The Meal as Indicative of Societal Norms - The Solitary Meal

A snippet of my recent 14 page paper (not proofed) for a cultural studies class. I liked this little section - it was succinct and to the point. However, one must take a step back, the solitary meal isn't always indicative in EVERY case. Personally, a meal out or at home by myself is sometimes needed as escape or just a moment of quiet alone to collect my thoughts and relax. A cigar is sometimes just a cigar and a meal for one is sometimes just a meal for one.

Of course, neither Anderson nor Jones argue that cultural studies should focus solely on the commensalitary aspects of the meal. While Anderson does argue that the human species is a communal at heart in that humans prefer and need the company of others for their mental, emotional, and physical health, as new cultural ideals emerge the ritual of the meal does as well (124). American society today encourages an idea of the lace-up-your boots, work your way to the top, 70-hour work week mentality propagated by an overly white, protestant culture. Personal success in the work place and a large paycheck signify worth (both monetary and societal). To gain this worth in such a society the meal has had to take a back seat, no longer do we have time to cook our meals as it cuts into time needed to work. Furthermore, the family meal lost ground as “all kinds of social and economic and technological factors then conspired to shred that tidy picture to the point that the frequency of family dining fell about a third over the next 30 years,” along with children shuffling between school and activities and the ease of the microwave meal, the family meal lost ground within a society that encouraged constant activity and personal gain (Gibbs). Rarely do people even go to a restaurant unless it’s a business dinner or a martini lunch in which one can have a communal meal where networking for personal gain is the primary purpose. Rather individuals obsessed with self-worth have elevated the idea of ordering in to the office or home and wolfing down fast food in the car. Both eating habits are usually performed alone.

This solitary meal then is symbolic of a culture that encourages solitary independence and devalues reliance on others. Putnam argues that dependence on electronics and the rise of massive corporations which demand more time and attention and offer less time to develop social capital is partially the cause (283). Jones also worries that the decline of the group meal will hamper our ability to create healthy identities, ones in which we are able to interact with members of society, without social construction (141). Furthermore, he notes that in certain studies of teenage girls’ foodways that “the teens distinguish between ‘healthful food’ served at home and ‘junk food’ purchased [elsewhere]; the former symbolizes ties to family, the latter… independence” (148). The eating habits of these girls then exemplifies the idea that eating out, usually alone, is then preferred by members of American society as it gives one a sense of autonomy and self-determination. Thus the dominant practice of the communal meal begins to sink into the residual – the idea of the family sitting down to dinner is now reserved for many part of American society as part of old world nostalgia or relegated to solely Christmas dinner while the group meal is seen as a threat to individuality.

This loss of social capital via the solitary meal then can lead to the loss of communal culture. Putnam notes that “social connectedness [is] well established in the case of health and well-being,” citing that a lack of social capital correlates with a rise in unhealthy behaviors such as poor eating habits and weight gain, both common factors of the solitary meal where pre-prepared food is consumed. Indeed a recent article in Time magazine about the family meal noted that, “studies show that the more often [people] eat together, the less likely they are to smoke, drink, do drugs, get depressed, develop eating disorders and consider suicide;” for the most part the communal meal is simply more beneficial for the individual. With less importance on the communal meal (which more often than not involves the preparation of the meal as well) the pre-prepared meal gains popularity within society. These prepackaged meals, made to be eaten on the run and often alone via their single serving sizes, the solitary meal, as a propagator of culture, begins to encourage a society valuing personal reliance where cooking and eating aren’t important, therefore shifting or negating the communal values of society. The solitary meal then encourages a de-emphasis in personal health and social networking within society.

Read about Dining Alone on Vanilla Garlic.