Samuel Roytburd

Slow-Cooking in the Melting Pot: The Development of the American Family Dinner

When considering dinner as a meal to spend with one’s family, it may appear at first glance that not much has changed in the history of its practice, as eating together is an integral part of American (and other nations’) culture. While the practice has become less common as of late due to differing norms, work-life balance, and other factors, the idea of setting the table and spending time conversing with one another seems like an immortal American experience. Despite our romanticized and inaccurate notions of the family dinner, mostly a product of mid-20th century family ideals portrayed in mass media, this ritual many have nostalgia for wasn’t available for most throughout American history. As we observe the parallel evolution of gender norms, racial divides, immigration, and technology, it is clear that the family dinner experience is far more than simply a universally-held meal–it is a marker of socioeconomic status and historical development in American society, varying widely across the country and different subgroups.

Mealtime in Colonial America

In the Colonial Era, what we have come to regard as dinner, the largest meal of the day with family, was held at a completely different time. Due to the work schedule on most households being agriculturally-centered, the largest meal was held around 2 PM, with preparations taking place significantly beforehand. Waking up before the crack of dawn was common for women of both the lower and middle classes, as well as servants, in order to prepare the fire that would be used to heat ingredients for the day’s meal(s). The evening meal, known as supper, would be considered a relative afterthought, as it would take place following the day’s work and consist of leftovers from the afternoon meal. The entire family would contribute to the creation of the meal in some way, as men would be responsible for duties like hunting and intensive fieldwork and children would be assigned basic tasks such as grinding corn, harvesting crops, and weeding the family’s land.1 Still, it would be far from accurate to describe the meal as egalitarian, as if there were less chairs than family members, the women and children would stand as the father would eat sitting, a display of the patriarchy in full gear during Colonial America. The practice of having a dining room and table grew in America, as having a space within the home formally meant for a family meal originated in England, and was popularized by wealthy gentry like Thomas Jefferson in his Monticello home.2 While more homes than simply the wealthy adopted this, the appearance of the dining room also widely varied: the lower-classes mostly had wooden flatware, with earthenware pots also being common in slave quarters. The middle class relied on ceramic and pewter, while the wealthy owned ironed linens, glassware, and imported porcelain, conspicuously distinguishing them from those less well-off.1 A focus on morality at the dinner table was also emphasized at the dinner table, as saying Grace by all family members was expected as a sign of religious piety. This was done even for seemingly secular holidays, like Thanksgiving, as depicted by this painting of a sermon before the meal. 

This was a sign of the times, as much of life revolved around the fear of living impiously and going to Hell, a fear intensified by pastors and other religious leaders in the colonies.3 In wealthier households, formal guidebooks for manners were common, as behavior at dinner could reflect one’s social standing and educational background. These rules included obedience, such as “Sit not down until thou art bidden by thy Parents or other superiors”, and, “Eat not too fast or with greed”.1 The avoidance of greed as a sin here is obvious, again indicating the religious undertones of mealtime with the family. Slaves also had a distinct dinner experience, as they contributed to the development of cooking methods brought from Africa, such as slow-cooked stews, meals not centered around meat and dairy, and deep-frying. Making stews was an extremely practical choice by enslaved women, as it allowed for a larger volume of food to be created with fewer ingredients, as well as permitted significant time for fieldwork as the stew simmered throughout the course of the day, highlighting both harsh conditions of labor and nutritional deprivation. Slaves often cooked in wealthier households, such as that of (George and) Martha Washington, who was known to carefully plan the meal and delegate the cooking to slaves that she would read the recipe aloud to.1, 4 Slaves not being taught to read and write was reflected in this preparation of dinner during colonial times, as an example of disparity in educational access between races. Through both racism and class-disparity in Colonial America, very different versions of the dinner were available to families. 

Industrial Dinnertime

Following the Revolutionary period, the United States began a process of industrialization, following the footsteps of Victorian England, which in turn revolutionized the dinner. With many fathers being away from the home, working jobs at manufacturing sites in the industrial economy, the lighter meal would shift to midday, sometimes provided by the employer. In its stead, the larger meal began to be served closer to the evening when all family members were present, with the exception of Sundays, a time meant to focus on the family midday after Church service.5 It was in this Victorian era of “moral exceptionality” that the idealistic notion of the dining room being a place for familial harmony, piety, conversation, and moral lessons exponentially grew, remaining so till the middle-to-late 20th century. The dinner party was a ritual that grew during the 19th century, as guests were invited to establish an intimate, yet paradoxically formal environment built on “good conversation” and flaunting a family’s wealth in the age of conspicuous consumption.6 There were formal manners ascribed to this new dinner outside the family bubble as well, including “Never take a long, deep breath after you finish eating”, as implying fatigue after overeating portrayed a lack of refinement.7 Racial divides were strong at this time as well, even following the abolition of slavery in the middle of the century, as African-American servants prepared most meals. In their own homes, African-Americans began to hold the tradition of Sunday dinner post-slavery in churches.8 It was essential to have a safe space where they could be free from worry of discrimination, through which dinner, as shown by lack of safety in eating around whiter communities, exemplified persisting racial injustice following emancipation. In establishing a moral high ground for the wealthy, or a communal space for disenfranchised communities, the dinner grew during this period as a social tool. 

