“Social eating, then, is often heavily politically symbolic, particularly when carried out on a national scale” (Evans, 2018)
For my last week of readings I decided I wanted to look into social eating. I was curious how community played into concepts of food and feeling, and while I can write my personal experiences and opinions on eating with and cooking for other people, I wanted more historical context, as well as something more scientifically backed than my own ideas.
I used two sources, the first was “The Social Facilitation of Eating or the Facilitation of Social Eating” by C. Peter Herman. Published by the Journal of Eating Disorders, I was initially surprised by how much this paper was focused on overindulgence, but it didn’t feel like he was parading around obesity like some other writings. Instead, Herman focused on uncovering the many potential roots of why we eat more when we eat in groups. He tells the reader about John de Castro and his studies, and the theories that came from them.
One was simply that exposure to the food over time makes us eat more, that while it is in front of us we will eat until something stops us. Another suggestion was that group meals take longer as you’re socializing, but as Herman points out if we are talking are we still eating? Another interesting theory was that the presence of other people lead to arousal, raising hunger levels. This last one seems unlikely as we all have such different hunger swings with out emotions.
The last theory is interesting and leads to some interesting questions. We are modeling those in front of us, we want to please them, and we know people hate when others eat less than us. While a convoluted theory, I would love to see the rabbit hole that lead there. Why do we hate people for eating less than us? If we are already overconsuming why are we concerned with each other plates?
The next article was more historical, simply called “Social Eating” by Bryce Evans. This piece weaves together historical, political, and philosophical ideas and instances of social eating and their impact on their community.
Covering the world wars, Evans discusses the first government-subsidized food kitchens and pseudo restaurants. Across multiple countries and continents, she first highlights programs that were directed at the very poorest of their nations, to the dismay of many struggling middle-class workers. The British government hired a prominent athlete and vegetarian as a spokesperson of sorts to combat bad geopolitical stereotypes that surrounded vegetarianism, as many of the soup kitchens served meatless dishes that felt far from homey.
This leads into a more political look at social eating as Evans briefly mentions the long communal dining times observed in the Soviet State, and the network of comedores who were feeding people in pop-up kitchens during Perus civil conflict. Many of these women were put to death by either side of the conflict, both too radical and not radical enough. It is incredible that throughout history we have politicized food without fail, even when the food itself is not in discussion we must still defend how we set out tables, the way we eat, and who we eat with.
The last section is on more modern day social eating, but instead of sharing from Evans I want to share my own story. In the 2020 Seattle Autonomous Zone there were a lineup of meal trucks that were all a part of the same organization, I wish I could remember their name. All they did was show up and feed people, for free, every day. The cops smashed their stuff up pretty badly for no reason, and the city refused to pay damages because the witnesses weren’t cops. We are still oppressing social eating because it is an avenue to conversation.
I have really enjoyed this quarter of readings, I am exited to make my last update with my summary post.