The Lunchbox painted a very accurate depiction of workers in the food industry worldwide. Ila’s role as a neglected housewife is one that reappears itself in the food industry, considering the actions and work done by those in the industry often goes unnoticed and unrecognized. In a sense, Ila stands as a symbol to this contemporary notion of “farm to table”, being that as an ever consuming population, we often do not give a second thought to the labor and actions done to prepare our food. However, even though Sajaan appreciated her food, this idea of being unseen was still present as both Sajaan and Ila never met despite their exchange of letters. Thus, not only does the film in way demonstrate the unrecognition of those in the food industry but also this sense of hopelessness and difficulty that comes with trying to change such a complex and unequal system. Much like the process of growing papaya as observed in Ian Cook’s “Follow the Thing: Papaya”, many consumers simply do not know or are willing to know the toil and sweat in the cost of labor for their food. For the papaya workers in Jamaica, the constant picking of the fruit is an everyday struggle coupled with the realities of poverty and insufficient wages. Yet, for those in England it is just one of those fruits that people bought and ate but ultimately cared little for. Even when the depth of the process of its production was realized and understood, consumers in England much like Sajaan in the movie, are helpless to curb such a system.

In context to this understanding of hopelessness, there is also this notion of an encroachment by industrialization. This encroachment comes in numerous forms that affect the lives of those in the movie. Throughout the film, there are a few notable instances when this is present, such as when Ila’s husband, Rajeev, mistakes the cheap lunchbox service food for his wife’s own cooking. Another being, when Sajaan returns home only to eat a pre-packaged instant meal, rather than the home-cooking that he very much envies. More importantly, industrialization is observed as leading to this eradication of community, culture and food, especially in regards to India. Within the last few decades, India has experienced unprecedented economic growth and industrialization, however, development has not seen the same successive results in all sectors of the developing Indian economy.  As mentioned in Thomas Lyson’s “From Subsistence to Production”,

“In these [developing] nations, only a relatively small fraction of the laborers work for wages and provide for most of their needs through commercial market transactions. Larger segments of the population survive in a world of local capitalism that includes not only the exchange of goods, services, and labor for money but also barter, informal work arrangements, and labor exchanges. For these people, the neoclassical conception of the economy as being separate from the household or community has little meaning.” (25).

The crucial point with industrialization is the dramatic change that has occurred in India’s social structure. This is particularly evident within the movie as there is a growing lack of compassion and love within Indian society. As a result this leads to a feeling of nostalgia among Ila, Sajaan and Ila’s mother for a period before industrialization, before the mechanization of food, in which it was the ideal labor of love, not merely a transaction. In doing so, there is this struggle to return to this period despite the inevitable reality of industrialization. Namely, Ila’s attempts to reconnect to her husband through her cooking, Sajaan to live a similar life prior to his wife’s death and Ila’s mother to a time when she truly loved her husband. For these characters food was that expression of love but overtime as industrialization spurned, their roles became neglected and underappreciated like so many others in the food industry. However, as a result, there were instances in which industrialization had no effect or meaning to them with respect to their spaces.

Sajaan, for example, would regard the time he spent for lunch as vital and more importantly the space he encompassed became sacred to him. The anticipation of eating lunch, but more importantly receiving another letter from Ila became ritualistic, in the sense that he isolated the space that he used in order to find some sort of inner peace through her food and letters. It took a while before he would let anyone in, specifically Shaikh, whose trust and friendship was gained slowly to allow him to even conceive the thought of having lunch with him. Much like Jackson’s assertion in “Thinking Geographically”, the space that Sajaan occupied, became grounded more in place once there was some importance or interconnection attached. The interesting thing however, is that Sajaan’s place became more and more severed off from the global and specifically industrial as the boundaries that he drew became more and more local. For him it became a place in which he could enjoy his own experiences away from the vastness of the globalized world and be connected to the home cooked meals he desired.

