Analysis Of My Year Of Meats By Ralthy Pachirat

Both Ruth L. Ozeki, the author of My Year of Meats, and Timothy Pachirat, the author of A Politics of Sight use ideas such as the concealment of producers towards consumers, and point of view to further promote political and social change. In order to promote the political and social change both of the authors use different techniques in an attempt to convince the readers of the negative consequences of the meat industry and how not monitoring it can prove to have many negative consequences.

Ruth L. Ozeki uses concealment and visibility in the television industry to convince readers of the negative implications of hiding away the gruesome meat industry. Throughout the novel Ozeki uses examples of how corrupt the meat industry is and how it

While one of the characters, Jane, is on the know-all side of the situation, “Having said this, however, there is evidence that hormones in the environment, including those used in meat production, may contribute to the overall decline in fertility rates.” Akiko,her Japanese counterpart is often on the unlucky side, “There were several long words—“unsavory,” “sterility,” “impotence”—that Akiko didn’t understand” (Ozeki) Ozeki uses this contrast between the two characters to allow the reader to closely examine just how little the world knows about some of the practices that are going on in countries such as America. This allows the readers to contemplate the idea of how little is known about the meat industry and come to the realization that political change is needed in order to bring clarity to the issue of the meat industry. By using a changing point of view, Ozeki allows readers to feel deep empathy towards Akiko since her character has no idea of any of the events going on, on the other side of the planet. This empathy forwards Ozeki’s political intentions of forcing the reader to contemplate how much they really know about the meat industry. The negative implications that can arise from trusting the meat industry are highlighted in Ozeki’s choice of what each character knows and how they

Timothy Pachirat uses his own point of view to write the essay and in the beginning of it states: “I am a researcher interested in writing an account of industrialized slaughter from the perspective of those who carry it out.” (Pachirat 234) and it is from this moment that Pachirat introduces his first person point of view of the inside of the slaughterhouse. The point of view Pachirat uses is important when readers think about the implications it has on the essay he has written. The point of view of Timothy Pachirat recalls all of the details of the slaughterhouse that he worked in and as a result the reader knows that there can be trust placed in this author-reader relationship. From there Pachirat uses the point of view to give the readers a life-like glance at the industry itself, starting with the “simultaneous concealment (of food safety and humane handling violations) and surveillance (of kill floor workers).” (234) Through this quotation Pachirat uses the point of view to gain the trust of the reader in order to forward idea of political and social change within the meat