In the late 19th to early 20th century, a massive influx of immigrants came to the United States to find work, and similarly adjusted to American dinner customs. For Italians, products considered luxury in the fatherland like olive oil, and especially meat became common in Italian-American cooking, signifying the differences in nutritional accessibility following immigration to the United States. Again, dinner became a time to flaunt how well-off one’s family was, as despite working long hours at their various workplaces, the Sunday feast was a feast of unimaginable proportions relative to their European counterparts.9 According to social scientists of this time, Italian-Americans were recommended to turn away from their native dishes and, “learn to eat American food if they [were] to live here”. These recommendations made the dinner a marker of assimilation for immigrants, and even a catalyst for poorer health, as consuming caloric foods like oil and meat in vast quantities to show one’s wealth was associated with poorer health for immigrants.10 Despite this, the entire country would undergo downsizing in the preparation of dinner thanks to the nation’s economy and government policy. During WWI, as allied countries and soldiers often went hungry, Herbert Hoover, head of the Wilson-era Food Administration, promoted reduction in expensive products like fat, sugar, wheat, and meat, via campaigns such as Meatless Tuesdays (Mondays would come later), and Wheatless Wednesday, which would limit consumption for the sake of the country, making having a certain type of dinner a symbol of patriotism for the family.This would continue into WWII and echo beyond, as the idea that children needing to clear their plate due to guilt from “the starving children in____” remained.11 Technological innovation in home appliances was also an important aspect of the time and in gender roles, as refrigeration, which exponentially grew from being in 10% of American households in the 1930s to 85% in 1944, liberated hours of women’s time due to not needing to undertake the extensive processes to preserve food or to constantly buy fresh ingredients as they would go to waste.12 This innovation allowed them to enter the workforce en masse, which had huge ramifications for gender roles and norms that were reflected in how dinner was prepared. For immigrants, families experiencing economic crisis, and those employing new technology, what a ‘proper’ dinner consisted of (that is, if any food was available) came into question. 

An Idealized Dinnertime

Following WWII, in the 1950s, the emphasis on reinforcing the white upper-middle class nuclear family at dinner as the picture of perfection catapulted into much of national media. In the instructional film, “A Date with Your Family”, particular expectations of dinnertime behavior are underlined, which during a time of great uncertainty in the age of the Cold War, highlighted the desire for order and the avoidance of irregular behavior. In the video, children are warned not to upset their parents with “unpleasant topics or occurrences”, nor “emotion in conversation”. This restriction on interaction with the family while putting on an air of joy is emblematic of the lack of realism in this portrayal, as such dinners weren’t possible for working-class families where both parents had jobs outside the home. Despite women having roles outside the home at this point in time, the focus on the upper-middle class subservient housewife remained, as the women and children were instructed “never to start eating until Father’s served himself”.13 This is depicted in “Freedom From Want” by Norman Rockwell, in which a mother serves Thanksgiving dinner with the patriarch of the family at the head of the table as the rest of the family gleams with smiles. It could be argued that Rockwell is acknowledging the impossibility of this “dream” for most Americans with the man almost knowingly smirking in the bottom-right hand corner. 

 The preparation of dinner also perpetuated gender stereotypes during this time, as in a clip from Leave It to Beaver, the father in the show explains to his son that the reason he is grilling while his mother cooks indoors is that a woman's place is within the home, away from “rugged, outdoor” activities only men are capable of without technological aid. Nevertheless, in the WWII era there was a counterculture growing to these patriarchal depictions of perfection, such as in the work “A Destruction of the Father” by Louise Bourgeois. 

