An Examination of Food Aggression

It is a familiar scene. It may start with a one person playfully tossing a grape at another. In turn, that person may giggle and flick a potato chip at the offender. But then when the instigator accidentally misfires and, instead of hitting the friend with a baby carrot, accidentally pelts an unaware individual, this seemingly playful game becomes an ugly fight. A food fight.

Food fights can be the source of humor in movies, entertainment during the lunch hour, or even childish flirting in the movie theater. However, a food fight is often not recognized for what it really is: an act of aggression. Food aggression is an act of violence that is executed using food as a weapon. It is regularly seen as humorous instead of threatening and violent.

The food fight is a device used in movies that would occur under the category of slapstick humor, which in itself lends itself to making pain and violence into comedic material. By substituting mash potatoes for a baseball bat, food fights and other forms of food aggression are not seen as threatening.

The food fight is not just a comedic American device used in movies. Food fights have been occurring in other countries with much more tradition than seen in the basic kid's movie. The Tomatina Tomato Throwing Festival, known natively as La Tomatina, is a yearly food fight that occurs in a town called Buñol in eastern Spain. The historical significance has been lost throughout the years, but it is known that the first tomato battle occurred in 1945. Some believe it was just a game between friends, others believe that it is mimicking an anti-Franco rally. Whatever the reason, the festival has survived and has made its permanent place in the town's tradition. Both tourists and locals will gather in August on the last Wednesday of the month to throw over-ripened tomatoes at each other. The Plaza Del Pueblo becomes covered with tomatoes as thousands of pounds of the vegetables are dumped and then heartily thrown at everyone in sight (Pilot Guides).

Another festival that is heavily founded in historical significance is Il carnevale d'Ivrea, or the Ivrea Carnival. In Ivrea, Italy each year before lent, the story of the revolt of the townspeople against the tyrannical count Conte Rainieri di Biandrate is told through live action reenactment. Biandrate had passed a law called "right of first night," a law that would allow him to have sexual intercourse with every new bride on the couple's wedding night. However, this law would ultimately be his undoing when Violetta, a miller's daughter, craftily placed a sword beneath her skirts when she went to him. Catching him off guard, she beheaded him and set his castle on fire. The beheading evoked a full rebellion, in which the people of the area fought and won against the count's men.

When reenacted in the Ivera Carnival, the rebellion is called the Battle of the Oranges. Historically the common people used stones as weapons; today any extra crops of oranges at the end of the growing season are used in place of stones. The Battle of the Oranges is an elaborate event with over 10,000 people in costumes, horse drawn wagons, orange throwing teams, and strategy. And like the Tomatina Tomato Throwing Festival, visitors as well as locals are encouraged to participate (Corradin).

A final example of other cultures food fighting traditions occurs once again in Spain with the world famous running of the bulls. In Pamplona, Spain bulls are released down a path of city streets to run their way into the bullfighting arena for the night's match. In addition to taking a chance to run with the bulls, participants will spray each other with champagne and other types of wine, throw eggs at one another, and dump flour, mustard and water from rooftops into the crowds below. There seems to be no real cultural significance to why these particular food items are used - or why food items are used in general - other than the fact that the flying objects and mess add to the already adrenaline packed event of running with the bulls (Ross-Thomas).

Food fights are only one example of food aggression that is ignored as an act of violence. Food-throwing is another form of food aggression which is often more serious and damaging than the food fight. This form of food aggression is one sided - the offender throws the object at the target, but the target does not return the food aggressive action. Other aggressive action may take place, but it is not food aggression. Once the target returns the food aggressive action, it would then be considered a food fight, not food-throwing.

During the Elizabethan era in England, it was not uncommon for patrons of the theater to throw rotten vegetables at performers if they did not enjoy the play (Elizabethan Period). This occurred in the Victorian age as well except instead of this practice occurring at the theater it occurred in music performance halls (Skidelsky). As one magazine columnist so eloquently pinpoints:

Food-throwing must have carried a particular force in times when food was less plentiful than today. By choosing to throw - rather than eat - an item, one was in effect saying: "Your performance is so offensive to me that, rather than using this perfectly good tomato to feed my family, I am going to chuck it at you instead (Skidelsky)."

In throwing a tomato, the patron is expressing dislike for the performance, but with little risk of severe damage to the performer - damage that may have dire consequences for the patron, such as punishment. The choice of a tomato instead of a harder, more damaging object, such as a rock, is advantageous for the patron. There is little chance of the performer suffering physical damage, but the potential for wounded pride is definite. The patron has communicated dislike effectively, and harshly, to the performer.

