Latest news with #diningEtiquette
The National
03-07-2025
- General
- The National
In defence of eating with hands: Culture, science and colonial politics amid Zohran Mamdani backlash
When New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani was recently criticised online for eating with his hands, the backlash revealed more than just a cultural misunderstanding; it exposed lingering colonial biases around dining etiquette. Eating with one's hands is not only normal, but deeply rooted in tradition, wellness practices and social ritual for millions across the South Asia, the Middle East, South-east Asia and Africa. In the West, however, eating without cutlery is often viewed through a lens of primitivism – unless, of course, the menu includes "finger food" such as pizza, tacos, fried chicken or burgers. The contradiction is telling – certain foods (and diners) get a cultural pass, while others carry the baggage of perceived "uncivilised" behaviour. But Charles Spence, professor of experimental psychology at University of Oxford, UK, and author of Gastrophysics, believes that 'we eat first with the hand'. 'Certainly that was once true. Over recent centuries, a range of utensils, first the knife, then spoon, and slowly the fork have come to intervene between Western diners and their food. Who ever thought cold stainless steel or shiny silver cutlery would actually enhance the taste of food? Rather it separates us from what we eat,' he says. In much of Western society, however, eating with the hands has long drawn scorn, and been seen as uncouth or unsanitary – a view rooted in colonial-era ideas of civility and class. Cutlery became a marker of refinement and social status as formal dining rituals evolved in the 18th and 19th centuries, creating a stark contrast with hand-eating cultures, often labelled 'primitive' or 'unhygienic'. As far back as 1897, Mrs CE Humphry declared in Manners for Men that only 'bread, biscuits, olives, asparagus, celery and bonbon' were acceptable to touch with one's fingers. Around that time, cutlery sets among the Western upper classes ballooned in size, sometimes including about 100 specialised utensils. Decades later, etiquette began to loosen. DeBrett's Guide to Etiquette eventually gave its blessing to finger foods such as pizza, chicken wings, spare ribs and ice-cream cones – at least at informal gatherings. But over centuries, nearly a third of the world's population, from Tanzania and India to Laos and the Middle East, never stopped eating traditional meals by hand. In the Philippines, Kamayan feasts (from kamay, meaning hand) bring families together to eat grilled meats, rice and seafood without utensils, an echo of pre-colonial tradition. In India, scooping up rice with dal, sambar or curry is a generational practice. In the Middle East, biryani and kabsa are eaten communally by hand as a gesture of hospitality. In Ethiopia and Eritrea, injera serves as both plate and cutlery, used to scoop up stews and lentils, while West Africans eat dishes such as fufu and jollof rice by hand. Hand-eating is personal and rich in ancestral meaning across these cultures, but continues to face stigma – revealing enduring colonial attitudes about etiquette, race and cultural superiority. Yann Martel's protagonist Pi Patel says it all in The Life of Pi: 'My fingers, which a second before had been taste buds savouring the food a little ahead of my mouth, became dirty under his gaze. They froze like criminals caught in the act... I picked up the knife and fork. I had hardly ever used such instruments. My hands trembled. My sambar lost its taste.' Numerous studies have showed that the direct tactile experience of eating with the hand can prime the brain for taste. Studies show this tactile interaction can create a deeper sensory connection, heighten anticipation and enhance satisfaction, Spence says. In Mixing Methods, Tasting Fingers: Notes on an Ethnographic Experiment, University of Amsterdam researchers wrote that tasting does not start once relevant 'sense data' has reached the nostrils and tongue; there is already 'tasting' going on while food is still on the plate. 'As the fingers move, the mouth anticipates. As the mouth anticipates, the fingers work... Tasting, or so we would like to suggest, is not confined to a single moment. It is actively being done throughout this entire process.' Aware of this, many contemporary chefs and culinary voices across the world are reclaiming hand-eating in fine dining. Asma Khan, the restaurateur behind London's popular Indian outpost Darjeeling Express, has been vocal about eating with hands and challenging colonial norms in British dining culture. Fatmata Binta, a modern West African chef, sets up nomadic dining experiences where eating with hands is integral. In Dubai, chef Ross Shonhan, who believes that eating with hands can aid digestion, improve taste and redefine dining, launched a 10-course Japanese menu meant to eschew cutlery at his fine-dining Japanese restaurant, Netsu at the Mandarin Oriental Jumeira, Dubai. Deepak Barua, executive chef at Anantara Kalutara Resort in Sri Lanka, has seen people enjoying their food by hand during his work at top hotels in Bhutan, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and the UAE. 'These days, even Michelin star restaurants are serving some courses to be eaten by hand; this stimulates multiple senses, including taste and touch,' he says. But, it's not just about awakening the senses. Ayurvedic and traditional medicine practitioners believe that eating by the hands is more beneficial to the body. Gaurang Paneri, an Ayurvedic practitioner based in Rajasthan, India, explains that the practice is deeply rooted in Ayurvedic philosophy. 'Each of the five fingers represents one of the five elements – earth, water, fire, air and ether,' he says. 