University of the Philippines-Manila
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of Social Sciences
WHAT’S IN THE PLATE?
The Role of Food Politics in the Culinary Tradition of a Modernizing Society
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for
Political Science 198
Second Semester
AY 2013-2014
Submitted by:
John Vherlin Canlas Magday
2010-14725
Submitted to:
Prof. Clarinda Lusterio Berja
Adviser
Date:
March __, 2014 I. INTRODUCTION
“Pampangos live to eat.”
True enough, this statement from Gilda Cordero–Fernando’s Philippine Food & Life
(1992) testifies to the well-entrenched influence of food and anything culinary in the province of
Pampanga. For the past centuries, Kapampangans have been very much recognized not only in the Philippines but also in various parts of the world due to its ardent passion towards the excellence of culinary arts in the province, which eventually gave them the reputation and the title of “Culinary Center of the Philippines.” Ranging from “the earthly exotic to the heartachingly heavenly” dishes (Pampanga Culinary Arts, 2013), Kapampangans sure do know how to run the kitchen very well – a skill which can also be attributed to the influences brought about by several cultures which either visited or colonized the country. Hence, this so-called
“fixation” and “obsession” (Musni, 2014) of the Kapampangans toward food has been imbibed in the culture and, in turn, became a tradition passed from one generation to another.
This tradition, however, has been relentlessly challenged by various factors as time went by. Brought by the influx of modernity in the province, several commercial establishments have started to offer ready-to-eat, made-to-order, or restaurant-made Kapampangan dishes. These offers aimed at helping families to enjoy their favorite dishes without the hassle of laborious and meticulous preparation and cooking methods, which consequently enable them to cope with the fast-paced life brought by the changing times.
Conversely, the relevance and significance of culinary tradition in the province have been heavily affected by its modernizing society. Alongside other cultural gems, Pampanga’s culinary tradition is disputed by modernity and, if not fervently promoted and preserved, will be subjected towards the point of obsolescence.
This research report, therefore, aims to determine whether culinary tradition still imparts a significant contribution amid the expansion of modernity, in the context of the role that the present food politics in the province plays. Furthermore, using the case of the province of
Pampanga will justify the purpose of this study and determine whether there is an apparent struggle or an untapped harmony between what is traditional and modern in keeping not only the great array of dishes that the Kapampangan have been preparing and cooking for the longest time, but also the distinct, colorful, and tasteful identity that the province of Pampanga can promote not just in the whole country, but also to the rest of the world.
Research Question
General Question:
What is the role of food politics in the culinary tradition of a modernizing society?
Specific Questions:
1. How do we define and relate the concepts of culinary tradition and food politics in the
context of a modernizing society?
2. What is the relevance of culinary tradition as reflected in the context of food
industrialization, and how do several stakeholders respond to this trend?
3. What is the cultural significance of a variedly-influenced culinary tradition in the face
of globalization of food system?
4. How does the socio-economic situation of modernizing communities reflect the way
they view the subsistence of culinary tradition?
Research Objectives
General Objective:
To identify the role of food politics in the culinary tradition of a modernizing society
Specific Objectives:
To define and relate the concepts of culinary tradition and food politics in the context of a
modernizing society;
To distinguish the relevance of culinary tradition which is reflected in the context of food
industrialization, vis-à-vis the response of culinary stakeholders to this trend; To assess the cultural significance of a variedly-influenced culinary tradition in the face
of the globalization of food system; and
To determine the relationship between the socio-economic situation of modernizing
communities and their view of the subsistence of culinary tradition.
II. METHODOLOGY
In this study, the researcher had used several research methods in order to acquire sufficient and necessary data that he needs to complete his research. The main approach to which the researcher mainly based his data collection was the ethnographic field study, since the topic mainly delves into the concepts of culinary tradition and food politics in the context of a modernizing society, which can be projected as a cultural phenomenon worth researching in the field. In line with this, the researcher’s procedures include firsthand data gathering through key expert interview (KEI), key informant interview (KII), journal notes, and survey. Secondhand research materials (e.g. documents, articles, etc.), however, were also considered and used to give a further understanding of the concepts related to the study.
Qualitative Data Collection Procedures
In order to gather firsthand data which were essential to the first three objectives of this study, the researcher had conducted interviews among key experts and informants. For the key experts, the researcher had his personal interviews with Sir Lord Francis Musni, consultant and archivist from the Center for Kapampangan Studies (CKS), and Atching Lillian Lising-
Borromeo, famous Kapampangan culinary expert. On the other hand, the researcher also had his key informant interview via phone patch with Mr.James Reyes, sales supervisor from Pampanga’s Best, one of the province’s, and even the country’s, famous food processing businesses.
The informants for this specific study were selected based on their (1) knowledge and/or expertise regarding a certain area of the study which the researcher wants to know more about to help his data gathering, (2) their willingness to contribute to the study to be seen on the promptness and degree of desirability to be an informant, and (3) citizenship as a member of the population of Pampanga, except to certain areas of the study wherein someone may be suitable to be an informant, but [a] may not be from Pampanga but is in a key office or sector inside the province, or [b] his/her field of knowledge is based on the province but does not live there directly.
In addition, journal notes have been made and kept, specifically over the course of the interviews, to keep a guide of what to transcribe and, at the same time, to identify the salient points of the interviews.
Specifications
The researcher had collected the data for the key experts and informants through electronic devices. A mobile phone was used as a recording device for the interview, where the raw transcriptions have been derived and extracted afterwards.
The questions that were asked among the interviewees were categorized into three, which can be easily identified with the first three objectives of this study. For the first part, questions were asked which aim to define the basic concepts of culinary arts and, immediately, tradition, food politics, and other related concepts. The second part focused more on culinary tradition in the context of industrialization, particularly related to food businesses which as Kapampangan- based or themed, as well as the concept of “consumer society.” Lastly, the third part of the questionnaire focuses on culinary tradition in the context of the globalization of food system, which delves specifically on issues pertaining to “lack of identity” and “identity crisis” of
Kapampangan food, as well as the constant interconnectedness of foreign influences in the local level.
Quantitative Data Gathering Procedures
The researcher also conducted a survey in order to mainly provide and bolster the findings for the fourth objective, and, to some extent, support the other three objectives. The survey was conducted in the cities found in Pampanga, namely Angeles, San Fernando, and
Mabalacat, to which the areas were further limited to one (1) barangay per city, namely
Balibago, Dolores, and Dau, respectively. The purpose for this specificity was not only to make the gathered data more coherent, but also in order to give justification of the reflection of a
“modernizing” society since these barangays are the epicenters of modernization, especially when it comes to food, not only within these cities but for the entire province as well.
Specifications
Questions in the survey form were divided into four parts, and were translated in Filipino for better comprehension. The first part is consisted of basic information of the respondent such as name, age bracket, sex, occupation, gross income, and address. The second part comprises sets of question pertaining to the respondent’s linkage with Pampanga or the Kapampangan culture, specifically that of their length of residence, Kapampangan relative/s, cooking experience, frequency and manner of cooking Kapampangan dishes, as well as the types of Kapampangan dishes that are commonly cooked by the respondent and/or his family. The third and fourth part of the survey are mainly opinion questions linking to the socio- economic factors linking to the subsistence of culinary tradition in the province despite modernity, to which the respondent will choose his/her answer based on his/her personal stand on the matter raised upon him/her. To be more specific, the third part is a series of questions with answers ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. On the fourth part, however, the questions were answerable by yes or no.
In order to compute the sample size needed for the survey, the researcher used the
Slovin’s formula, to wit:
n=___N___
(1+Ne2)
where: N=total population
e=margin of error (1-confidence level)
With a confidence level of 90% (10% margin of error), here are the computations for the sample size of each barangays derived from their respective population as of May 1, 2010
(NSCB, 2013):
BALIBAGO, ANGELES CITY – 32, 291
___32, 291___ = ___32, 291___ = 99
(1 + [32, 291] [10]2) 323.91
DOLORES, CITY OF SAN FERNANDO – 19, 473
___19, 473___ = ___19, 473___ = 99
(1 + [19, 473] [10]2) 195.73
DAU, MABALACAT CITY – 48, 809
___48, 809___ = ___48, 809___ = 99
(1+ [32291] [10]2) 489.09
TOTAL NO. OF RESPONDENTS: 99 x 3 = 297
Purposive sampling had been used by the researcher in choosing the areas where the survey should be conducted. For one, the researcher opted to choose the three cities in the province in order to justify the existence of a modernizing society in the province of Pampanga.
The selection of one barangay for each city, furthermore, is based on the proliferation of
Kapampangan food businesses in the area, to see if this will affect the way people regard culinary tradition in these modern times.
Data Analysis
In this stage of the research, the researcher organized the collected data in order to select the most important ones that will form part of the research findings. For the qualitative data, all the recorded key experts and key informant interviews were transcribed and, subsequently, underwent content analysis byusing the coding technique. Meanwhile, data analysis for the quantitative data, which were gathered during the survey part among residents from the cities in
Pampanga, will be done with the help of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
Free and Prior Informed Consent
The researcher acknowledges the importance of ensuring that the rights and interests of the research participants will not be disregarded and abused in every stage of their involvement. Hence, necessary measures to establish the protection of the interests of both the informants and survey respondents prior to their engagements in the data collection process has been made by providing a free and prior informed consent form to the interviewees (presented before the interview proper) and survey respondents (attached to the survey form). Moreover, research participants were advised beforehand that their participation will be voluntary and that they can withdraw their participation anytime whenever they feel uncomfortable with the flow of the data gathering procedure.
Established Relationship of Researcher
The researcher had pursued to establish a certain relationship with the interviewees and/or the survey respondents in order to get the necessary and sufficient data that he needs to finish the research. In the course of his interviews, the researcher tried to establish a neutral relationship with the informants to maintain impartiality, although some of the interviewees needed a more collaborative relationship in order to fully express their answer.Same goes for the survey respondents – mostly residents who are rather opinionated and vocal in expressing their view on the focus of this research.
Reliability and Validity of Research
Aside from ensuring the quality of the form and content of this study, the researcher also considers and protects its reliability and validity. For one, the researcher opted to use the triangulation method (Bryman, 2013), as reflected in his choice of interviewees for KII and KEI, as well as with the survey respondents, in order to see the different perspectives of the stakeholders involved in this topic, as well as to present a wider set of results and strengthen the foundation of the study.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This study, which mainly revolves around cultural reflections through culinary tradition, vis-à-vis the prevalence of modernization in the society, will fall under the tenets of cultural studies (Winter, 2000; Hall, 1980, 1992a, 1997a; Barker, 2000) with special consideration of the constructivist school of thought (Schütz, 1962; Barker, 2000) and modernization theory (Aron,
1964; Berger, 1996; Bernstein, 2002; Huntington, 1993; Lerner, 1967; Stephenson, 1968; Zapf,
1991, 2004), with a specific distinction of neo-modernism (Alexander, 1994;Tiryakian, 1998;
Zapf, 2004).
Cultural studies
First among the theoretical approaches to be used in this study, and perhaps the most important, will be cultural studies. This particular theoretical framework aims to know how cultural symbols and traditions are used and altered in the context of social change, under specific power relations and in states of social conflict between participants. One of the most striking definitions of cultural studies has been that of Bennett (1998) as cited by Barker (2000), to wit:
“Cultural studies is concerned with all those practices, institutions and systems of classifications through which there are inculcated in a population particular values, beliefs, competencies, routines of life and habitual forms of conduct” (p. 28).
Furthermore, cultural studies is molded as “a discursive formation,” which, according to
Stuart Hall (1997a), again as cited by Barker (2000) is, “‘a cluster (or formation) of ideas, images and practices, which provide ways of talking about, forms of knowledge and conduct associated with, a particular topic, social activity or institutional site in society’.”
