Rachel Black

I just found out about this new documentary film that is being made about the Porta Palazzo market in Turin. I can’t wait to see the whole film. I wonder which will appear first my book or their film. It would be fun to present the two together.

Babel’s Market Trailer from Peter Gerard on Vimeo.

We are up and moving to Boston next month! In September, I will be starting my new job as Assistant Professor in the Gastronomy Program at Boston University. For Fall 2009 I will be teaching one course: “Food, Culture & Exchange: The Economic Anthropology of Food.” I am looking forward to working with the wonderful students in the Master of Liberal Arts in Gastronomy program.

This morning I read an article in the New York Times entitled “Table for 2? Get Ready to Wait in Line” and it got me thinking about the social aspects of waiting for food (something this article missed entirely).

Sure, I can understand the inconvenience of having to wait to be fed but I can also see a positive side–the social side of the ordeal. It seems to me that Americans have forgotten how to socialize in public spaces and why spontaneous sociability is important. Hey, it can even be pleasant! Waiting in line is an opportunity to meet new people, exchange a few words and maybe even some ideas. Have we forgotten that it can be a good thing to check in with the world around us? This mundane activity can also build solidarity!

On my first shopping trip to Eataly in Turin, Italy, I was fascinated by two very socially different worlds of the deli counter and the refrigerated self-serve cases. One goes to the deli counter partially out of a desire to socialize and communicate. First there is the waiting in line that necessitates cooperation and a certain ability to follow unspoken social rules and codes. One mustn’t jump the line. One must speak politely to the counter person and others waiting. One must state clearly what they would like and ask for help when they are unsure of this. Then there is the exchange with the counter person. We have the opportunity to ask questions, learn and exchange ideas. In contrast, those who prefer anonymity choose the self-serve case. To me this is an expression of independence and a desire for speed. Who has time anymore to wait to be served? Why would I waste my time talking to other people I don’t know from Adam? Spending a few moments observing the shopping behaviour at the deli case and the counter taught me a great deal about the changing social habits of Italians. Increasing social ineptitude is not unique to North America.

Well, whether waiting in line at a restaurant in New York or a deli counter in Italy, we come in contact with our fellow eaters. A priori we have something in common–our humanness.

Have you ever had a wonderful copious meal and regretted that last bite of panna cotta? A long walk after dinner will help but Italians have come up with an even more civilized cure–the digestivo.

A digestivo is an alcoholic beverage often consumed after a meal in Italy, although many of these drinks make appearances at the aperitivo (drinks before dinner) and are believed to stimulate the appetite. Digestive drinks include amaro, Vermouth, grappa, vin santo, herb-infused concoctions as well as a bevy of non-Italian drinks such as Whiskey and Cognac. They all have the main function of aiding digestion. These drinks have a long history that is tied just as much to Italian medicine and pharmacies as to the specialty beverage trade.

How did digestivi, such as Barolo Chinato, Martini, San Simone and Fernet Branca, go from being consumed as a medicine to drinks associate with more pleasurable, social moments. At one time digestivi were concocted and sold mainly in local pharmacies; now they have become popular ingredients in cocktails, particularly in North America. In particular, modern manufacturing, branding and distribution have played an important role in transforming the way in which these drinks are consumed. By looking at the changing meaning of these beverages, we can begin to understand the ways in which the consumption of digestivi has lost most of its medicinal meaning and taken on a new life in different cultures of alcohol consumption.

I will be presenting this paper at the Food in Bloom Conference in Bloomington, Indiana on June 3, 2010.

A few weeks ago I started a discussion about applied anthropology and the role of theory. Here is a response to my initial post from Barry Bainton:

The question, “where is the theory in applied anthropology?, is an old one. It is one I have dealt with for the past 40 years and this is what I have learned.

You ask, “Why is academic anthropological theory and sometimes training of so little use to researchers using ethnography as a research technique?”

The simple answer is that it not the job of academic anthropologist to do so. Academic anthropology is based on the university’s paradigm of professionalism.

This paradigm (using Kuhn’s definition) is part of the larger institutional culture of free and open dialogue and sharing of information directed toward finding “Truth.” The research subsystems of scholarship and science promotes the search for truth by limiting the questions to be addressed to those arising from the dominate paradigm of the discipline at the time — regardless of the policy questions facing society or its members.

The applied anthropologist is a technician in the real world outside of the academic department. He/she is hired to provide answers (not questions) for a client seeking to make a “practical” decision related to the client’s self interest.

The applied anthropologist is asked to play the role of expert, not seeker, for applying ethnographic knowledge. The client expects the “bullet points” in the executive summary so that they can judge the value of the information and apply it to their problem. Even if you write a detailed report, the client will not read it. The detail only serves to justify a decision based on your conclusion after the fact, especially in the event that the decision is questioned.

As an applied anthropologist you must understand your client and the purpose they have in mind when they hire you.

You also ask, “How can academics create theory that speaks to applied fields and industry?”

This is the wrong question. The theory already exists in the broad sweep of behavioral and social science. The question is “How do you package the theory in an user friendly mode that will be meaningful to the client?”

Academics write for academics. Applied anthropologist are culture brokers who bridge the academic and real world cultures of their particular “people.” They write for non academic.

The theory that academic anthropologist should apply to communicating to the applied fields and industry are the basic ethnographic principles of “participant-observation,” and learning the native language and rituals. What do applied anthropologists need, not what do we want them to know?

If the applied anthropologist’s client wanted to be an anthropologist, she/he would study anthropology and not do what they are doing. But they don’t, and you can’t blame them for that short coming. Otherwise, there is no need for the applied anthropologist as a profession if every client can do it themselves.

Hope this is helpful.

I use the analogy to the legal profession. There are law school professors who research and write about jurisprudence, and then there are attorneys who practice their craft in the real world. Here they apply their legal training to help clients avoid problems; or they are trial lawyers who help their clients defend/advocate their interests. Applied anthropology lives in this real world. The applied anthropologist needs the added communication skill set to survive and prosper here.