Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 International Conference on Communication in Multicultural Society, CMSC 2015, 6-8 December 2015, Moscow, Russian Federation Garlic and love: gastronomic communication in an intercultural family Olga Leontovich* Volgograd State Socio-Pedagogical University, 27 Lenin Prospect, Volgograd 400066, Russian Federation Abstract The paper discusses gastronomic discourse in a family including representatives of different cultures from semiotics and communication perspectives The non-verbal aspect deals with foodstuffs, dishes, use of space and time, distribution of responsibilities between family members, artefacts, and scripts (sequences of actions) Verbal signs are represented by nominations of foodstuffs, dishes and artefacts, gastronomic metacommunication, and etiquette phrases accompanying a meal The analysis of the way gastronomic systems are combined can be further extended to the study of other aspects of life in an intercultural family, such as living space, religious beliefs, moral values, etc © 2016 2016The TheAuthors Authors Published Elsevier © Published by by Elsevier Ltd.Ltd This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license Peer-review under responsibility of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Peer-review under responsibility of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) Keywords: Intercultural family; gastronomic communication; foodstuffs; dishes; meals; artefacts; behavioural patterns Introduction A wise person once remarked that compatibility in intercultural marriage has as much to with garlic as with values (Romano, 2001, p 45) Food is one of the key factors ruling the fate of families, which include representatives of different cultures Experienced spouses agree with scholars who argue that preferences in food are no less important than the choice of family language – neither of them can be ignored The present study is based on the research of different aspects of communication in an intercultural family carried out by the author of this paper and E V Bondarenko (Yakusheva) (Bondarenko, 2010; Leontovich and Yakusheva, 2013) It employs the mixed method research design including observation, use of questionnaires and interviews, narrative, biographic, and semiotic analyses The respondents were 193 intercultural family members from 19 * Corresponding author E-mail address: olgaleo@list.ru 1877-0428 © 2016 The Authors Published by Elsevier Ltd This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Peer-review under responsibility of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.12.039 90 Olga Leontovich / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 countries (Leontovich, 2014) Most of the opinions quoted in the paper are postings on Internet forums and sites devoted to intercultural marriages, answers to our questionnaires, or real-life situations observed in the course of research Discussion Factors which define the choice of food in different ethnic groups include: 1) cultural traditions; 2) assumptions about approved or disapproved food preferences: e g in most cultures eating humans is a taboo, but in some groups cannibalism is a norm; Europeans think that eating dogs is horrendous, whereas Koreans believe it is OK; Russians enjoy eating beef, but in India a cow is a sacred animal; insects, worms, snakes and turtles are seen as food in some cultures and are rejected in others; 3) religious traditions, such as kosher food in Jewish communities; fasting before Christmas and Easter prescribed by Russian Orthodox church; a ban on pork and alcohol for Muslims, etc.; 4) ideology, i e vegetarianism; 5) attitude towards health: the use of ecologically clean food in developed countries; ideas about useful and harmful food in different communities, etc Semiotics of food intersects with other semiotic systems defined by religion, etiquette, economy, system of artefacts, etc and includes both verbal and non-verbal signs The non-verbal sphere of gastronomic family communication is represented by visual, olfactory, gustatory, behavioural, and other types of signs Foodstuffs acting as signs can be culturally marked and non-marked Culturally non-marked products, such as bread, milk, meat, fish, butter, etc., are used in many cultures and are usually not associated with a particular country or ethnic group Culturally marked foodstuffs become a symbol of their community where they form the basis of the national cuisine The same sign can be neutral (rice in Russia) or culturally marked (rice in China or Japan) Tastes and smells familiar since childhood are very powerful on the physiological level and become part of a person’s cultural identity (e g the taste and smell of rye bread for Russians) The habits, likes and dislikes of spouses – natives of different cultures – can be very different Those enjoyed by one can be unpleasant and even repugnant for the other In this connection D Romano described two couples: in one a Scottish wife could not get used to the smell of raw onion coming from her Iranian husband; in the other a Swedish husband always complained that the smell of Malaysian food cooked by his wife nauseated him (Romano, 2004, p 47) When Filipino women in Europe cook fish in hot oil, it “produces — by German tastes — a terrible smell which will not disappear from the apartment for days even if you let in fresh air” (Beer, 1996, p 202 Qtd from: Roth, 2005, p 229) A US friend