It would be satisfying to think that the act of throwing food at a performer has fallen by the wayside in more civilized and technological times, but trends particularly among young people show otherwise. More and more high profile individuals are becoming victims of food-throwing, particularly pieing. Pieing or being pied occurs when the offender throws or shoves a pie directly into the target's face.

One recent example is that of Ann Coulter, a Republican political writer, who had pies thrown at her while giving a speech at University of Arizona in October of 2004. The offenders were Liberal students of the college who ran towards the stage during the question and answer portion of Coulter's speech. Coulter was able to step out of the attack, only being hit slightly on the shoulder. The offenders then attempted to flee unsuccessfully, and were reportedly beaten, handcuffed, and removed (Coulter).

Coulter is not an isolated incident. A brief list of other notable pieings include Conservative speakers David Horowitz and Bill Kristol, who were pied within the same week at two different Indiana universities, and big business leaders Bill Gates of Microsoft and Jeffery Skilling of Enron (Another Good Person).

Pieing, like the food fight, is no new trend, and has also been a longtime standard of slapstick comedy. Charlie Chaplin, the Three Stooges, and Bozo the Clown, to name just a few, have all used pieing as part of their comedic repertoire. Pieing occurs in cartoons and movies. It is hardly seen as a threatening action.

The ingrained humor of pieing can be clearly seen in a video clip of the pieing of Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Chrétien is shown walking through a crowd indoors, smiling and unaware, greeting members of the crowd. From the viewer's left comes the offender in a black leather jacket. He makes no effort to conceal his face or his identity as he shoves the pie directly into Chrétien's face. The offender then ducks out of sight of the camera on the right; it appears that he runs off, but he does not remain onscreen long enough for this to be confirmed (Chertien Pie1).

Watch the actions of the people in the crowd, particularly the man in the left background in a striped shirt, the woman in the left foreground wearing a light blue crew neck shirt and glasses, and the man in the right foreground with the black suit jacket and camera. The man in the black suit jacket initially points at Chrétien after the pie has struck him before he starts snapping photos. After Chrétien pulls the tin away from his face, watch the reactions of the striped shirt man and the blue shirt woman. Both are smiling for a fraction of a moment. In listening to the crowd one can here sounds of laughter beneath the collective outcry of shock. It is not until Chrétien has completely removed the pie tin from his face and started to wipe it out of his eyes that the crowd's smiles and laughter turn to that of shock and perhaps outrage (Chertien Pie1). Why is pieing so unconsciously funny? Is it because it is such a shock to see someone attack a high profile individual in such a way? Or is it because it has been so ingrained in society's mind as a humorous action?

In stepping back and examining the pieing of politicians, one comes to many scary thoughts. What if it had not been a pie? What if it had been a handgun or a baseball bat? Perhaps even if the extreme is to be considered, what if the offender was too forceful and broke the target's nose? As pieing victim Carl Pope, member of the Sierra Club, said, "It's like being slugged. The pie has nothing to do with it - it's the fist behind the pie (Classical Values)." The propensity for violence as a result of pieing is infinite if one is to explore all possibilities of attack and outcome.

Pieing in itself can lead to violence. One example is of Pim Fortuyn. Fortuyn was an edgy Dutch leader who had both many supporters and many enemies in his political career. Fortuyn was once stuck with a urine and cream pie by an extreme left wing supporter. After the attack Fortuyn hired additional bodyguards, but it would not prevent a final attack. One month later on May 6th, 2002, Fortuyn was shot and killed by another extreme left wing activist (Ann Coulter & Pim Fortuyn).

It may seem like such a stretch to think that the pieing of Fortuyn led to his death, but in considering several factors this conclusion does not seem so far-fetched. The initial attack - the pieing - showed the killer that it was possible to get close enough to Fortuyn to cause serious damage. Without the pieing, the killer may have seen Fortuyn as impenetrable and the idea of actually attempting to kill him would have never surfaced, or if it had, would have been quickly disregarded. A second factor is that offenders will regularly congratulate each other over pieing successes, particularly through use of the Internet. One extremely well-organized and active example of this is the Biotic Baking Brigade, which has several resources for piers, lists of successful pieings, and even a published book. The killer could have seen this intensely positive reaction to the successful pieing of Fortuyn and determined that killing him would bring just as much, if not more support, praise, and happiness to fellow extreme left wing activists.

