In "The McDonaldization of Society," George Ritzer defines rationalization and demonstrates how it is impacting American society. He states that "a society characterized by rationality is one which emphasizes efficiency, predictability, calculability, substitution of nonhuman for human technology, and control over uncertainty" (372). Efficiency has become an important part of American society and is demonstrated through the food that Americans eat. Home-cooked meals are no longer widespread due to the availability and efficiency of "TV dinners", frozen, packaged meals, and fast food restaurants. Predictability is another component of a rational society - people tend to dislike surprises and would prefer to have consistency with their food. Calculability is another term for quantity that defines rationalization. Sometimes, it is very difficult to assess quality, so people switch to quantitative measurements. This becomes a problem in the food industry, because companies care more about the quantity of food produced and ignore the more important component - quality. Because of the desire for efficiency, fast food restaurants have become assembly lines. Every worker learns a simple task to perform repeatedly. Since the task is very simple, we can substitute robots to take the places of humans, putting many people out of work. Finally, large corporations like McDonald's exercise control over their employees and their customers with the way food is prepared and served. Ritzer ends by stating that "rational systems are not reasonable systems."
I agree with the points Ritzer makes in "The McDonaldization of Society." He states that rationalization dehumanizes society, which can be seen through all his examples. People are eating prepackaged, predictable food, instead of making their own food creations. They are eating food that is all the same, tastes the same, and looks the same - all lacking in quality. Food chains have become assembly lines, workers have essentially become robots, and corporations are controlling all of this. Rationalization has forced us to live bland lives in which everything is the same or predictable. Of course, it has benefited our society, but it may have reached the point of irrationality. What can we do to reduce the negative impact that rationalization has on society? Do you think that rationalization is reasonable? Do you think it will last for a long time?
Julie Guthman, author of "Can't Stomach It," gives her opinion on the obesity crisis. She states that the evidence for the obesity "epidemic" is ambiguous, because it is based on the average Body Mass Index (BMI). It is often difficult to determine the causes of the increase in the average BMI. For example, "it is unclear whether a relatively small number of people have become extremely fat, or whether many people have put on a few pounds" (77). Guthman continues by stating that this can significantly alter the groups into which people are categorized, causing an illusion of an epidemic. She acknowledges Pollan's effective writing style in convincing people to eat healthier foods, but she disagrees with the way he and others like him portray obese people. She points out that in the documentary "SuperSize Me", fat people are seen from the back and without showing their heads whereas skinny people are shown their heads. She believes that this evokes a sense of shamefulness for those portrayed without heads and pride for those with heads. Also, overweight people are demonstrated "at best...as victims of food, bad genetic codes, or bad metabolism; at worst...slovenly, stupid, or without resolve" (78). Finally, she claims that just because one is skinny does not mean that he/she has healthy eating habits.
I thought Guthman's opinion on the obesity crisis was very interesting, and it made me think about the issue in a different perspective. Even though Guthman states that the obesity problem is not necessarily an "epidemic," I still believe that it is an important issue that needs to be addressed. She states that the increase in BMI can have a false impression due to the way it is measured; however, I feel that it shouldn't matter whether a small group of people are become extremely overweight or whether it is a large group gaining a couple pounds. Weight gain is weight gain, and excessive weight gain causes health issues. What can we do to encourage others to eat healthier foods instead of junk food? If junk food were to increase in price, do you think people would stop buying those foods? Or would they continue to eat them anyway?
Guthman, Julie. "Can't Stomach It: Why Michael Pollan et al. Made Me Want to Eat Cheetos". Gastronomica. 2007.
In the fifth and sixth chapters of Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan describes how corn is processed into almost every food product that we eat and how that affects human health. Most of the corn that farmers grow are given to feedlots or passed onto a "wet mill", which breaks down the kernels into many parts that can be used for a variety of ingredients. Some of these ingredients include: glucose, fructose, malodextrin, and high fructose corn syrup. Pollan also states that food industries are now aiming to make consumers eat more food and spend more money on that food. One way of achieving this goal is increasing portion size. This ultimately affects human health by allowing people to overeat. Since portion sizes have increased, the amount of fat, sugar, and other additives in our food has increased. This is the reason for the rise in Type II diabetes and obesity. Pollan also states that "researchers found that a dollar could buy 1,200 calories of potato chips and cookies; spent on a whole food like carrots, the same dollar buys only 250 calories...It makes good economic sense that people with limited money to spend on food would spend it on the cheapest calories they can find" (108). At the end of the chapter, he suggests that the government should subsidize the healthier foods, rather than the foods made from corn-made calories.
I agree with Pollan that the government should change the food that they subsidize. Currently, the government is subsidizing corn, which produces most of our processed foods. However, if the switch was made to subsidize healthier foods, then more people could afford to eat healthier. Those with low income would finally be able to purchase fruits and vegetables instead of eating fast food everyday. This would also cause a decrease in diet-related illnesses, such as Type II diabetes. Obesity would decrease and general public health would change for the better. It may be difficult to change the current policy, but over time, I think that the switch is possible. What can consumers do to encourage a change in the subsidization of corn? It seems that corn is in almost every food product in some shape or form; will there ever be a time when there is no longer any corn in our processed foods?
Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore's Dilemma. New York: Penguin Books, 2007.
Sidney Mintz, author of "Eating American", gives his perspective on the lack of a definitive American cuisine. He emphasizes that just because America does not have a specific cuisine, it doesn't mean that it does not have culture. Americans come from a variety of origins - mostly European, which contributes to our diverse menus. Mintz claims that we have many regional cuisines, but not a national cuisine. As he continues to discuss the American cuisine, or lack thereof, he talks of the problems with Americans and food. Now, Americans eat out regularly, "often choosing fast foods, as well as ordering take-out food to eat at home; eating much prepared and packaged foods, which require only intense heat or nothing at all to be 'cooked'; continuing to eat diets high in animal protein, salt, fats, and processed sugars" (Mintz 29). He also recognizes the rise of junk food and soda, high in fat and sugar content. Finally, Mintz addresses how many Americans use the excuse of not having enough time for the reason why they don't eat as they should. He refutes their argument by stating that they could spend less time watching TV and more time cooking. He believes that if we spent more time caring about how and what we eat, then we could actually have a cuisine.
I agree with Mintz in that America does not really have its specific cuisine. Instead, it is more of a combination of cuisines from several different countries. America has always be known as the "melting pot" and its cuisine is no exception. However, I also agree with the issues that Mintz brings up in his article. All the fast food and "convenient" meals are contributing to America's obesity problem. It is as he says: if we spend less time on unimportant things, we can improve our health just by focusing more on what we eat. Do you think that if we spent more time on cooking, we could create an American cuisine? Because many people would prefer to watch TV than cook, what can we do to persuade them to stop eating convenient meals and cook a healthier meal?