Despite Sajaan’s reconnection to this idea of home cooked meals and his new bond with Ila, both of them were still bound by this notion of proximity and distance which inhibited them from ever meeting. Most notably when Ila and Sajaan were supposed to meet at the restaurant, Sajaan’s own insecurities about his age, prevented him from encountering her, even though she was willing to travel to Bhutan with him; obviously a much greater distance than simply across town, or in this case across the restaurant floor. In a way, there was more importance placed on this idea of seeking happiness in a distant country rather than in the local realm which they both inhabited. This is certainly the case for many workers in the food industry, notably those who find a lack of support from their local communities or those who are reliant on local resources but in turn provide for areas outside their communities. Ila in this case, is rooted in her local community and relies on its resources but overtime is more willing to provide and make a space for herself in another place due to this lack of connection from her community.

The film provides for an interesting perspective on the food industry not told from that of a stereotypical worker in such an industry, but a common housewife whose role can be used to explain many of the complexities and intricacies of the vast industry. Additionally, the dynamic between Sajaan and Ila allows for one to really understand how the consumer’s role within the process can either initiate or inhibit change.

 

 

Bibliography

<Cook, I. et al. (2004) “Follow the Thing: Papaya” Antipode 36(4): 642-664.>

<Jackson, P. (2006) “Thinking Geographically” Geography 91(3).>

<Lyson, T. (2004) “Chapter 2: From Subsistence to Production” Civic Agriculture. Tufts University Press: Medford.>

<Lyson, T. (2004) “Chapter 3: Going Global” Civic Agriculture. Tufts University Press: Medford.>

 

 

 

 

 

 

&Set in the gritty concrete jungle of New York City, Bob Giraldi’s Dinner Rush is a riveting and revealing story of the various lives of the people anchored to this one Italian restaurant, Gigino. Within the movie, there is an observed power dynamic between the different roles in the restaurant as described in the readings by Prole and Fine. The atmosphere is portrayed as chaotic and sometimes violent, amidst the joyful cacophony of unknowing customers. The movie also appropriately conveys the real lives of those who work in the restaurant and allow it to operate each day.
From the first scenes of the movie there is an obvious power struggle between Udo “King” Cropa and his father, Louis Cropa, the owner of the restaurant. In the film, as Udo’s star presence as an elite cook begins to grow, his father’s role as owner and more importantly as a paternal figure begins to wane. Furthermore, it was Udo’s decision to stray away from the traditional Italian cuisine, this displeases his father and as a result he seeks Duncan, another chef, to cook him the meals he desires. The hierarchy and power struggle between Udo and his father is one that mirrors itself in the other characters throughout the film. As highlighted in Prole’s description of the organization and division of labor in a restaurant, the role of the individual in the establishment also determines their rank. This can thus lead to conflicts of power when there are competing individuals in the same rank vying for the same position. This competition is seen through the servers, who although are ranked equally, still compete with each other for more tables even if there was the potential to be completely overwhelmed. Ultimately, the strive for power and mobility is a universal desire by all those who work in the restaurant industry.
In having a glimpse into the real lives of the workers in the restaurant, the film also allows the audience to make their own conjectures about the people in the restaurant industry. Although not overt, the true personalities of the servers became apparent through their interactions with the customers. Notably, when the waitress remarked that the paintings in the restaurant were done by her, another when the bartender was able to answer every trivia question given to him by those at the bar, as well the shocking revelation of the wall street banker’s dual identity as a hit-man. These instances gave a real face to these characters in that, workers in the restaurant industry have real lives behind their uniforms. They are real people who face real struggles, and are not necessarily poor or un-educated, and get through life by simply earning a meaningless wage. Therefore, they should not be assumed as previously stated, as they do suffer through the drudgery of the work that they are indoctrinated into and that makes them appear un-human.
Although Dinner Rush is not a warm-felt movie, surely it allows one to gain a glimpse into the cutthroat restaurant industry that survives on an array of diverse people.

I have not given nor recieved unauthorized aid on this assignment