Culture Within A Food Court

by Jennifer K. Mulcahy

© 1995 Jennifer K. Mulcahy. All rights reserved.

It is often difficult for an anthropologist to observe aspects of his own culture and still maintain he necessary objectivity for effective fieldwork. One of Anthropology's purposes is to "make the familiar look strange"(ANTH1a 9/5/95). In Body Ritual Among the Nacriema. Horace Miner gives us a Fascinating example of looking at one's own culture in a foreign light. I found his article on the 'body rituals' of our culture so interesting that I decided to try a similar experiment. I had always been intrigued the phenomenon of the American Shopping Mall, and I decided that the 'food court' in particular had always seemed to be a world of its own, with its own norms and rules. I wanted to discover what sorts of rules these were, and to examine them from both an objective view and in relation to traditional American life.

On a Tuesday afternoon, I made a trip to Arsenal Mall in Watertown, Massachusetts. Notebook and pen in hand, I made my way up the escalator to the "Food Emporium", a food court consisting of several restaurant chains and an array of booths, tables, trash receptacles, street lamps and trees. The strangeness of this environment was the first thing I noticed as I entered the Emporium. The tiled floor, trees, street lamps and picnic-like tables along with the two 'streets' of restaurants on either side of the food, court seemed to be an obvious attempt at simulating an outdoor atmosphere. I smiled and wondered if the people sitting at the picnic tables realized this trickery, and proceeded to obtain my fieldwork 'props'- a slice of pizza and a large cola. As Malinowski points out, "it is good for the Ethnographer sometimes to put aside his camera, notebook and pencil, and to join in himself what is going on(Malinowski,1922:21)". As I ate my lunch, I began to look around to get a feel for the place. There were a wide variety of restaurants to choose from: Taco Bell, Burger King, Sbarro(ltalian), Sakkio(Japanese), Inna's Grill(American and Armenian Food), Colombo Ice Cream, Hong Kong Express(Chinese) and Popeye's Famous Fried Chicken and Biscuits. The restaurant that seemed to attract the most customers was "Taco Bell'. A close second was "Burger King", followed by "Sbarro". Interestingly and perhaps not inconsequentially, Taco Bell seemed to have the brightest sign and graphics as well as the lowest prices and free drink refills.

I observed several points of interest regarding selection of restaurant, and ordering. Restaurant selection seemed to be largely a group effort, as a group of people dining together almost always selected the same restaurant. Since the groups of people varied from single-sex to coed and also ranged from two
to eight people, it was difficult to discover who in the group generally made the restaurant decision. The sole exception to this was in the case of a parent or both parents who had children with them. In this case, a child in the group would either point to, run to, or loudly indicate the restaurant of his or her preference. The parent would oblige the child almost without fail. During the ordering of meals, people would generally look at the overhead menus with a look of great concern on their faces. Almost invariably, they would touch their faces in some way: a stroking of the chin, a scratching of the head, or a rubbing of the nose, usually. I found this exaggerated concern over the menus amusing, especially since I took the liberty of assuming that many, if not all, of these people had been at the restaurant before, perhaps scores of times. A possible reason for this could be that the people feel self-conscious. Perhaps they feel that they are being watched by the restaurant workers or by other mall shoppers. Whatever the reason, I found this to parallel other fidgeting habits displayed in other areas of public American life such as toe tapping,
finger drumming, and the like.

In preparing to receive their meals, people tended to take many more napkins than they could possibly use. This could possibly indicate a need to get the most for one's money, to keep busy until the food was ready, or perhaps both. When the food is handed to them, it is wrapped and contained colorfully on a plastic tray. People received their trays eagerly, and then hurried away from the counter. Once away from the counter, the person or group slowly found a seat. Besides the frequent seating in close proximity to the restaurant one had ordered from, where one sat was largely dependent upon whether one was alone or in a group of two or more people. People dining lone hardly ever sat at a table right next to an occupied table, while a group of people seemed comfortable sitting at a table next to one occupied by a person dining alone. The food court was only about a third full while I was collecting this data, and therefore there was a choice of seats. If the court had been more full the people would have had to adjust their spacing comforts in order to obtain available seats. Given their choice, single diners tended to sit at a table next to one of the four trees in the food court. This struck me as very resourceful, for the tree acted as both a surrogate dining partner and as something handy to look at while eating.