In its application to the study, cultural studies provide a salient approach which will focus on culinary tradition in a modernizing society. For one, the use of cultural studies as an approach to this particular research in political science emphasizes the centrality of the concept of “power” in it – which is also the core concept of political science. Chris Barker (2000) pointed out that most cultural studies writers see power to be “pervading every level of social relationships.” As a matter of fact, the use of cultural studies in the context of power can also be “understood in terms of the processes that generate and enable any form of social action, relationship or order.”
In this regard, using cultural studies in analyzing power relations, insofar as the topic is concerned, can be observed as an interconnected process not only between tradition and modernity, but as well as with its linking concepts, such as food politics, industrialization, and globalization, among others. As Barker (2000) puts it, “power, while certainly constraining, is also enabling.”
This school of thought also deems its essentiality as a framework which will prove that the practices and identities which formed culinary tradition – and in this case, that of the province of Pampanga – can subsequently draw its significance and relevance in a modernizing society per se. As Rainer Winter (2000) puts it:
“For this context is not merely a framework that influences and determines social practices that take place within its borders. It is rather that the practices and identities first constitute the context within which they are practices and identities.” (p. 120) Another justification in the use of cultural studies as a research paradigm can be observed with what is at stake in pursuing it. As Hall (1992a) was cited by Barker (2000), it is “the connection that cultural studies seeks to make to matters of power and cultural politics.” In relation to the topic at hand, cultural studies can serve as a linkage to the concept of culinary tradition vis-à-vis food politics and modernization that will enable the researcher to gain an analysis of the power relations, perhaps not only in a social and cultural context but also in political and economic contexts as well. Hence, with culinary tradition as the cultural process in this study, cultural studies will enable the researcher to investigate such a process “in their contextual link to power relations” (Winter, 2000).
Limitations
As in the case of any other approaches, cultural studies also has its own limitations. For one, many of the assumptions formulated under the cultural studies approach are actually based on the Western line of thinking (Barker, 2000). This may not be a limitation to some researches, but in this particular context, which is based on a non-Western setting, it may not fully satisfy the contextualization of this research.
Another contention regarding the use of cultural studies, especially in the field of political science, as a relevant theoretical framework concerns that of its focus of inquiry. It is presupposed by some scholars that the use of cultural studies in a political science research may not be quite a fit, given the fact that it has always been a “multi- or post-disciplinary field of enquiry which blurs the boundaries between itself and other ‘subjects’” (Barker, 2000).
In line with the preceding limitation, the use of cultural studies, still according to Barker
(2000), “does not speak with one voice, it cannot be spoken with one voice, and I do not have one voice with which to represent it.” This entails that the use of triangulation should become prescribed while using cultural studies to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings in the research, to which the researcher had been very cognizant.
Constructivism In relation to cultural studies, the researcher also used the constructivist approach that would enable the researcher to further analyze the way the Kapampangan people perceive the importance of culinary tradition in their everyday life. To further elaborate, Schütz (1962) vindicates this research parameter, to wit:
“All our knowledge of the world, in commonsense as well as in scientific thinking, involves constructs, i.e. a set of abstractions, generalizations, formalizations and idealizations, specific to the relevant level of thought organization.”(p. 5) In the context of this study, the significance of using constructivism lies with how people perceive and make sense of the world upon them, not just on the macro level of the entire province, but on the micro level or their individual viewpoints, and how these shape their attitude towards the role of culinary tradition in a modernizing society. As reflected by the answers in the surveys, the application of constructivism will play a vital role in providing a basis for drawing an assumption based on the collated data in order to gauge the present stance of the
Kapampangan with regards to culinary tradition and food politics in the context of a modernizing society.
A relevant concept which can also contribute to the theorizing of this study is the so- called “anti-essentialism” (Barker, 2000). Since it is established that culinary tradition is identified by and dependent upon the people’s notion of it, anti-essentialism posits that
“identities are not things that exist” and, in turn, these identities “have no essential or universal qualities.” In turn, it is assumed that identities are “constituted, made rather than found, representations” of the people’s construction of culinary tradition. And since this study is linked with the present trend of modernization, it is important to discern the current view of the people, and even the experts, regarding the feasibility of a subsistent culinary tradition amid significant social and cultural changes.
Limitations Not so much of a limitation as it is, but the application of the constructivist approach in this study will only be limited within the boundaries of the cultural studies paradigm, since the latter is considered to be the main theoretical framework. According to Barker (2000), the so- called “questions of representation” or “how the world is socially constructed and represented to and by us in meaningful ways,” become the center of cultural studies. This entails that the researcher is required to “explore the textual generation of meaning,” that is to make sense and analyze the “materiality” of cultural representations and meanings, which are “produced, enacted, used and understood in specific social contexts” (p. 8), in this case that of the
Kapampangan culinary tradition as a cultural representation of the province of Pampanga.
In relation to this, constructivism will also be applied within the context of Kapampangan culinary tradition vis-à-vis the influx of modernization in the province. Again with cultural studies to complement it, constructivist approach also “demands investigation of modes by which meaning is produced in a variety of contexts” (Barker, 2000), which means that by using the concept of modernization as a mode to the study of culinary tradition and its roles, the findings will be more understood and not lose track of its objectives.
Modernization Theory
Lastly, the theory of modernization will also be used by the researcher especially in expounding the themes of industrialization and globalization, and to some extent, the socio- economic factor in this study.
Many scholars have attempted to come up with a working definition of modernization theory. For one, Johannes Berger (1996) provided this definition:
“Modernization is the internal achievement of a society; the particular processes of modernization support each other in combination; the leading nations do not impede the followers; the processes of modernization are converging in a common goal” (p. 46) (Emphasis supplied.).
In the context of this study, modernization can be felt by the people, since it is an “internal achievement,” and as to whether the cultural tradition had a contribution to such an achievement, it will depend upon its prevailing significance and relevance in the processes of modernization – such as industrialization and globalization – which all aims at one goal, development. As David
Lerner (1967) had defined modernization, it is “the social process of which development is the economic component.”
Henry Bernstein (2002), moreover, had enumerated the principal assumptions of this theory – “(1) that modernization is a total social process associated with (or subsuming) economic development in terms of the preconditions, concomitants, and consequences of the latter; [and] (2) that this process constitutes a ‘universal pattern’”. Applying these assumptions, especially in the second through fourth objectives of this study, that (1) modernization is directed towards economic development of an area using various trends and instruments, such as industrialization, and (2) modernization becomes “universal,” by means of the growing trend of globalization.
Modernization theory, according to Zapf (1991), gains its recognition with its three-fold reference; but the most relevant one in this study is the third one, which highlights the “efforts of the modern societies to cope – via innovation and reform – with new internal problems and, more importantly, with the changing international and globalizing environment.” At the influx of food industrialization and globalization, food issues have become lineated towardsthe demands of the modern times, while away from the cultural base of food which is reflected in the subsisting culinary tradition. But for some scholars, such as John Stephenson (1968), the concept of modernization
“has to do with a transformation of culture and of personality in so far as it is influenced by culture, rather than of some aspect of social organization or of human ecology.” Due to this dilemma, the researcher had chosen to adapt an offspring approach which may augment the opposing concepts of culinary tradition and modernization – “neo-modernism” or
“modernization II” (Alexander, 1994; Tiryakian, 1998; Zapf, 2004).
The neo-modern approach still stresses “democracy and free economic development,” but
“without the concept of convergence to Western cultural patterns and without underestimating nationalist and fundamentalist counter-movements” (Zapf, 2004). Given this parameter, not only does neo-modernism explain certain events without imbibing the Western ideas, but also it values the roles brought about by indigenous forces. Hence, neo-modernism will enable the researcher to emphasize the roles of culinary tradition amid the gradual dominance of the trends of food industrialization and globalization.
Limitations
The limitations brought about by the application of modernization theorylies with the
“competition between modernizers, conservatives and bystanders” (Tiryakian, 1998), and are mainly presented by Bernstein (2002). For one, modernization theory becomes limited with how it creates a clear-cut dichotomy between what is tradition and what is modern. In this theory, traditional notions are subjected to negativity, since modernization theorists, such as Raymond
Aron (1964), assume that the prevalence of a traditional society becomes “of little use because it is supposed to be applicable to all underdeveloped communities.” This theory, therefore, may compromise the traditional elements in this study if this is not applied harmoniously with the other theoretical framework in this study. Another limitation to this study is the theory’s emphasis of ethnocentrism – or how a particular nation tends to dominate the concept of modernization. Particularly, modernization has been equated with Westernization, since this theory has been “devoted to the ‘export’ of Western institutions and values” since its early stage during the 1950s-1960s, and was “designed as a program explicitly directed to the non-Western world” (Zapf, 2004).
An adverse effect to this limitation is effectively explained by Zapf (2004), to wit:
“During the stage of culturalism and constructivism, which still has influence today, the non-Western world was considered to have committed the same fallacies as the West by not being aware that there is no reality outside our interpretations of it, and that even “tradition” is invented or constructed.” (pp. 5-6) (Emphasis supplied.)
Another impact caused by adapting modernization in the Western framework in a non-
Western nation had been elaborated by Lerner (1967):
“…the modernizing lands are societies-in-a-hurry. Emulating what the advance Western societies have become today, they want to get there faster. Accordingly, they force the tempo of Western development. Even more serious, as a result of their hurried pace, they often disorder the sequence of Western development.” (p. 24) (Emphasis supplied).
Another limitation is that of the concept called “reductionism” which, as Barker (2000) puts it, “the attempt to explain what a cultural text means by reference to its place in the production process.” Applying modernization theory in this study has the consequence of accentuating the significance of modernization in its economic aspect to explain a cultural phenomenon – that is, the subsistence of the roles of culinary tradition. In turn, cultural studies have come up with a contending concept – “non-reductionism” – to prohibit the over-emphasis of the reductionist factor of modernization theory.
Lastly, in relation to the pertinent neo-modernist approach, the challenge is to prove the applicability of this approach amid the challenges brought about by the “theories of globalization… on one hand,” that is, according to Zapf (2004), the decisiveness of the indigenous forces despite visible trends of globalization, and, on the other hand, Samuel
Huntington’s (1993) concept of a “clash of civilization,” or even shorter as the “West against the rest,” which is apparent with the existing “non-Western resistance/opposition” (Zapf, 2004).
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Insofar as the research proceedings have gone, the researcher had found sources which he can use for the study. And out of these references, the research has formulated the initial themes which subsequently formed part in the study as research objectives.
Culinary Tradition and Food Politics
We will never talk about food the same way again.
Normally, we tend to enjoy the talk whenever food becomes the topic of discussion, to the point when we feel hungry just thinking about it. From the adventures of finding a new restaurant or food stop to dine in, to the nostalgia brought about by the scrumptious taste of the dish you just recently ate, there is no way that a chat about food makes our palate crave for more.
In this study, however, we will talk about food in a different way – one where gastronomic satisfaction and insatiable cravings is all there is to know.
Most people may find it too out-of-the-context to talk about food in another level – in a political perspective, for instance. But in the modern context, food is now observed and studied under the political lens. As food politics proponents Maya Joseph and Marion Nestle (2012) put it: “It is unusual to think of food as being political. And yet, it is just as rare for a modern food system not to have its origins in national and international politics.” (p. 87)
For some, discussions about food should not just end on how we prepare, cook, and eat it.
This premise was further supported by Joseph and Nestle (2012), saying that:
“The inconspicuous and often unrecognized decisions and activities that constitute everyday life also constitute a kind of politics. At times, political differences about food may arise from collisions in values, customs, religious beliefs, and social priorities. Considered in this light, the politics of food is ubiquitous in the modern world.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 87)
From the above-quoted, one can presume that discussions about food have been influenced not just by politics but also by the modern times. Indeed, food was just equivalent to cooking and preparing it – no more, no less. But as the society began to shift its course, so did the way we tend to look at food. It is in this light that the above-quoted was contextualized.
