The importance of practices related to food consumption, and specifically those related to commensality , are widely discussed in sociological and anthropological literature. Classical sociology has already extensively studied this topic and emphasized its importance. The theoretical contributions of Comte, Fustel de Coulanges, Le Play, Durkheim, Spencer, Simmel, and Tönnies are indispensable in this regard. Generally, the concept of commensality suggests a type of practice tied to the idea that everyone sitting at the same table is served the same foods . But historical literature teaches us that this is not the only model of commensal practice.
Various types of commensalism practices can be distinguished, which vary from one society to another and over time. Guests at a banquet may all sit at the same table and eat the same foods, as was common in Europe from the 17th century onwards; or, people sitting at the same table may be served different foods depending on their social standing.
Different types of commensalism
Beyond its specific historical forms, functionalist and evolutionary approaches, however, emphasize the universal diffusion of commensalism and the presence of some recurring traits. It is the belief system that determines whether a meal can be shared with certain people, according to certain rules of behavior and certain modalities, with other people according to certain other modalities, or whether it cannot be shared with other people at all. The French anthropologist Arnold van Gennep emphasizes how the social rites of most of the civilizations he studied are often based on practices that involve the exchange or consumption of food. “ Commensality or the rite of eating and drinking together (…) is clearly a rite of aggregation, of a properly material union that has been called a sacrament of communion. ” ( van Gennep 1909, 25 ).
Commensality: The Evolutionary Perspective
Pierre van den Berghe, on the other hand, starts from an evolutionary perspective to emphasize the universality of commensalism. He researched the origins of the practice of commensalism by conducting a comparative analysis of human social habits and those of other animals. The immediately striking fact is that the practice of sharing food is common to most carnivorous animals . In particular, van den Berghe observes how some species—such as chimpanzees and canids—use food exchanges to create and maintain social bonds that go beyond natural blood ties.
According to van den Berghe's analysis, the fact that the practice of sharing food is common to most carnivorous animals demonstrates how ancient and deep the roots of this human behavior are and can serve to explain its centrality and universality. " Not only is food the gift par excellence, but it is also the gift that cannot be refused without offending. " (van den Berghe 1984, 390). More generally, sharing food seems to perform a pacification and socialization function.
The meal as a “social act”
While it is often difficult to perceive one's own behavior as belonging to a ritual dimension or to attribute symbolic meaning to it, it must be recognized that industrial societies (as well as postmodern and postindustrial ones) are rich in ritualized practices and charged with symbolic values, perhaps less consciously. The behaviors and practices associated with meals play an important structuring function within the participating group; the ways in which the table is set, the criteria by which diners choose their seats around the lavishly laid table, the ways in which they converse, " create proximity and distance: people sit together but in a way that reinforces distance and hierarchy. " (Maffesoli 1985, 7).
The meal thus becomes a fundamental social act to the extent that diners are given the opportunity to experiment, to carry out a sort of test of what social relationships are like within the group, or more generally, within the society to which they belong.
Acceptance of the rules imposed during the meal implies acceptance of social relationships and the social hierarchy among the diners even after the meal is over. As in classical Greece, when for meat-based banquets " the sacrificed animal (...) was then cut into pieces and eaten during a ritual banquet in which each received a share of the meat in accordance with his status in the City. (...) The share of meat that the citizen receives during the sacrificial banquet is literally the embodiment of his political and social status. " (Fischler 1992, 112).
Commensality: “food nomadism”
Jean-Pierre Corbeau, referring to modern societies, has emphasized the fact that in advanced industrial society there has been a rapid transformation of those commensal practices that had long been considered extremely stable and resistant to change. The sense of belonging to the group, particularly the family, " is affirmed through some commensal ritual that no longer necessarily presupposes gathering around the table. " (Corbeau 1985, 111)
Corbeau speaks of a practice of " food nomadism " that can be observed on two distinct levels. The first level is the increasingly widespread habit of eating meals outside of one's home and family group, reflecting changes in working hours and a different management of free time; the second level refers to the private space, where meals are no longer necessarily consumed in the dining room or kitchen, in the presence of all family members, but rather in front of the television , perhaps at different times according to the family's different needs.
This change is an expression of the growing individualization brought about by the neoliberal system, which interprets individuals as “ hyper-rational monads ,” and which in this sense carries with it the risk of destructuring the most ancient social practices linked to commensality.
Rino Carfora
