I've been wary of the addictive nature of social media for years. Like a gambler, we slot emotional hope and attentive energy into the affective node and wait for payback - likes, loves, re-tweets, shares, more than before. But it is never enough. As per the old truism, the casino always wins. Except our casino is not a glittery neon behemoth on the outskirts of town - it is a small glowing rectangle - less than a second away, lurking on the devices we rely on to contact our family and friends.
When we share we are using our emotional and cognitive energy. But, of course - the payback is seldom. We never quite hit the jackpot like we once did. Just recall how we use our social media: we check, twitching and fevered, for updates - but how often do those updates, those interactions, that endorphin jacuzzi dopa-mine, warrant our efforts? 1/10...1/20? We spend a lot of energy on such things, hoping for attention, but the payback is scant. We put in more than we get out.
I believe that social media monetizes both loneliness and relationships - social interactions feed the revenue streams of the technocrats. Yet, at the same time, so does the striving, often never responded, call for some feedback, attention or interaction. So, if, for the gambler hope and winning are the cruel dynamic mode - hope, before let down in the search of an occasional win - then, for social media, hope is the loneliness and the effort of relieving it and the win is interaction and attention. Of course, it is a fool's pursuit. The casino always wins.
In Irresistible: Why we can't stop checking, scrolling, clicking and watching, by Adam Alter, the Moment app is described. It monitors a user's screen time. Not phone calls, but time spent using the seductive cyan touchscreen or staring at it. With a set of approximately eight thousand users the average screen-time each day was three hours. Let's be good little reductive capitalists for (a) (M)oment... How much is your three hours worth? (UK minimum wage is £7.20 - so minimum, £21.60 per day) Would you pay that for a service that shares staged disingenuous holiday snaps, political hot-takes, snide moral one-upmanship, and avocado fetishisms? When I see fellow writers and academics (no doubt assuming their time and energy market rate is more than the UK minimum wage) I wonder if the deal is as good as it seems. People say social media is necessary for self promotions in the gig-economy of intellectual labour - yet, I do not know of anyone who has got a gig through these vampiric platforms.
But let's now turn to this passion for self promotion. I accept that we live in a world of normalized disingenuousness. The vacant mirror snap stare and the grinning selfie facade is commonplace - as is social climbing via online sycophancy. We glibly re-tweet gesture politics #JeSuisCharlie #ICantBreath #Westminster #Solidarity yadadada. This is the rub for me. I could bear online 'social' self-entrepreneurialism if it was frank and honest. BUY MY BOOK is preferable to the din of smarmy smug lefty promotion. The hot-takes and 60 character put downs that exploded on the platforms in the aftermath of the Westminster attacks troubled me. I found it difficult not to be cynical about the busy ethical-trumping and event romanticization that seemed so prevalent. In between glamming up the jet-set #PhDLife or #Writerproblems, the passive-aggressive showing off (replete with filtered selfies, city-fawning and ubiquitous feline presence) felt utterly, and shamefully, opportunistic. Because - during tragic events what purpose do these posts serve other than to expose the user to others for attention and interaction. Surely the use of the hot hashtag is the junky's jump on the good shit?
Thank-you for arguing the toss about media coverage or the opinions of others, thank-you for that covert self-promotion veiled as outrage, moral high-ground or pithy gesture politics with your Patreon account linked in profile - how altruistic of you. But then, addiction does manifest as selfishness doesn't it?
The burger is of
Germanic origin: Hamburg. Hannah Glasse’s 1758 recipe for ‘Hamburgh Sausage’, served
with bread beneath it is, perhaps, its genesis. By 1847 the Hamburg America
Line served Hamburg steak, the burgers cooked to order on the gasoline range of
the sandwich cart. The meal was humble and good value (freshly cooked meat
aboard a train today is reserved for a few specialized and luxurious excursions
into re-living railway nostalgia). Yet, one could argue that the Hamburger
never quite took off till the personal and bespoke attitudes of the 19th
century provoked a phobic response in the burger business.
In the post-modern
American époque, the Reagan period, when rapid and aggressive expansion,
globalization and large-network efficiency were the business foci de rigueur,
the burger got pimped. The humble, Germanic émigré, transformed into the
orphaned dish of multiple component parts we understand as the modern burger;
in all its dried, limp and corn-syrupy fatigue. The burger became its own razzle-dazzled
pimp: garishly dressed in artificial Sesame Street hues – it’s prospect always
a fleeting memory, a shadow of good sustenance, in comparison to its
dissatisfying and cruelly anti-climatic let-down of a gastronomic experience.
The burger became removed from its earnest simplicity and, via reconstitution
under the forces of globalization, became a vivid simulacrum, like it’s own
hyper-real advert: vibrant visuals with little taste.
compound meal, the composite dish of minced beef sandwiched between
pre-processed doughy buns with distractions of cheesy unctuousness, swinesque crispiness,
pickled crunch sourness or dent-a-kill sugary condiments, mustard, ‘tomato’,
relish, onion or occult special sauce,
never realized its potential till corporations spread it too thinly. Burger
chain burgers, the frantic, agitated, and stress-frazzled piles of
de-personalized flesh ’n’ polystyrene melancholy inevitably found their
moribund nadir re-territorialized to Barlesque hipster-chic haute-novelty.
