Elena Shippey
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110 – Section G
20 February 2019
Food: Feeding our Bodies and Beyond
Eat or die – it is quite simple. For just about anything with a pulse, food is a critical point
for survival. Although its primary purpose is nutrition, humans have uniquely given meaning to
their meals beyond being what merely keeps them alive. A surplus of time, money, and energy
goes into preparing and enjoying these meals; this is solely by choice. In Lizzie Widdecombe’s
article “The End of Food,” she shares the day-to-day struggles of entrepreneur Robert Rhinehart
and his business partners while starting up a software plan. In a pinch for money and food,
Rhinehart successfully develops an nutritional alternative that can potentially replace food
altogether. His product is called Soylent: a concentrated powder mixture of necessary daily
vitamins and nutrients. What started off as a temporary solution to grocery expenses has become
a cheaper, easier, and more efficient way to fuel the body. It is so economic that Rhinehart
believes it to be a leading component of “ ‘the college-student fridge of the future’ ”
(Widdicombe 6). Rhinehart also vouches for the fact that Soylent actually works. After thirty
days of the replacement diet, he claims “my physique has noticeably improved, my skin is
clearer, my teeth whiter, my hair thicker, and my dandruff gone” (Widdecombe 2). There seems
to be solid proof of an effective, more efficient alternative, yet people are persistent in more
costly meals in terms of time, price, and work. Although Soylent has its economic benefits, there
is profound cultural value in food that could not exist if replaced with the dietary alternative.
Sharing a meal is what makes people feel and experience human connection; without this
communal experience, the connection is lost.
On a societal level, food is of utmost importance to people. That being said, most people
cannot remember what they ate for dinner two weeks ago. This is completely normal. There are
so many combinations of foods that provide the body with the nutrients it needs; it would be
ridiculous to remember every combination of food for every meal consumed. One probably
remembers their favorite meal and their least favorite meal, but for the most part memories of
food fade into the background. When a meal is forgotten, then the food served its purpose. It did
its job. The food is a medium for which people get together – a gateway to communion. It is not
about the lasagna that took three hours to prepare, but rather the loved ones who gathered to
enjoy the meal. It is not about whether the ratio of ricotta cheese to homemade sauce was
spot-on, but rather what happened over dinner – the stories, the jokes, the conversation. This is
what we take with us. These interactions are the memories, not the plates of food.
Food being used as a method for union takes advantage of the fact that its primary
purpose is to nourish the body. In this way, food as a limiting resource is taken for granted.
When it comes to food, nourishment is usually a secondary thought, if that; some people eat
without thinking of its dietary importance much at all. In American culture, food is used as an
excuse to hang out. Commonly, people meet with friends or family while conveniently fueling
their systems at the same time. “Hey, let’s grab coffee” usually doesn’t mean “hey, next
Wednesday I’m probably going to have a 2pm crash – let’s caffeinate at the same time so we can
get through the rest of the day.” When making food-related plans, logistics like these are usually
not taken into account. Getting coffee is almost never about the coffee itself; rather, it is an
excuse to sit down for two hours and catch up with loved ones. Food is such a convenience that it
it is consumed recreationally in some places, yet in other areas people struggle to access food to
keep them from malnutrition. In the United States, culture revolves around food – especially food
in abundance. Superbowl parties, potluck dinners, Thanksgiving. There is more food than
necessary, and rarely does it all get eaten. The food that gets wasted from these events is more
than many people around the world currently have access to. Should Americans feel guilty for
abusing the raw, fundamental function of food?
The answer is probably yes. There is a reason people look at their plates with shame
when they do not finish a meal. Mothers scold their children with leftovers still on their plate
with “there are children starving in China, Africa etc…” This statement is clearly stereotypical
as starvation is a global issue, as well as bottom-line ignorant. However, the mothers do have a
point. It is a lucky thing to have food on the table every night, and it important to realize that
because not everyone is as lucky. Although the lesson could be more consciously-worded on the
parents’ part, the moral value is consistent: food is a valuable resource, so be mindful when
taking it.
