A Philosophy of Dirt

by Olli Lagerspetz

What is dirt, and what does it really mean to be dirty or clean? Dirt and cleaning are often associated with ideas of guilt, otherness, and social control, but also with living responsibly and in harmony with the environment. In this learned, innovative study, Olli Lagerspetz offers a persuasive discussion of dirt and its ramifications across philosophy and culture. Writing with wit and grit, he argues that questions of dirt and soiling can neither be reduced to hygiene nor to ritual pollution. Instead, they are integral to almost every human activity.

As participants in material culture, we not only produce things and dispose of them, but we also engage with them practically, aesthetically, and morally. Everything, in essence, comes back to dirt and waste. Ranging through subjects and times, from Heraclitus of Ephesus to the Renaissance (via Heidegger and Mary Douglas), from the hygienic products of modernity to abject art, Lagerspetz constantly questions current thinking on all subjects most foul. Proposing a new view of dirt based on our physical engagement with the world, A Philosophy of Dirt is essential reading for all students of philosophy and for anyone who’s felt soiled—and wants to know why.

Genres: Philosophy, Anthropology, Nonfiction

256 pages, Hardcover

Published March 15, 2018

Reviews

[Helene Uppin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pole just kiire lugemine, aga mõtlemis- ja silmaringiainet pakub küllaga. Oli huvitav näha mustuse käsitlust, mis pole otseselt ei hügieenist lähtuv ega ka paduantropoloogiline. Kuigi suuremaid ahhaa-elamusi pakkusid mingid nüansid - nt vee- ja korrapõhise puhtuse vastandamine aitas aru saada, miks parukate puuderdamine võis tunduda 300 a tagasi täiesti legit *puhtus*, aga vannis käimine ebavajalik või isegi rõve. Endisaegsete elamisviiside suhtes pisut ajaloolist empaatiat kulub muidugi alati ära, pole ju ajalugu mingi mõtestatud arengumars, pigem ikka nartsissistlik sihitu ringiratast tammumine. Endisaegsed mõtlemisviisid on aga vist meie teadvusesse sügavalt juurdnud ja elavad nn teadusliku maailmapildi all oma värvikat elu. Ilmselt pean kunagi uuesti lugeda, et sellest teadusfilosoofilisest poolest päriselt aru saada.

[Tommi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whether A Philosophy of Dirt revolutionized my understanding of dirt is something I’m not sure about yet, but this was certainly an enjoyable book on the subject matter: such a comprehensive perusal from several (philosophical) angles. I appreciated his inclusion of many female scholars, such as Martha Nussbaum (“‘The Secret Sewers of Vice’: Disgust, Bodies, and the Law”), Mary Douglas (Purity and Danger) and Julia Kristeva (Powers of Horror), whose work he discusses in detail and hence also managing to whet my appetite to read all of them! The book could use a proper concluding chapter, though. Lagerspetz is a bit tangential at times (who philosopher isn’t?) so some kind of a wrap-up could’ve been useful. The physical book itself is a thing of beauty, the layout well formatted – a great experience overall.

[Oguz Albayrak · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was brilliant!
The book starts with ontological analysis of what is dirt, and investigates every concept that we use in our lives for which dirt could be used as a metaphor.
The connections that are made between cleanliness, tidyness, heterogenity, homogenity, public order, racism was remarkable.
Also it was really interesting that how dirt concept is one of the fundamentals of every human society but yet it was investigated very little philosophically
Then as the second part, it investigates the historical philosophical background.
It was a very structured and well designed book, with a simple language

[Ian Jest · Rating 4 out of 5]

well written, engaging read drawing together a lot of different ideas about cleanliness and dirtiness.

at times he gets too caught up explaining why other writers are wrong, which i found smug, uninteresting, and occasionally felt in bad faith.

e.g. one tack he takes to dismantle other's arguments is their equivocation of terms (clean/pure). but he engages in the same equivocation when for example he equivocates his "dirt" with Kristeva's "abject". Kristeva is not talking about raspberry jam on a white shirt. Her abject is something quite specific which is related to but not the same as his idea of dirt.

[Piret Peensoo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Põhjalik analüüs, mis on samas nii nauditavalt ja kohati vägagi humoorikalt kirja pandud, et suur rõõm oli seda lugeda.

"Üks näeb koristamata tuba, teine aga tuba, kus /elatakse/. See seletab ilmselt ka asjaolu, miks peetakse koristusmaaniat eluvaenulikuks. Koristusmaania tähendab, et kodumajapidamisest tahetakse kõrvaldada pooleliolevate tegevuste märgid. Elu loomulikke tunnusmärke pannakse pahaks kui mustust ja korralagedust." (lk 335)

/kursiivis/

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an intriguing book relevant to my current research interests. The book starts strong with its overview of philosophical perspectives on dirt/filth/soiling, but then wanders about all sorts of other topics without any clear destiny. This meandering approach was not unpleasurable, but it was less useful than I had hoped after reading the first few chapters.

[r · Rating 5 out of 5]

“What is pure is clean, spotless, unsoiled. Pure water is unmixed water, water that is nothing but water. Note that such water is actually dead, a fact that says a lot about life and about a certain nostalgia for purity. Whatever lives also soils, and all that cleans kills.”