A burger is the
pre-primed ideal of post-Fordist capitalism – one could say it is meta-fordist.
The burger is a nexus of Toyotan Just-In-Time manufacturing. Each component of
the towering feats is a complex exercise in Fordist technique. The bread-buns,
be they bleached clouds of corpo-uniformity or artisanal sepia-to-saffron
butter-puffs of brioche sweetness, need a factory’s worth of preparation. The
carb-packaging requires multiple levels of process, effort, transport and
refinement. The old phrase of ‘making bread’: bread making, especially making
bread big time – baking – was always a hard graft, complex, involved and
hierarchical. Yet, such things are merely the sandwiching of the main
attraction. Buns are not even condiment, distraction or side. They are but
buns, brackets of the main attraction – the begrudged practical necessity of
their presence is all that keeps them at the sides of the stage.
The meat is the
burger-real. It reveals the extravagant negation of economy that euro-cuisine consistently
re-fetishizes. Aged, hung, fresh, local, rare… these are the shibboleths of
anti-capitalist withdrawal and cultural conservatism. The meat must be somehow
unique, have provenance, a post-mortem luxury of hanging and aging akin to fine
wines and whiskies, whilst all along, and despite such pernickety
predilections, be presented in a minced-up, ground-down, patty-mushed and
heat-seared discus form. The burger itself, the patty, is a queer thing. It
fails, glams up, indulges and negates itself. It is neither cut not product –
it is burger, at once indistinguishable from its primary butchered familiarity
yet uncannily other. The burger is too cultured, too artificial to be mistaken
for steak. It is an impossible compound, it is multiple cuts, multiple parts,
advanced meat recovery provides protein materials beyond the quaint simplicity
of mere butchery. Machinic efficiencies reclaim the flesh of bovine skeletons.
squeamish pescatarian or noble vegan the burger is an uncanny valley of gastrohorror. The burger doesn’t present the
distinctly animal appearance of unprocessed meat. There are not joints, bones,
fat or form. The musculature of its original corporeal origins erased, in its
place stands vertiginous possibilities of flesh. The burger is the unthinkable,
the lamella, of capitalism’s machinic impersonality. The ground meat no doubt
polygenic, of multiple animals, parts and, in some occasions, species – all
harvested in myriad mysterious ways. The burger harbours the horror of sci-fi:
unrecognizability – the deeply horrifying prospect of epistemological ambiguity
overtakes the sheer explicitness of gore.
patty, contra-steak, is stoically post-human. Its weirdly optimized production
and form has a futural streak – a future steak. Normal steak is too beastly,
too animal, too fibrously carnivorous in bite to be comparable; our soft incisors
are too weak for real meat. The steak reeks of antiquated ways – it seems overly
mammalian, crude and base. The burger is speed, efficiency and optimization; it
is the Jetsons, the mystery of science, engineering, technology and sly corporate
finesse. Steak is Fred Flintstone, it is the self-winding wrist-watch, the map,
the phone-call, the human-controlled automobile, the real fire: its pleasure is
precisely the sentimentally for yesteryear – an indulgence retrospection and
nostalgia: the pantomime rehearsal of bygone ways, the dignities of
The patty, the
pixelated bovine avatar, the meta-Fordist-Frankenstein nexus of vertiginous
processes and networks, is all the more satisfying for its synthetic
optimization: pre-ground, pre-mixed, curated, arranged by an unseen Svengali-systems. Re-made and re-modeled,
seasoned and pre-masticated protein presented with maximum sear-surface for carcinogen
charred smokiness and blood-oozing rareness. Its profile of blackened exterior
and pinkish soft interior betray the paradoxical brief of the future-steak. Its
beef must ham it up (hamburger not beefburger) in the new wave of gourmand
burgers. The hamming-beef must be Isserley close to human – replete with
undertones class stratification and eugenics. Our cows must have come from good
stock, breeding, a heritage of being grass fed and free range. Our mooing-ideal
must have a level of luxuriant idle happiness: an idyllic pastural bovine-bohemianism
of somnambulant grazing around, well, Hereford, ideally. Before the diner’s
imaginary lacuna of the slaughter one imagines a Cider With Rosie tranquility, chirping hedgerows, long hazy summers
of late evening violets and a quieter, more relaxed way of life in those halcyon
years between the wars… Such fictioning is the Menu’s Con – the MC that, before
the burger’s arrival, tells a story at once unimaginable and resolutely incredible. A story of heritage, origin
and provenance that is irrefutably incongruous with the horror of machinic
consistency that lurks between the buns.
One should be
cautious of the nostalgic turn that pervades cuisine. The meat atrocities of
corporate efficiency are let downs, they are cons, but future-steaks are not
necessarily doomed to forever being uncanny impostors. The next big thing is
often called a ‘young pretender’ – before the game changes, before a paradigm
shift. The supposed superiority of small-scale, localism, heritage and
desirable inefficiencies could be challenged by the cool efficiency of large
networks: the burger, the nexus of esoteric processes and occult saucery,
should stop dressing itself in vintage and be the unashamed future-steak it is.
Highly automated gastronomic luxuries, that exceed the possibilities of local
and small scale cuisine – as unthinkable as overseeing one’s steak cooking on a
train – are just around the corner.