;
the solution was perceived as recycling or burning it
for a profit. What more could any red-blooded American
ask?
There was
only one hitch: All but a few of the thousands of idealistic
recyclers who opened their doors in April 1970 were
quickly shaken out of business, and most of the big-enough-to-heat-Detroitsized
incinerators followed suit. Clearly, garbage was something
important we didn't yet understand.
Meanwhile,
without any hoopla, America's underground economy
had been stood on its head. The 1800s had been a boom
time for rag pickers because household garbage was rife
with old textiles that mills needed to produce paper.
But early in this century, the freshly christened transcontinental
railroad brought cheap lumber from the West to the East,
not coincidentally, just as the mills figured out how
to make paper out of wood.
That left
garbage pickers without a valuable to pick, and the
trade of garbage scavenging languished until the 1970s.
By then, battalions of pre-prepared foods and a newly
inspired desire for fresh-looking produce flooded America
with both profits and supermarket Dumpsters laden with
not-consumer-acceptable-but-still-edible wastes, such
as dented cans and slightly browning lettuce. The monetary
incentives attached to recyclables also led the hungry
underclass back to garbage. In fact, street people began
to stake out personal territories where the garbage
is rich in rewards.
But again,
something was wrong. Yes, some of the waste was salvaged,
but why were the mountains of waste there in the first
place, and why wasn't more of it benefiting millions
of the even more needy? Again, it seemed we didn't
understand garbage.
Meanwhile,
there was a third type of interest in everyday discards
that became prominent in the early 1970s: garbage "peeping
Toms." Since time immemorial, law enforcement organizations
have searched through garbage for evidence. That technique
was exploited by A.J. Weberman, a self-proclaimed "garbage
guerrilla" who wrote a cover article for Esquire
magazine in 1971. In it Weberman displayed refuse he
had swiped from the homes of Bob Dylan, Neil Simon,
and other celebrities of the day. Reporters quickly
took up the practice of swiping refuse, and similar
behavior appeared on just about every cop and whodunit
TV series, from The Rockford Files to Law
& Order.
What probably
kept this garbage avocation from surviving much past
the 1980s was simple: The artifacts hidden in celebrities'
refuse were, by and large, the same kinds of mundane
things we all throw away (Dylan's garbage contained
soiled diapers and Simon's a half-eaten bagel).
Besides, if you only sort through a bag or two, you
probably won't find many astonishing insights.
From my experience, those only come after sorting through
thousands of samples and looking for nonperson-specific
patterns that characterize neighborhoods.
Meanwhile,
such systematic sampling, sorting, and recording of
garbage appeared in what might seem a parallel universe
to "peeping Tom" refuse poking. Its roots
stretch back more than 100 years to the first archaeologists
who excavated ancient artifacts to shed light on humanity's
dim past. What archaeologists dug up was mostly old
garbage, but the passing centuries had tinged it with
both grandeur and mystery. Using discards, archaeologists
opened a window on ancient human behavior.
It wasn't
much of a leap to realize that our own fresh garbage
provided an equally clear window onto our contemporary
behavior, one that reported what we actually did rather
than what we just said we did. The study of garbage
was a "material sociology" of American society.
Early market
researchers exploited it as such. In a now legendary
study, household refuse collected from Andover, MA,
was searched for Campbell's soup cans that had
just appeared in markets. The cans weren't found
where expected, in the rubbish of the rich, who had
servants to make soup for them. Instead, the empty cans
were spotted in the refuse of the middle class, who
had little free time and less help. To judge from their
garbage, the middle class enjoyed the convenience of
canned soup
and the marketing of convenience
to everyday families began in earnest, restructuring
the form and content of the most critical relationships
within American families.
When I started
the Garbage Project's academic study of fresh MSW
in Tucson, I wasn't thinking in such big picture
terms. I just wanted to give freshmen at the University
of Arizona a chance to experience, hands-on, the panorama
of behaviors archaeologists could reconstruct from everyday
garbage.
We began
by focusing on foodwaste because the large quantities
we recorded were so shocking. Then we expanded to diet
and nutrition, recycling and household hazardous waste
discards, brand loyalty and consumer responses to new
products, and on and on.
Our unexpected
discoveries attracted considerable media attention,
due in no small part, I'm sure, to the fact that
clean-cut university students were hand-sorting and
recording yucky garbage. But that made the students
and our results "real."
Now all the
"meanwhiles" began to come together. Three
were especially memorable to me.
The first
occurred in 1971, well before the Garbage Project, when
Charles Kuralt interviewed a can-tosser named Frenchy
Benguerel in Kenwood, CA, as part of his "On the
Road" series for CBS Evening News. Kuralt
didn't interview Frenchy as a garbageman or a "peeping
Tom" but as a chronicler of neighborhood lifestyles,
concerned about waste and recycling, but just as interested
in the overall frequency of hair coloring and alcohol
containers.
Directly
related to that image of Frenchy as a neighborhood sociologist
is the Grin and Bear It cartoon that I believe
coined the term garbology. It pictured two bedraggled
hobos picking through the contents of a garbage can,
as one says, "Garbology' is becoming
a science, Arnold . . . And, just think, we were pioneers
in the field."
Finally,
in the spring of 1987, the garbage barge sailed out
from Long Island and into history. The Mobro 4000
was a riveting wake-up call. Before the garbage barge,
when someone I sat next to on an airplane asked me what
I did, I would change the subject to avoid puzzled looks.
After the garbage barge, there was no problem. Everyone
immediately got that I-understand-why-studying-garbage-is-important
look on their face.
We have the
same look on our faces today. We all understand that
to make a differenceto recycle efficiently, to
burn safely, and to cut down on waste in all MSW managementwe
need systematic, scientific studies to design waste
handling systems and consumer education programs that
work as they are supposed to.
It seems
that just about everyone is now a self-styled garbologist,
from Dumpster divers to people who test the strength
of garbage cans. And now and then don't all of
us who place our garbage out for collection claim garbology
expertise? In fact, the term has experienced such
wide circulation that it has appeared at a national
spelling bee, on the TV game show Jeopardy, and
now and again in Time and other national news
magazines. I believe that this is a good sign for both
garbage people and our nation as a whole.
Even though
it brings smiles, maybe even smirks, to people's
faces, the term garbology means that Americans
are no longer turning a blind eye to MSW. In fact, without
exception, garbage is being taken far more seriouslyeven
die-hard litterers feel either more guilty or more afraid
of fines. At the same time, most of the lay public is
aware of the basic refuse problem and is becoming more
garbage literate. Not everyone, by far, knows what "postconsumer
recycled content" or "source reduction"
means for sure, but they are beginning to believe that
they should know. After all, any self-respecting garbologist
would know.
Contributing
author W.L. Rathje is director of the Garbage Project.
|