So this is intriguing. Industrially slop has long been a norm (Dickinsonian porridge and prison slop, perhaps even to some degree school lunch, at least the old stereotype). Hugely scalable, cheap, little skill.
But restaurant and restaurant culture is an outgrowth if I recall of 18th century France. Where we see a shift of private chefs for the wealthy start to cater to anyone who could pay, this includes having a menu with choices, and a designated seating area. Before that we have lots and lots of forms of dining-
Taverns with no choices (eat what you get for whatever they charge), cafes/bars which mostly had drinks and snacks, and food stalls where you either just purchased and walked away or had something like a food counter.
Food trucks are very similar to the old medieval food stalls In this sense.
Communal festive meals being tied to restaurants seem a form of commodification and modernity to me (though maybe this is really how Georgian restaurants work?)
In one of the talks, someone asked the speaker how you could tie the idea of hospitality to modern day especially in the restaurant. The speaker viewed the restaurant as an extension of the owner's home and thus an extension of their hospitality. A sit down restaurant has a hostess after all.
I would agree that communal festive meals are a form of commodification/modernity, but not in a parasitic sense. Some can be for sure, but the net result is a more connected world which is the only goal I have.
One thing I asked Sarah Hardie when she was explaining the idea of this at Southeastuary was what differs between this and a Shabbat meal. (Beyond Shabbat is definitely not restaurant and the theme for toasts is the weekly Torah reading)
The biggest difference between shabbos meal and a supra is that shabbos is traditionally done amongst/for a household. Whereas the supra can be either inward or outward facing.
I think Shabbos is a great example that the supra does not have to be adopted globally to change the world, as examples of similar practice exist elsewhere.
Hmm ideally Shabbat meals are not just family/household but have many guests, both from your community and visitors. The difference then would be that's it's a home-based meal where one family hosts it vs a community meal with an individual hosting
Excellent as always. The last point about food is one which dovetails into the issue of our world of plenty as contrasted to the world of privation.
Our traditions around food largely dwindle because food cultures were built around hard limits. You have somethings which you can cook with, and others which you cannot because you do not have them.
In the age of abundance that constraint is gone, and so the menu becomes enlarged, but at the same time the traditions attached to the old menu fade (with notable exceptions like Turkey on Thanksgiving).
The same issue applies to housing. With air conditioners, we don't need to build homes in regional styles that are affected by the weather. Unfortunately, we are conditioned to think that it is morally superior to eat food with a million spices from a million different ethnic cultures and people who eat simple food are backwards and suspect.
Interesting analysis. I experienced the Tamada as a way to offer hospitality and bind together existing (but increasingly fractured) relationships that yet still eat together. More of a tool for the grass roots than a scalable tool in the abstract.
A contention I would have is that we should not necessarily focus on scaling this up, but rather scaling it wide. The industrial scale that comes with most ideas is sort of antithetical to how I view "localism" (living as a local). I think John Heers is onto something with the supra and part of the event was training people to become tamadas and host their own supras, but I don't think everyone has to host/participate specifically in the supra. It's a matter of people finding things that work for them to reintegrate them into their surroundings.
So this is intriguing. Industrially slop has long been a norm (Dickinsonian porridge and prison slop, perhaps even to some degree school lunch, at least the old stereotype). Hugely scalable, cheap, little skill.
But restaurant and restaurant culture is an outgrowth if I recall of 18th century France. Where we see a shift of private chefs for the wealthy start to cater to anyone who could pay, this includes having a menu with choices, and a designated seating area. Before that we have lots and lots of forms of dining-
Taverns with no choices (eat what you get for whatever they charge), cafes/bars which mostly had drinks and snacks, and food stalls where you either just purchased and walked away or had something like a food counter.
Food trucks are very similar to the old medieval food stalls In this sense.
Communal festive meals being tied to restaurants seem a form of commodification and modernity to me (though maybe this is really how Georgian restaurants work?)
Just in its own way
Very good points, thank you, Yosef!
In one of the talks, someone asked the speaker how you could tie the idea of hospitality to modern day especially in the restaurant. The speaker viewed the restaurant as an extension of the owner's home and thus an extension of their hospitality. A sit down restaurant has a hostess after all.
I would agree that communal festive meals are a form of commodification/modernity, but not in a parasitic sense. Some can be for sure, but the net result is a more connected world which is the only goal I have.
One thing I asked Sarah Hardie when she was explaining the idea of this at Southeastuary was what differs between this and a Shabbat meal. (Beyond Shabbat is definitely not restaurant and the theme for toasts is the weekly Torah reading)
The biggest difference between shabbos meal and a supra is that shabbos is traditionally done amongst/for a household. Whereas the supra can be either inward or outward facing.
I think Shabbos is a great example that the supra does not have to be adopted globally to change the world, as examples of similar practice exist elsewhere.
Hmm ideally Shabbat meals are not just family/household but have many guests, both from your community and visitors. The difference then would be that's it's a home-based meal where one family hosts it vs a community meal with an individual hosting
Excellent as always. The last point about food is one which dovetails into the issue of our world of plenty as contrasted to the world of privation.
Our traditions around food largely dwindle because food cultures were built around hard limits. You have somethings which you can cook with, and others which you cannot because you do not have them.
In the age of abundance that constraint is gone, and so the menu becomes enlarged, but at the same time the traditions attached to the old menu fade (with notable exceptions like Turkey on Thanksgiving).
Yes!
The same issue applies to housing. With air conditioners, we don't need to build homes in regional styles that are affected by the weather. Unfortunately, we are conditioned to think that it is morally superior to eat food with a million spices from a million different ethnic cultures and people who eat simple food are backwards and suspect.
Interesting analysis. I experienced the Tamada as a way to offer hospitality and bind together existing (but increasingly fractured) relationships that yet still eat together. More of a tool for the grass roots than a scalable tool in the abstract.
A contention I would have is that we should not necessarily focus on scaling this up, but rather scaling it wide. The industrial scale that comes with most ideas is sort of antithetical to how I view "localism" (living as a local). I think John Heers is onto something with the supra and part of the event was training people to become tamadas and host their own supras, but I don't think everyone has to host/participate specifically in the supra. It's a matter of people finding things that work for them to reintegrate them into their surroundings.
Yes, agreed. We are on the same page.