Summary of " The Culinary Triangle " and " Deciphering a Meal" by Stephanie Chu

Summary of Culinary Triangle

In “Culinary Triangle”, anthropologist Claude Lewis Straus demonstrates the transformative cultural power of cooking by a culinary triangle which the three points- the raw, cooked and the rotten that “delimit the semantic field”. He believes the three cooking modes in the triangle: boiling, roasting and smoking is based on nature or culture.
Straus argues that the “art of cooking is not located entirely on the side of culture” by comparing the three cooking modes. Straus states that some nations believed the boiled is on the culture, a civilized act and the roasted is an ancient act because the boiled requires a receptacle, a “cultural object”, which roasting is directly exposed to the fire. However, he also contradicts these examples with other cultures that favored roasting over boiling. For instance, boiling conserves entirely the meat and its juices, while roasting destroys the meat, or boiled meat is flesh without its juice. Therefore, the ambiguity of the roasted and boiled depends the way people think about them.
Straus continues his argument with "smoking", which illustrates the “greatest affinity to the abstract category of the cooked”. Smoking is similar to roasting because it cooks as the same way as roasting. It differs from roasting because smoking makes use of the air. Smoking is also similar to boiling because a cultural object, a utensil is used. It differs from boiling since the utensil must be destroyed immediately after use while pots and pans for boiling are preserved utensils. In conclusion, Straus stresses the fact that the boundary between nature and culture is determined by the way the “man’s insertion in nature".

Summary of Deciphering a Meal

In “ Deciphering a Meal”, anthropologist Mary Douglas explores the close connection of rituals and human/animal relations in Hebrew dietary laws. She argues that Hebrew dietary laws are not irrational but values purity and “ holiness as wholeness”.
Douglas explains the classification of animals according to degrees of holiness in diagrams and discusses the analogy between the classification of animals and human. She states that in the Moisac law, humans who touch or eat the abominable is “ to be defiled and defilement forbids entry to the temple”. Douglas continues to elaborate her point with the example of the Israelite obeying the Covenant and applies this rule to their animals that the first born is “ consecrated to divine service”, just as the analogy between altar and table (the degrees of holiness of animals).
Douglas continues to compare the classification of animals with the restrictions of marriages. Foreign husbands and wives can lead to “false gods and political defections” , which disrupts purity of the law. Therefore, this illustrates the application of food rules on the society, which ‘mixtures’ of people are not allowed.
Douglas also mentions the impossibilities of people adhering to the Mosaic Dietary Laws completely. Humans need to reproduce and be nourished. However, these problems are avoided. In conclusion, Douglas shows us that the ordered system of a meal (classification of animals which are edible or not) represents all the ordered systems in the society associated with it.


Comparison between The Culinary Triangle and Deciphering a Meal

Mary Douglas’ “Deciphering a Meal” and Claude Levi- Strauss “the Culinary Triangle” share similarities and differences. Both authors used diagrams to illustrate their subject. Douglas used tables and shapes of geometry to illustrate the analogy between food meals and humans, while Strauss used the “culinary triangle “ to explain the relationship between the raw, cooked and rotted.
A second similarity of the two readings is both authors connect the relationship of cooking/ food with the society. Douglas used the example of relating the classification of animals with the restrictions of marriages, which mixed marriages disrupts purity of law. On the other hand, Strauss states that the ambiguity of the roasted or boiled depends on how people think about them.
“Deciphering a Meal” and “Culinary Triangle” differ in the focus of cultural values. Douglas focuses on the Mosaic law ritual and the food that meets the criteria to be considered a meal using the Jewish Dietary Law. Strauss talks about different countries around the world and compares each country’s perspective in “the boiled and the roasted” instead of focusing on one ethnicity.
Therefore both articles are similar in making use of diagrams to illustrate their subjects, connecting the food with the society and differ in their cultural focuses.