The art depicts a scene where following a conflict in which a mother can’t satisfy the despotic father, the children throw him on the dinner table and eat him. This direct shot at the patriarchy illustrated the discontent with the idealistic family dinner that portrayed one version of family interaction as the only proper one, illustrating growing unrest over how the dinner table enforced social standards. In addition to these portrayals, diversity in America began to be mainstream in economic life, as various ethnic groups found increased access to their preferred foods. For example, one woman remembered her mother losing over 20 pounds when they began observing Kosher rules (a commandment in Judaism) in the Midwest, due to restrictions. Starting after WWII and peaking in the 1980s, kashrut-certifying agencies were utilized by several food companies, who found the profits made adhering to dietary restrictions of ethnic minorities outweighed the expenses. This also allowed Muslim families to find more dietary options that fit under the umbrella of eating halal, indicating how not just class, but ethnocultural variation shaped American dinners, even if profit in a capitalist society was the focus over diversity. 14  Technological innovation was also significant in the later decades of the 20th century, as thanks to the advent of refrigeration, frozen meals emerged in the American household. Allegedly originating from the methods used to store airplane food for flights, Swanson’s marketing of the frozen meal as a “TV Dinner” made it hugely successful, as watching primetime television interfered with having a meal with the family. Combining these two replaced the “ideal” family dinner for many American families, and allowed women a break from cooking daily. This however, did not come without its detractors, as the credited inventor, Gerry Thomas, admitted to receiving angry letters from husbands who complained about the lack of home-cooked meals made by their wives they desired, emphasizing the conflict over gender roles during this era, perhaps reflecting a more prominent fight for women’s rights at the time. While TV dinners weren’t having a significant health impact because of the freezing process, additives in them like fat, sugar, salt, and preservatives to enhance their taste compromised the nutritive value for many families. Concerns over processed foods being consumed at dinner would bleed over into contemporary America, reflecting a greater concern over health in the family and particularly for children. 

Today, perhaps as a reaction to the processed food craze in the later 20th century, there is a significant emphasis made on the importance of home-cooked meals. In the book, Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won’t Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do About It, a trio of sociologists discuss that, partially because of pressure from mass media commentary and health influencers,  many mothers and grandmothers feel guilt or shame over not providing home-cooked food.16 While the romanticized view of the aforementioned home-cooked meals in the 1950s remains, it was essential to recognize the role domestic servitude played in making this a possibility for wealthy white families; While almost all of them had 1 domestic servant around the 1950s, by the 20th century, less than 1% of American families would employ constant help around the home.17 This reality of financial constraints for many American families are an indication of class guilt in the home, as standards continue to be placed onto the dinner table without accounting for what the majority of American families experience. This is particularly true for immigrant families that come to the United States with minimal financial resources. In reflecting on her process of assimilation having come from Vietnam, journalist Soleil Ho remembers her mother putting cold cuts on top of white rice to create a dish reminiscent of her childhood.18 These types of combinations, which she refuses to attribute the term “fusion” to, as it carries an elite and colonial connotation, were both a necessity and a comfort for the immigrant dinner table. In the book How the Other Half Eats, the story of an undocumented immigrant from Mexico is told, including her having to sell random combinations of food as “experiments” to appeal to her children, and only occasionally having the money to purchase ingredients from a local Mexican store, something that has become more available in recent decades as people search for “authenticity” in their food. The fear of acculturation at the dinner table is also discussed, as while she hoped for her child to find a new sense of belonging in the U.S., she was afraid of him losing the Spanish language and pride in coming from Mexico, as he desired processed American foods like Kraft Mac and Cheese over Mexican alternatives.19 This tension is one that has existed in immigrant families for over a century, however parents are being blamed more than ever, as living in impoverished areas increases the probability of relying on processed junk food as a staple in the diet, which is more of a financial/socioeconomic reality for families than a choice to not prepare a home-cooked meal. The reality that dinner isn’t available for many of these children, as parents could work multiple shifts and rarely be home, has been addressed by the federal government through nutritional campaigns led by Michelle Obama, that emphasized, “shifting nutritional quality for the entire day with nutrient dense foods only at lunch”, if other meals are difficult to come by. 20  This program, while having been minimized by changes made by the Trump administration, highlights the reality that the American family dinner is not remotely close to the unrealistic depictions popular in the middle of the previous century, and reflects modernity and widening class disparities today. Other government programs indicate societal changes as well, as Meatless Mondays today are based around the idea of supporting health, animal rights, and combating global warming at dinner, as opposed to being facilitated by the war effort.11 While the benefits of having a homemade dinner as a family are discussed as being correlated with lower substance abuse, superior grades, and healthier eating in children, this picture presents the question of a bidirectional relationship: How much of this is due to actively having dinner together, or are these factors just a reflection of the type of family (in socioeconomic standing) that is able to afford the time to prepare and consume such a meal? 

