Differences in Food Culture - Traditions & Trends. Exemplified

Differences in Food Culture – Traditions & Trends.
Exemplified with the cultural differences between
France - Denmark - Sweden
Dr. Dominique Bouchet
Professor of International Marketing
Odense University
Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark
Dom@busieco.ou.dk
Fax : [45] 6615 5129
Dominique Bouchet: "Differences in Food Culture - Traditions & Trends. Exemplified with the cultural differences
between France-Denmark-Sweden."in Claus Heggun (Ed.): Quality and Risk Management. Proceedings of the 25th
International Dairy Congress (21-24. September 1998, Aarhus Denmark), The Danish National Committee of the IDF,
Aarhus 1999. pp. 210-216.
Abstract :
It is a challenge to become acquainted with the complexity of different food cultures. By
looking at the differences in the ways in which people in France, Denmark and Sweden relate
to the concept of “eating”, an introduction is here given to the analysis of food cultures.
A culture shock
I was born and grew up in France. Nearly
25 years ago - at the age of 25 - I moved to
Denmark and had a culture shock!
The first thing I noticed was the the
difference in food culture. In Denmark
people did not mind drinking something
sweet with their food, they served few
vegetables, and the bread often tasted – for
me – like cardboard. It was not unusual to
have to content oneself with one dish for a
so-called dinner, which was usually
consumed in the evening. Most meals were
supposed to be eaten quickly and alone.
The food was rarely a topic of
conversation. It did not take much before
the Danes felt that the food was - not
refined - but too fine. Brown gravy –
always tasting and looking the same --
over-done meat, onions, and potatoes
seemed to be their favourite food. When I
brought French products with me home to
Denmark, my guests were not very
interested. In their view French sausage
and French cheese looked positively
disgusting. Liquor was more interesting.
Without restrain they would taste
everything, just like they did not refrain
from eating my imported candy - which I
had thought would last for months - in just
one evening.
Some differences are noticed straight
away
Different food cultures and cultural
differences in general are neither easy to
analyse nor to describe. Cultures are very
complex systems of differences -
intertwined with each other, which the
culture members are guided by in their
choices. If you come from a different
culture, it is often easier to wonder at the
strange choices – and differences – you are
confronted by. You do not become
conscious of everything, but when it is a
question of food, the confrontation is
almost inevitable: you must eat even if it
disturbs you to the core when you are
submitted to a different food code.

The components of food culture
Among the basic differences which the
multiple cultures employ in the building of
their food culture, some are physiological
taste experiences (sweet, salt, sour, bitter,
cold, warm, dry, spicy...). Some have to do
with preparation (raw, boiled, fried...).
Others refer to basic attitudes (ethos)
concerning the relationship with nature and
the universe (pure, unclean, holy, secular,
genuine, healthy, necessary...). Yet others
refer to the social ties (traditional, public,
private, luxurious, festive, everyday-like,
exotic...).
In other words, it is not just what you eat
which is interesting, but also how, when,
with whom, and why. And all these
domains intersect: everything we eat - as
well as the way in which we eat it - is
influenced by all the systems of meaning at
once.
When an innovation occurs
If a technological innovation is made
which makes new products possible or if a
supplier from abroad tries his luck with
foreign products, the new product will be
viewed according to the complex system of
interpretation which makes up a culture.
This happens in more or less the same way
as when e.g. car manufacturers wish to find
out how they can benefit from new
technologies. When the ABS braking
system was introduced, BMW marketed it
as something which enabled the driver to
have even more control of the vehicle.
Volvo, on the other hand, emphasised that
the braking system meant even more safety
for the passengers.
Food cultures, however, are considerably
more complex than brand names.
Therefore, what happens in connection
with innovation is far less conscious than
the running of a business. In addition,
businesses - no matter which goods they
offer - are not only confronted with
technological innovations but also with
cultural changes. The latter are even more
difficult to relate to.
Ecology as an example
The increasing interest in ecology and
ecological production methods is an
example of such a cultural change. In this
connection it is observed that ecology
concerning food means something
different in France and in Denmark. With
respect to production methods, i.e. the
relationship between product and nature,
both countries are aware that such products
are gentle to nature. But when the issue is
the relation between the product and the
body, the priorities in the two countries
differ: in Denmark it is emphasised above
all that the products are healthy, whereas in
France the main issue is the better taste.
Thus, a tendency which seems to be shared
and homogenising, can, on further
analysis, turn out to be multiple and
diverging.
In the above example the experience seems
to be more important for the French than
the realisation, whereas it is the opposite
for the Danes. Two different rationalities
prevail: the Danish rationality is based on
scientific and juricidal criteria for
evaluation, wheras the French rationality is
dominated by aestethic - i.e. sensuous -
criteria.
The sensuous and the factual
General cultural criteria are also making
themselves felt when consumers relate to
other types of products. If it is a question
of cheese and meat, French consumers
emphasise the sensuous aspect - Danish
consumers the factual. Because the taste
sensation plays such a large role in France,
French consumers are less likely to let

