Facebook continues to provoke me, often to rage and thought, simultaneously and in equal measure. In this instance, it was a list titled 'Eating in the 50s', 24 comments which say more about the person(s) who put the list together than a historically accurate account of eating in the 1950s.
Admittedly, I'm a decade too young to remember it first hand, but what struck me most about the list is the narrow minded attitude; very white, English, middle-class, privileged and right-wing. Decidedly middle class, the types who sneer at the poverty of the working classes, aspiring to mix with those higher up the social ladder whilst maintaining a limited world view. It might have been created by someone who still holds these views, sharing them as some sort of nostalgia while poking fun at other nationalities. Or perhaps it was written by someone younger, to provoke an immediate 'Okay, Boomer' response? Or something to point out how much choice we have now in what we eat, but with a sarcastic tone? Either way, every time I read the list, I bristled a bit more. So, excuse the rant, so early in the new year, but I have to get something off my chest, and if not here, then where?
Let's have a look at them:
'Water came out of a tap. If someone had suggested bottling it and charging more than petrol for it, they would have become a laughing stock!' Water, mineral or otherwise, was being bottled at holy wells and springs across the UK since 1621, and was being sold at a premium as part of local, often rural economies in the 19th century, long before most people knew about petrol, and the people involved were not 'laughing stocks'.
Furthermore, even in the 1950s, water did not come out of a household tap for everyone. There were still people in slum housing who were using standpipes, and those in more rural districts who were still not on mains water and used a pump or well. What's different now is that spring or mineral water is often sold by the litre or more in plastic bottles, production in smaller glass bottles is more costly, and potable water is widely available from kitchen taps.
'Crisps were plain; the only choice we had was whether to put the salt on or not.' Ah, the enduring thing for binary, all-or-nothing choices! The little blue bags of salt meant you could decide how much salt you wanted on your crisps, if any. So they didn't come in other flavours yet, you could still drop a pickled egg in the bag, if that took your fancy? Or is that too working-class for you?
'Healthy food consisted of anything edible'; 'Sugar enjoyed a good press in those days and was regarded as being white gold. Cubed sugar was regarded as posh.' Of course sugar was regarded with joy, it only came off the ration in 1953. Rationing severely restricted the availability and quantity of food available in Britain for most people, and unavailability of some items became worse after the war. Meat and any other foods which were still restricted came off-ration in 1954.
'Fish didn't have fingers.' There was a reference to fish fingers dating to 1900, though they started to appear more after WWII. However, fish cakes, as a way to use up leftover fish and cold potatoes, were a thing since the 19th century and much more likely to be made by thrifty housewives or sold at the fish and chip shop.
'A takeaway was a mathematical problem'. No, it was called subtraction then, just as now, except then, you did it in your head or on paper, not with a calculator. Of course, food-to-go was available, just limited by how to wrap the food. Fish and chips or pie and chips were traditional, and could be wrapped in newspaper. Cornish Pasties had their own wrapping of pastry.
'People who didn't peel potatoes were regarded as lazy.' Really? Potatoes then weren't washed by suppliers, they came covered in soil, which helped them not to go green or mouldy quite as quickly as they seem to these days when washed and packaged in transparent plastic. Potatoes baked in their jackets were another street food, although of course eating on the street was viewed as a low-class thing to do.
A working-class equivalent of take-out was eating at a food stall, where you could (for example) get a very good hot pork pie, mushy peas and mint sauce in Bradford's Rawson Market to keep the wind out, in a bowl and eaten at the stall.
'Brown bread was something only poor people ate.' Brown bread was widely available and eaten, but after WWII, there was something of a backlash, a demand for soft, white bread after the gritty, hard, wholemeal 'national loaf'. It's not the only example on the list of something perceived as being eaten only by the poor.
'Pasta was not eaten'; 'A pizza was something to do with a leaning tower'; 'Oil was for lubricating, fat was for cooking'. Pasta, and pizza, were of course eaten, but largely made at home by Italian immigrant families, not available to the wider public unless they could afford to eat out at an Italian restaurant. Most food was home cooked, few could afford to eat at a restaurant except on a very special occasion. Most vegetable oil was used for making margarine, so of course lard, suet, bacon fat, margarine and butter were more readily available.
'Rice was only eaten as a milk pudding.' Short grain rice was grown and used in Europe since medieval times, and came to England (for the rich) in the Tudor period, traditionally as a pudding (with ingredients such as beef broth), because given the above, you wouldn't care about any foreign muck like risotto, would you?
'Curry was a surname'; 'Indian restaurants were only found in India.' Curry was then and is still a colonial European name for various spicy dishes from the Indian subcontinent and beyond. Curry and rice had become popular specialities in some restaurants around London's Piccadilly by the late 1700s. The first Indian restaurant was a coffee house, in Mayfair, London in 1810. The popularity for all things Indian took a knock after the 1857 revolt, but Queen Victoria's fascination for India revived interest and there were a handful of restaurants in London. The arrival of Bangladeshi immigrants in the 1970s brought a surge of 'curry houses', often open very late to catch those suffering from the munchies when the pubs closed (been there, done that. If the place had a number of locals from the Indian subcontinent also enjoying some food, you knew it was going to be all right. The first time I went to an 'Indian Restaurant' where there were tablecloths and cutlery and only white British customers was a bit of a culture shock, I was so used to tearing off a bit of chapatti and eating with my fingers!)
