History of Food in the US

History of Food in the US

 

Ms. Jane Ziegelman a historian, who was in Flora Rose House Cafe to talk about her new book “A square Meal”. One might hardly think of food other than in the context of its taste, however in this book she has historized the development of conceptions of food in the United States since the depression. Food which we think of as ahistorical is influenced by the history of the United States’s involvement in World War II and depression. She articulated that there was a shift in attitudes toward food in the U.S due to depression, where in the need to rationing and eating for calories and nutrient took precedence over taste and texture.

Not surprisingly, College of Human Ecology, then it was still in the form of Department of Home Economics, played a crucial role in changing the food habits and preference of American citizens such that they will be able to consume just enough calories and get the adequate nutrients from, ingredients they might not have thought of or even wanted to use in their cooking. Department of Home Economics developed recipes with cheap ingredients, yet with creamy and rich taste. Jane actually shared some of the recipes developed here in Ithaca by Flor Rose from her book. She further said some of the dishes that are very popular today and part of our menu was developed under the depression era. It was important for us to understand the influence of the historical events on our food and eating habits, in that sense, Jane opened the door for me to think about it.

Story about the Saviors or the Struggles

Thursday movies, a trend this Spring semester, made me look forward to it. But I was never was this excited as to this, to watch any other movie. Hidden Figures was released early this year, and I was unable to watch it then, thus, Rose Thursday movie night offering to watch Hidden Figures were exciting. The story of these three women of color’s achievement is brilliant.
In fact, it was really motivating to mid-semester beaten up brain.
However, as another individual in the audience, pointed out right after the movie, during the Q& A session, there was a subtle but vibrant political message about racial struggles and how to fight against this oppression. This story narrative had a supervisor, who didn’t “see color” only saw talent and hard work. This individual is a savior, who saves the day for one of the main characters. In addition, the entire story was occurring in the backdrop of space mission race with Soviet, and these women of color who are treated unjustly and unequally based on their race were still displaying loyalty and patriotism. The movie gives a strong patriotic message: although these women of color were oppressed and discriminated, they believed in the system, displayed loyalty to and patriotism. And continued to work within the system.
Despite this nationalist propaganda, and the savior veneration, the movie felt definitely motivating on a Thursday night after a busy week.

Telling your Story: Cover Letter workshop

One of the most crucial and intimidating aspects of looking for a summer internship, job or any other professional opportunity is presenting yourself via and on paper. It can be intimidating since no well-written resume or personal statement or cover letter can convey one’s complex experience of life and how these experience were received by the individual. However, today’s systemic understanding is such that each and every one of us is part of the capital: Human Capital. And now it has become our duty to sell/ present ourselves.
I think many of us are used or at least somewhat comfortable with resume due to its familiarity. But, cover letter or professional personal statement is otherworldly. It is not quite like the narrative freedom I had when I was writing my personal statement during college application process. Nevertheless, this workshop confirmed it is indeed a narrative about you and your compatibility with the position, only with length and style restrictions. Unlike, college application essay the purpose of a cover letter is not to get you the job, rather get you an interview. So, it will not be read in depth or analyzed in detail, definitely looked in a quick glance to offer an interview or not. That understanding is necessary, to be concise, clear and to the point to express your compatibility. No, need to list all your talents, skills and experience in a cover letter, since it is accompanied by a resume. Dr. Cynthia and Shiv gave us ideas of how to keep an all comprehensive running resume, which could be sued to customize the resume according to the job opportunity and cover letter accompanying it. This workshop was something I really needed, and very helpful for me as I am writing cover letters for summer opportunities.

 Unpacking “They Call Me a Muslim”

“They call me Muslim” was a 30-minute documentary film which was produced in 2004, after the French Republic started instituting laws against women in France wearing Hijab (veil or a headscarf) –of course, this headdress is usually worn by Muslim women around the world, and it’s a symbol of Muslim women’s identity in may cases.  However, this documentary seems to be revolving around Hijab or the veil. It attempts to do a comparative case of Hijab in the French Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran in the mid-2000’s (~2005).  I am not sure what was the message this documentary intended to convey, but it could be easily mistaken and misrepresented. The French Republic, under the disguise of secularism, targets Muslim women and ban them from wearing the Veil in Public places- particularly in public schools. And, the documentary interviews some French Women affected by this law- who felt as their government was attacking their core of their identity- and their resistance to this law. Also, the documentary included some French officials claiming that the law was meant to protect the Muslim-French women from oppression and to protect the French Republic’s founding philosophy- “secularism and separation of church and state”.

