Food in Literature: Dickens v. Melville

The food writing explored in Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist and Herman Melville's Moby Dick both promote their plots by us prominent themes and enhancing character traits of the role and places in which they are served. The heart of thematic and characteristic revelations lies in their juxtapositions. But, where Dickens makes large social criticism, Melville develops the character and his attitudes against societal faults.

The narrator, Ishmael, later describes the whole establishment of Try Buckets inn as the “Fishiest of all fishy places,” and how even the milk had a fishy tinge. Nonetheless, he indulges in the delicious chowder and enjoys the place about which he was first anxious. This contradiction between the dubious and unappealing connotations of “fishy” and one of the most delicious sounding meals in literature and his level of comfort within the place reminds us not to judge outsides harshly. 

However, a warm savory steam from the kitchen served to belie the apparently cheerless prospect before us. But when that smoking chowder came in, the mystery was delightfully explained. Oh, sweet friends! hearken to me. It was made of small juicy clams, scarcely bigger than hazel nuts, mixed with pounded ship biscuit, and salted pork cut up into little flakes; the whole enriched with butter, and plentifully seasoned with pepper and salt. Our appetites being sharpened by the frosty voyage, and in particular, Queequeg seeing his favourite fishing food before him, and the chowder being surpassingly excellent, we despatched it with great expedition..                                                                                                                        (Melville, 79)

This scene comes in hand of Ishmael meeting the heavily tattooed, Polynesian cannibal Queequeg, with whom Ishmael, an educated white sailor, is forced together and to whom he becomes close. The apprehensions around Queequeg are of race and creed, but nonetheless parallel with the trepidations Ishmael has for the name and look of the inn. Through the fishiness (connoting anxiety) is prominent throughout, showing Ishmael’s inability to fully forget his prejudices, he does wade into acclimatization with them.

The Little Library Café post

Dickens uses his juxtapositions in a much more negative way. In a BBC article, Emma Jane Kirby summarizes about Dickens' writings: “Fat adults often starve thin children; characters who share and enjoy lavish feasts are good, characters who make lavish food just for show or who waste food are generally bad.” So it is not hard to see how when a sympathetic, frail young boy like Oliver Twist asks for more food and all the adults react in the most eccentric way of flabbergasted overreaction, we immediately revolt against all adults in the novel. We are meant, then, to criticize those in charge of wealth and see their greed and revolt for the pleads of the weak as completely ridiculous.

Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens

The issues fought in these novels speak to the prevalent sociopolitical issues of the time. For England in 1850s, at least to Dickens, it was the problem of class division and the human rights (ie. the ability to not be starving). For America in the 1850s, to Melville, it is the issue of racial prejudice (ie. thinking of a tattooed Polynesian as lower in human rank is like being apprehensive of an inn by it's smell or name).

Food Blogs and Bloggers: Serious Eats v. London Food Babes

Food blogs are the travel-savvy, city-engaged, under-30 go-to for where to find the best, least expensive, and/or hip, entertaining spots in the city. They also direct the conversation on food through images and captions. American blog, SeriousEats, have been taking a more health-conscious turn, showing there’s good food that’s also good for you, whereas the English blog, London Food Babes, have focused on deliciously indulgent foods to spoil the flavor beast inside of every woman.

What surprised me is Serious Eats’ strayed focus on places to eat, divulged with simple food descriptions of appreciation, like their post on blood orange season.

Blogs like these flagship the turn for “health-conscious America." America has been known for decades to be the inventors of fast food, the glutinous, and the obese. But in the past decade, groups like Serious Eats that promote getting to know the food you’re eating and staying away from processed foods and foods with added sugars have been gaining popularity, especially around millennials, which are more likely to see posts on Instagram and similar social media sites.

London Food Babes, however, are not concerned with calories, but actually encourage them. In its own way, it is changing ideologies. For many years, the stigma around English food has been all but indulgent: mostly bland and over-boiled. This blog shows that London is quickly becoming a foodie-mecca. More than that, I think worth noting, is this calorie-splurging blog is made by women and testifies to the changing stigmas of how women are expected to eat. There is no light lunch or skinny salads for these ladies. They are proving women have the appetite of men, if not double, and are a new kind of role model for women of the digital photo-shop age, forgetting all consumer ideals of petiteness and body-image, reminding the public through mouth-watering images of triple-stacked, dripping burgers and caramel-lathered pancakes that women should enjoy themselves, and good food!

Civilian Television Food Challenges: Worst Cooks in America v. The Great British Baking Show

The immediate distinction between American food challenges and British food challenges is the ridicule.

The Great British Baking Show, to an American, is the most incredible display of anti-climactic gradualness and restrained stress I have ever seen. Hour long episodes of posh-accented, perpetually-embarrassed Brits in a tent who get the recipe titles, get to go home and learn them, study and practice them for a week and then get there and still worry about if it will turn out fine, is a DRAMATIC parallel to the fast-paced completely clueless chaos of amateur multi-cultural cooks who must compromise a recipe on spot.

American judges on Worst Cooks in America are not afraid to hold back their quips and lashes to put down the brave unskilled volunteers. This show exemplifies how American entertainment is not only based on the humility of failure, but feeds the American consumer’s desire to watch stupidity. The show’s producers pride themselves on finding the entertaining kitchen-idiots, who might use a lemon zester for a knife in a tight bout. The British are far more calm and do things more for the joy of it, and keep themselves away from the panic and discomfort that Americans thrive on.

In this way, it is difficult to distinguish which program will encourage more cooking at home. The American programs are definitely more engaging, and appeal to the non-cooks who are fearless or looking for fun in the kitchen. The British programs are far more centered on patience and the simple joy of cooking; this is for the home cooks who do have time and a passion for baking.