What do you think?
Rate this book
The Domestication of the Savage Mind
Book by GOODY, Jack.
179 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1977
11 people are currently reading
439 people want to read
About the author
Jack Goody
97 books67 followersSir John (Jack) Rankine Goody (born 27 July 1919) is a British social anthropologist. He has been a prominent teacher at Cambridge University, he was elected Fellow of the British Academy in 1976,[1] and he is an associate of the US National Academy of Sciences. Among his main publications are Death, property and the ancestors (1962), The myth of the Bagre (1972) and The domestication of the savage mind.
Jack Goody explained social structure and social change primarily in terms of three major factors. The first was the development of intensive forms of agriculture that allowed for the accumulation of surplus – surplus explained many aspects of cultural practice from marriage to funerals as well as the great divide between African and Eurasian societies. Second, he explained social change in terms of urbanization and growth of bureaucratic institutions that modified or overrode traditional forms of social organization, such as family or tribe, identifying civilization as “the culture of cities”. And third, he attached great weight to the technologies of communication as instruments of psychological and social change. He associated the beginnings of writing with the task of managing surplus and, in an important paper with Ian Watt (Goody and Watt, 1963), he advanced the argument that the rise of science and philosophy in classical Greece depended importantly on their invention of an efficient writing system, the alphabet. Because these factors could be applied to either to any contemporary social system or to systematic changes over time, his work is equally relevant to many disciplines.
Jack Goody explained social structure and social change primarily in terms of three major factors. The first was the development of intensive forms of agriculture that allowed for the accumulation of surplus – surplus explained many aspects of cultural practice from marriage to funerals as well as the great divide between African and Eurasian societies. Second, he explained social change in terms of urbanization and growth of bureaucratic institutions that modified or overrode traditional forms of social organization, such as family or tribe, identifying civilization as “the culture of cities”. And third, he attached great weight to the technologies of communication as instruments of psychological and social change. He associated the beginnings of writing with the task of managing surplus and, in an important paper with Ian Watt (Goody and Watt, 1963), he advanced the argument that the rise of science and philosophy in classical Greece depended importantly on their invention of an efficient writing system, the alphabet. Because these factors could be applied to either to any contemporary social system or to systematic changes over time, his work is equally relevant to many disciplines.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
January 27, 2025
I didn’t like the title very much, but understand, in retrospect, the intended irony: it expresses the kind of thinking Goody does his best to discredit, an old, ugly pattern encoded in the terms European societies use to describe others. Sometime stated differently, e.g. “primitive and civilised”, it is always some variation of “us-and-them” and always favours “us.”
Goody acknowledges important differences. Avoiding or deliberately reversing anticipated value judgements, however, he correlates differences to an orality-literacy spectrum, that is, differences in how often, effectively, comfortably a particular group of people rely on speech versus writing to communicate with one another. For some readers, perhaps, the experience of reading this book could be an occasion to sense the limitations of a book: the text is silent, fixed, unresponsive, as it must be; Goody is continually discussing relationships that are complex, interactive, always changing.
I was not disappointed in my hopes for getting a bit more specificity about what happens when people learn to read and write. The book begins with a very forceful argument about intellectual life grounded in oral communication: if there is anything rigid about his contentions, it is that people everywhere reflect on their lives and relationships, remember what they have thought and felt, and communicate their understanding to one another. The idea that literacy produces complex thought is simply wrong.
Drawing on a dramatically different examples, both old and new, he focusses in particular Greek society at the time it was absorbing the effects of writing (the time of Homer) and contemporary African societies in a comparable position with respect to written communication. He he goes on to make a short list of simple, clear patterns that people invariably exhibit when they begin to read and write. One particularly revealing one is making lists. This is followed, appropriately enough by list: a series of quite wonderful, thought-provoking discussions of the formula, the recipe, the prescription and the experiment…all indications of literate ways of ordering and recording information.
I sought the book out in hopes that it would give me a better, more specific idea of how people and social groups change when they become literate. It may seem as though that doesn’t matter anymore, since it seems like just about everyone can communicate somehow. But it does matter. It always did, and now, as literacy rates steadily fall in societies that have been among the most committed to literacy, we are encountering what Walter Ong called “secondary orality,”. Others have called it “post-literacy”. In any case, it is oral communication that depends on technologies of literacy which, however, may be preserved, archival, no longer active. At least some of differences Goody describes seem like descriptions of what we are losing.
Goody acknowledges important differences. Avoiding or deliberately reversing anticipated value judgements, however, he correlates differences to an orality-literacy spectrum, that is, differences in how often, effectively, comfortably a particular group of people rely on speech versus writing to communicate with one another. For some readers, perhaps, the experience of reading this book could be an occasion to sense the limitations of a book: the text is silent, fixed, unresponsive, as it must be; Goody is continually discussing relationships that are complex, interactive, always changing.
