Chewing Over The Food Of The Future Analysis

1242 Words 5 Pages
Chewing over the Food of the Future?
In Lizzie Widdecombe’s “The End of Food,”, the writer shares how “The notion that we can nourish ourselves with something purer and more effective than food has long been part of our collective fantasy life.” This thought holds true for many in the developed world today, for whom food certainly feels like a burden, rather than a pleasure. The time, money and effort of purchasing, preparation, and eating food all seem to be a nuisance. Nevertheless, Robert Rhinehart’s startup of a drink mix, Soylent, has broke through as not only a crowd-funding hit, yet as a potential solution to the utilitarian burden. As Rhinehart explains in the article, the customary system of food “…just seem[s] like a system that’s
…show more content…
Of course, it is no accident that many of the words used to describe eating are the very same ones used to express even one’s thinking process. When presented with an idea, the mind will first grasp it and chew on it (hence, the title).It will consciously break the idea down into its component parts, savor it, then swallow for the idea to assimilate. Rhinehart explains that the product allows individuals to “cruise” throughout the day, without the mind having to worry about hunger pains or running out of energy. As Rhinehart puts it, Soylent is “, it’s easy…” and undemanding to plan, prepare and consume. While there is something appealing about this efficient diet and lifestyle, it may, on the other hand, serve as a detriment psychologically. Adam Hadhazy, a science writer insists, “The little brain in our innards, in connection with the big one in our skulls, partly determines our mental state..” Drinking Soylent limits all the necessary interaction the brain takes to inform the digestive system. The refusal to actually eat and enjoy food stands to reason that the full beneficial digestive response is not being provoked. The brain visualizing, smelling, and anticipating food is basic to one’s digestion and hunger satisfaction. Thus, adhering strictly to a Soylent diet, day in and day out, rather than food can interfere with the gut-brain interaction. The Widdecombe …show more content…
The social interaction revolving around meals is nothing new to society. From catching up for coffee in the morning to meeting friends for drinks at a bar, it seems unimaginable getting together without the company of food. Rhinehart reassures that the food substitute “isn’t coming for our Sunday potlucks. It’s coming for our frozen quesadillas.” Moreover, he explains that Soylent will allow a “…separation between our meals for utility and function, and our meals for experience and socialization.”” In other words, Rhinehart suggests that a go-to-meal, like Soylent, will still allow people to enjoy leisure meals and “recreational food.” His claim rests upon the questionable assumption that the majority of people eat for either two reasons: nourishment or enjoyment. And although a few resort to “frozen quesadillas” for sustenance, the majority of people prefer to eat food for both sustenance and pleasure. While Soylent, provides total nourishment, does so at the expense of social experience. The “future food” aims to eliminate the need for food, turning real meals into an optional, recreational activity. This prospect brings about what Widdecombe points out as “…visions of a world devoid of pizza parlors and taco stands.” This quotation reminds the audience of the social and entertainment value of eating food that Soylent lacks. A future filled with the beige liquid

Related Documents