Accommodation fetishism

Since their introduction into English in the mid-sixteenth Century, accommodations have registered weighty concepts in religious, economic, and political discourse: they represented the process by which divine principles could be adapted to human understanding, the non-interest property loans that were the bedrock of Christian neighborliness, and a political accord that would satisfy all warring factions. These important ideas, however, give way to misdirection, mutation, and suspicion that can all be traced back to the word accommodation in some way—the word itself suggests ambiguous or shared agency and constitutes a blank form that might be overwritten with questionable values or content. This dissertation examines the semantic range and rhetorical value of the word accommodation, which garnered attention for being a “perfumed term” (Jonson), a “good phrase” (Shakespeare), a stumbling block (Milton), and idolatry (anonymous author). The word itself is acknowledged to have an extra-lingual value, some kind of efficacious appeal or cultural capital that periodically interferes with its meaning. These tendencies align it with different modes of fetishism—idolatry, commodity fetishism, and factishism—which I will explicate and synthesize through an analysis of accommodation’s various careers and explicit commentary evidenced in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century texts.