Truth be told, however – there are not much of related literature as of the present which tackles the concept of food politics. A quick view of its definition over the internet will give you a preliminary discernment that food politics focuses on “the political aspects of the production, control, regulation, inspection, distribution and consumption of food” (Wikipedia, 2013).
Furthermore, Joseph and Nestle (2012) also provided us some explanation of why food politics occurred in the first place, which according to them was “because of economic disputes over who benefits financially from the existing structures of food production, distribution, and consumption” (p.88). From these excerpts, we get a chance to take an overview of the scope of food politics; but aside from these, there were no more accounts as significant as these literatures are. Whereas sources pertinent to food politics are scant, literatures regarding culinary tradition are quite generous on the other hand. Given the proliferation of studies regarding this field, it is comparably easier to gather literatures which delve on culinary arts and the traditions attached thereto than food politics. Nevertheless, it is of utmost importance that culinary tradition should be further studied especially in these times when modernity is gradually competing for influence in every aspect of the people’s lives, including food.
A certain literature captured and encapsulated the very essence of culinary tradition. In a series of lectures on Maori food traditions and cookery conducted by Professor Helen Leach
(2012), a culinary anthropologist at the University of Otago in New Zealand, she gave her notable explanation of how food cultures contribute to our lives. To wit:
“…food cultures incorporate rules and principles that we learn, often unconsciously, as we grow up. They are passed down from our generation to the next, they guide our decisions, and mark our identity.” (Italics supplied.) In relation to culinary tradition, Professor Leach (2012) divided the term into two sets.
On one hand, culinary tradition “relates to foods: for example, what items are classified as edible…, how foods should be combined into dishes, what equipment should be used to prepare and cook them, what is believed about the properties and symbolic meanings of these foods.”
The second set, on the other, “… help in the composition of meals and include, what dishes should be served and what combinations with what drinks, in what order, on particular occasions, when and where meals should be served, with what utensils, and how people should behave at meals” (Leach, 2012). By distinguishing these two sets, Leach has given a new light in establishing the scope of culinary tradition and how it can be examined. To further elucidate the concept of culinary tradition, Leach (2012) provided a definition which posits a distinct context germane to the theme at hand.
“… a culinary tradition combines edible items, material culture, or artefacts, customs and ideas. And as with cultural traditions, it undergoes progressive change as it adapts to changes in food supply, new technology and social trends and external influences.
“… when people migrate, their culinary tradition moves with them, but it needs to adapt quickly to the new environment, for on it depends the survival of its practitioners. (Emphasis supplied.)
What can be observed here is the inclusion of the culinary tradition undergoing
“progressive change.” For one, the adaptive response of culinary traditions over the changing circumstances extricates tradition from its former notions as fundamental and unyielding. The possibility, therefore, of augmenting the concepts of culinary tradition and food politics is feasible. Not only do they both tackle the same issue of food, but also these concepts both have the capacity to address the immediate conditions brought about by change – modernity.
To provide an overview of the concepts in relation to the case of Filipino, specifically
Kapampangan, cuisine, we will base the explanation on the contributed literatures from different authors. Rodell (2002), for one, presented in his book Culture and Customs of the Philippines the level of sophistication and the abundance of agricultural sources in Pampanga and neighboring provinces.
“Manila and its immediately surrounding provinces have a high level of sophistication in their food preparation and a marked variety of food ingredients. Freshwater foods are found in… Pampanga…, which [has an] extensive river systems and commercial fishponds. Meanwhile, saltwater products are never far away. In addition, Pampanga produces a remarkable number of desserts thanks to its extensive sugar plantations.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 104)
Meanwhile, Alvina (2000), in her article entitled Regional Dishes: In this land of more than 7,000 islands, regional diversity can not only be seen but tasted, she condensed her observation of Kapampangan culinary arts in this paragraph:
“In Pampanga food is a major pre-occupation; the cuisine is ornate and lavish, like their wood carving. Many exotic dishes attributed to land-locked Pampanga: fried catfish with buro, a fermented rice sauce; fermented crabs; frogs or milkfish in a sour soup; fried mole crickets, and cured pork slices called tosino.” (p. 10)
Lastly, Alejandro’s (1982) book The Basics of Philippine Cooking wrote how Filipinos like the way their food is served:
“When a Filipino sits down to eat a meal, it is all there—all at once—appetizers, soup, main dishes, desserts—to be eaten randomly, at will…
“The Filipino taste is accustomed to contrasts and distinct flavors. Bitter, sour, salty, fishy, and meaty flavors are very much part of the cuisine. Filipinos also appreciate the subtle flavors that are produced when a number of foods are slowly sautéed or gently stewed together.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 20)
These literatures can further support the connection between food politics and culinary tradition, given the premise that these literatures provide some backgrounder on how traditions are kept and lived in the province, as well as how it reflects on food’s connection to other dimensions such as the political and socio-economic aspects. As to the question whether culinary tradition partakes in the process of modernization, it will be left unanswered until the end of the research, where conclusions can be made out of the new data to be gathered and analyzed.
Tradition and Industrialization
Establishing a connection between culinary tradition and industrialization may seem irrelevant and irrational for some. This is not the case, however. Modern times demand modern mechanisms in order to catch up with the changing needs of the society. And in the case of culinary arts, the tedious process of preparing and cooking dishes had gradually become an inconvenience for many families today because of their rather busy schedules at work or school. Keeping up with the fast-paced process of modern life, in turn, hindered the people from taking their time to relive the tradition imparted for generations.
Because of this circumstance, coupled by “changes in population size, urban concentration, urban sprawl, and gender employment patterns,” increasingly important aspects of the country’s cuisine were directly affected. These were “the growth of the restaurant industry, both fast-food and regular dining places, and the incorporation of greater amounts of ‘street food’ into the daily diet” (Rodell, 2002; p. 109).
Using mainly Rodell’s (2002) book, we shall be able to explain as to how culinary tradition has been in sync with food industrialization – in this case through street vending and restaurants.
In the Philippines, the earliest signs of food industrialization can be traced back during the Spanish period, which actually persists up to now – that is, through the culture of street vending. Street vending, given Rodell’s (2002) explanation, can be divided into two types: mobile and stationary. Those who can be distinguished as mobile vendors are the ones who are
“walking through a town’s streets hawking rice cakes, ice cream, fruits, breakfast breads, and fertilized duck eggs (balut),” and are serving “residential areas and have daily fixed routes and regular customers” (p. 109).
On the other hand, vendors who are stationary, also known as sidewalk vendors, have likewise “a long lineage and are equipped to sell hot noodles, boiled corn, barbecue, syrup- coated sweet potatoes, and bananas, halo-halo…, and any of a number of other dishes” (Rodell,
2002; p. 109). Moreover, these vendors mainly “concentrate of everything from public markets and schools to construction sites and office buildings or set up their operations outside of churches on Sundays and special occasions” (pp. 109-110).
Come the American occupation, restaurant industry began to flourish in the country.
During these earlier years of restaurant business – which were mainly situated in major urban centers – however, Filipino food “was generally not available.” And if there were, most of them
“hid their cuisine behind their foreign borrowed names,” enumerating Aristocrat, Grove, and
Selecta as examples (Rodell, 2002; p. 110).
In the 1960s, restaurant business “began to change… as dining out became less of an elite habit and as American fast-food chains… began to develop a market.” And whereas Filipino cuisine-based restaurants were few and were mostly hidden under foreign names, an “amazing growth of all-Filipino restaurants with names to match” emerged during this time (Rodell, 2002; p. 110).
But what should be stressed from this point is that, again according to Rodell (2002; p.
107), “there is strong evidence that the juggernaut of corporate America is being indigenized by stubborn Filipino taste buds.” He furthered this claim by citing some examples, such as Jollibee’s inclusion of noodle dishes like palabok in their menu, which was not common to American fast- food chains. Another is the proliferation of “Tuba Coke” – a special kind of the globally- renowned soft drink which is especially sold in the province of Leyte, where people always make a concoction out of Coke and the fermented drink tuba. Food processing industry also contributes a big part to the food industrialization trend in the Philippines, especially in these modern times. There are, however, a few, if not none at all, literatures can give an adequate, or at least good, detailing of food processing and culinary tradition. This is aimed to be filled by means of key informant interviews.
In relation to theme of tradition and industrialization, we can see from this point that as time went closer to modernity, the people have gradually become more of the consumer and less of the producer. Modernity has brought many demands among people that they tend to lose time, and eventually the motivation, when it comes to their roots, seeing it as merely irrelevant to their self-development. Consequently, every single one of us living in the modern world is a participant “in a contemporary phenomenon that has been variously called a consumerist culture and a consumer society” (Goodwin, Nelson, Ackerman, & Weisskopf, 2008; p. 7).
Using the work of Goodwin et al (2008), we can further expound the concept of a consumer society. Whereas many think that consumption is something that “benefits individuals,” and that decisions about it are being made mainly by “individuals and families, and not so much by businesses, governments, or other organizations,” this tends to be more complicated that the individualistic picture implies (p. 3).
As modern consumers, we, according to Goodwin et al (2008), are not isolated individuals “making purchases in a vacuum, ” but are participants in a “consumerist culture and a consumer society” (p. 7). But what is more striking and worth highlighting is that:
“Consumerism has emerged as part of a historical process that has created mass markets, industrialization, and cultural attitudes that ensure that rising incomes are used to purchase an ever- growing output.” (Emphasis and italics supplied.) (p. 7)
We may begin to determine through this why people behave in such a way that they overlook the importance of tradition in their cultural upbringing. According to them, we humans
“seem to be more tuned in to changes in our perceived satisfaction than to the absolute level of satisfaction we experience.” This can be seen as a reaction to our “reference point” whenever we judge something we want and/or need in relation to something which we have grown accustomed
(p. 6). To further clarify:
“… [O]nce we have adapted to the new situation, the pleasure tapers off and we come to think of the new situation as normal… For this reason, as marketers well know, to the extent that we seek jolts of happiness, we can be continually attracted by stimuli that promise us something more, new, or different” (Goodwin et al, 2008; p. 6).
Given this premise, one can say that a person clings on change mainly because it brings happiness to them, perhaps because it brings them “something more, new, or different.” In relation to food, we opt to cook or prepare dishes which are easy to prepare and are not time- consuming, in order to focus more on other matters. And with this, the existence of the food industry becomes essential because not only does it help them easily cook their favorite dishes, but also they get to do other things without the trouble of thinking about what food to prepare and how long it would take for them to finish.
Nonetheless, industrialization of food has indeed made its impact to the Philippine society. On one hand, we see that food-related businesses such as restaurants are booming because (1) there is a need for it where one could go for a business meeting, as the nation’s urban areas are growing and the pace of life increased; (2) the hectic lifestyle of professional couples; and (3) the nostalgia factor brought about by the restaurant, and that is also working on busy urbanites longing for the simple life of the province (Rodell, 2002; p. 111). On the other hand, those who are quite tight on their budget resort to street food, making it the primary reason for many Filipino to choose this option over restaurant. Moreover, street food “is usually quite good, the servings are substantial, and the service is fast, which makes the vendors popular lunch and snack venues for time pressed students, office workers, and travelers”
(Rodell, 2002; p. 111).
In conclusion, Rodell (2002) had depicted how culinary tradition may seem to be living in the midst of a modernizing society – one where people can cook, prepare, and consume their cuisine while earning something out of it.
“Considering the rushed nature of modern urban life, many a husband and/or housewife has been known to purchase a “to go” package for the family’s evening meal. Finally, because the overhead expense of setting up a business is minimal, many a budding entrepreneur can easily get started so there is no lack of eager low-cost vendors waiting to please the public” (p. 111).
