McDonaldization of Society and Tomato Trail

As George Ritzer points out in the The McDonaldization of Society, society has become increasing rationalized. Americans strive to eat in ways that are quick and cost efficient, and fast food restaurants are a great way to do this. Chain restaurants are all the same, because then people can get exactly what they expect, no matter where they are. In an effort to be more rational, fast food restaurants focus on quality, instead of quality. Although people do work at fast food restaurants, they are working in a machine-like way with the help of many actual machines. In the industry, employers have a lot of control of their workers, giving them simple, specific tasks, and by providing a similar experience at all fast food restaurants, they have control over customers as well. Although becoming increasingly rational has many benefits, it is also very dehumanizing and makes life less exciting.

The Tomato Trail, discusses the production of tomatoes, which has become increasingly rational. Now, countless people in many different locations play a small, machine-like role in production. Growth is no longer natural, but instead controlled at each step. All of the tomatoes in each box look the same. Although it may seem efficient, the quality of a tomato produced this way is worse than one produced locally and the costs to the environment are great.

I think that the entire food system has become rationalized. Corporations want efficiency and predictability. There are benefits to rationalization and mass production, but there is a great loss of quality as well. If Americans moved away from this type of eating to actually cooking their own food, we would benefit greatly. Actually caring about the food we eat and putting in the time may be less efficient, but we would be healthier and have a better experience.

Do the benefits of McDonaldization and rationalization out weight the costs?

If the food industry continues to become increasingly rational, what is the next step? 

"Can't Stomach It" and "Fried chicken and fresh apples"

Julie Guthman discusses the way that obesity is viewed in America. As she points out, we constantly hear about the epidemic of obesity and the many social problems that obesity causes. Society has become so obsessed with the concept of weight and many political solutions, like “Snack taxes, corporate-sponsored exercise breaks, stronger food labeling laws, and, most troublingly, state-mandated student weigh-ins at public schools” have been suggested (1). Obesity has become profitable for many industries, and advertisements for weight loss, fitness, and health foods are increasingly common. Guthman fells that Pollans and authors like him are a part of the fuel for America’s obsession with obesity.  Although she agrees with Pollan that the overproduction of corn is a problem and subsidies should be removed for social and ecological reasons, she does not agree at the points where Pollan brings up obesity. Blame is put on those who are obese and negative self-images are forced on them. By labeling obesity as an epidemic, disease, or problem, overweight people are looked down on by society. Yet, very little is actually known about the relationship between food, exercise, obesity, and health. Guthman believes that government policy should focus on subsidies, protecting the environment as well as the rights of workers, but the choices of individuals should not be up for debate. But, as Kwate points out in Fried chicken and fresh apples, there are some undeniable facts about obesity. It can’t be a coincidence that obesity, poverty, and the presence of fast food restaurants are highly correlated. Fast food is cheap and high in, calories, fat, and cholesterol, but lacks nutrition. Partly because of racial segregation, some areas have significantly higher levels of obesity and more health problems. These areas often lack the resources and/or opportunities to obtain healthier food

            I think Guthman raises some good points, but unlike her, I believe that there is a real obesity problem in America. The exact cause and effect relationship between food and health may not be understood fully, but I don’t think it is jumping to conclusions to say that the way many American’s eat now is harmful to their health. However, the idea of focusing on government policy related to production, not consumption as well as protecting the environment and worker’s rights may be a good way to go about creating change. On the other hand, considering that the current system puts some people at a disadvantage, without adequate information about or access to healthy food, I think the government may have a responsibility beyond that. Obesity is not entirely based on personal preference, but on personal circumstance as well.

Does America have an obesity problem? And if so, whose responsibility is it to fix it? 