In the minds of many Americans, the idyllic family dinner cooked by a housewife who was told her main priority should be taking care of her husband and kids through housework was, and never will be a reality. As discussed in her book, “The Way We Never Were”, Stephanie Coontz emphasized the stability of 1950s families as a result of incredible economic prosperity at the time and a subsequent federal penchant for generosity to allow families loans and support to create a household that could thrive on a single-income (on the condition you were White and at least middle class).21 This was also in a time where mothers were warned about the danger of “Momism” or creating overachievers as children, in contrast to many contemporary mothers who are extremely involved in both housework, their job, and taking their children to activities that could one day make them stand out for college applications. This kind of pressure in today’s “hustle culture” makes the time needed to cook dinner and have everyone sit around a table on a nightly basis unrealistic, especially when it is understood that the family dinner was available to a select few throughout American history.

References

1. Crooks, Betsy. “What Did People Eat in the 1700s?” Foodways at Colonial London Town. UMBC, 2012. http://che.umbc.edu/londontown/cookbook/what.html. 

2. Griffin, Mackensie. “'No Place for Discontent': A History of the Family Dinner in America.” WFDD. 88.5 WFDD, February 16, 2016. https://www.wfdd.org/story/no-place-discontent-history-family-dinner-america. 

3. Blower, Brooke. “HI303 Lecture”. Boston University, April 27th, 2023.

4. Crosby, Johanna. “Reviving Revolutionary Recipes.” Cape Cod Times. Cape Cod Times, July 4, 2007. https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/lifestyle/food/2007/07/04/reviving-revolutionary-recipes/52858926007/. 

5. Creative, Vox. “The Evolution of Dinnertime.” Eater. Vox Creative Next, March 28, 2019. https://www.eater.com/ad/18285548/evolution-family-dinner-history. 

6. Humanities, National Endowment for the. “Morning Herald. [Volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, July 12, 1839, Image 2.” News about Chronicling America RSS. James Gordon Bennett. Accessed May 4, 2023. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030312/1839-07-12/ed-1/seq-2/. 

7. Frost, Sarah Annie. Frost's Laws and by-Laws of American Society. Project Gutenberg, 1869. 

8. Okona, Nneka M. “Sunday Dinners Are Sacred for African Americans.” Medium. ZORA, April 20, 2020. https://zora.medium.com/why-the-tradition-of-sunday-dinners-is-sacred-for-african-americans-4e07d432319c. 

9. Gill, Cassandra. “The Transformation of Food in America in the 19th Century.” Oxford University Press Blog . Oxford University , October 3, 2016. https://blog.oup.com/2016/10/immigrants-food-america/. 

10. Lohman, Sarah. “The Perils of Assimilation: How What We Eat Makes Us American, for Better or Worse.” Tenement Museum. Tenement Museum, June 22, 2022. https://www.tenement.org/blog/the-perils-of-assimilation-how-what-we-eat-makes-us-american-for-better-or-worse/. 

11. Avey, Tori. “Discover the History of Meatless Mondays.” PBS. Public Broadcasting Service, August 16, 2013. https://www.pbs.org/food/the-history-kitchen/history-meatless-mondays/. 

12. University of Montreal. "Fridges And Washing Machines Liberated Women, Study Suggests." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090312150735.htm (accessed May 4, 2023).

13. Britannica Films. Dinner with the nuclear family, 1950. Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. Accessed May 4, 2023. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/dinner-nuclear-family-1950. 

14. Jacoby, Jeff. “The Kosher-Industrial Complex.” BostonGlobe.com, November 2018. https://apps.bostonglobe.com/ideas/graphics/2018/11/the-next-bite/the-traditions/. 

15. Debczak, Michele. “How the TV Dinner Revolutionized American Life.” Mental Floss. Dennis Publishing, February 27, 2023. https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/651796/tv-dinners-food-history. 

16. Bowen, Sarah, Joslyn Brenton, and Sinikka Elliott. Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won't Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do about It. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 

17. Hampton, Rachelle. “Cooking at Home Is Difficult Enough. It's Time to Stop Measuring Ourselves against a Mythical Perfect Past.” Slate Magazine. Slate, March 15, 2019. https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/03/home-cooking-food-history-inequality.html. 

18. Ho, Soleil. “Let's Call It Assimilation Food.” Portside. Portside. Accessed May 4, 2023. https://portside.org/2022-05-16/lets-call-it-assimilation-food. 

19. Fielding-Singh, Priya. How the Other Half Eats: The Untold Story of Food and Inequality in America. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2021. 

20. Chandler , Ashlie. “News & Events.” Obama-era school nutrition policy led to better diets for students but faces changes | UW School of Public Health, July 28, 2020. https://sph.washington.edu/news-events/news/obama-era-school-nutrition-policy-led-better-diets-students-faces-changes. 

21. Coontz, Stephanie. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. New York: Basic Books, 2016. 

About the Author