Tradition and Globalization
The trend of globalization posits an impact that transcends even in the simplest things such as food.
In the advent of modernity, the world has grown closer more than ever. This global interconnectedness has enabled nations to share each other’s cultures in every means possible – in this case, culinary arts. But if one reckons that this only occurred in the present times, history says otherwise.
Take the case of the Philippines, for instance. A historical background has been written by Paul Rodell (2002) to narrate the beginnings of Philippine cuisine. In this light, this literature will be mainly used to lay the theme of tradition and globalization, with addition to some supplementary literatures alongside it. “The Philippines’ long colonial history under two Western nations, as well as frequent contact with many Asian neighbors, has made this island nation a unique case study of cultural adoption.” (p. 99)
Even before the Spaniards occupied and colonized the islands, several neighboring nations have come, mainly for trading purposes. One of the most prominent peoples who transact business in the pre-colonial era, as well an “early foreign [influence] on Philippine cuisine were the merchants of China’s southern coast” (Rodell, 2002; p. 104). In fact, as Rodell (2002) furthered:
“Chinese foods… have permeated deep into Philippine society… this complete indigenization came about because the Chinese arrived in the Philippines as lowly merchants and eventually blended in with the local population.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 105)
But as colonizers came to occupy the country, so did their influence on Filipino dishes.
During the Spanish era, preparing and cooking food has become more of a symbol of social status than a mere dietary intake. To quote Rodell (2002):
“Spanish recipes entered the local cuisine, too, but not to the same degree as Chinese dishes, since many of their ingredients… cannot be grown in the Philippines and because of their greater use of meat. As well, Spanish food was that of the elite colonizer, and it assumed a status greater than lowly Chinese food.” (p. 105) In spite of this, Rodell (2002; p. 105) also pointed out that “some dishes of Spanish commoners were transformed and indigenized in a manner similar to Chinese recipes,” such as paella which was Filipinized in the form of biringhi.
Come the time of American occupation, Filipino cuisine took its turn to another level. As these colonizers’ “…imperial thrust took on the reform ethic of the Progressive era,” they “… sought to change Filipino ways of doing things.” By the use of their new educational system,
“they sought to uplift the island’s cuisine.” (Rodell, 2002; p.106) As time went by, technological changes were presented by the Americans to the Filipino kitchen, such as “gas and electric stoves, refrigerators, various food processing machines, and… microwave ovens and rice cookers,” which “streamlined the task of food preparation.” (Rodell,
2002; p.106) But even if these advancements were presented, Filipinos were still adept in using
“the ‘dirty’ wood and coal burning kitchens” to “cook the most authentic dishes, and during fiestas, the backyard becomes an open cooking ground” (Rodell, 2002; pp. 106-107).
Aside from these three distinct cuisines, another prominent cuisine that permeated in the
Filipino plate but often overlooked is that of the Mexicans. According to Rodell (2002):
“When journeying to their distant Asian outpost, Spaniards traveled by way of Mexico, taking the annual galleon that linked Spain with China. Mexico had an impact on the Philippines that is not often recognized. Most Mexican foods are used as flavoring supplements to pre-existing recipes or, in the case of fruits, simply added to the Filipino table and have been completely incorporated into the cuisine.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 106)
Note the italicized phrase in the above-quoted. Although Mexico was not a colonizing nation, their influence in our culinary arts was apparent by means of the traveling route of our colonizers, the Spaniards. In relation to tradition and globalization, this was a clear sign that since the Spanish era, our cuisine was further influenced by the global interconnectedness brought about by economic relations. And even though there were no direct contact whatsoever, we were nonetheless influenced.
The present times further witnessed how globalization has further taken its effect in our cuisine. Among other global influences, as Doreen Fernandez (2000) had enumerated, were
“French, Italian, Middle Eastern, Japanese, Thai, [and] Vietnamese,” among others. She disclaimed, however, that even though these cuisines “grow familiar,” they “remain [to be]
‘imported’ and not yet indigenized” (Fernandez, 2000; p. 9). Although Filipino cuisine became more vibrant and varied as global influence came to existence, some accuse these infusions to cause the our cuisine to suffer from “lack of identity” and “identity crisis.”
Based on an article by the Manila Bulletin entitled Giving Filipino Food An Identity
(2012), Filipino food is suffering from “lack of identity” and “identity crisis.” It was said that there exists a “lack of identity” among Filipino food because of the unawareness of most foreigners about the Philippines’ signature dishes (e.g. chicken and pork adobo). Unlike other countries where one can associate their signature dishes, Filipino cuisine is somehow challenged by its lack of recognition to the global community.
Furthermore, Filipino food is also “believed to be suffering from an ‘identity crisis’ in terms of tastes and presentation” (Giving Filipino Food An Identity, 2012). In contrast to other countries where their dishes are served in its original form, Filipino dishes seem lost with how they taste and presented. Perhaps because of the regional distinctiveness or the need to adapt to what is likeable among others, but acknowledging Filipino cuisine is said to be compromised due to the needs of the time.
On another note, Kirshenblatt-Gimblett and Fernandez (2003) have given a different stance on this theme. To wit:
“The native culture stood and ‘kept the faith,’ borrowing only technology (freezers, pressure cookers, instant flavorings) when necessary, but not changing in essence. Foreign culture was tried, examined, adjusted and then used as the base for creation within the Philippine lifestyle.” (Emphasis supplied.) (p. 66)
This excerpt attempts to prove that Filipino cuisine, though it might be criticized for its identity issue, is adaptive, and that it can indigenize any foreign dish and make a distinct Filipino twist out of it. This also entails that adapting foreign cuisine to create a Filipinized one does not diminish the skill and passion of our own culinary arts – rather, it goes to show the flexibility of the Filipinos to create new dishes, and the variety of food that emanates from it.
On one hand, these premises provide such justifications which can help the topic at hand in building its foundations. For one, globalization vis-à-vis modernity can be seen here as a factor which can compromise the quality of the dishes. The industrialization of food in the province, for instance, produces food products which one can easily cook and/or readily eat a signature dish. Moreover, processed foods can also be exported to other countries where there is an increasing demand for such “dishes,” Filipinos or foreigners alike.
On the other hand, the lack of identity and identity crisis only pave the way toward creating our own identity. Indigenization of foreign dishes may seem unoriginal, but for some, this shows a deeper context of Filipino values of resiliency, skill, and adaptability. If food becomes a reflection of one’s culture, it may as well show the characteristics and values that their culture attain. As Fernandez (2000) puts it:
“What really is Philippine food, then? Indigenous food from land and sea, field and forest. Also and of course: dishes and culinary procedures from China, Spain, Mexico, and the United States, and more recently from further abroad.
“What makes them Philippine? The history and society that introduced and adapted them; the people who tuned them to their tastes and accepted them into their homes and restaurants, and especially the harmonizing culture that combined them into contemporary Filipino fare.” (Italics supplied.) (p. 9)
Perhaps the flexible and adaptive characteristics of Filipino cuisine can be best expounded by using Rodell’s (2002) words:
“Most properly said, Philippine culture is syncretic in that it adopts external influences and reshapes them to fit local conditions and preferences. This syncretic process is most clearly seen in then nation’s widely varied cuisine that combines influences from many other cultures and creates new dishes and tastes that are truly Filipino.” (Emphasis and italics supplied.)(p. 99)
Finally, in Professor Leach’s (2012) words, we will be able to understand how culinary tradition can coexist with the trend of modern world via globalization in order to sustain a stable sense of cultural identity. For her, “migration of ideas had the more significant impact on our culinary traditions,” and more importantly, she stressed that “culinary traditions are so deeply associated with a people’s sense of identity, [and] that they are powerful agents of resistance”
(Leach, 2012).
Tradition and Socioeconomic Situation
Since time immemorial, culinary tradition has been a concealed reflection of the people’s socioeconomic condition.
From the first three themes of this review of related literature, it can be observed that there exists a commonality when it comes to tackling a salient issue germane to the research topic – socioeconomic condition as reflected by culinary tradition.
Food has become political ever since the pages of Philippine history began to flip through time. This disparity had become more glaring as colonization entered the islands. Citing the article of Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett and Doreen Fernandez (2003) talking about the historical background of this premise:
“Only the native elite, not the masses, could afford the colonizer’s lifestyle, and so the former became colonized not only by the desire to emulate prestige and class, but through their wealth.” (p. 66)
Given the fact that culinary arts in the Philippines was developed using the colonizer’s lifestyle, only those who have the resources – which are the elites – can actually afford the price to pay just to prepare the most intricate and lavish of dishes. The masses, on the other hand, only get the chance to prepare such cuisine during special occasions, one of which is very close to the
Filipino culture – fiesta.
Introduced during the Spanish era, fiesta was not only the time to celebrate a town’s saint, local products, and whatnot. Rodell (2002) asserted that it is “during the annual fiesta that the Filipino pulls out all the stops” (p. 107). It was also a clear yet implicit depiction of the breadth of influence and power one possesses through the dishes served, and a time “when hospitality is extended to everyone and prosperity and generosity are judged” (p. 107). And since
Spanish dishes were “far beyond the daily household budget of all but a handful of Filipinos,” these “became status food reserved for the fiesta table or for other special occasions” (Rodell,
2002; p. 105).
To present the difference between the fiesta thrown by the elites and the masses, Rodell
(2002) furthered his discussion by stating that in the wealthiest home, “the fiesta table takes on a decidedly elite Spanish flavor, where vegetables are almost absent, since the consumption of quality expensive meat is the best indication of one’s prosperity an elevated status” (p. 107). The masses’ fiesta table and hospitality, on the other hand, “mirrors that of the wealthy host with some significant adjustments” such as less exquisite meat and more of vegetables (p. 108).
Even the way guests are treated during these occasions reflects the way socioeconomic relations exist in the society. For Rodell (2002): “Guests are treated to levels of hospitality and positioning at the table depending on social rank with priests and government officials given priority and then other people of status and family rank.” (Italics supplied) (p. 108.)
Moreover, it was also said that the host “cannot spend a great deal of time with each guest but usually devotes most of his attention to guests of greatest status” (Rodell, 2002; p.
108). Nevertheless, the differences in food never compromised the level of hospitality in every
Filipino home – one where it is “warm and genuine and centered around food” (p. 108).
As to how food translates into families’ socioeconomic status, it has been reiterated by several other literatures that historical roots play part in the study of food and culinary arts. As a matter of fact, Jean Kinsey (1994) provided a literature which takes its view on the different factors relevant to the relationship between food and socioeconomic status. On one hand, “men hunted for meat [while] women gathered or grew crops and prepared the food for the family to eat” in primitive societies. On the other, in “less primitive, but still poor countries today, women are the primary producers of food and the source of knowledge about food, nutrition and medicine,” as well as trading food in the marketplace. The men, meanwhile, “are more likely to work in the labor force and earn some type of monetary income” (Kinsey, 1994; p. 1878S).
But as modern societies demanded greater labor force participation from the people, a paradigm shift occurred. A study conducted by Burros (1988), as cited by Kinsey (1994) found that “most working women spent less than a half hour preparing an evening meal and one fifth spend less than 15 minutes” (p. 1884S). Another survey, still by Burros, saw a correlation between the amount of time making the meal of the day and the socioeconomic status of the families. As the households get poorer, their time to prepare increases – in this study, from an average time of about an hour to the poorest households’ average of an hour and fifteen minutes. Comparing the two studies, Kinsey (1994) pointed out that the “meal preparation times are higher [in the second] than the earlier study, but they [second study] are based only on household income, regardless of labor force participation” (Italics supplied) (p. 1884S).
Given these results, one may say that the poorest households can have more time to apply their culinary traditions in the confines of their homes. But this assumption tends to be ironic since poor households do not have the financial capacity required to purchase ingredients needed to prepare the dishes.