Single diners seem to have an interesting position in a mall food court. In American society as a whole, eating alone carries a sort of taboo. Sharing meals with someone is nearly a requirement for a socially accepted member of society. In a mall food court, however, the taboo is temporarily lifted. A mall is primarily a place for shopping. Shopping is an accepted solitary activity, so dining in a mall becomes an exception to the usual dining norms. Since shopping in America is typically a female activity, that could help explain the fact that I observed approximately double the amount of solo female diners as
opposed to the amount of single male diners. Whether the taboo is lifted or not, single diners continue to display curious behaviors which appear to reveal their discomfort with solo dining. The solo diners I observed often wore their coats and jackets while eating, as if to imply that they were in a hurry. When one eats "on the run", it is more acceptable to eat alone. This idea is based on the notion of busy lives, conflicting schedules, and the underlying implication that if one wasn't so busy, one would dine with others. Single diners also prominently displayed their shopping parcels on their tables, as if to announce to the other diners that they are shopping and therefore it is all right if they are alone. One man I observed actually was clutching his shopping bag with one hand under the table while eating with the other hand.

While dining alone, people seemed to need a distraction. Some people concentrated visibly on chewing their food, others stared at a spot in space(or at a tree if they were sitting next to one). Several other solitary diners read books and newspapers while they ate. They hardly ever looked at or made eye contact with the other diners around them. Since I was dining alone, but also observing everyone intensely, I was breaking one of the norms of solo mall dining. Perhaps this was part of the reason I got some strange looks from several of the people in the food court. Most of the single diners I made eye
contact with looked away immediately. People in groups lingered on me a little longer, but I still got strange, unwelcoming glances from them. Sometimes one must step outside of the norms of the society one is observing in order to obtain proper data. As Margaret Mead said, "...the anthropologist must learn
the culture without embodying it, in order to become its accurate chronicler"(Mead 1966:25).

Groups of two or more generally sat somewhat near the restaurant where they had purchased their food. Couples consisting of a man and woman tended to sit far away from the other diners, while same sex couples or groups seemed less fussy over their seats. There are obvious romantic implications with this
observation, given the preference for privacy for romantic couples in the U.S.A. As I stated previously, groups of people did not usually avoid sitting next to a table occupied by a single diner. In fact, a group of three college-aged women sat down at the table right next to me. At first I felt a little invaded, which perhaps is an insight into how the other single diners feel when a group sits next to them. There is a feeling of power or dominance involved in the situation, as if their togetherness is superior to solitude. I quickly recovered from my natural reaction, however, and found myself delighted to be in such close
proximity to some unwitting specimens. The girls looked me over quickly and began to eat. They, as I bad earlier observed as a norm, bad all ordered from a single restaurant. I sipped purposefully on my cola as I attempted to eavesdrop
undetected on their conversation. I overheard various conversations about television shows, the weather, and gossip. A common trait that the topics of conversation bad was their casual nature. This complemented the colorful decor and deceptive outdoor charm and gave the "Food Emporium" a very relaxed, upbeat atmosphere. The mall food court seemed to be a place of lighthearted discussion and gathering; perhaps an escape from the pressures of the outside world.

The interactions of mothers and young children are also noteworthy. There are certain unwritten, undeclared rules in the food court(and in much of society) such as to keep the noise level moderately low, to stay within one's claimed space for the duration of the stay, and to be reasonably tidy and clean up after
oneself. Young children are an excellent reminder to the anthropologist that these rules are an active choice and participation on the part of the adults, and not something we instinctively do. The young children I observed ran from their table to various parts of the food court, screaming, laughing or crying, and throwing waste and food around the area. The mothers took actions that ranged from all but ignoring their child's outbursts to picking up the child again and again and bringing him back to his seat and trying to explain why it is 'naughty' for them to behave that way. One mother I observed placed her daughter on a stool and spun her around, trying to keep her amused long enough for the meal to be completed. I found this to be an outstanding example of the way "the child learns as part of growing up and becomes what he learns"(Mead 1966:24-25). This also illustrates a point that Geertz brings up in "The Impact of the Concept of Culture on the Concept of Man": "We are, in sum, incomplete or unfinished animals who complete or finish ourselves through culture ...and not through culture in general but through highly particular forms of it"(Geertz 1973:49). Although children receive cultural information from the moment of birth, the teachings of mothers in the mail food court show us the way culture is consciously taught and refined in our young.