told us how relatives had sent his Russian wife what he called dead dry fish, and he found the strong smell reaching the nostrils of his neighbours embarrassing The treatment of foodstuffs and the way they are cooked (hygiene, use of fresh or processed products, the technique of their treatment, eating them cold or hot, etc.) in different cultures may also differ, like in the following example of a Russian – US family: Yes, as a Russian, I use a lot of wholesome ingredients I DON’T TRIM MY FAT OFF if you know what I mean I use whole milk and cherish the whipped butter! This doesn’t go too well in the USA where people generally prefer to cook with leaner, healthier ingredients A dish is a more complex sign than separate products Examples include culture-specific dishes, such as Russian shchi (cabbage soup), rasstegayi (small open pies with a filling), blintchiki (crêpes), pelmeni (sort of dumplings); Spanish paella; Japanese sushi; Italian spaghetti, pizza, risotto, etc Not every dish seems tasty and acceptable for a representative of another ethnic group Here is an opinion of an American who visited Russia: If you have to choose between eating holodets and being run down by a trolley, seriously consider the trolley variant In many cultures (e g in India, Tunisia, Ghana, the Philippines) the number of dishes cooked and served can be a sign of the family’s status and affluence, especially during receptions or holidays Meal organization Meals occupy an important place in family communication Their high significance results not only from their function of food supply, but also from their social and communicative functions when “table manners and rituals, values and norms are passed on, above all to the children at the table” (Jeggle, 1988 Qtd from: Roth, 2005, p 227) The number of meals, their content and place in the worldview of representatives of different cultures can be fundamentally different L Visson writes that the word lunch (obed) for an American may be associated with a ham Olga Leontovich / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 and cheese sandwich, whereas for a Russian it may denote a vegetable salad, then soup, meat with potatoes and a dessert (Visson, 1999, p 107) In Russian culture an invitation to tea (“na chai”) usually presupposes a table with a variety of desserts or maybe even something more substantial And this is the way it looks in the US: If you have been invited to tea, it is really going to be tea with cookies and chips Don’t expect hot dishes and have something to eat at home Frame and script organization of a meal also has its cultural peculiarities: there are differences in the way the table is laid, in what order dishes are served, and how they are combined with each other Russians invite guests to the table right away, and Americans begin a party with small talk accompanied by a glass of wine and snacks At the table Russian hosts start by putting different kinds of salads on the guests’ plates, whereas Americans pass a dish around the table so that each guest could take a desired quantity of food Russian hosts make every effort to treat their guests to the food, which is sometimes seen as an imposition by Americans In their turn, Russians visiting American homes often remain hungry: when they politely refuse to eat after the first offer, they expect that the hosts will be more insistent in inviting them to the table, which may not necessarily happen The reaction of spouses to intercultural differences in meals is usually emotional rather than rational and takes the form of evaluative remarks, such as right or wrong One’s own cultural habits are seen as natural and normal, and their spouses’ – as a deviation from the norm, which brings about misunderstandings and even conflicts The spacial aspect of gastronomic communication is represented by the family’s place of residence, place of food consumption and the position of family members at the table The influence of the place of residence on gastronomic family communication is determined by local traditions, the spouses’ wish to become part of the local community or, on the contrary, preserve their cultural identity, their preference for a particular cuisine, the accessibility of certain types of foodstuffs, and, if there are children in the family, – by peer pressure concerning the choice of food The place of food consumption – area and table – are ancient and complex signs conditioned by the sacred character and rituals of the process of eating The word table itself in many cultures is polysemantic and is used to denote both the corresponding piece of furniture and the food eaten by a group of people Depending on where the family live, food can be consumed in the same place where it is cooked (kitchen) or in a place specially dedicated for it, no matter what it looks like in different cultures Besides, in some societies a kitchen may represent a separate locus – symbol of ‘female territory’ inappropriate for men or children It is obvious that such semiotic characteristics of gastronomic space are culture-specific Many ethnicities in the East (Turkmens, Kazakhs, Afghans, Turks, Koreans, etc.) traditionally eat food sitting on the floor Europeans who are not used to this arrangement see this as an interesting exotic custom, which they can adopt for short periods of time during their visits abroad, but hardly as an everyday practice A Russian female comments on the absence of organized meals in Norwegian