In addition, the fact that rich households justify the existence of a so-called “postmodern consumer culture” (Featherstone, 1991, as cited by Kinsey, 1994; p. 1884S) affects the way other social classes, even the poor, prepare their food. Although it was asserted that this consumer culture “allow people to display their sense of style and distinguish their tastes from the masses,” it was also added the people “at all income levels can participate, since trendy niches can readily be identified at all price levels” (Kinsey, 1994; pp. 1884S-1885S). This, in turn, makes every other social class to rely on what the rich dictates – in this case, food choices – to the point of imitation which can undermine the traditions imparted through generations.
In addition to this, the wife/mother – who normally assumes the role “as the ‘gatekeeper’ of food and nutrition” in the family – often loses such a role as they participate in the labor force.
In effect, as Kinsey (1994) puts it:
“More food is selected and even prepared by individuals, including children. This places a special burden and responsibility on the food industry to ensure nutritious and safe food and on educators to provide information about food handling, nutrition, and safety.” (p. 1884S)
Kinsey (1994) further explained how income in modernizing societies affect food and, consequently, culinary tradition. She enumerated three phenomena, to which she said are universally occurring. First, “as incomes increase, the quantity of food and nutrition and consumed increases but a smaller and smaller portion of family income is needed for that food.”
Second, “the initial increase in meat consumption levels off as the per capita calorie consumption reaches a saturation point and then meat falls as a portion of total food consumed.” This, in relation to culinary tradition, may affect the meat-based dishes, one of the most prominent dishes in the Philippine cuisine. And the third, and most salient, point at hand given is that “the processing and preparation of food moves away from the household as families purchase more services. Ultimately, more affluent families purchase more meals ready to eat, and less food to cook” (Kinsey, 1994; 1878S). This best explains the phenomenon that culinary tradition tends to affect the food politics in a modernizing society, since this depicts how modern times minimize the people’s time to cook and prepare their food first-handedly and based on their culinary tradition.
###
To conclude, this review of related literature has been a fruitful one, and helped the researcher to explore more about his topic. Furthermore, this will help a lot as the researcher pursues his topic and, ultimately, hopes to find an answer as to how culinary tradition contributes to the food politics in a modernizing society. Hopefully, by using the province of Pampanga – the so-called “Culinary Center of the Philippines” – as the case study of this research, there will be a better ground to justify the results of the study, which will contribute to the perpetuation of cultural heritage through culinary arts in the society. III. RESEARCH FINDINGS
APPETIZER: Preparing the Palate through Cultural Base
Culinary Arts and Culinary Tradition
The concepts of culinary tradition and food politics became more connected as time entered the modern era. And, true enough, as the findings have bolstered, this connection becomes all the more strong and intact as modernity continues to permeate in the society.
In order to establish the significance of a concept such as culinary tradition, a clear definition of its base concept – culinary arts – had been determined first. Based on the answers given by the key experts (Borromeo, 2014; Musni, 2014), culinary arts is projected as a concept whose scope transcends beyond cooking itself.
For Musni (2014), taste is not the only factor to be considered when one cooks, “but also its texture, color, [and] all other elements – all other things that you look for to make it attractive, delicious, and appealing.” On the other hand, Borromeo (2014) projected culinary arts in relation to the cook as the artist, saying that “ang isang nagluluto ay para kang artist din, na kung ano ang gusto mong ilagay… parang may innovation (a cook is like an artist, too, in the sense that you get to choose what to put… like there is an innovation)…”
There is, however, a factor which culinary arts and culinary tradition both share, insofar as the KEI’s answers are concerned – that is the strict adherence to the fundamentals of cooking which are based in a particular culture. Whereas this adherence is emphasized in food as an art in such a way “that it should taste how it is expected to be,” food becomes influenced by tradition if its cooking follows “a prescribed way of doing it” (Musni, 2014). This adherence, in turn, forms part of the cultural significance that culinary tradition possesses. This significance can be assessed from this working definition of culinary tradition provided by Sir Lord Francis Musni (2014):
“Culinary tradition includes a set of recipes, procedures, techniques, including tools, implements, and other details of preparing and cooking traditional dishes, confectionaries, delicacies, and the like, in keeping with a prescribed family, regional, ethno-linguistic, or cultural tradition…”
In the aforesaid,the cultural significance of culinary tradition can be observed with the levels of influence which serve as its parameters. These levels – namely (1) family, (2) region, and (3) cultural or ethno-linguistic custom – provide patterns which will subsequently define the culinary tradition of a particular society.
The personal experience of Atching Lillian Borromeo, on the other hand, to resurface the cultural significance of the Kapampangan culinary tradition has been a series of challenges for her. Although she enjoys the fame of becoming the proponent of Kapampangan cuisine at present, she admits that it has been difficult to uphold the culinary tradition with all the changes brought by modern times. For her, “…para panatilihin mo ‘yung nakaraan, ‘yung kultura natin, that’s something na mas mahirap, mahirap gawin (…for you to preserve the past, our culture, that’s something that is more difficult, difficult to do).”
For one, only a few Kapampangan recipes were, according to her, documented. But the more apparent problem that Borromeo encountered was the consequences brought forth by a modernizing society. At one point, Atching Lillian recounted the way she was criticized during the early days of her culinary project: “Tinatawanan ako ng lahat ng tao nu’ng time na ‘yon
(Everyone was laughing at me that time),” to which she accepted and bore while pushing her objectives through before gaining her reputation today. Kapampangan Culinary Tradition
It has been known for a fact that the culinary tradition of Pampanga gained a reputation of variety. Ranging from the most sophisticated and grandiose, to the most exotic and uncommon, the Kapampangan culinary skill and prowess is nevertheless one of the most well- respected and sought-after, not only in the Philippines but even in other countries around the world.
In fact, these qualities make the Kapampangan culinary prowess a notable one, particularly with the way the people want their dishes to be – of high-end quality. For one, Musni
(2014) emphasized how sophisticated Kapampangan cuisine is, describing that it “is rich, is varied, and tasteful, and elegant.” Reyes (2014) also stressed that Kapampangan people become distinct with their “kumpleto rekado” of a culinary expertise. Lastly, in Borromeo’s (2014) own words,
“We [Kapampangans] want something different, something special, puro ganyan, puro number one ang gusto nila (We want something different, something special, always like that, they always want what is number one).”
One of the factors pointed out by the interviewees as to how the Kapampangan people achieved their culinary distinction is the ingredients, which are not only fresh but also expensive.
In fact, for Atching Lillian, speaking for most of the Kapampangan cooks, said that
Kapampangans cook lavishly “kasi na-train sila… sa mga masasarap at saka sa mga expensive na mga ingredients na walang tipid-tipid. Kumbaga, garboso (because they were trained… with delicious and expensive ingredients without the worrying the budget. Thus, grandiose).”
Furthermore, the ingredients used by the Kapampangan also contribute to the “originality” of the dishes (Reyes, 2014). Culinary Tradition and Food Politics
It is important in this part of the research that the relatively new concept of “food politics” should be given an ample amount of consideration – that is, in order to justify the entire essence of this study.
Quite frankly, though, both the key experts do not have a very clear notion of the concept of food politics, and how this becomes subsequently related to the topic of culinary tradition.
Nevertheless, the key experts’ own understanding of the term “food politics” actually gave a fresh, new perspective in dealing with this concept, which is not very delineating from its established definitions and assumptions.
Perhaps one of the most significant and relevant assumptions brought about by the key experts’ comprehension of the term “food politics” is the manner to which the concept implicates food as an integral element not only of culture, but also of politics. For one, when the term “food politics” surfaced in the interviews, the initial assumption that came in the minds of the experts was looking at food as a tool for social stratification – a “class definant” (Musni, 2014), and
“kinakain ng Presidente (what is eaten by the President)” (Borromeo, 2014).
Subsequently, the experts have also similarly reflected “food politics” by looking at food in its role and influence in the political scene – for instance, perceiving food as an identifier of
“local political phenomenon” (Musni, 2014). This can be further expounded by Borromeo
(2014), in her so-called “simple-minded” notion of food politics, that food becomes political when
“iniisip mo rin na kung… ‘yung mga politiko rin na tao na [para maging] malapit sa mga [kababayan] nila, ginagamit nila sa kanilang pangangampanya ‘yung pagkain (you are already thinking if… the politicians, in order to become somewhat close to their constituents, are using food in their campaigns).” Given these notions, therefore, the linkage between the concepts of culinary tradition and food politics can now be established. These linkages include, insofar as the commonalities of the key experts’ answers are concerned, (1) the predominance of culinary influences, and (2) the inclusion of the economic sphere in the process.
First, the proliferation of culinary influences in a particular society has developed a certain link which not only augmented culinary tradition and food politics but also the cultural history from the past, transcending into the present, and perhaps, into the future as well. As an example, the province of Pampanga is a living artifact of how influences from different period came to define the present-day Kapampangan cuisine (Musni, 2014). From the Spanish colonizers, where “much of what is known now as Kapampangan cuisine is influenced…[by]
Spanish mileage,” to the Americans whose influence reflects the Kapampangan, as well as other regions’, liking of “anything that is continental to America” such as steaks, fries, and burgers, to the Japanese influence in our cooking method, particularly the “generous use of toyo [soy sauce]” in our dishes, to the subsequent exposure to other cuisines up to the present – these influences altogether shaped the way Kapampangans prepare and cook their exquisite array of dishes.
Secondly, culinary tradition and food politics are also joined together by the economic sphere. This becomes all the more palpable as the popularity and reputation of Kapampangan cuisine, as an example, becomes an avenue for some commercial enterprises to profit. Musni
(2014), for one, said that
“[a]s a matter of fact, there are many establishments now and restaurants and stores, delicacy stores who claim to be authentic Kapampangan, et cetera [which are] riding on the bandwagon and the popularity of Kapampangan cuisine.”
The effects brought about by these economic players further intensified as modernization, as reflected by the influx of industrialization and the ever-growing trend of globalization, continues to permeate in a society which has its distinct cultural customs and tradition. This has consequently caused an immense, double-edged impact in the perpetuation of the culinary tradition – that is, the ascendance of power relations between the traditional and the modern manners of producing and consuming food.
Although the culinary influences and economic sphere are projected by some as contributors toward a positive linkage of culinary tradition and food politics, especially in the context of a modernizing society, the experts have at the same time pointed out the downside of these factors, especially on the part of keeping the tradition alive. For one, the mix of influences has also posed a threat to the subsistence of culinary tradition, particularly to that of the
Kapampangan cuisine during its “[decrescendo] sometime in the 80s, into the 90s… into the
Pinatubo Period,” to which Musni (2014) also repudiated by saying that since the eruption of
Mount Pinatubo, the advancement of traditional Kapampangan cuisine together with other cultural traditions, has been exhibiting “a marked increase in interest,” which continues to heighten as time goes by. Musni is also confident that the Kapampangan “can sustain the interest” towards promoting and preserving their culinary tradition despite the inevitable phase of modernity.
Whereas Musni has a confident stance on culinary tradition as a significant element in food politics, Borromeo (2014) on the other hand, had a different viewpoint. For her, people nowadays are much affected by the fast-paced life brought by modernization trend. In fact, “kung saan ang madali, du’n na lang sila. I mean ‘yung mga instant food, ganu’n. Du’n na lang sila (wherever convenience can be found, then the people will suit themselves there. What I meant was the instant food, something like that. That is where they will be).”
Nevertheless, it is still indubitable that the arrival of the trend of modernization, as the next theme of the research findings will expound, had made its impact on how culinary tradition continues to uphold its significance and relevance in the modern times and beyond.