'Touch activates digestive enzymes, helps regulate portion control and enhances the overall sensory experience of eating. It also naturally aids digestion and satisfaction.' Perhaps that's the reason the Hindi language has several distinct terms that describe different hand gestures used in dance and yoga poses, inspired by the act of eating, each tailored to the type of food being consumed. Ghronikah mudra involves bringing all five fingertips together like a delicate petal to scoop up rice and dal/curry. Annabhakshana mudra turns four fingers into a spoon, while the thumb helps guide a mix of curries, sambals and chutneys into the mouth. Kangulah mudra uses three fingers to grasp long, slender foods like celery or asparagus. And Kadambah mudra describes the cupped hand position used to hold ripe fruit for biting. Together, they elevate the practice into a refined and mindful ritual. 'Eating with hands also encourages hygiene awareness because one tends to be mindful about washing up before a meal. It may not always suit formal settings or fast-paced lifestyles, but incorporating it at home or during special meals can be a meaningful way to reconnect with heritage and health,' Barua says. In her 2009 research article Eating with Your Hands, journalist Keridwen Cornelius writes that eating with your hands is a sensuous indulgence, a meeting of soul and skin. 'It's getting soaked in a monsoon, taking off your shoes and squishing wet sand between your toes, making mudpies, impaling raspberries on your fingertips and kissing them off one by one till your mouth is juicy and full,' she writes. "The mutual giving and receiving between fingers and tongue. Primal and earthy and natural.' That pleasure goes back centuries, to the beginning of humankind and through medieval times. After all, history has it that when Napoleon III of France met the Shah of Persia, they disagreed about the proper method of eating. The Shah, a guest, insisted on eating with his fingers despite the emperor urging him to use a golden fork. 'You don't know what a pleasure you are missing,' the Shah is said to have replied. Kurush F Dalal, archaeologist and culinary anthropologist, sums it up: 'The modern day use of cutlery is a colonial hangover. We need to desperately disassociate it from any so-called etiquette. Why can we not eat and let eat?'
Telegraph
20-06-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Eating without waiting for others is not rude, study finds
Eating your food at a restaurant while others are still waiting for their dish to arrive is not rude, scientists have found. The predicament of what to do if a waiter brings only part of a table's food out at one time is an enduring dilemma. A study of almost 2,000 people run by City St George's university in London discovered that beginning eating instead of waiting for all to be served is not the social faux pas Britons think it is. Various tests were run on different groups of people to determine how they felt about starting their meal while others had not been served, and also how they would feel if they were still waiting while someone else commenced dining. Other studies investigated the impact of people encouraging their fellow patron to begin and not to delay, and for the person who has already been served to consider the situation through the lens of their unserved company. The scientists discovered a double standard in how people see this quandary because people hold themselves to a higher moral benchmark than they do others. People are largely unbothered if someone is served before them at a table and starts eating. However, people are mortified by the idea of themselves tucking in alone while others wait. Janina Steinmetz, a professor of marketing at Bayes Business School, said: 'The decision of when to start eating food in the company of others is a very common dilemma. 'Norm adherence dictates that we wait until all food is served before starting, and disregarding it feels rude and discourteous to us. Surprisingly, this feeling barely changes even when another person explicitly asks us to go ahead. 'It occurs because people have greater access to their own internal feelings – such as appearing considerate or avoiding social discomfort – than to others' psychological experiences.' Often diners wait for their own benefit, she added, with co-diners minding 'far less than we think if we wanted to go ahead and eat'. 'People will wait to feel polite, but if the quality of their food is dependent on factors like temperature it may not taste as nice when they finally do start eating.' Irene Scopelliti, a professor of marketing and behavioural science, added: 'This is not just about politeness: it's about psychological access. 'We can feel our own internal discomfort, guilt, and the positive feelings from appearing considerate, but we can't fully access what others are experiencing internally. 'So, while we might feel genuinely awful about eating before others get their food, we assume others won't feel as strongly about it. 'Results of our study have implications for restaurants and beyond. Any service where people receive food at different times within a group creates similar psychological dynamics. 'Providers often optimise for efficiency, without realising that some people experience genuine discomfort when they receive service before others in their group. 'The research shows how much we systematically underestimate others' internal emotional experiences, which contributes to broader understanding of social norms and group dynamics.' The study is published in the journal Appetite. 'We've been doing it all wrong' It comes after a University of Oxford scientist claimed in 2022 that another rule of decorum at the dinner table should be abandoned and that people should actually eat with their mouth open. Prof Charles Spence, an experimental psychologist, claimed that smacking your lips and letting guests see your food as you chew it is the best way to eat. The academic now wants Britons to embrace a more uncouth and hedonistic approach to dinner time and abandon all sense of decorum and sensibility. 'We've been doing it all wrong,' he said. 'Parents instil manners in their children, extolling the virtues of politely chewing with our mouths closed. 'However, chewing open mouthed may actually help to release more of the volatile organic compounds, contributing to our sense of smell and the overall perception.'