'Kebab was not even a word, never mind a food.' Spit or skewer-roasted food is nothing new, even in England. The word 'kebab' has been used in England since the late 17th Century. The food may only have been popularised here since the 1970s, but the word existed, and so did the food.
'None of us had ever heard of yoghurt; surprisingly, muesli was readily available, it was called cattle feed'. Cattle were grass fed, not fed muesli or anything like, and I wonder what the Swiss would make of this idea. Although neither you nor the people around you had heard of yogurt, I'm sure even in England, there were those who had, and perhaps even made it!
'Seaweed was not a recognised food'. Not in your small world, maybe, but Laverbread (from the seaweed Porphyria) has long been a food in Wales.
'Prunes were medicinal'. I've always liked prunes. Brandy was often described as 'medicinal' too. Of course, the French recognised the benefits of prunes and brandy (as well as many other fine foods) a long time ago, well before Béchamp and his 'food is medicine' and Terrain Theory, so much derided by Pasteur and his Germ Theory. Guess what, boys, you were both partly right. Another instance of black and white thinking. Alors, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
'Eating raw fish was called poverty not sushi'. You're just displaying your ignorance now. Raw fish isn't sushi, it's sashimi, in Japan, but other countries have their equivalents. I'm sure the Great British upper classes enjoyed the occasional Gravad Lax. So where did this idea that eating raw fish implied poverty come from?
'Cooking outside was called camping'. And wasn't it fun, enjoyed by hordes of girl guides and boy scouts. Oh, you mean, barbecues were still only a thing in the USA, like burger bars?
'A big mac was what we wore when it was raining'. Yes, but you were probably aware of Wimpy burger bars opening from 1954, even if you felt it beneath you to visit one.
'Tea was made in a teapot using leaves and never green.' I'm sure there were people who made herb teas, just as now, and black tea can still be made with tea leaves in a pot, if you so choose. This is one where I can't work out if it's really a complaint about the availability of tea bags and green tea, or not.
'And the things that we never ever had on our table in the 50s and 60s: elbows or phones!' Come off it, most houses in the 1950s didn't have phones, and even in the 1960s, they were limited to a front room or hallway within reach of the GPO socket into which their lead was wired! At the time, the discussion was about whether newspapers and books should be allowed at the table. Okay, so seeing a group of people scrolling on their phones while eating rather than interacting with each other might annoy you. If they are in your home, impose your own rules, otherwise mind your own business and stop making judgements!
Finished whining about how things aren't like the good old days yet? That was then, this is now, things have changed, and largely for the better (exceptions include the extinction of the hot pie and peas stall, and of Rawson Market itself, as was).
My need to comment on this probably says a lot about me, not least that the writer's apparent pride in their own, small experience, and their scorn and derision of the poor and anything foreign, was more than I could stand.
Back in 2001, the then Foreign Secretary Robin Cook made a great speech (which you can read here) arguing that the idea of a homogenous white, Anglo-Saxon British identity wasn't and isn't true, nor was/is the idea that, due to immigration and multi-culturalism, British identity was under siege and in terminal decline. Then, chicken tikka masala had recently been voted the favourite national dish, and Robin Cook upheld this as a 'perfect illustration of the way Britain absorbs and adapts external influences', because the masala sauce reflected the British liking for meat to be served in gravy. It's a rather British-centric view; my thought was that it's a perfect illustration of the way that immigrants in Britain find food a good way to integrate into and adapt to British life.
He summed up with: 'Tolerance is important, but it is not enough. We should celebrate the enormous contribution of the many communities in Britain to strengthening our economy, to supporting our public services, and to enriching our culture and cuisine. And we should recognise that its diversity is part of the reason why Britain is a great place to live.'
The popularity of other cultures' foods has increased in the past 20 years, with an ever-wider choice available from restaurants, take-aways, supermarkets and food fairs.
Sadly, at the same time, the clamp-downs on immigration, the Windrush scandal and (sorry) Brexit have all shown that far from decreasing, there is still a racism or xenophobia driven by a perception of a homogenous, white, Christian/protestant British identity and idea of a 'sovereign nation' under threat from other cultures.
The real takeaway from that list has to be a renewed awareness of changes which aren't improvements. Unseasonal, unsustainable foods, litter from takeaways, single-use plastics, too much sugar, salt, palm oil, highly processed foods and a pervasive, racist worldview of which the British should be extremely ashamed.
Enjoy your food and drink, be thankful of the diversity we enjoy, make the best choices you can in terms of health, packaging, food miles and sustainability, and recognise that we all need to eat, drink and have somewhere we can call home.
