By Ben Becker, Newsletter Writer
Cannibal Sandwiches versus Avocado Toast
How does time, and the age of an eater, influence a food trend? Certainly, different philosophies and ideals held by separate groups of people might inform something as essential as what they choose to eat. High calorie diets rich in grains, protein, and dairy may be more suitable to agrarian lifestyles requiring shorter food chains and higher expenditures of physical energy, while those living in a more cosmopolitan time or place might value lighter fare or more diverse flavors. As the world turns, changes in technology, knowledge, science, and changes in availability may also inform food trends. What a strange time we live in where residents of Wisconsin might enjoy mangoes, a luxury less accessible to past generations. Our ability to reshape the way we reach our food can influence and popularize trends, or even lead to their decline. Consider the case of the cannibal sandwich. Also known as “tiger meat” or “steak tartare,” this appetizer of raw lean ground beef served on rye cocktail bread with sliced onions, salt and pepper, and sometimes a raw egg was long popular at parties in the Midwest, especially in Wisconsin. Yet, despite its regional popularity, younger generations are increasingly less likely to have even heard of this adventurous hors’d’oeuvres. As new food science has emerged along with the risk of E. Coli and other dangerous bacteria associated with it, the CDC and USDA have encouraged partygoers to pass on raw meat. In fact, foodborne illness outbreaks have intermittently been reported in Wisconsin as a result of consuming raw meat since the mid-1980s, putting the future of this regional tradition in question.
Compare this carnivorous delicacy to the more recent rage for avocado toast. This Instagram favorite has become so popular in recent years that it has become synonymous with Millenials and their eating habits. So why have North Americans suddenly gone crazy over this dish that relies on a fruit from California and Mexico? Certainly, this phenomenon couldn’t happen without our ability to rapidly transport products across thousands of miles under refrigeration. However, this kind of food supply chain existed for decades before avocados became commonplace in the midwest. The rise of avocado toast also speaks to a shift in values and beliefs about nutrition, aligning with an emphasis on healthy fats for proper nutrition, simplicity in preparation, and the environmental sustainability of a vegetarian diet. So how do these food trends take root, and what makes us associate different foods and ideas with different age groups? Just as economies, cultures and ideas change with the way we live our lives from age to age and the influence of shifting markets, technologies, and means of communication, so goes our food system and the way we understand it.
Supermarkets and Shopping Trends
The very idea of the marketplace has become more complex over the last century. The market in which Americans buy their groceries is often not the communal collection of vendors in the town square or the small general store. The way we procure our food today has its seeds in the original supermarket. Starting this trend was the first Piggly Wiggly that opened in Memphis, Tennessee in 1916. The store introduced the self-service model, which was a departure from how grocers had traditionally operated. Prior to this new shopping model, clerks would select and bag items from a list which shoppers provided. Piggly Wiggly fixtures such as shopping baskets contributed to an experience in which customers exercised more choice in what they wanted to buy. The store’s expanded sales floor afforded customers a decrease in prices as the sales of multiple food items were consolidated under one roof. This model also introduced branding to the grocery business, including the introduction of recognizable employee uniforms.
Supermarket chains gained momentum during World War II, as small stores closed their doors as their proprietors went off to fight. Post-war increases in wealth continued to fuel the supermarket phenomenon, as shoppers bought refrigerators and cars. The post-war boom also brought changes to the supermarket as well, with the introduction of shopping carts, marketing toward children, and the development of a more sophisticated approach to merchandising. This era also gave rise to innovations in how food was stored, packaged, and consumed. In particular, shoppers suddenly had access to the TV dinner, which Swanson pioneered and marketed as a meal that did not require tedious preparation, departing from the need to invest time and effort into whipping up dinner from fresh or canned ingredients.
The emergence of the supermarket has had a profound impact on our society and culture. Yet, while we take it for granted the way in which we buy food everyday, the impression that this institution is static is an illusory one. Even in more recent generations, we can see the supermarket continue to evolve. One ongoing trend is the continued growth in size and consolidation of stores and franchises. For example, while the median supermarket was only about 35,000 square feet in the mid-’90s, its counterpart after two decades has grown to nearly 43,000 square feet. This growth has been in part fueled by the demand for more options which are both fresh and healthy. An important sector of this growth has been products bearing organic brands. As organic sales continued to grow by double digits over recent decades. The organic market became a niche that conventional markets and grocery stores could no longer ignore, and as organics became more mainstream the brand was increasingly co-opted beyond its original health and natural food stores. The emergence of organics from niche to mainstream segment of the market has its roots in one generation’s rebellion against the ideas of others. The idea of organic itself began with the rejection of industrialized agriculture reliant on chemical inputs which gained dominance in the twentieth century. Yet the growth of this brand can in part be credited to the public’s concern for healthy food. This concern is not unique to any one generation, but the understanding of what healthy eating is often has been.