I was not disappointed in my hopes for getting a bit more specificity about what happens when people learn to read and write. The book begins with a very forceful argument about intellectual life grounded in oral communication: if there is anything rigid about his contentions, it is that people everywhere reflect on their lives and relationships, remember what they have thought and felt, and communicate their understanding to one another. The idea that literacy produces complex thought is simply wrong.
Drawing on a dramatically different examples, both old and new, he focusses in particular Greek society at the time it was absorbing the effects of writing (the time of Homer) and contemporary African societies in a comparable position with respect to written communication. He he goes on to make a short list of simple, clear patterns that people invariably exhibit when they begin to read and write. One particularly revealing one is making lists. This is followed, appropriately enough by list: a series of quite wonderful, thought-provoking discussions of the formula, the recipe, the prescription and the experiment…all indications of literate ways of ordering and recording information.
I sought the book out in hopes that it would give me a better, more specific idea of how people and social groups change when they become literate. It may seem as though that doesn’t matter anymore, since it seems like just about everyone can communicate somehow. But it does matter. It always did, and now, as literacy rates steadily fall in societies that have been among the most committed to literacy, we are encountering what Walter Ong called “secondary orality,”. Others have called it “post-literacy”. In any case, it is oral communication that depends on technologies of literacy which, however, may be preserved, archival, no longer active. At least some of differences Goody describes seem like descriptions of what we are losing.
January 25, 2013
Intéressant
April 18, 2020
Una crítica y análisis antropológico muy interesante para abordar el problema de la relación entre escritura, pensamiento y estructuras sociales.
July 27, 2025
The Domestication of the Savage Mind, published in 1977 by Cambridge University Press, is a seminal work by British social anthropologist Jack Goody. In this book, Goody challenges the prevailing dichotomies used to describe differences in human societies’ cognitive processes, such as “advanced” versus “primitive,” “open” versus “closed,” or “domesticated” versus “savage.” He argues that these “we-they” distinctions hinder meaningful analysis of long-term cognitive changes and transformations in traditional societies. Instead, Goody proposes a framework that links variations in “mentalities” to changes in communication technologies, particularly the development of writing.
Key Arguments and Themes
1 Critique of Dichotomous Thinking: Goody criticizes anthropological and sociological approaches that rely on binary oppositions, such as those advanced by Claude Lévi-Strauss in The Savage Mind. He contends that these frameworks oversimplify cultural differences and fail to account for the mechanisms driving cognitive and social evolution. The book’s title is intentionally ironic, reflecting the kind of ethnocentric thinking Goody seeks to dismantle.
2 Impact of Literacy: Goody’s central thesis is that the advent of writing fundamentally altered modes of thought and social organization. He explores how literacy, as a technology, enhances cultural memory, promotes systematic knowledge, and shifts communication from oral (auditory) to visual modes. Writing enables abstraction, objectification, and the organization of information through tools like lists, tables, and indices, which are rare in oral cultures. For example, he notes that lists “rely on discontinuity” and “encourage the ordering of items,” fostering new ways of categorizing and thinking.
3 Empirical Foundations: The book draws on Goody’s fieldwork among the LoDagaa and other groups in West Africa, as well as historical analyses of ancient Near Eastern societies (e.g., Mesopotamia, Sumer, Ugarit). He examines how writing systems, such as cuneiform and alphabetic scripts, influenced social structures, including bureaucratic institutions and knowledge transmission.
4 Anthropology of Literacy: Goody is recognized as a pioneer in the anthropology of literacy. He builds on the work of scholars like Lévi-Strauss and Jacques Derrida, while offering a more accessible, English-language perspective. His analysis extends to the implications of literacy in both colonial and ancient contexts, making it relevant to historians, archaeologists, and other specialists.
5 Social Change and Communication: Goody situates literacy within broader social transformations, alongside factors like intensive agriculture and urbanization. He argues that writing facilitated the management of surplus and the rise of bureaucratic systems, which reshaped traditional social organizations like families and tribes, contributing to what he describes as “the culture of cities.”
Reception and Critiques
• Positive Reception: The book is widely regarded as a classic in anthropology, praised for its innovative approach to literacy’s cognitive and cultural impacts. Reviewers have highlighted its relevance to understanding both modern and ancient societies, with one describing it as a “neglected classic” that offers “incredible value.”
• Critiques: Some critics argue that Goody’s writing style is dated, with excessive use of the first person and phrases like “what I do not mean is…,” which can disrupt the flow and reduce coherence. Others note that while Goody’s ideas are bold, his attempt to address all possible arguments sometimes leads to a lack of depth in certain areas.