MAIN COURSE: Integrating the Taste of Economic Flavor
Food Industrialization and its Impacts
The trend of modernization comes in many forms, and pervades as many areas of human life as possible. And in this particular study, modernization is perceived in the context of one of its main machineries – industrialization, and how this actually affects the way culinary tradition plays its role in the current power relations between stakeholders of food.
Both the key experts agree to the fact that as time goes by, modernization, along with its channels, becomes an inevitable phenomenon. For Musni (2014), this trend towards modernization is “a part of our cultural, economic, political evolution,” and that “in the course of time we will be shifting from one phase towards another and to another.” Borromeo (2014), on the other hand, had observed how the thread of modernization has already entered the country, saying that “…ang Pilipinas ay talagang isa na sa makabagong countries (the Philippines is really one of the modern countries).”
Aside from its being an inevitable phenomenon, there is also a shared view among the experts on how modernization, and subsequently industrialization, creates a big impact in the society, especially in the promotion of cultural – specifically, culinary – tradition. What is more is that this impact is actually two-pronged, insofar as the accounts of the experts are concerned.
On one hand, they see the influx of food industrialization as an advantage to the advancement of culinary tradition. For Borromeo (2014), industrializing food can contribute in the culinary tradition since (1) there are new things to learn and develop in food, i.e. food manufacturing helps in promoting other Kapampangan dishes which are virtually unknown to the people, and (2) it can actually help in preserving food for future consumption. Musni (2014) had also given some potential advantages of industrialization, such as (1) the availability of what were known before as “seasonal food,” whose price cheapens as harvest time abounds, and (2) less trouble in cooking and prepping food, since people can easily order and avail their favorite
Kapampangan dishes “without all of the fuss and the trouble of having to prepare it.”
On the other hand, industrializing food can also serve as a threat, especially in a society, like that of Pampanga, where culinary tradition came to be the base of its distinction amid other regional diversities. In fact, Musni (2014) perceives this imminent threat of industrialization, along with “technology, and modernism,” towards “things which are closely linked with tradition…is a given.”
But perhaps one of the most glaring impacts brought about by industrialization is the emergence of a so-called “instant lifestyle” among the people of the present times – which both key experts have observed. This assumption was made first by Musni (2014) on the grounds of a fast-paced life, that is why the proliferation of instant products has been “an [unavoidable] consequence of modernism, industrialization, and our ever-complicated urban life.” For
Borromeo (2014), “…sa trend…ng cooking ngayon, instant dito, instant doon, at saka ang oras parang, para na tayong nasa ibang bansa, eh (the trend of cooking nowadays is instant here and there, while our time is comparable with foreign countries).” But whereas an instant lifestyle has the propensity to provide convenience and ease among people, it also covertly demands that people should be constantly keeping up with the fast pacing of the changes in the modern times, or else, as Musni (2014) warns, “you’ll end up losing a lot of things, which includes our propensity to buy something instant.”
Food Business, Culinary Tradition, and Consumer Society
It is indubitable that food industrialization had already permeated in many societies, and continues to do so as the world shifts into modernity. And in the context of culinary tradition, the growing number of businesses catering to food has become all the more significant in determining whether culture – as reflected by food – is still of contributing value especially in a modernizing society.
Using the Kapampangan culinary tradition as the base, it becomes all the more evident that there are various commercial enterprises which promote the tastes of Pampanga. And as to whether these businesses actually contribute or compromise the subsistence of culinary tradition, the key experts and key informant generally agree to the fact that it has a two-way effect in the process.
On one hand, they see these businesses as contributors toward the advancement of
Kapampangan culinary tradition. Relying on the words of Reyes (2014), he stressed that these
Kapampangan food-related business do not intend to give any “negative mark especially sa trade, sa market” because they do not to tarnish the image of the province which they are promoting. Using their own product – the Pampanga’s Best tocino – as an example, Reyes affirmed that businesses such as Pampanga’s Best give a great contribution to promote culinary tradition.
On the other hand, businesses also have the tendency to compromise Kapampangan culinary tradition, especially the sophisticated quality of the dishes. Borromeo (2014) for one, shared a more negative feeling about the proliferation of many Kapampangan food-related businesses in the market, saying that many of these businesses only use the name of Pampanga
“para mabili ‘yung kanilang produkto (for their products to be sold).” What is worse, according to her, is that many of these businesses are not of Kapampangan quality, albeit some other businesses actually live up to the standards.
Meanwhile, another concept – or perhaps another outcome – brought about by food industrialization is the “consumer society” (Goodwin, Nelson, Ackerman, & Weisskopf, 2008; p.
7).. For Reyes, even though working in a food processing company, the shift of the people toward consumerism can pose negative implications, some of which include the promotion of a lazy culture, which consequently entails a larger population whose culinary knowledge is scant – as well as dangers of too much food preservatives.”
But looking in another light, Reyes saw that the shift caused by a “consumer society” is not one from a traditional to a modern – rather, it is one from a tradition to another tradition. In his own words (2014),
“[Y]ung tradition na nga ngayon ng Filipino na... noon, wala pa ‘yung mga food chain. Pupunta ng palengke ‘yan, mamimili, iluluto ‘yan. Pero ngayon iba na, ‘di ba? Kaya nga kahit sa mga okasyon, ‘di ba? Minsan bibili na lang tayo ng McDo, Jollibee, luto na. (The present tradition that Filipinos have today, unlike then when there were no food chains. People would go to the market to buy ingredients which they cook later on. Nowadays, it’s different, isn’t it? That is why even at occasions, am I right? Sometimes we will just buy at McDo [McDonalds] or Jollibee, it’s already cooked).” Moreover, the trend caused by the consumer society only became a triggering factor for some, like Atching Lillian, to further advance culinary tradition. In fact, according to her, it was this turn of the tide which urged her to start her “project” of reliving the Kapampangan culinary tradition, which surprisingly for her was accepted by the people.
Globalization of Food System and its Impacts
One of the other relevant trends – globalization – also plays its role in the process of subjecting a society towards modernity. Since globalization connects the locality to the world, and vice versa, it can be emphasized that, in the context of food, this global interconnectedness underscores the concept of availability (Reyes, 2014). Citing their own company and products, the processed meat business extraordinaire “Pampanga’s Best,” sales supervisor James Reyes highlights that globalization is as simple as the availability of the products in a much larger area of international level.
Alongside the factor of availability, another impact brought about by the present trend of globalization is the recognition the local cuisine gains in different levels – (1) on a national scale
(Borromeo, 2014; Musni, 2014), and (2) on an international scale, as well (Musni, 2014; Reyes,
2014).
On the national level, Musni (2014) enumerated some of the Kapampangan dishes which have gained a reputation in the country – such as tibuk-tibuk (also known as maja blanca), sisig, asado, morcon, tocino, and longaniza, to name a few. Borromeo (2014), on the other hand, emphasized her different viewpoint on the national recognition that Kapampangan cuisine as a renowned culinary expert as well. Recognition, as she implied in her words, equated respect, especially on the origins of the cuisine, especially when one benefits from it. Moreover, Borromeo also ensured that her efforts will enable the Kapampangan cuisine to regain its glory, such as the use of the Kapampangan word “Atche” (or elder sister) instead of chef, which was also her profession. And indeed, her efforts have succeeded up to now.
Meanwhile, international recognition for Kapampangan cuisine, unlike the national one, has not yet materialized. Musni (2014) repeatedly asserted the fact that up to date, not a single dish has reached the worldwide accolade that adobo had attained for one. He furthered that he has “to see the day when a particular Kapampangan food will gain some kind of respectability outside the Philippines, and gain the same popularity…so that it may be identified as Filipino or
Kapampangan.”
But as globalization provided an avenue for availability and recognition around the world, it also has its repercussions – one of which, according to the experts and informant, is the increase of the use of Kapampangan reputation of quality as a profiteering scheme. In particular,
Borromeo and Reyes have pointed out some of the ploys which other commercial enterprises use to gain profit. For Borromeo, it has something to do with the use of Kapampangan name to profit, while for Reyes, having his work at Pampanga’s Best – which has expanded its business abroad, there is a huge tendency for businessmen to imitate their product since they see how its being of Kapampangan quality becomes a key to greater profit.
Nevertheless, the trend of globalization still made and continues to make an impact, especially in terms of the advancement of the cultural significance of culinary tradition in the midst of a modernizing society, which will be further discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.
“Lack of Identity” and “Identity Crisis” Some of the most significant effects of globalization which require a different category in this study are the pertinent concepts of “lack of identity” and “identity crisis” (Giving Filipino
Food An Identity, 2012). And, indeed, these phenomena provide more than enough explanation as to how modernization heavily affects the culinary tradition and the cultural identity attached thereto.
For one, it has been apparent that the Kapampangan cuisine is a mix of influences that encompass throughout the cultural and, to some extent, political history of the province. For one,
Reyes (2014) recognizes the fact that when “…na-invade tayo ng mga ibang nations, panahon noon… may tinuro sila, may natutunan tayo sa kanila, may na-adopt tayo (we were invaded by other nations back in the early days, they thought us something, we learned something from them, which we subsequently adopted).”
Musni (2014), on the other hand, gave a more elaborate take on the importance of these influences in the formation of what is now known to be as Kapampangan cuisine. For one, he contravened the common notion of people that the authenticity of a cuisine is always pure by saying that “it cannot be pure” and that it “is an add mixture, [and] a co-mixture of influences.”
Moreover, he also asserted that once we attempt “to take out all these influences… you’ll end up with nothing.” In fact, he even made a figurative representation of the inseparable link between a society’s array of indigenous dishes and the influences it has acquired over time:
“Para bang you’re stripping the banana off its peel. You think the banana inside is different from its skin but, you know, if you peel the banana, it tells the flesh consists of as many influences as there are, actually…” Nevertheless, just because the Kapampangan cuisine is inextricably tied with its foreign influences does not mean that it already lost its own identity. As a matter of fact, all three of the interviewees attest to the fact that Kapampangan cuisine still possesses a distinct quality amidst the variety of influences attached to it. But the one with the most striking justifications to support this claim is that of Atching Lillian’s.
For one, Borromeo, as a culinary expert herself, knows that Kapampangan cuisine becomes distinct because it is subjected to modification – either done intentionally or by accident. Consequently, “‘pag i-develop mo pa ‘yon, pagandahin mo pa ‘yon,… marami kang makukuhang hindi nila alam (once you get to develop those dishes and create a better version, you will get a lot which others do not know themselves)” (Borromeo, 2014).
Furthermore, she also added that the combination of different local spices can create a dish which others will not know how it has been cooked, that is why foreigners tend to visit her at her ancestral home in the town of Mexico, where she had established her culinary haven, because “…hinahanap nila ‘yung taste na hindi nila makuha sa Amerika o sa ibang lugar na nandidito lang sa Pampanga (they are trying to search for the distinct taste which they cannot get in America or in other places, but is only indigenous here in Pampanga).”
Nevertheless, the key experts and informant have also agreed, through the commonality of their answers, that the mix of influences does not actually cause a so-called “lack of identity” and “identity crisis” in the Kapampangan cuisine – instead, it enables the tradition to be stronger by means of looking down to the grassroots, where everything had its origins to begin with. To quote Borromeo (2014) as to why Kapampangan culinary tradition has been respected for the longest time and its underlying problem:
“It’s because of the… ating ancestors na nag-spend sila ng oras sa kusina, nagluto, nag-experiment – but they were never recognized. (It’s because of our ancestors who spent their time in the kitchen, cooked, and experimented – but they were never recognized).”
Thus, in order to fight the imminent prevalence of “lack of identity” or “identity crisis,”
Borromeo repeatedly asserted that the people of the present, especially the chefs, should give credit to the ancestors to pay respect on their contributions to the continuing culinary tradition.
Because just as an old adage goes, “Ang hindi lumingon sa pinanggalingan, hindi makararating sa paroroonan.”
