Food: Not Just for the Hungry

In Glenn Sheldon's article, " 'What's on Their Plates?' or Feeding the Hungry Mouths: Laborers, Families, and Food in the Late Twentieth Century" he makes the argument that a full plate of food has always been a symbol of success in American culture, regardless of the quality or nutritional content of that food. Sheldon states, "The heaping, steaming plates of slung foods - both in the media and in the real world - are representative of abundance in the face of sacrifice." ( Sheldon 567) These "slung foods" may have no real nutritional value, but to the working class they represent the success of their labors despite adversity. Sheldon proves his point very well using an analysis of an unconventional cookbook, examples from popular culture, and even anecdotes from his life.

The majority of Sheldon's article is dedicated to understanding the culture of food through the eyes of the middle and working class as seen in everyday life and as seen on television. Sheldon uses the popular sitcoms such as Roseanne and Alice as examples of how food culture is expressed in popular culture. "Roseanne emphasizes[s] working-class heartiness over working-class nutrition," while the show Alice makes the point that "food - and lots of it- can be the apologist of the resistance to economic inequality." ( Sheldon 566) Sheldon easily demonstrates that these shows view food not only as a form of physical sustenance, but also as a bolster for emotional and mental health of the working class. Whatever was wrong in their world, a big plate of food could fix it because food has become the ultimate symbol of success.

Sheldon offers his own personal experience as the epitome of how food is manipulated to provide a sense of well-being and accomplishment. He recounts the sparse meal that invariably came the day before pay day, what he calls "American chop suey." While the term chop suey invokes the image of exotic and tasty foreign cuisine, in reality, it was nothing more than what was left in the pantry just before pay day thrown together in a careless hash. Sheldon explains, "Illusion was integral to our diet; by calling it 'chop suey,' exoticization of a humble meal made our plates seem fuller than their offerings or actual nutrition." (569) Once again, it seems that food is less about hunger and more about satisfying a need for social and economic success.

Sheldon concludes his article with an examination of a rather unconventional cookbook entitled White Trash Cooking. The ingredients of the recipes (little more than cornmeal, water, bacon drippings, and hog's liver) and the manner in which they are presented (as accompaniments to social events such as "Foot Washins, Prayer Meetings... Funerals... Family Reunions... Picnics...

Sheldon is quite clear that many times eating is not about hunger or nutrition, it's about making someone feel better. Food becomes a vehicle to emotional stability. Sheldon presents this idea as a historical concept, something that has led up to the way we eat today. The baby boomers whose parents made up the working class of their time watched their parents exhaust themselves simply trying to put food on the table because feeding your family meant that at least in one aspect, you had succeeded. Now, in a time of plenty, when fast food is abundant, that mentality still exists. Food is still about making someone feel better and it is still a status symbol of success. The idea of eating to feel better is what nutritionists now call 'emotional eating' and many cases of obesity have been linked to emotional eating. The mentality of eating to feel better and to prove that you have succeeded is so ingrained in our culture that we have forgotten the pang of real hunger. It is not only the availability of fast food that has made our nation a fast food nation but the mentality that this availability is a measure of success.