themselves be influenced by e.g. hygienic
arguments, which is a source of wonder for
many Scandinavians.
These types of consumer behaviour are
deeply rooted in different ways of relating
to the animalistic - to life and death. Fresh
oysters and red meat are seldom
appreciated in Denmark, whereas in France
exactly red meat is perceived as being
more alive, and thereby more powerful and
appetising.
The animalistic aspect is seen as something
positive in France and Spain, whereas the
associations in Denmark and Germany are
more in the direction of death and
morbidity. The reaction is one of disgust,
and therefore it is desirable to kill each and
every trace of what is disgusting in a
process of frying, boiling, or pasteurising.
Thereby, the animalistic is transformed
into something different: the proteins it
consists of. Digging a little deeper into this
issue, one finds that there are different
perceptions of the distinction between the
human and the animalistic which support
the experience of the consumer in their
respective cultures. In the Nordic countries
people talk more about nature in man than
about culture versus nature, just like many
people try to behave naturally. Contrary to
that, people in Catholic countries are fond
of rhetoric and pomp and gladly make use
of culture and staging for seduction.
The food cultures in France and
Denmark
The French use food more intensively as a
means of communication, because they
share a code in which both food and
language play an important role. The
mastery of the shades of the French
language and the appreciation of the
principles of the French kitchen are the key
to the integration in a community in which
one both feels welcome and has the
possibility to move up independent of
occupation as well as social status. The
references - the food ideal - are practically
the same for all sections of the population.
In Denmark too, roughly the same food
ideal is shared across social groups.
However, that ideal does not have the same
content or significance as in France. Food
and language are not employed to the same
degree in order to show off an expertise,
the food rituals are less imposing. In
Denmark one is included in the community
without necessarily taking an interest in
food.. It is acceptable to eat alone and
hurriedly on a frequent basis, and there are
fewer occasions for eating together, and
even fewer for exquisite meals.
Thus, the food rituals function differently.
In Denmark a pronounced sense of the
matter of course and indifference rules,
everybody is accepted irrespective of
individual taste. In France everybody has
to confirm their state of membership and
secure their place by showing a
commitment as well as a knowledge of
taste and aesthetics. But, as mentioned, not
very much in both countries distinguishes
the food ideals of the various social
groups.
Swedish multiplicity
Matters stand differently in Sweden where
the French aristocratic food ideal rules in
one part of the population, and Danish-like
popular food ideals in another.
Compared to the situation in France and
Denmark, the Swedish food culture is less
homogenous. It refers less to the national
community and has a higher degree of
complexity from local and group-specific
codes. Thus, the Swedish and French food
cultures share the demand for a
confirmation of a person’s affiliation. But
only in few groups do taste and
sensuousness play a central role. In
general, the nutritional and the natural
aspects take up the most central place

across all groups of identification. Unlike
Denmark, they are moving away from
having common references and are going
in the direction of natural rather than
practical characteristics, and the taste
preferences refer less to personal than to
natural and simple aspects.
At a seminar where the food was prepared
by a proud French cook, the Danish
participants critisised the uniformity of the
food with reference to people’s individual
taste. The Swedes deplored the fact that the
food was too exquisite, they would have
preferred a sliced tomato and a grilled fish.
The French participants, however, made
extensive comparisons to previous food
experiences.
milk-free omelet. The Frenchman remarks
that he prefers this kind of discrete service
to what he has experienced in the United
States where the staff with a stiff plastic
smile would inelegantly interrupt the meal
at any given time with an importunate and
agressive “Good day, sir. My name is
Peter. How is everything?” The Swedish
informal form of service pleases the
Frenchman who perceives the American
formalism in that area as an interruption of
the intimity and intensity of the meal
where the intrusion of the waiter breaks the
spell. The Dane, on the other hand, who
also perceives the waiter’s smile as being
false, primarily notices the the falseness
rather than the lacking consideration of the
social aspect of the meal.
The perception of service
The differences in food cultures are also
expressed in other ways, which can be
illustrated as follows:
A Dane, a Frenchman and an American
met for breakfast in a Stockholm hotel.
The American stops in front of the table
where the waitress is preparing omelets.
He tells her that he is allergic to dairy
products and asks if that particular omelet
contains milk. The Swedish waitress does
not appear to react. She does not answer
but turns her back and walks off to make a
new omelet. While the American is
expressing his surprise and disappointment
through his body language, he sees a
different table with hard-boiled eggs.
“Never mind”, he says in a firm and
irritated voice, “I’ll just have a hard-boiled
egg.” But the waitress does not register
this. She seems to be lost in her own
thoughts. While the three colleagues are
filling their plates from the buffet, the
Dane comments on the lacking
qualifications of the waitress.
Three minutes later the waitress comes to
their table where, discretely and without
any comment, she serves the American a
Planet system or commode
A great deal of the categories which are
used more or less consciously for an
evaluation of the quality of food and meals
are not objective. Their meanings are
connected in a culture-specific structure
which has more in common with a mobile
planet system than with a well-organised
commode consisting of well-separated
drawers. Quality, formalism, authenticity
refer to widely different culture-specific
combinations. The authenticity, for
instance, which Danes seek in a meal is
often a relaxed atmosphere, whereas
Swedes will primarily seek something of
that sort in purely natural products.
Accordingly, it ought to be clear that it
does not suffice to make superficial
analyses of individual dimensions, set up
independently of each other in a commodelike
chart where the familiarity forms, the
social aspect, and the taste are taken out of
context. All dimensions are not only
closely connected, they are also intricately
connected like a hologramme. As a
summary, in Table 1 I have tried to
illustrate some of the intra-cultural
interactions mentioned in this article.

Table 1: How priorities differ in the three countries:
TOPICS OF FOCUS/
CULTURES
FRANCE DENMARK SWEDEN
Food Taste Nutrition Nutrition
Meal
The most important aspect
of the meal
Food formalism
Taste preferences
Taste/the social bond
Possible social tie
Taste sensation..
Sensous experience
Social interaction
Cultural characteristics
Taste
High aesthetic priority
• More important than
hygiene
• Social bond
• Sensous
Carrier of social bonds
Cultural code expressed
through speech
National conformism
Differentiation by
means of refinement
Physiological necessity
Individual pause
Nutrients
Personal pleasure
Practical characteristics
Low aesthetic priority
• Secondary to hygiene
• Individual choice
• Nutritional
Personal pleasure
Cultural code very
seldom expressed
Simple and tolerant
code
The legitimacy of simple
taste
Natural necessity
Individual pause
Nutrients
Personal pleasure
Natural characteristics
Medium aesthetic
priority
• Secondary to hygiene
• Naturally rooted
• Natural
Dependent on social
group
Cultural code
occasionally expressed
Simple and tolerant code
The legitimacy of natural
taste
Relative differentiation
Sourish or mixed taste Seen as archaism Very widespread Very widespread
Food talk
Food talk - when?
Food talk - who talks the
most?
Food talk - what about?
The decisive aspect of the
relation to taste
When buying food
The rhythm of meals
Restaurant
Industrialisation of food
production
Very extensive
Wordy
Already while shopping
Even more at the table
Demand
Questions
Taste experiences
Food experiences
• Being able to distinguish
the good taste
• Being able to express
slight distinctions
Seeing, touching,
smelling
Commensal (community
based on food)
The art of food
The social aspect
Damages taste
• Loss of taste
• Banalising, levelling of
products
• Loss of cultural
identity (upbringing,
“terroirs”)
Weak
Laconic
Very rarely while
shopping
Rarely at the table
Supply
Brochures
Safety and health
Individual taste
• Corresponding to a
person’s individual
taste
• No explanations
Perhaps read about it
Physiological
Hygiene
Service
Usually rational
Seldom injurious to
health
• Distribution of norms
for security
• Shortening of
preparation time
• Easy-to-use
Weak
Laconic
Rarely while shopping
Rarely at the table
Supply
Brochures
The natural and health
Individual taste
• Natural, corresponding
to a person’s individual
taste
• No explanations
Perhaps read about it
Physiological
Hygiene
The social aspect
Mostly rational
At times injurious to
health
• Distribution of norms
for security
• Shortening of
preparation time
• Distortion of the natural

Ecological products
For taste reasons
Terroir
For health reasons
Pollution
Meat Life Death Death
For health reasons and
because of the natural
aspect
Pollution
Preparation of meat Red meat because of its Well-done for safety Well-done for safety
powerfulness
reasons
reasons
Cheese Alive Pasteurised Pasteurised
Eating cheese
Room temperature
Gourmet
Tasted with wine and
bread
Development of the
product
National taste
classification system
Chilled
Standardised
Rigid norms
Unvarying taste
Food code
No reference to a shared
classification system
Main reference Culture Nature Nature
Chilled
Standardised
Rigid norms
Unvarying taste
No reference to a shared
classification system
Historical influence Aristocratic Peasantry Different sources:
Aristocracy or peasantry
and/or the working
classes