Modernization and Culinary Tradition
Adjoining the two trends of food industrialization and globalization, the larger process that is modernization is now established in the context of its impact toward culinary tradition.
One shall observe that the analysis, again based on the accounts of the key experts and key informant, is divided once more between the positive, negative, and neutral effects of modernization in the subsistence of culinary tradition in a society.
For the better half of the analysis, the good side of the influx of industrialization and globalization in a society can be explained by (1) the growing international recognition, (2) the promotion and preservation of culinary culture, and (3) the customs and values brought about by these trends. For Musni (2014), international recognition is once more important on the basis of what is known today as “fusion cooking” – where it becomes a vehicle towards international acceptance. For instance, according to Musni, Kapampangan chefs like Claude Tayag have incorporated and indigenized the famous Japanese dish sushi using the Kapampangan exotic delicacy buru. This consequently paved the way towards the standardization of “our cooking to suit international standards.”
As to the promotion and preservation of culinary culture, all of the interviewees agree to the fact that, in one way or another, industrialization and globalization are also contributing factors. For the part of the food-related businesses, companies such as “Pampanga’s Best” for one serve as catalyst for the advancement of Kapampangan cuisine. As Reyes (2014) puts it
“And in relation sa company nga, dahil ang pangalan nga ng company namin ay Pampanga’s Best, du’n na nali-link…na …‘pag sinabi mong Pampanga’s Best, ‘Ah! Magaling magluto ‘to.’ Kumbaga produkto ng Pampanga ‘to – it means masarap (And in relation to the company, as the name of the company, Pampanga’s Best, suggests, it links us to the fact that when you say Pampanga’s Best, ‘Ah! This is a good cook!’ And because this is a product of Pampanga – it means delicious).” In relation to this, Musni (2014) also attributed the benefit brought about by industrialization and modernization to the preservation of culinary culture with “the sprouting of commercial enterprises” such as “restaurants, delicacy stores, [and] food stores selling
Kapampangan food.”
Moreover, efforts to somehow promote and preserve the culinary culture of Pampanga lead us to consider other actors in the process. For instance, Borromeo implied that the youth today have an important role to play in keeping the culinary traditions alive in terms of creating new technological innovations that will enable people to easily create more dishes in a shorter period of time. These innovations, as Borromeo (2014) explained, had helped her in producing dishes and delicacies more than what she formerly makes. For one, the availability of new equipments enabled her to further maximize her propensity to create more Kapampangan recipes.
Lastly, the trend of modernization had highlighted in relation to culinary tradition that there are customs and values to which the businesses uphold to some extent such as (1) the
Kapampangan quality of fastidious cooking, and (2) the rigorous cooking methods in order to achieve the perfection of Kapampangan cuisine. For instance, Pampanga’s Best, according to
Reyes, which claims to promote “the best of Pampanga,” which they want to ensure by means of “product quality, ‘yung technology namin, ‘yung very good or [best] service na pwede naming ibigay sa trade or sa mga consumers namin.
There are, however, the inevitable downsides caused by modernization – one of which is the issue on quality. For Musni (2014), this problem has been observed among some businesses over the past few years, citing a well-known Kapampangan food business, which he did not give a name for anonymity, that “because it cannot handle its massive volume of orders, the quality
[began] to deteriorate.” This, in turn, implicitly causes an embarrassment of Kapampangan culinary prowess, since when someone buys “certain delicacies, and then one is good, the other is [not]… there is no consistency” (Musni, 2014).
Nevertheless, all of the intellectual views and perceptions of the experts and informant will not be validated unless the people – or the Kapampangan – themselves take their stand regarding the surrounding issues brought about by the implicit food politics in the culinary tradition of a modernizing society. In this light, the subsequent key theme in this study will provide a quantitative assessment of the people’s perception of the issue at hand, and how this can affect the played role of food politics in the subsistence of culinary tradition in these modern times.
DESSERT: Finishing the Meal with Social Response
Basic Information
In this particular study, where culinary tradition is weighed and tested upon its subsisting significance and relevance in the food politics of a modernizing society, it is vital to take the people’s viewpoint in the subject matter into consideration, since it is they who embody the concept of a modernizing society, and, at the same time, determine the importance of culinary tradition in their lives, whether consciously or unconsciously.
A survey was conducted among 300 respondents, which were equally divided among the three key cities of the province of Pampanga – Angeles City, City of San Fernando, and
Mabalacat City. Among these numbers, 198 respondents (or 66%) are female, while the remaining 102 (34%) are male respondents (Graph 1).
Sex
Male Female
34% 66%
Graph 1. Distribution of Respondents [by sex]
In terms of age bracket, majority of the respondents (equivalent to 216) are aged 45 years old and below, with a cumulative percentage of 73.7% (see Graph 2). The most number of respondents, which is 81 (27.0%), came from the middle-aged population range between 36-45 years old, while the least number are from the very old-aged group of over 70 years old, with 6 respondents (2.0%). 90 81 80
70 64 60 54 50 46 40 30 25 20 17 10 6 7 0 <18 y/o 18-25 y/o 26-35 y/o 36-45 y/o 46-55 y/o 56-70 y/o >70 y/o No Response Graph 2. Distribution of Respondents [by age bracket].
A significant 35% of respondents (equivalent to 105 respondents), however, have not indicated their household annual gross income (see Graph 3), which heavily compromises the variability of gauging the socio-economic condition of the respondents. Nevertheless, it is still important to emphasize that, excluding the missing responses, a majority of 141 respondents have an annual gross income of P100, 000 and below, with a cumulative percentage of 72 .3%.
Graph 3. Distribution of Respondents [by annual gross income, household].
Family Annual Gross Income 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Below P50, 000 P50, 001 - P100,001 - P500,001 - Above P Missing P100,000 P500,000 P1,000,000 1,000,000 Meanwhile, 209 respondents (69.7%) have said that they were native Kapampangan
(Table 4), where 167 of which (79.9%) claimed to have knowledge in cooking (Table 5). On the other hand, 90 respondents (30.0%) are among those who live in the Kapampangan cities but are not native Kapampangan, where 74 of which (82.2%) are cooking. A single respondent (0.3%) has not disclosed whether he is native Kapampangan or not, while a single native Kapampangan respondent (0.5%) did not respond on whether s/he is cooking or not.
If combined, a total of 241 respondents (80.6%) are in the cooking population – whether they may be native Kapampangan or not, while the remaining 58 respondents (19.4%) are combined population of both native Kapampangan or not, who are either not cooking (19.1%) or have no response at all (0.3%).
Native Kapampangan
Yes No No Response
0%
30%
70%
Graph 4. Native Kapampangan frequency distribution.
Cooking * Native Kapampangan Crosstabulation
Native Kapampangan
No Yes Total
Cooking No Count 16 41 57
% within Native Kapampangan 17.8% 19.6% 19.1%
Yes Count 74 167 241
% within Native Kapampangan 82.2% 79.9% 80.6%
No Answer Count 0 1 1
% within Native Kapampangan .0% .5% .3%
Total Count 90 209 299
% within Native Kapampangan 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Table 1. Cooking/Native Kapampangan crosstabulation.
Accordingly, a huge majority of the respondents have been living in the province for more than 10 years, with a frequency of 220 (73.3%), while those who have been in Pampanga for the past six months or less have the least number of respondent with 5 (1.7%). Moreover, 11 respondents (3.7%) have not indicated their length of residence in the province.
Length of Residence
2% 3%
4% 5% <6 mos.
13% 6 mos.- 1 yr.
1 yr. - 5 yrs. 5-10 yrs. 73% >10 yrs.
Missing
Graph 5. Distribution of Respondents [by length of residence].
Socio-cultural Impact
Delving further into the study, this particular section provides the findings regarding the socio-cultural impact of food politics in relation to the culinary tradition among the city residents hailing from the province of Pampanga – as reflected by the gathered answers of the survey respondents.
The following set of statements was derived from the survey questionnaire, and was used in synchronization with some of the key highlights from the preceding themes of this study, which caters specifically on the relationship between culinary tradition and development – a vital essence of modernization.
###
STATEMENT 1: Observing the coexistence between modernity and culinary tradition is a potential key to development.
52
32
13.7
1.3 1
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree No Response
Based on the result which arrived with the collated answers of the respondents, most of them (a total of 153 respondents, or 84%) generally agree, that is, in varying levels (see Graph
6), that development is at sight when the link between the traditional and modern way of life has been taken in to consideration. A number of 68 respondents (13.7%), on the other hand, have a neutral stand about the observation, while only 4 respondents (1.3%) disagree to this relationship. The remaining 3 respondents (1%) have no response.
STATEMENT 2: Maintaining a culinary tradition may contribute to the development of a society.
48 45
6 0.3 0.3 0.3
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly No Response Disagree In this statement, there is a wide range of gap between the responses. A majority of the respondents once again agree, at varying levels, that culinary tradition in itself remains as a significant factor in a society which undergoes further development, with a total of 279 respondents (93%) – where 144 of them strongly agree (48%), while the remaining 135 only agree to it (45%). Eighteen respondents (6%), on the other hand, remain neutral to this essence of culinary tradition, while 2 respondents disagree at varying levels (0.6%). One respondent (0.3%) has no response on the matter. STATEMENT 3: Development will ensue even without the help of culinary tradition.
35.3
23.3 20
14.7
5 1.7
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly No Response Disagree
Lastly, this statement also received almost the same level of response. Again, a subtantial number agree (once again, at varying levels) that culinary tradition is an optional factor in the realization of development – a total of 176 respondents (58.6%), 70 of which strongly agree
(23.3%), while the remaining 106 only agree (35.3%). Sixty respondents (20%), on the other hand, have a neutral stance, while a combined total of 59 respondents (19.7%) disagree at varying levels, that culinary tradition will remain as a significant factor towards development. A single respondent (1.7%) has no response.
###
Given these numbers, one shall be able to analyze that despite the trend of modernization in the society, many of the respondents – which are all city residents – generally agree that culinary tradition still retains its significance, and that its subsistence becomes contributable to the attainment of development whether it may be (1) in itself or (2) in harmony with the modern customs and values. There is, however, a bit of contention on the part of the third statement in relation to the first two, where many respondents also agree to the notion that development can be achieved without the help of culinary tradition. Thus, by synthesizing the results of the responses in relation to the statements, it can be said that the socio-cultural perception of culinary tradition is that it still plays a significant part in the process of development, but not to the extent that development will be heavily reliant upon the upholding of culinary tradition, thus giving a good justification on Zapf’s (2004) notion based on the neo-modern approach that nationalist and fundamentalist counter-movements should not be underestimated in their contribution towards development.
Socio-economic Impact
Now, by using the independent variable, which has been measured by the scale of the household annual gross income, we should see that there are answers which provide some patterns that will enable us to analyze the role of food politics in keeping the culinary tradition alive. Then again, the weakness of using the gross income comes with the percentage of respondents who actually disclosed their income, though it comprises the majority (65%) of the whole sample size.
Using the Pearson chi-square formula, the computed asymptotic significance (2-sided) level based in all of the cross-tabulations hereby derived into charts are marked at .000, with varying likelihood ratios and linear-by-linear associations. Furthermore, the divided groups of respondents based on their household annual gross income will be defined as Class A for respondents with more than P1, 000, 000 annual gross income; Class B for respondents with an annual gross income of P500, 001 to P1, 000, 000; and so on, for brevity.
### QUESTION 1: Do you think that people of the present times lack knowledge and training when it comes to cooking?
QUESTION 1 (by %) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 0 0 0 0.5 No 0 33.3 45.8 26.7 41.7 38.5 Yes 66.7 66.7 54.2 73.3 58.3 61
The greater percentages of responses – regardless of their socio-economic status – that were acquired from the collated valid answers reflect that, indeed, people today lack culinary knowledge. Despite this turnout, the remaining percentages of respondents who said otherwise was generally not too far from the leading answer, except Class C (P100, 001-P500, 000), with a big disparity of 46.6%. One of Class A respondents, on the other hand, had a no answer response which translated to 33.3% in totality.