The ending of a food court visit also has some interesting components. One person in a group generally collected the trash for the whole table. The person who collected the trash usually seemed to be one of leader' status in the group, so I did not feel that it was an obligation of an underling, but rather
more of a volunteered service that showed friendliness as well as assertiveness. Most people were very good about cleaning up the mess they had made, but there was a situation that fell outside the normal range of cleaning up after oneself. At the table to my right, there was a Burger King bag filled with trash. The trash it contained was largely paper and therefore no~hygienically disturbing\)o touch or remove. A lady sat down at the table with the bag on it. When she first sat down, she looked at the bag and then
looked quickly away. She arranged her meal and belongings on the table so that nothing came within several inches of the bag. After about twenty minutes of dining, the woman carefully gathered her trash and got up from the table to dispose of it. She left the Burger King bag where she had found it. About ten
minutes after the woman-had-left, another woman came with her meal to sit at the table. She arranged her food and purse in a strikingly similar fashion to that of the previous lady, and avoided the bag after an initial glance as well. A cleaning woman employed by the "Food Emporium" came by the woman's table after a few minutes and picked up the Burger King bag. The lady sitting at the table did not acknowledge the presence of the cleaning lady, but after the employee left she seemed relieved. I was puzzled at why two different women both would choose not to acknowledge or dispose of a perfectly sanitary-looking bag of trash, especially since the bag was somewhat in the way of the customers. I also was somewhat confused as to why the women chose to sit at the table with the bag on it even though there were plenty of tables free in the food court. The only explanation I can come up with for at least part of these actions is that people in American society generally do not want to get involved in things that they are not already a part of. An example of this in urban American society is the common occurrence of people needing help
on the streets. Most people walk right by the needy, choosing not to become involved. To some extent I can understand why people would choose not to become involved in a potentially dangerous or legal problem by helping someone they do not know on a city street, but the same ideas don't translate very well onto the Burger King bag incident. It is possible as well that the women though to themselves,'l didn't make the mess and I am not cleaning it up!', which holds up pretty well except for the fact that the bag was
in their way while they were eating. This also does not explain why they chose to sit at this particular table in the first place. Perhaps after further observation of the same phenomenon and upon deeper reflection on my own part I may find a better answer to this puzzle. If I had thought that asking the women about it would have gotten me an honest answer I would have tried that route, but a positive result from that approach seemed to me highly unlikely.

I found one exception to the rule of a single person collecting the trash for a whole table. In every situation I observed, the people at the various tables each held on to their own soda cups upon leaving the table. The people would then sip at their sodas regardless whether or not there was anything left in them
but ice. Some people would follow their 'trash collector' to the waste basket and sip on their soda until the last possible moment before reluctantly dropping the cups into the trash. A few people carried their sodas out of the food court with them instead, but the notion that the sodas were something that was hard to give up prevailed. When I got up to throw my trash away, I did the very same thing before I even realized it! It was then when I snapped back to the 'reality' of being a human being rather than just an observer.

In conclusion, I feel that my miniature fieldwork excursion was highly informative as well as quite enjoyable to do. I believe that the observations I made and recorded reflect my original thought that the food court of an American Shopping Mall has its own set of norms and is, in effect, a culture in its own right. In doing a mini-fieldwork assignment I found it very fitting to observe a 'mini-culture* of sorts. This was a great experience of the aforementioned "making the familiar look strange"(ANTH1a 9/5/95).
The theories I have read and learned about so far in this class showed themselves to me in new and exciting ways. I can't imagine how the early anthropologists were satisfied with "armchair Anthropology"(ANTH1a 9/1/95) when fieldwork gives one such a personal, nearly tangible experience
from which to draw conclusions and learn. I am sure that the world of the "Food Emporium" in the Arsenal Mall has an abundance more to offer, and that I have only scraped the surface of its intricacies and patterns. Perhaps I shall return to this or other food courts and continue my observations. I think that the best way to approach fieldwork is by combining objectivity with self-involvement, and I believe that this experience was an exercise in both.

top