• Legacy: The book remains influential, inspiring interdisciplinary studies in anthropology, history, and communication. Its focus on literacy’s transformative power aligns with later works by scholars like Walter Ong and David Olson.
Broader Context
Jack Goody (1919–2015), a distinguished anthropologist and Fellow of the British Academy, was knighted for his contributions to social anthropology. His work, including The Domestication of the Savage Mind, reflects his broader interest in comparative studies across Europe, Africa, and Asia, focusing on literacy, family structures, and inheritance. His fieldwork in northern Ghana and teaching at Cambridge University informed his interdisciplinary approach, which bridges anthropology, history, and archaeology.
Conclusion
The Domestication of the Savage Mind is a groundbreaking study that reframes cognitive and cultural differences through the lens of communication technologies, particularly writing. Despite some stylistic critiques, its theoretical insights and empirical grounding make it a foundational text in the anthropology of literacy and social change.
Key Arguments and Themes
1 Critique of Dichotomous Thinking: Goody criticizes anthropological and sociological approaches that rely on binary oppositions, such as those advanced by Claude Lévi-Strauss in The Savage Mind. He contends that these frameworks oversimplify cultural differences and fail to account for the mechanisms driving cognitive and social evolution. The book’s title is intentionally ironic, reflecting the kind of ethnocentric thinking Goody seeks to dismantle.
2 Impact of Literacy: Goody’s central thesis is that the advent of writing fundamentally altered modes of thought and social organization. He explores how literacy, as a technology, enhances cultural memory, promotes systematic knowledge, and shifts communication from oral (auditory) to visual modes. Writing enables abstraction, objectification, and the organization of information through tools like lists, tables, and indices, which are rare in oral cultures. For example, he notes that lists “rely on discontinuity” and “encourage the ordering of items,” fostering new ways of categorizing and thinking.
3 Empirical Foundations: The book draws on Goody’s fieldwork among the LoDagaa and other groups in West Africa, as well as historical analyses of ancient Near Eastern societies (e.g., Mesopotamia, Sumer, Ugarit). He examines how writing systems, such as cuneiform and alphabetic scripts, influenced social structures, including bureaucratic institutions and knowledge transmission.
4 Anthropology of Literacy: Goody is recognized as a pioneer in the anthropology of literacy. He builds on the work of scholars like Lévi-Strauss and Jacques Derrida, while offering a more accessible, English-language perspective. His analysis extends to the implications of literacy in both colonial and ancient contexts, making it relevant to historians, archaeologists, and other specialists.
5 Social Change and Communication: Goody situates literacy within broader social transformations, alongside factors like intensive agriculture and urbanization. He argues that writing facilitated the management of surplus and the rise of bureaucratic systems, which reshaped traditional social organizations like families and tribes, contributing to what he describes as “the culture of cities.”
Reception and Critiques
• Positive Reception: The book is widely regarded as a classic in anthropology, praised for its innovative approach to literacy’s cognitive and cultural impacts. Reviewers have highlighted its relevance to understanding both modern and ancient societies, with one describing it as a “neglected classic” that offers “incredible value.”
• Critiques: Some critics argue that Goody’s writing style is dated, with excessive use of the first person and phrases like “what I do not mean is…,” which can disrupt the flow and reduce coherence. Others note that while Goody’s ideas are bold, his attempt to address all possible arguments sometimes leads to a lack of depth in certain areas.
• Legacy: The book remains influential, inspiring interdisciplinary studies in anthropology, history, and communication. Its focus on literacy’s transformative power aligns with later works by scholars like Walter Ong and David Olson.
Broader Context
Jack Goody (1919–2015), a distinguished anthropologist and Fellow of the British Academy, was knighted for his contributions to social anthropology. His work, including The Domestication of the Savage Mind, reflects his broader interest in comparative studies across Europe, Africa, and Asia, focusing on literacy, family structures, and inheritance. His fieldwork in northern Ghana and teaching at Cambridge University informed his interdisciplinary approach, which bridges anthropology, history, and archaeology.
Conclusion
The Domestication of the Savage Mind is a groundbreaking study that reframes cognitive and cultural differences through the lens of communication technologies, particularly writing. Despite some stylistic critiques, its theoretical insights and empirical grounding make it a foundational text in the anthropology of literacy and social change.
Read
November 29, 2025I like the Sappho on the cover, a picture is worth much more than a thousand words here, since it summarises (and without much loss) the entire argument of Goody's thesis: that the difference between the 'savage' and the 'civilised' mind can be chalked up to the profound and irrevocable chasm carved out by literacy and the behemoth power of the written word to utterly transform and structure thought. The meditative, self-reflecting, melting, dreamy, trans-like intellectual state, the apotheosis of which is a poet at work surely, percolates through a literate society over time and changes its shambolic, chaotic, irrational oral ways into clean, clear channels of logical thought and rationalism.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews