Switching Your Fork-Holding Hand While Eating? Do People Do This?

[OpalCat]

Eh, I’ve eaten many a baked potato in my time and never once needed to use a knife to get it onto my fork.

[lowbrass]

@OpalCat

Yeah I’m not seeing how this is complicated. In the spirit of sharing, though, I’ve made two videos to demonstrate this amazing feat of dexterity. Please welcome my lovely assistant, a plate of leftover Thai food:

using a fork tines-up to spear food
using a fork tines-up to scoop food, without “pushing it all over the plate” or using a knife

It’s amazing stuff, but I promise it’s unretouched footage, and there were no special effects, mirrors, or tricks of any kind.

Very rude to have your cell phone on the table while eating.

[Lust4Life]

Some years ago as an Englishman in Norfolk Virginia I was accused by a rather strange American woman that my mate was trying to seduce , of being a glutton because I was obviously trying to shovel food into my gob as fast as possible ,the evidence being holding both knife ®and fork (l) at the same time. while eating lunch

[Malacandra]

@Lust4Life

Some years ago as an Englishman in Norfolk Virginia I was accused by a rather strange American woman that my mate was trying to seduce , of being a glutton because I was obviously trying to shovel food into my gob as fast as possible ,the evidence being holding both knife (r)and fork (l) at the same time. while eating lunch

And I hope you pointed out to her what I expressed upthread: that in England we are brought up to display a polite restraint at table without needing to handicap ourselves with exhibitions of cutlery-juggling to enforce it.
Fork-handling: I found myself paying more than usual attention at lunch today. The third and fourth fingers provide a base, holding the handle of the fork against the base of the hand. Thumb and first two fingers manipulate the shaft just behind the head (stop it! :rolleyes: ), rotating from tines-down to tines-up as necessary. When cutting or spearing, the first finger is applied directly to the shaft to provide the necessary downward pressure - no more should be needed.

[OpalCat]

@lowbrass

Very rude to have your cell phone on the table while eating.

Heh. Rude to who? The cat? My son is away for the summer–I live alone. (Actually that’s the tray table that stays next to the couch and is mainly used for my phone, drink, and the TV remote. I just happened to be using it for eating at the time.)

[Acsenray]

@lowbrass

@acsenray

@lowbrass

lowbrass
I think that’s the idea behind the “switching hands” thing. It shows that you aren’t in a hurry to eat your food. Of course I don’t care about such things, but that’s my impression of why we switch hands.

That may be post facto rationalisation for the practice, but as another poster has pointed out, the real reason is because the American system was originally developed when the only utensils used were a spoon and a knife. When the fork was adopted from Europe, it was stuck in the place of the spoon (holding with the left while cutting with the knife and then scooping with the right). The European method was developed with the fork itself.

It very well could be. I wasn’t around when the rules of etiquette were first formed; I only know how people tend to think about them during the time I have been alive. I’m quite sure my Mom never said, “Be sure to switch hands, because they didn’t have forks in the original colonies”, but I don’t have any reason to believe it couldn’t have started that way.

Well, the real reason – and the posts to this thread are great evidence of this – is merely because that’s the way individuals were taught or are accustomed to doing it. The rationalisation (“otherwise you look like you’re gobbling”) is merely a way to enforce the practice; it has no basis in fact.

In other words, the practice of fork switching started as an easy substitution of the spoon-knife system and continued the way all such cultural habits do, through social reinforcement. The rationalisation is a component of the reinforcement, but is not “the reason why” things are done that way.

@mhendo

Is it still called French Toast in India, or is there a specific local name for it?

When speaking English, it’s called French toast. There are other terms in Indian languages (in Bengali, it’s dim-pãuruti, “egg-loaf bread”), but even when speaking an Indian language, “French toast” is common. (Indians commonly mix vocabulary from different languages when speaking.)

[lowbrass]

@acsenray

Well, the real reason – and the posts to this thread are great evidence of this – is merely because that’s the way individuals were taught or are accustomed to doing it. The rationalisation (“otherwise you look like you’re gobbling”) is merely a way to enforce the practice; it has no basis in fact.

In other words, the practice of fork switching started as an easy substitution of the spoon-knife system and continued the way all such cultural habits do, through social reinforcement. The rationalisation is a component of the reinforcement, but is not “the reason why” things are done that way.

You seem to be taking offense at my explanation of the American system. It was not meant as an insult to Europeans. There are no “facts” here; only traditions. Rules of etiquette were not arrived at by scientific committees. It matters not how the explanation originated; it exists now. Any culture that has different customs can appear rude or odd to another culture. That doesn’t mean they are. Neither system is based on any “facts”. If we simply used the most expedient and pragmatic method, we wouldn’t even have rules of etiquette. The idea of setting one’s utensils down between bites is not a post hoc rationalization. The idea exists independently of which hand one holds the utensils. From a primer on European style dining:

http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/behaviourfood.html

When eating in formal situations, rest the fork and knife on the plate between mouthfuls, or for a break for conversation.

It’s not the switching hands per se, but the idea that you should avoid looking like you’re in a hurry to shovel food into your mouth. Europeans and Americans just apply the idea slightly differently. It’s all pretty arbitrary; I don’t think you can really argue that one is any more or less rational than the other.

[Acsenray]

@lowbrass

It was not meant as an insult to Europeans.

It would be presumptuous of me to take offense on behalf of Europeans.

There are no “facts” here; only traditions.

Exactly.

Rules of etiquette were not arrived at by scientific committees.

I’m not asking for scientific justification for the practice. However, when you say “This is the reason why,” you are making a statement of fact.

The rest of what you say, I have no dispute with. This is what I’m nitpicking:

@lowbrass

I think that’s the idea behind the “switching hands” thing.

“This is the idea behind” can have two meanings: (1) “This is why we do it.” or (2) “This is how it started.”

As to (1), as you say, these are merely traditions. For most, or even all, traditions “This is why” has a simple answer: “because it’s a tradition; one generation reinforces it over another.” The answer can’t be “it shows that you aren’t in a hurry to eat your food” because that perception arose only after the practice became the norm. There is no reason why seeing someone holding both a fork and a knife creates that perception except that it is already outside the norm of the viewer’s experience or because it has been reinforced by mom.

People come up with all kinds of ex post facto stories and tales to justify a tradition, when, really no justification is needed, or to justify looking down on people with different traditions.

[lowbrass]

@acsenray

I’m not asking for scientific justification for the practice. However, when you say “This is the reason why,” you are making a statement of fact.

The rest of what you say, I have no dispute with. This is what I’m nitpicking:

Since that statement of mine would be superceded by my later post where I conceded that there may have been an earlier reason, all this pedantry of yours would seem to be for nought. I’m not allowed to go back and edit prior posts, so you do need to read subsequent posts where I explictly state that I’m not defending the position that this was the origin of the practice.

[Acsenray]

@lowbrass

Since that statement of mine would be superceded by my later post where I conceded that there may have been an earlier reason, all this pedantry of yours would seem to be for nought. I’m not allowed to go back and edit prior posts, so you do need to read subsequent posts where I explictly state that I’m not defending the position that this was the origin of the practice.

Okay, okay. Truce.