The University of Chicago Scientific Knowledge And
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE CULINARY ARTS AND MATHEMATICAL FINANCE A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY BY CHAD RICHARD BORKENHAGEN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2018 For Shirley, Nils, and Kai. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables............................................................................................................................. v List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. vii Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 1 Empirical settings: Culinary science and quantitative finance ......................................... 1 Data and methods ........................................................................................................... 3 Summary of chapters ....................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2: Working between art and science in the field of fine dining .............................. 12 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 12 Data and methods ......................................................................................................... 14 Background: Tradition, creativity and science in the culinary arts ................................ 16 Modernist cuisine and a “scientific approach” to cooking ............................................ 21 Demarcating between modernist and traditional cuisine ............................................... 26 Modernist cuisine as legitimate culinary practice .......................................................... 33 Conclusion: Walking the line between art and science................................................... 40 Chapter 3: “Open source cooking” and field organization in the culinary arts ................... 44 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 44 The social organization of the culinary arts ................................................................... 46 Methods and data .......................................................................................................... 51 Modernist cuisine .......................................................................................................... 53 Open source cooking and the social organization of the culinary arts ........................... 67 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 73 iii Chapter 4: Scientific Expertise and Organizational Structure ............................................. 77 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 77 Background and Cases .................................................................................................. 78 Data and Methods ......................................................................................................... 82 Adopting science in finance and the culinary arts .......................................................... 85 Secret recipes, proprietary models, and scientific norms of knowledge sharing ............. 92 Incentives for open sharing ........................................................................................... 95 Individual and Organizational Interests ...................................................................... 101 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 105 Chapter 5: Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 108 Future Research .......................................................................................................... 111 References ............................................................................................................................. 115 Appendix: Participants ......................................................................................................... 127 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Participants, culinary arts .......................................................................................... 127 Table 2: Participants, finance .................................................................................................. 128 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Green tea “caviar.” .................................................................................................... 18 Figure 2: Immersion circulators. ............................................................................................... 32 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My first expression of gratitude goes to the chefs, scientists, instructors, journalists, and everyone else who participated in this research. Their generosity made the project possible; their thoughtfulness and candor made it interesting; and their personalities made it a joy. I hope that my work does justice to the experiences and perspectives they have so kindly shared. Next, I wish to acknowledge an enormous debt to my longtime advisor and dissertation committee chair, John Levi Martin. John’s insightful observations and incisive feedback serve as constant motivation to produce better work, and his guidance has made an indelible mark on both this project and my approach as a scholar. Perhaps as importantly, John has consistently gone out of his way to help ensure that obstacles in my personal life didn’t derail my academic pursuits. Whether that meant giving parenting advice, setting aside large chunks of time for a week for close collaboration, or meeting over bibimbap in a food court in Queens, John has always been willing to (sometimes literally) go the extra mile to help. Having such a generous and multifaceted mentor is truly a gift for which I will always be thankful. I am also immensely grateful to the other members of my dissertation committee, Karin Knorr Cetina and James Evans. This dissertation began as a research paper in Karin’s course on science studies, and it was her initial encouragement that inspired me to take the project more seriously. And although he probably does not remember it, James has been an important presence in my professional life since our meeting on prospective student’s day, where his relaxed demeanor and sharp wit stood in sharp contrast with what I expected from the faculty at a university where fun goes to die. At every stage of this dissertation, both Karin and James have been remarkably supportive, and their advice has been invaluable. Our many conversations have vii left me with a long list of ideas that I still hope to pursue, and I look forward to more such conversations in the future. I also wish to extend my thanks to several others who have lent their assistance to this project in one way or another. Special acknowledgement goes to Peter Bearman, who first showed me that oddballs and misfits can thrive in academia, and whose guidance ultimately led me to pursue graduate school. (Not coincidentally, it was also Peter who suggested that I seek out John Levi Martin at Chicago.) Thanks also to Ryon Lancaster, Ed Laumann, and Linda Waite for their support and mentorship in my first years at Chicago, and to my fellow U of C sociology graduate students, especially Jessica Borja, Michael Castelle, Michael Corey, Laura Doering, Jan Doering, Gordon Douglas, Ben Merriman, Dan Menchik, Jeffrey Parker, and Thomas Swertz. I am also grateful to Vanina Leschziner for lending her expert perspective to this project, and to Emily Erikson and Adam Slez for their advice, support, and friendship. Eric Klinenberg and New York University’s Institute for Public Knowledge provided me with office space and an intellectually stimulating home base in New York City, and Chapters 2 and 3 of this dissertation benefitted greatly from the comments from editors Sergio Sismondo (Social Studies of Science) and Shyon Baumann (Poetics), as well as several anonymous reviewers. This project also could not have been completed without considerable support from family and friends. I am indebted to Linda Fan and Matt Polazzo for inviting our family into their home, and to Laurie Fan, for making sure our children were regularly clothed and fed. It is difficult to imagine how I might have finished this dissertation without their help. After moving to New York, Jean Soh provided a place to stay on my many visits back to Chicago. And although academic life is quite foreign to them, my mom and dad have always supported my viii decisions, however unorthodox my path in life may have seemed. While I suspect the interest they express in my research is feigned, I know the pride they feel for me is quite real. Finally, I reserve my greatest expression