There is another question on the table as to whether or not these coffee dates, parties, and
dinners are a waste of time. Robert Rhinehart’s invention of Soylent allows for the body to get
all its necessary daily nutrients while maximizing temporal efficiency by cutting out the time it
would take to cook or go out to eat. Rhinehart asserts that it is easier to get more done when “you
don’t have to stop for lunch” (Widdicombe 14). By cutting out travel time from lunch breaks,
work days could indeed be more productive. Additionally, Rhinehart argues that, with Soylent,
“your energy levels stay consistent” so “afternoons can be just as productive as mornings”
(Widdicombe 14). Not only does Rhinehart hold time efficiency close to him, but consistent
productivity in the ability to exert energy to work is just as important to him. In terms of time,
Rhinehart seems to believe that more is more. On a societal scale, people desire more time to be
able to do more things. Based on his argument on his meal-replacing invention, it feels as though
Rhinehart is suggesting quantity over quality. More time available means more working, which
is a good thing; Soylent gives the body more energy so it can do more work, which is a good
thing. I have a difficult time agreeing with this concept. The amount of time a person has is not
as valuable as how the time is spent. One may be able to maximize their time throughout the day
with Soylent, but it does not automatically equate to a happier, more fulfilling life. If the time
that would have been “wasted” by eating or preparing a meal was replaced with work, does that
necessarily increase quality of life and overall happiness? That depends on the person. The
answer could be yes, in which case they should pursue Soylent and take advantage of the ease
and accessibility it offers. Others would not benefit with Soylent because they work better with
the punctuality that a lunch break provides. I know that for my mother this rings true.
When my mom was working as a goldsmith, she would go on lunch break with her coworker, Ellen, who is a close family friend to this day. On Wednesdays, they’d go to what is now my favorite restaurant in the world and eat what is not my favorite food in the world (Shippey).
My mother enjoyed her lunch breaks because they offered her a time away from her workplace
to enjoy herself. If she had not left work every day for lunch, life would be much different for
both her and myself. Eating (or drinking in the case for Soylent) at work makes it difficult to
separate work from enjoyment. The majority of people need this separation to help maintain their
mental stability. Keeping occupation and recreation too close together may cause them to merge
together, making life as a whole seem like a task. Without these lunch breaks, my life would be
different as well. These outings my mother went on continued long after her coworker left the
job, and after she left the job herself. She continued going to the restaurant for pure enjoyment –
for the past memories as well as the present experience. My mother mentions “I would eat them
every week when I was pregnant with you. As soon as you were born, you started coming to the
restaurant…” (Shippey). Because she continued this weekly custom, my mother helped introduce
me to my favorite meal: enchiladas. Every time I eat enchiladas now, I think of where the
memories all began twenty or so years before I was even born. I think of those memories and
hold them close. If my mother had spent her lunch breaks in her office with Soylent, this custom,
and huge part of my life, would have never come into existence.
At the end of the day, it is important to be satisfied with the life one lives. Time is
extremely valuable. It should not be spent trying to buy more time for the future; it should be
spent living and enjoying the present. Rob Rhinehart has proved his Soylent has its share of
benefits in health, time, money, and overall effort. The invention compliments some people’s
lifestyles nicely, in which case they should pursue the dietary switch. For others, this change
would harm more than it would help; time in the day can get thrown off or lost without the
punctuality of a meal. Regardless of a person’s commitment to Soylent, it is vital to maintain
some connection with food. People hold attachment to their food far beyond the function of
nourishing the body. Food is a key component of culture in America and around the world, so to
cut ties with food would be to lose a piece of our humanity.
Works Cited
Widdicombe, Lizzie. “The End of Food.” The New Yorker,
12 May 2014, pp. 1-18. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/12/the-end-of-food.