Omnivore's Dilemma: Chapter 5

In this chapter of Omnivore’s Dilemma Pollan looks at corn and the production of processed food. Most of the corn that enters our bodies isn’t actually eaten as corn. Wet mills turn corn into the building blocks for large companies to make processed food. This whole process is invisible to consumers, taking place in “sealed vats, pipes, fermentation tanks, and filters” (86). Although he is not allowed in the processing plants, Pollan does get to visit the Center for Crops Utilization Research at Iowa State University. Here new uses for surpluses of corn and soybeans are developed. In wet mills, kernels are broken down in a process like digestion, “complex food is reduced to simple molecules, mostly sugars” (87). Different from the digestion that takes place in animals, there is no waste at the end of this industrial process. One thing produced is high-fructose corn syrup, now the most valuable food product made from corn.

Processing food has been happening forever. By salting, drying, and pickling, we are able to prevent food from going bad and to eat foods from different seasons and locations Following World War II, processing food went beyond preservation. Now, almost all processed food contains either corn or soybeans in some form.

Nature has made it so that companies’ profits can only grow so much. Prices of raw materials (like corn) will continue to fall, but the amount each consumer can eat stays fixed. Growth in the food industry can only come as a result in growth of population. For food companies to make more profits they can encourage people to spend more in proportion to the cost of production and/or get people to eat more food.  Cheap corn helps companies achieve both.

This chapter reminded me how much our food production has moved away from nature and towards both science and economics. Companies are focused on the bottom line. For them to be more profitable, they need to find ways to produce more food for less money, often at the expense of quality and health. The General Mills cereal headquarters is so far from what I think food production should be like. Essentially food is coming from board meetings and laboratories instead of nature. Before, finding a way to process food was a necessity for survival. Now food is being processed in new ways simply so that corporations can make profits.  

What does it mean for our health that so much of our food comes from corn?

How much further can processing food go? Will there ever be a point where we stop trying to alter food even more? 

"Consumer Culture and Participatory Democracy: The Story of Coca-Cola During World War II" and "Eating American"

During a class discussion, Mintz said in passing he “did not think that there is such thing as American cuisine”. Some students took offense. A student pointed out that maybe eating food from all over the world is American cuisine. “Eating American” is a very broad topic, partly because America is large in both size and population. Different regions started to develop slightly different diets, variation of natural environments. Some differences are still there, but they have been diluted due to commercialization. People who move to the US are encouraged to “forgo their traditional cultures in order to ‘become American’”. Even if the first generation holds on to their culture, as time passes each generation becomes more “American”. Foods like hot dogs, hamburgers, ice cream, PB and J sandwiches, barbecues, and pizza may be a part of a “list of favorite foods,” but that does not qualify as a cuisine.There is not much actual cooking takes place in America, leading to a reliance on premade food, take out, and restaurants. There is also too much variety, “class, regional, and ethnic” differences, for us to have a true cuisine.

            Mark Weiner identifies an American food, Coca Cola. Mintz says standardization and commercialization lead to a lack of American cuisine. Coke is American for that very reason. It is ALWAYS the same and accessible. During WWII, coke became an important symbol of America. The best way to make a profit during wartime was to tie product to patriotism. Coke sent things to solders and tried to make it so that every solder could buy a bottle of coke for 5 cents anywhere in the world. Politicians and Military leaders defended this effort. Bottle plants and distillers were set up where troops went. At home, ads showed Coke as a part of American identity and tied daily life to war efforts. Solders, feeling alone and homesick, saw coke as “a symbol of the United States or their own identity.” Coke is something common to the American experience, a truly American food.

So much of our reading has pointed out that there is a priority on efficiency and availability instead of true quality. This focus on efficiency and commercialization in the food industry has made it so that we are left with what Mintz thinks of a lack of cuisine.  In other countries there is pride in their food and time is spent cooking. Americans seem to lack this. America, whether or not we have what can be defined as a cuisine, would benefit from spending more time and energy (and possibly money) into the food we eat.

Do you think there is an American cuisine?

Is not having a cuisine necessarily a bad thing?