A Changing Idea of Nutrition
Our ideas about nutrition seem to constantly be in flux, with new health and diet fads appearing every few years. While new science and information can drive our views on what constitutes a healthy lifestyle and responsible dining options, market forces also have a way of driving our most official and often the most trusted recommendations. By taking a long view of our evolving diet philosophy, we can see that the prevailing wisdom on nutrition can be observed as something dynamic. This is best exemplified by “the basic food groups,” an institution we may mistakenly believe to be set in stone, but is as shifting and easily influenced as the government which established it. Depending on what generation you are a member of, you may think about the food pyramid when considering the food groups, as for many American this was the primer by which proper nutrition was introduced to them at a young age. So it may be surprising to learn that the U.S. Department of Agriculture ditched the pyramid back in 2011, in favor of the current guidelines known as “MyPlate.”
If this seems arbitrary or unnecessary, consider that the food pyramid was not the original nutritional framework, nor were the four (or five) food groups we know today. Early in the twentieth century, the USDA began to establish nutritional recommendations for healthy Americans through the Farmer’s bulletin, in which they printed articles on “Food for Young Children,” “How to Select Foods,” and “What the Body Needs.” It wasn’t until the 1940s that the government began to condense this information into a more easily marketable format, with the introduction of “Guide to Good Eating,” which set forth a foundational diet in the image of a wheel shape. This guide also premiered several well known nutritional tenets, such as daily servings, and a whopping seven food groups, including a whole section for butter and fortified margarine. The basic seven food groups rotating around the wheel was considered complex for its time, but it had yet to include information on specific serving sizes. This wheel would be spun off into a new framework starting in 1956 into A Daily Food Guide describing “Food for Fitness.” This new prescription which was used through the ’60s and ’70s introduced specific serving sizes for different age demographics and simplified food categories into the Milk, Meat, Bread, and Vegetable/Fruit Group. The “Food for Fitness” guide was focused on meeting an adequate foundation for a healthy diet, but guidance on fats, sugars and calorie counts weren’t included. In 1979, the USDA released a tighter, more inclusive framework for a “Hassle-Free Daily Food Guide.” Along with the basic four food groups, a fifth group was added to include Fats, Sweets & Alcohol under a new header. In 1984, the nutritional guidelines came full circle with the return of the Food Wheel. Under this model, a total diet approach complete with moderation and recommended daily calories levels were provided. This approach would carry over and be restructured in 1992 under the Food Guide pyramid. The food pyramid demonstrated visually recommended proportions for each food group, with grains and cereals making up the foundation of a healthy diet, and greater moderation of fish and proteins. It also separated fruits and vegetables into distinct categories. In 2005, the pyramid morphed to slim down prior levels of protein and carbs while bulking up on vegetables and fruits, and recommended a regiment of physical activity. The five food groups made a strong comeback in 2011 with the new MyPlate model. The visuals of this model were intended to help consumers structure their meals by matching up to the proportions on the plate. This makes veggies your biggest slice of the diet, and places dairy as a smaller part of a healthy meal. The way that nutritional frameworks prescribed by our government influence what we think is healthy and also reflect the changes in how we eat from one age group to another.
From age to age, the various divides in food preferences that define each generation have been shaping the marketplace. These differences in attitudes toward nutrition, health, sustainability, as well as distinctions in flavors and preferences have informed what food producers focus on. The size and buying power of different generations can also shape the marketplace. A large segment of Americans, over 100 million, are over 50 years old, and in general they prefer to focus on the “basic four food groups” and a culinary fare resembling traditional European fare. These facts cannot be ignored when chefs set their menus, especially when you consider that in 2010, consumers between 55 and 64 were the biggest spenders per capita at restaurants and other foodservice business while visits from young adults were falling. Compare this to Millenials and Gen Xers are much more likely to make meals at home. Further distinctions emerge when we examine the dining habits of Millennials, who statistically speaking have developed preferences for gourmet foods, foods from cultural traditions that are less Eurocentric, and the convenience of takeout. However, Millenials are the largest growing segment of grillers, but have utilized their barbecues to cook up pizzas, roasts, and appetizers as an alternative to burgers and steaks. Millennials also lead other departures from market conventions of Baby Boomers and Generation X. These market changes take several forms. First, Millenials are more likely to describe themselves as inexperienced cooks as compared to older age groups. Second, along with Generation X, Generation Y has more self-declared foodies looking to try new recipes. This inclination towards the gourmet also goes hand-in-hand with a preference for fresher ingredients, as Millennials ditch the canned or frozen goods. Finally, Millenials will often engage with online apps and ordering as a means to procure groceries or carryout. These characteristics have given rise to several new market innovations. For example, meal delivery kit companies such as Blue Apron and Home Chef have emerged along with in store meal kits to provide fresh ingredients and instructions allowing consumers without much confidence in their culinary experience to enjoy cooking sophisticated dishes at home. Other emerging markets include delivery apps such as GrubHub, and home delivery for grocery orders, allowing technology-prone shoppers to place orders without navigating store aisles or perhaps without leaving home.
However, while the habits of younger generations may be driving the marketplace, it is worth noting that this doesn’t so much create a divide between age groups as leading innovations enjoyed by everyone, as new market trends are increasingly adopted by older consumers. While new shopping innovation and means of procuring food continue to change, emerge, and sometimes die out, all age groups will need to continue to contend with an ever-changing marketplace while adventurously experimenting with new avenues. However, as we inevitably come to take these once revolutionary practices for granted as normal and entrenched, it will continue to be interesting to look back on how we got here, what ideas, beliefs, and technologies brought us to this place, and how they can inform where we are going.