workplaces: There are no canteens at work Cafes are expensive and too time-consuming Everybody brings food from home People can also bring an apple or a banana Stores sell lots of lunchboxes here The temporal aspect of gastronomic communication includes the time spent on cooking and food consumption, the length of meals and the number of meals per day: Do we have breakfast in the morning? Are there fixed times for meals, for example “exactly o’clock in the evening” or “roughly between and 10 o’clock”? And of course the question of how much time is spent on a meal can be answered in very different — and conflict provoking — ways (Scheibler, 1992, p 95 Qtd from: Roth, 2005, p 230) Other questions are: who and when goes shopping for foodstuffs and how long they spend choosing and buying them? How much time does one need for cooking food? Is a family meal supposed to be a quick snack in the kitchen or a ceremonious sit-down dinner? How precisely are guests expected to arrive to a party? How soon after their arrival should food be served? How long is it polite for the guests to stay? The appropriate length of time spent on eating a meal is not the same in different cultures An example from the experience of a Russian married to a Norwegian shows the difference in the habitual eating schedule: I found it hard to get used to their meals: they have dinner at or and eat only one dish I had to say good-bye to our Russian habit of eating soup and the second course and then to have supper at about In Russia guests are at once invited to the table set for a festive meal; in Western cultures they first serve cocktails or wine; the Chinese cook food in the guests’ presence to show that it is fresh The time spent at the table is 91 92 Olga Leontovich / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 regulated by the norms of etiquette: in Japanese and some Caucasian cultures it is considered very impolite to eat quickly and leave the table, while a Russian proverb says: Who eats quickly, works quickly In the US popular TV dinners that are warmed up in a microwave have become a symbol of a fast pace of life and women’s aspirations for career development, rather than the role of housewives The distribution of responsibilities in the system of gastronomic communication deals with buying foodstuffs, cooking meals, and behaviour at the table, as well as gender and age roles of family members In traditional societies the responsibility for meals usually lies with a woman, whereas her husband is expected to earn the money to feed the family As was mentioned earlier, the kitchen is considered to be the female territory In Eastern countries where a woman is not expected to go out alone, the husband either buys foodstuffs or accompanies his wife to a grocery store or a supermarket In Western societies the liberation of women from kitchen responsibilities has become a symbol of feminism Cultures also differ in regard to the children’s participation in household activities, e g shopping for food and helping in the kitchen The communicative situations of family meals can differ in several different aspects In traditional families a man sits at the head of the table; eastern women serve men during meals and then eat in a specially designed room The difference between Western and Eastern attitude can cause conflicts in an intercultural family: a Western woman can regard the request of her husband – a representative of an Eastern culture – to bring him fruit or a cup of tea as an act of gender discrimination D Romano also gives an interesting example of gender roles: on Thanksgiving an American wife always asked her Japanese husband to curve the traditional turkey He found the situation stressful: “I usually hacked the poor bird to shreds” (Romano, 2001, p 50) Artefacts, such as kitchenware and other objects used during meals or in the process of their preparation, have an outward, auxiliary, aesthetic rather than physiological character They include: tableware, cutlery, decorations, and gastronomic symbols The use of spoons, forks and knives or chopsticks is connected not only with cultural preferences but also with the ability to use them For example, in Japan food is served on small low tables; in formal situations both males and females sit “seizastyle” (kneel resting their buttocks on the heels) In casual situations men sit cross-legged and women sit with both legs to one side [Japanese Table Manners] Food is placed into small wooden or china bowls with covers The Japanese eat solid food with chopsticks made of lacquered wood or bone and drink soup out of a cup Traditional tableware is different for men and women because a male’s hand is bigger than a woman’s (Tradicionnaja japonskaja kuhnja, 2012) Scripts (sequences of actions) as part of gastronomic communication are quite variable Cooking and food consumption, table decoration before a meal and cleaning up after it, ritual actions accompanying meals during holidays, weddings, memorial services, etc are all part of a vast semiotic system where each action has a special meaning and is consciously chosen by representatives of a culture Europeans hold a knife in the right and a fork in the left hand; Americans, in their turn, first cut the meat, then put the knife down and eat holding a fork in the right hand Such behaviour of an American spouse can be interpreted as ‘uncultured’ by demanding European relatives The question how to teach a child to use a fork and