QUESTION 2: Do the costliness and rarity of the ingredients hinder some families from preparing and cooking dishes?
QUESTION 2 (by %) 100%
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 0 0 0 0.5 No 66.7 66.7 37.5 26.7 27.1 30.8 Yes 0 33.3 62.5 73.3 72.9 68.7
The pattern that was formed out of the responses in this question exhibited itself as one of the most interesting and expected turnouts in the survey. As the annual gross income ascends
(except for Class D, where its percentage of 73.3% is higher than that of Class E), the percentage of the respondents who said that the cost and rarity of the ingredients become an impediment in promoting culinary tradition descends – that is, from a whopping 72.9% from Class E to an empty 0% percent of “Yes” response from Class A. The general percentage of 68.7%, however, suggests that most of the respondents agree to the fact that the costliness and rarity of the ingredients make it hard for them to prepare and cook trademark Kapampangan dishes. Again, a single respondent from Class A had no answer in this particular question.
QUESTION 3: Will proselytizing traditional dishes into processed and ready-to-eat foods suffice?
QUESTION 3 (by %) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 0 0 0 0.5 No 66.7 66.7 95.8 86.7 83.3 86.7 Yes 0 33.3 4.2 13.3 16.7 12.8
In this question, the valid collated number of respondents generally gave a “No” response, in the assumption that regardless of the convenience and ease of labor demanded by processed and ready-to-eat foods, they still prefer Kapampangan in a way that it should be traditionally cooked. The general percentage of the negative respondents is 86.7%, while those with an affirmative response – including a single no answer response – belong to the remaining
13.3%. Class C attained the highest percentage of “No” response with 95.8%, followed by
Classes D and E, with 86.7% and 83.3%, respectively, while both Classes A and B had a similar percentage of 66.7%.
QUESTION 4: Do you think that traditional dishes should be solely prepared during fiestas and other celebrations? QUESTION 4 (by %) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 0 2.2 0 1 No 33.3 66.7 79.2 80 72.9 75.4 Yes 33.3 33.3 20.8 17.8 27.1 23.6
In this particular question, the general response, with a turnout of 75.4% of the total share of respondents, was, again, a negative stance, assuming that the respondents believe that the traditional dishes – Kapampangan in this context – can be still prepared even during ordinary days. The highest share of percentage within their socio-economic group belongs to Class D, with 80% of “No” response, followed by Class C with 79.2%, and Class E with 72.9%. This implies that for the respondents in the lower strata, Kapampangan dishes do not only solely belong to special occasions.
QUESTION 5: Should there be a compromise or an adjustment when it comes to culinary tradition in a modernizing society?
QUESTION 5 (by %) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 0 0 0 0.5 No 33.3 33.3 45.8 42.2 37.5 40.5 Yes 33.3 66.7 54.2 57.8 62.5 59
Compared to the other results acquired from the other questions, the found pattern of answers in this particular one entails that the respondents have a generally mixed feeling on whether culinary tradition should be treated in such a way that is more passive to the point of compromise and adjustment to give way to the trend of modernization. This is reflected by the percentage share between the two options (the 0.5% share of the no answer response is included in the 100% total share) – where 59.0% of the total respondents took an affirmative stance, while in a not too far position, the “No” respondents have a 40.5% share, which shows an 18.5% difference. The one with the highest percentage in the “Yes” respondents, as per their share in their respective groups, is the Class B (or the upper middle class) with 66.7%, while Class C (or the middle middle class) garnered the highest percentage in the “No” response with 45.8%.
QUESTION 6: Should culinary tradition be considered an obsolete factor once a society undergoes modernity?
QUESTION 6 (by %) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%
Percentage of Respondentsof Percentage 10% 0% Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Total No Answer 33.3 0 2.1 0 0 1 No 33.3 33.3 77.1 64.4 71.9 70.3 Yes 33.3 66.7 20.8 35.6 28.1 28.7
Lastly, the biggest question regarding the significance and relevance of culinary tradition amid a modernizing society received a relatively positive response. As to the obsolescence of culinary tradition in a modernizing society, a majority of 70.3% among the respondents exude their stance that culinary tradition is still an important factor regardless of whether a society undergoes modernity or not. With 77.1%, Class C respondents garnered the highest relative percentage among those who rejected culinary tradition’s obsolescence, while Class B respondents had the highest relative percentage among those who had an opposite view that culinary tradition should be obsolete as modernization permeates a society – with 66.7%.
###
After laying the most important factors and numbers out, what can be synthesized afterwards? For one, the presented questions were not only chosen because of their significance level, but also because of the implied notion of the power relations pertaining to food, in the context of culinary tradition. That is why the questions were asked in such a way that they convey an untapped relationship between traditional and modern, or between convenience and tediousness. The more important factor to look at, however, is the responses to the questions.
Since the objective that the study aims to achieve in this part is “to determine the relationship between the socio-economic situation of modernizing communities and their view of the subsistence of culinary tradition,” there is a need to determine whether a relationship has been established in the first place. Fortunately, it is relatively safe to say that there is a relationship between the socio-economic situation of the communities and their view regarding culinary tradition – that is to some extent. It can be said that in some questions, the influence of the respondents’ socio-economic status is prevalent, but in some, it is not. Nevertheless, this quantitative part of the study has supplemented the additional validation that the qualitative part needs.
CONCLUSION: The Aftertaste
Now that everything has been served, it is time to ask: “What’s in the plate?”
Indeed, the province of Pampanga has been the home of the people who love and value cooking and eating as much as they are breathing. For the longest time, they have treated their cuisine as a significant part of their existence, of their identity, of who they are today not only as
Filipinos, but as Kapampangans.
Things, however, inevitably change as time runs by. As a first-class income province and a home to three cities, one of which (Mabalacat) is a newly-established one, while the remaining two (Angeles and San Fernando) are the key economic players, Pampanga faces the reality that it is developing at a relatively rapid pace. In this turn of events, certain traditional culinary customs and values are undeniably affected, since everyone is trying to keep up with the fast- paced life brought about by a modernizing society. And as Kapampangan culinary, or even cultural, vanguards fear, this phenomenon may eventually lead to the dissolution of the once- established pride and glory of the province as the “Culinary Capital of the Philippines.”
Nevertheless, there is hope to be seen. As the findings have shown, the influx of modernization – through the trends of industrialization and globalization – has a two-way effect; it has its benefits and its costs. Moreover, the people’s perception is all the more important in keeping the culinary tradition alive, since it is through them that tradition is ensured to be passed on from the previous generation to the next.
Therefore, the role that food politics play in the culinary tradition of a modernizing society becomes all the more significant as time goes by. For one, food politics attempts to continuously depict culinary tradition as a significant and relevant factor as the number of food- related industries and businesses continue to grow, as well as to perceive how the people’s socio- economic status influence them to continue or to stop in practicing their culinary tradition.
Ultimately, food politics exists today as a distinct concept, insofar as the subsistence of culinary tradition is concerned, in order to create and secure a constant link between tradition and modernity.
###
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alejandro, R. G. (1982). The Basics of Philippine Cooking. In R. G. Alejandro, The Philippine Cookbook (pp. 17-20). New York: Perigee Books.
Alexander, J. (1994). Modern, Anti, Post and Neo: How Social Theories Have Tried to Understand the 'New World' of 'Our Time'. Zeitschrift für Soziologie (23) , 165-197.
Alvina, C. S. (2000). Regional Dishes: In this land of more than 7,000 islands, regional diversity can not only be seen but tasted. In R. G. Alejandro, The Food of the Philippines: Authentic Recipes from the Pearl of the Orient (pp. 10-13). Singapore: Perigee Books.
Aron, R. (1964). The Industrial Society (English translation). London.
Barker, C. (2000). An Introduction to Cultural Studies. In C. Barker, Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice (pp. 3-38). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Berger, J. (1996). Was bedeutet die Modernisierungstheorie wirklich – und was wird ihr bloß unterstellt? Leviathan (24) , 45-62.
Bernstein, H. (2002). Modernization Theory and the Sociological Study of Development. Journal of Development Studies , 141-160.
Board, N. S. (2013, February 22). Philippine Standard Geographic Code Interactive: Angeles City. Retrieved from Republic of the Philippines: Philippine Statistics Authority - National Statistical Coordination Board: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/
Borromeo, L. L. (2014, January 23). Interview_Kapampangan Culinary Expert. (J. V. Magday, Interviewer)
Bryman, A. E. (2013, August 20). Triangulation. Retrieved from Reference World: http://www.referenceworld.com/sage/socialscience/triangulation.pdf
Burros, M. (1988, February 27). It's Still Women's Work. New York Times .
Cordero-Fernando, G. (1992). Philippine Food & Life. Pasig: Anvil Publishing Inc.
Fernandez, D. (2000). What is Filipino Food? Indigenous dishes blended with flavors brought by Chinese traders and the spices of the conquistadores comprise this versatile cuisine. In R. G. Alejandro, The Food of the Philippines: Authentic Recipes from the Pearl of the Orient (pp. 7-9). Singapore: Periplus Editions (HK) Ltd.
Giving Filipino Food An Identity. (2012, November 10). Manila Bulletin .
Goodwin, N., Nelson, J. A., Ackerman, F., & Weisskopf, T. (2008). Consumption and the Consumer Society. Tufts University Global Development and Environment Institute , 1-19.
Hall, S. (1980). Cultural Studies: Two Paradigms. In Media, Culture and Society (pp. 57-72). London: Academic Press Inc. Limited. Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs , 22-49.
Kinsey, J. D. (1994). Food and Families' Socioeconomic Status. The Journal of Nutrition , 1878S-1885S.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B., & Fernandez, D. G. (2013, September 29). Culture Ingested: On the Indigenization of Philippine Food. Retrieved from New York University: www.nyu.edu/classes/bkg/web/fernandez.pdf
Leach, H. (2012, July 7). Food cultures and culinary traditions. Retrieved from Backyard Books NZ: http://backyardbooks.wordpress.com/2012/07/07/food-cultures-and-culinary-traditions-prof- helen-leach/
Lerner, D. (1967). Comparative Analysis of Processes of Modernization. In H. Miner, The City in Modern Africa. London.
Musni, L. F. (2014, January 20). Interview_Center for Kapampangan Studies. (J. V. Magday, Interviewer)
Pampanga Culinary Arts. (2013, August 19). Retrieved from Department of Tourism: http://www.visitmyphilippines.com/index.php?title=PampangaCulinaryArts&func=all&pid=6979
Reyes, J. (2014, February 24). Interview_Pampanga's Best. (J. V. Magday, Interviewer)
Rodell, P. A. (2002). Culture and Customs of the Philippines. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Schutz, A. (1962). Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality . Massachussetts: Kluwer Boston, Inc.
Stephenson, J. B. (1968). Is Everyone Going Modern? A Critique and a Suggestion for Measuring Modernism. American Journal of Sociology Vol. 74 No. 3 .
Sztompka, P. (2002). Socjologia. Znak .
Tiryakian, E. A. (1998). Neo-Modernisierung: Lehren für die und aus der postsozialistischen Transformation. In K. (. Müller, Postsozialistische Krisen (pp. 31-52). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
Winter, R. (2000). Cultural Studies. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke, A Companion to Qualitative Research (pp. 118-122). Hamburg: Sage Publication.
Zapf, W. (1991). Modernisierung und Modernisierungstheorien. In W. Zapf, Die Modernisierung moderner Gesellschaften (pp. 23-39). Frankfurt: Campus.
Zapf, W. (2004). Modernization Theory - and the Non-Western World. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung , 1-14.