Then in the other half of the documentary revolve around an Iranian woman, who grew up in the United States, who is targeted by laws regarding women’s attire by the Iranian Theocracy. The documentary portrays her creative methods of dissenting against the requirement to wear a veil/Hijab in public places. By juxtaposing these two cases in a 27 min video, without giving adequate context this documentary could be taken as the story or the two sides of the story of Hijab; thus, the documentary was presenting two sides of the same coin. But the only common thread in this documentary was women’s oppression – in the French Republic and in the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Not the Hijab. Also, the modern nation states that were presented here seems to be portrayed as equally guilty. I want to take a step back and consider the fact that the French Republic presents itself as a secular democracy whereas the Islamic Republic of Iran is a Theocracy.  Women’s oppression in Iran is clear, visible and voiced in international arenas. However, the despotic and the oppressive nature of French Republic is neither clear, to many, nor visible and never voiced in the international arena. Couple of the women interviewed in the first half of the documentary mentioned that in the public schools there was no laws restricting   wearing of crosses or Yakama- in the very secular French Republic- in fact, one girl pointed out, the public school buildings had Christmas trees decorated for the celebration of Christmas. Thus, arise the question what secular democracy, then French president Jacques Chirac, bloviate about?  Neither this a unique problem for France nor this is uncommon in the “secular liberal democracies”. In almost all cases, where there is a form of government that legitimizes itself through the “people” or to be even more accurate, through a “majority opinion”, what does secularism mean?  But, ultimately if this documentary’s objective was to portray the oppression of women by the state, it could have juxtaposed Iranian case with the women’s reproductive rights in the U.S or French case with some other example of women’s oppression. But doing this comparison, this documentary did not get to the heart of the issue surrounding Hijab neither in France nor in Iran.

I want to take a step back and consider the fact that the French Republic presents itself as a secular democracy whereas the Islamic Republic of Iran is a Theocracy.  Women’s oppression in Iran is clear, visible and voiced in international arenas. However, the despotic and the oppressive nature of French Republic is neither clear, to many, nor visible and never voiced in the international arena. A couple of the women interviewed in the first half of the documentary mentioned that in the public schools, there were no laws restricting wearing a Cross or a Yakama- in the very secular French Republic- in fact, one girl pointed out, the public school buildings had Christmas trees decorated for the celebration of Christmas. Thus, arise the question what secular democracy, then French president Jacques Chirac, bloviate about?  Neither this is a unique problem in France nor is this uncommon in other  “secular liberal democracies”. In almost all cases, where there is a form of government that legitimizes itself through the “people” or to be even more accurate, through a “majority opinion”, what does secularism mean?  But, ultimately if this documentary’s objective was to portray the oppression of women by the state, it could have juxtaposed Iranian case with the women’s reproductive rights in the U.S or French case with some other example of women’s oppression. But doing this comparison, this documentary did not get to the heart of the issue surrounding Hijab neither in France nor in Iran.

Project Mayhem: A metric for Values

Fight club, a movie that must be watched-I was told as a teenager by my friends. And I have watched this twice before; however, watching it this time in Rose with Dr. Hill’s preamble and closing and also with my evolved value system gave me a different impression. Fist time when I watched fight club, the fight scene and the surface level visibility of masculinity was something that I admired and revered. I think when I watched it the second time, after developing a critique of materialism and state-supported corporate capitalism may be 6/7 months ago, I admired the revolutionary theme in the movie. Given, that I didn’t expect my reading of the movie to change much. But, watching it this time my impression of the movie did change, I saw and felt differently.
I definitely saw the very deep, but subtly placed critique of masculinity and violence. Also, I am not very sure about its radical revolutionary message either. The brilliance of the movie lies in the ambiguity of the message it carries. I got the impression that the movie was conveying a message that radical revolution leads to mindless violence and total destruction; therefore, it will behoove us to not rocking the boat too hard. After watching the movie for the third time and hearing Dr.Hill’s closing remarks on the movie, I understand this movie’s messages are deeply woven in the script, only a close reader of the film will understand it. I think Fight Club is a movie that I want to watch every couple of years to see, how my understanding and values have evolved.