knife can cause disagreements in this kind of family: which of the traditions to choose? Or should the child be taught both patterns of behaviour? Russians think it is a real nightmare to eat chicken during a meal with foreigners because in Russia we have a well-known rule voiced in the film Beginning (“Nachalo”): “Poultry can be eaten with hands,” whereas people from Western cultures usually use a fork and a knife In some cultures smacking, squelching and burping are part and parcel of the process of eating, they express delight and encouragement for the hostess; in other cultures they are seen as inappropriate Communicative behaviour is also different in the process of the consumption of alcohol Russians drink vodka undiluted, in one gulp, and always accompany it with eating Foreigners coming to Russia often sip it slowly, not eat a lot and sometimes get drunk before their Russian hosts (Leontovich, 2005, p 297) On the other hand, Russians are surprised by the American habit to serve cocktails with nuts and other snacks before dinner – as L Visson indicates, Russians drink at the table and not before meals She illustrates it with an example from the life of a US-Russian family: the Russian husband Fyodor hates US receptions where guests eat and drink standing For a Russian ‘getting together’ means that everybody sits at the same table participating in a Olga Leontovich / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 common conversation The idea itself of chatting to someone for five minutes and then moving on to a different person contradicts the concept of a long cordial talk (Visson, 1999, p 162) Discrepancies can be also observed in the process of cooking food, cleaning the table after meals, and washing dishes A Russian wife Vera believes that the hygienic way of washing dishes is under running water, whereas her British husband Nat fills the sink with water and “Fairy” and does not rinse the dishes afterwards Representatives of other cultures, e.g the American journalist S Lyall married to an Englishman, also notices this: When they the washing-up, they appear to believe that the part where you are supposed to rinse off the soap is optional (Lyall, 2008, p 5) Let us further analyse verbal signs used in the gastronomic sphere The names of foodstuffs, dishes and corresponding artefacts form the core vocabulary of gastronomic family discourse and are quickly picked up by a spouse in the language of the other one: never-ending homemade blinchiki s tvorogom The seemingly endless tables of lumpia, pansit, lechiplan, and puto were enough to satisfy my cravings for Filipino food until the next lot of parties and fiestas the following year Gastronomic metacommunication is carried out in the language accepted in the family and has a number of genres in each culture, such as: prayer, thanks, toast, praise to the cook, explanation of a recipe, etc Metacommunication of parents and children can have an educational flavour: Don’t rest your elbows on the table Don’t talk with your mouth full Etiquette phrases accompanying a meal include such formulas as: Russian: Prijatnogo appetita! French: Bon appétit! etc as well as standard phrases pronounced during alcohol consumption, e g.: Za vashe zdorov'e! English: Cheers! French: A votre santé! Chinese: ᒢᶟ Gvnbwi! etc The combination of signs of the gastronomic system, as well as other semiotic systems discussed above can take different forms K Roth’s classification includes: segregation, predominance, compromise, hybridization, and choice of a ‘third cuisine.’ (Roth, 2005) We use a slightly modified version of this classification in the analysis given below Predominance – the prevalence of gastronomic traditions of one spouse’s culture when the other spouse and the children have to follow them Sometimes alien cuisine is adopted willingly, as in the example of a MexicanDominican family: She loves the way Dominican food is cooked and the flavor we use is phenomenal, so she gave up her own preference Forced submission to the domineering cuisine may create inner psychological problems and result in an explicit expression of discontent The coexistence of gastronomic systems within an intercultural family has its own peculiarities The coincidence of the basic signs of the gastronomic system is the most favourable situation of all: the closer the family members are in their gastronomic preferences, the greater is the possibility of compromise in the family eating traditions, like in the following example: Although we are both Latin, me being Mexican and him being Dominican, he has learned to eat with tortilla like Mexicans and I have somewhat learned to cook some Dominican food It’s fun The conscious combination of gastronomic traditions presupposes a negotiated decision satisfactory for both sides, like in the union of a Russian and an American of Italian origin: mostly it’s a combination of Russian and Italian cuisines My husband’s favourite dish is Herring Under Fur Coat, and mine – Veal Milanese We love to explore new recipes, and always cook together Our research indicates that the most frequent variant of compromise is a harmonised alternation of two culinary traditions represented in the family during one day, week, month, etc.: (a Swedish-American family) We follow the Swedish traditions that I grew up with and at Christmas we eat Corn Puddin’ and other southern dishes so he feels at home Another form of coexistence of gastronomic systems within