Fox News
02-06-2025
- General
- Fox News
Restaurant consultant reveals what customers should never do when dining out
When it comes to dining out, there are some unwritten rules of etiquette between server and customer that are important to know. Salar Sheik, a Los Angeles-based restaurant consultant and founder of Savory Hospitality, told Fox News Digital that the rudest thing a customer can do is "one-timing" a server. That's when a customer asks for something like a glass of water, for example — but when the server returns, the customer then asks for something else, Sheik said. "You're just running them in circles," Sheik pointed out. "Try to bulk up on your order. Let them know right at the same time." What if you're in a hurry and need to place your order quickly? There's a polite way to ask your server to put your food order in right away, Sheik said. "I think a little explaining goes a long way for your waiter," Sheik told Fox News Digital. "It doesn't have to be in detail, but you can just tell them, 'I'm in a bit of a hurry.'" Sometimes servers seem to disappear after your meal is done, leaving customers antsy about getting the bill. There is a proper way to get your server's attention, Sheik said. "It's trying to make eye contact and kind of do a wave," he said. Snapping your fingers at your server might work in the movies — but in real life, that comes off as rude, Sheik said. "I think a wave is pretty lighthearted, you know?" A common concern among customers is when a waiter or waitress doesn't write down their order. If the meal comes to the table and isn't correct, it's natural for the customer to blame the server. "You can't assume it was just their fault." "I think a patron has to understand, even though that was a scenario, you can't assume it was just their fault," Sheik said. In a standard restaurant kitchen, "there's a lot of room for error," he noted. "Obviously, the only point of contact you have between your food and who made it is the waiter," Sheik said, meaning the server is the one who takes the brunt of the criticism. "You can kind of approach it softer," he said. "Some people tend to be aggressive and take personal offense." Another area of frustration from a server's perspective can involve the length of time customers remain at a table after the meal has concluded and the bill has been paid. How long is too long? It depends on if it's a casual or fine-dining experience, Sheik told Fox News Digital. "Fine dining, you're looking at two to two-and-a-half hours of appropriate dining time," Sheik said. "Casual, you are probably looking at an hour to an hour and 45 minutes. Two hours is pretty much the limit." Another factor to consider is the speed of service and how quickly the food arrived when you were seated. It's courteous to place your first order shortly after being seated, Sheik said. For more Lifestyle articles, visit "But a lot of times we get tables that talk for an hour and then order," he said. "I think that's just inappropriate." It's a server's job to set the pace of a customer's dining experience, whether that's refilling drinks or checking with the kitchen staff on the status of a table's order, Sheik said. "You should have your first appetizer order within 10 to 15 minutes max," he said. "And your entrées — in a perfect world, you should [receive] them within 20 to 25 minutes max."
Washington Post
17-05-2025
- General
- Washington Post
Miss Manners: Friends' messages about loved one's cancer anger me
Dear Miss Manners: When serving a steak, the server will often say something along the lines of, 'Please cut into the center to make sure it's cooked the way you want it.' At a business dinner of around 20 people, I was rather rudely corrected for doing so by someone who thought I was about to commence eating before everyone's entrée had been served.