Immediate violence stemming from food-throwing as a whole must also be considered. Some targets, such as Former President Bill Clinton, have taken being the target of food-throwing in stride. However, others are not so forgiving. In Britain, throwing raw eggs has been stated as a traditional form of political protest. Two egg throwing incidents occurred in Europe one after another, demonstrating two very different reactions to food-throwing. British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott was hit in the face with the raw egg in Wales. He immediately lashed out and struck the offender with his hand, which in turn encouraged the offender to grab Prescott over a temporary barrier used to control the crowds. The two wrestled each other to the ground where Prescott was pinned for a number of seconds until they were finally separated by authorities. The very next day Clinton was struck on the arm by an egg in Warsaw, Poland. Instead of reacting violently, Clinton laughed and said, "It's good for young people to be angry about something (Biotic Baking Brigade)."

In examining these two incidents, there are several factors to consider. One is the area of the body that was hit. Prescott was hit in the face with the egg, while Clinton only in the arm. This would have a severe impact on the way the target would react. Being hit in the face would be much more alarming than on the arm. Because of the multiple violent acts within Prescott's incident, it is hard to know whether the true reason Prescott initially hit the offender was because he was more alarmed then angry, yet it is still a plausible hypothesis.

The other factor that differs in these two incidents is distance. Prescott was hit at a very close range, whereas Clinton was not. There was hardly any distance between Prescott and the offender Craig Evans and there were no bodyguards or police officers to buffer Prescott from the crowd. Because Prescott's attacker was so close and so personal, this added to his anger and made confronting the offender an easy task to accomplish. Clinton, on the other hand, was hit while walking in the Old Town district; the offender remains unknown, making the attack extremely impersonal and not nearly as threatening as Prescott's (Biotic Baking Brigade).

So why devote so much time and energy to acts of violence that to most seem to be nothing more than grade-school pranks? The danger that could come of food aggression is evident if one chooses to explore all possibilities for harm. If nothing else, the apparent ease of which offenders can get so close to their targets should alert law enforcement individuals to the need for better security tactics or training.

But the bigger question at hand here is why does society today feel that there is no other resort than food aggression? Skidelsky wrote in the same article as mentioned above that:

It is only comparatively recently, in fact, that the expectation has come about that audiences should sit tight for the duration of a performance, before displaying their gratitude with polite applause. But why should we be so respectful of those who entertain us (Skidelsky)?

Though Skidelsky mentions only performers here, he is speaking of high profile individuals as a whole. While entertainers live for the audience, politicians live for the public. Without the public they would not be the high profile individual that they are. So if they are in fact performing for the public and the public is not happy, should food aggression not be an acceptable form of feedback considering that it aims only to damage pride and is usually viewed as humorous?

Food aggression has been a part of some cultures for so long that to some it seems as strong a right as any other the society may grant its individuals. In response to Prescott's actions from the egg throwing, a British Conservative candidate said:
What sort of role model is he for young people? Throwing eggs is almost a time-honored tradition in this country. It might hurt and sting your face a bit, but it doesn't harm you. If politicians can't put up with things like that they shouldn't be in the job (Biotic Baking Brigade).

However, the more rational, less instinctual individual has to stop and wonder if tradition really should outweigh courteous and civilized behavior. Is that not what elections are for, to show disapproval? Perhaps it is time for society to actually use the suggestion box and comment card and start putting food to good use - like eating.

Ann Coulter & Pim Fortuyn. 23 Oct. 2004. 21 Apr. 2005 . Another Good Person Hit With Food Stuff. 8 Apr. 2005. 21 Apr. 2005 . Biotic Baking Brigade. Whispered Media. 21 Apr. 2005 . Chertien Pie1. Perf. Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, Biotic Baking Brigade Member. Biotic Baking Brigade, 21 Apr. 2005 . Corradin, Silvia . "Il carnevale d'Ivrea - Ivrea Carnival." 2Camels 2005. 21 Apr. 2005 . Coulter, Ann. "It's Only Funny Until Someone Loses A Pie." Universal Press Syndicate 13 Apr. 2005. 21 Apr. 2005 . Elizabethan Period. 21 Apr. 2005 . No One Was Really Hurt! Besides, It's Funny! Classical Values 22 Oct. 2004. 21 Apr. 2005 . Ross-Thomas, Emma. Fireworks, Food Fight Open Pamplona Bull Fiesta. 6 July 2004. Yahoo! India News. 21 Apr. 2005 . Skidelsky, William. "Food - William Skidelsky Celebrates the Venerable Custom of Food-Throwing." New Statesman 22 Sept. 2003. 21 Apr. 2005 . Thurrott, Paul . "Gates Gets Pie In The Face." Windows IT Pro 4 Feb. 1998. 21 Apr. 2005 . Tomatina Tomato Throwing Festival. 2002. Pilot Productions. 21 Apr. 2005 .