one family is hybridization, i e the inclusion of particular foodstuffs “into the local cuisine, such as individual foodstuffs, spices or techniques of cooking“ (Roth, 2005, p 238) 93 94 Olga Leontovich / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 236 (2016) 89 – 94 The majority of our respondents believe that the combination of elements of two culinary cultures in a unique family tradition is undoubtedly a positive phenomenon, as in the following Filipino-Cuban family: There are some things we hate about each other's cultures, but when it comes to the kitchen all is well in our kingdom of three Ideally such a solution on the inner communication level personifies the unification of two or more cultures into one single whole, and on the outer level – peculiar features of an intercultural family making it original and attractive: “< > intellectuals in Western Europe and North America often take pride not only in their exotic marriage partners but also in their ‘exotic cuisine.’” (Roth, 2005, p 233) A less fruitful variant of the coexistence of two culinary traditions within one family is segregation when the spouses completely reject each other’s culture-specific dishes, up to eating separately from each other In the example from the life of Filipino-German families given below two culinary traditions exist parallelly and almost never cross their ways: “Most Filipino women < > cook German dishes for their husband and children and Filipino dishes for themselves” (Beer, 1996, p 200) When members of an intercultural family make such a decision they deprive themselves of the possibility of joint cooking and common meals The absence of unified gastronomic space has a negative influence on family communication and the upbringing of children The choice of the ‘third cuisine’ is a conscious family decision to switch to the food of the country were they are abiding or the so called ‘international cuisine’ (Goody, 1997, p 36) This is a compromise meant to avoid conflict and not allow one of the parties dominate in a marriage Under such circumstances the cultures acquire the status of something exotic, the zest of family communication associated with festivities and fun The family overcomes its marginal status and the difference between the inner and outer communication levels Conclusion The research has shown that non-verbal signs used in the gastronomic sphere of intercultural family communication include: foodstuffs and dishes of national cuisine; organization of meals; spatial signs – areas where food is cooked and consumed; temporal signs – time and length of a meal; kitchenware, cutlery and other artefacts; actions accompanying gastronomic discourse; distribution of roles connected with the set of responsibilities to cook food and lay the table; and the aesthetic perception of cooked dishes and other attributes of gastronomic discourse Verbal signs referring to the gastronomic sphere are represented by: nominations of foodstuffs, dishes, table accessories; gastronomic metacommunication; and etiquette formulas used during meals The analysis of the way signs of the gastronomic system are combined (predominance, coexistence, hybridization, segregation, and the choice of a ‘third’ local or international system) can be further extended to the study of other aspects of an intercultural family’s life, such as living space, religious beliefs, moral values, etc References Beer, B (1996) Deutsch-philippinische Ehen: interethnische Heiraten und Migration von Frauen Berlin: Reimer Bondarenko (Yakusheva), Y.V (2010) Mezhkul'turnaja semejnaja kommunikacija kak osobyj tip obshhenija [Intercultural family communication as a specific form of interaction] Ph.D dissertation Volgograd: Volgograd State Pedagogical University Goody, J (1997) Industrial food Towards the development of a world cuisine Food and culture A reader, ed by Carole Counihan and P van Esterik, pp 338-356 New York, London Japanese table manners URL: http://traditionscustoms.com/lifestyle/japanese-table-manners (accessed on 02.11.2015) Jeggle, U (1988) Eßgewohnheit und Familienordnung Was beim Essen alles mitgegessen wird Zeitschrift für Volkskunde, 84, 189-205 Leontovich, O (2014) Where angels fear to tread: communication strategies in an intercultural family The XXV Annual International Academic Conference, Language and Culture, 20–22 October 2014 /Ed Svetlana Gural Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164, pp 286-291 Leontovich, O A (2005) Russkie i amerikancy: paradoksy mezhkul'turnogo obshhenija [Russians and Americans: paradoxes of intercultural communication] Moscow: Gnozis Leontovich, O.A., and Yakusheva Y.V (2013) Ponimanie – nachalo soglasija: mezhkul'turnaja semejnaja kommunikacija [Understanding as the beginning of accord: intercultural family communication] Moscow: Gnozis Lyall, S (2008) A field guide to the British Glasgow: Quercus ... like in the union of a Russian and an American of Italian origin: mostly it’s a combination of Russian and Italian cuisines My husband’s favourite dish is Herring Under Fur Coat, and mine... between Western and Eastern attitude can cause conflicts in an intercultural family: a Western woman can regard the request of her husband – a representative of an Eastern culture – to bring him fruit... meat, then put the knife down and eat holding a fork in the right hand Such behaviour of an American spouse can be interpreted as ‘uncultured’ by demanding European relatives The question how