Appraisal — May 2, 2014, 7:55 am

Operation Margarine

Tracing the wartime rise of ersatz butter

George Orwell declared that his strongest memory of the latter half of the First World War was not the slaughter but the margarine. “It is an instance of the horrible selfishness of children,” he wrote in his 1940 essay “My Country Right or Left,” “that by 1917 the war had almost ceased to affect us, except through our stomachs.” He underlined the moral relationship between bad food and bad character in Down and Out in Paris and London. “You discover that a man who has gone even a week on bread and margarine,” he wrote, “is not a man any longer.”

Orwell is scarcely the only writer to have been scarred by the butter substitute — the literature of postwar England is greasy with margarine. In 1919, D. H. Lawrence gratefully wrote to a friend, “The butter is a great kindness, for I sicken at margarine.” Evelyn Waugh, in his memoir, A Little Learning, recalls with distaste the “milkless cocoa and small pats of margarine and limitless bread” at boarding school. And W. H. Auden, who was also in school during the war, remembers reaching for a second slice of bread and margarine, something that was permitted, only to have a master acidly remark, “Auden, I see, wants the Huns to win.”

In Erich Maria Remarque’s classic war novel, All Quiet on the Western Front, German soldiers receive their ration of synthetic honey and play cards on the lid of a margarine tub. As a modern, industrialized butter substitute, margarine was a depressingly suitable food for the world’s first modern, industrialized war. Butter had been adulterated before — with carrot or turnip or lashings of salt, to hide its rancidity — but margarine made it wholly artificial. Born in a laboratory instead of a cow, it was at the vanguard of the artificial tinned, tubed, canned, bottled, and dyed food blitzkrieg of the twentieth century, which turned cuisine into chemistry.

Dutch margarine advertisement, 1893

Dutch margarine advertisement, 1893

Margarine thrives on adversity, and its origins are rooted in it. Margaret Visser’s Much Depends on Dinner provides a first-rate account of the circumstances leading to its invention. In 1869, a cattle plague in France prompted Emperor Napoleon III to offer a prize to anyone who could come up with a butter substitute to feed his army and people. Hippolyte Mège-Mouriès, the food chemist who won the prize, had impeccable credentials, having already developed a widely honored process for “making more bread with less flour.” His substitute for butter was an amalgam of beef tallow, milk, and udders, pressed and heated in his laboratory. Initially called oleomargarine (after oleic acid and margaric acid), the name was shortened to margarine (margarites means pearl in Greek, and the fatty deposits of margarine had a pearly sheen). Over the years, beef tallow was replaced by vegetable and cottonseed oils, and yellow dye was added to turn margarine’s unappetizing white lardiness into a more buttery yellow. It arrived in the United Kingdom as Butterine, but the aural kinship with butter was too close for England’s dairy farmers, and an 1887 law changed the name to margarine, soon cockneyfied to marg.

Cheaper than butter and longer-lasting, margarine became a breakfast staple of the working classes in England’s factory towns, where cows were scarce. H. G. Wells’ social satires are a handy index of the status of margarine in industrialized prewar England. In his 1905 novel, Kipps: A Story of a Simple Soul, for instance, the eponymous hero is raised on butter despite being a poor orphan, simply because his schoolmaster owns cows. Later apprenticed to a draper in a big town, Kipps is reduced to toast and margarine, but when he inherits a windfall and aspires to be a gentleman, the joy of his day is to wait longingly for teatime to arrive with a plate of “toce all buttery.”

The First World War changed everything. Even the upper and middle classes had to eat margarine. War rations were introduced to manage food shortages, and in England dairy was particularly hard hit, with German submarines torpedoing butter imports from Australia and New Zealand. As blocks of butter sank to the bottom of the ocean, the fortunes of margarine rose steadily. Rudyard Kipling captures this in Changelings, a poem about a butter-selling grocer’s clerk who enlists with the navy and returns after the war to his grocery.

Or ever the battered liners sank
With their passengers to the dark,
I was head of a Walworth Bank,
And you were a grocer’s clerk.

I was a dealer in stocks and shares,
And you in butters and teas,
And we both abandoned our own affairs
And took to the dreadful seas.

. . .

Now there is nothing — not even our rank —
To witness what we have been;
And I am returned to my Walworth bank,
And you to your margarine!

Despite the rueful mockery that touches this seemingly lighthearted ballad, it was written in the shadow cast by the death of the poet’s beloved son, John. Kipling had pulled strings to get John enlisted and never forgave himself for pushing him toward the trenches. The jingoism that made Kipling a pillar of the War Propaganda Bureau is absent in this fine poem. What were all those deaths for, the poem dryly asks, if they only returned us to a cut-rate margarine version of peace?

From Harper’s Magazine, January 1918.

From Harper’s Magazine, January 1918. Subscribers can also read “The Oleomargarine Rebellion” (December 1943), about the battle between margarine and butter producers in America.

By the time the war was over, margarine was a fait accompli, and the butter lobby, which had fought hard against it, decided to get a piece of the action. Dorothy L. Sayers’s 1933 novel, Murder Must Advertise, offers an entertaining window on the spin that ensued. When Sayers’s aristocrat detective, Lord Peter Wimsey, briefly joins an advertising firm as a copywriter, Green Pastures margarine is the first product he has to sell. With true Oxonian flair, he comes up with well-bred lines like, “It’s a far, far, butter thing,” which, however splendid, just won’t do. To start with, Wimsey is told, the client likes to have a cow in the picture:

“Why? Is it made of cow-fat?”

“Well, I daresay it is, but you mustn’t say so. People wouldn’t like the idea. The picture of the cow suggests the taste of butter, that’s all. And the name — Green Pastures — suggests cows, you see.”

“I see. Just something about ‘Better than Butter and half the price.’ Simple appeal to the pocket.”

“Yes, but you mustn’t knock butter. They sell butter as well.”

“Oh!”

“You can say it’s as good as butter.”

“But in that case . . . what does one find to say in favor of butter? I mean, if the other stuff’s as good and doesn’t cost so much, what’s the argument for buying butter?”

“You don’t need an argument for buying butter. It’s a natural, human instinct.”

“Oh, I see.”

But if Britain struggled through the war, Germany starved through it. The British navy blockade around Germany caused famine-like conditions in the country. In Swindled, her fascinating history of food fraud, Bee Wilson shows how the war turned Germany into a laboratory for the most outlandish fake foods. “They even came up with a new word for it: the experience of ersatz food.” Now widely used in English as an adjective for cheap or counterfeit, ersatz, in German, simply meant “substitute” or “replacement,” but by the end of the war it had acquired the connotation of inferior. Ersatz coffee (walnut shells flavored with coal tar), ersatz eggs (maize and potatoes), ersatz pepper (ash), and ersatz lamb chop (rice) were staples during these years, as were 837 varieties of ersatz sausage. Wilson quotes an Australian trombonist trapped in Leipzig saying she didn’t mind consuming rat; it was substitute rat she couldn’t bear. With lard and dripping in short supply, the Germans tried “producing fats from rats, mice, hamsters, crows, and even cockroaches. There was even a plan to extract protein from the wings of dragonflies.”

In the last two years of the war, Germany was even further reduced, to a state of “ersatz ersatz”: all the finer substitutes had been exhausted, and in their absence all kinds of dubious surrogates were packaged as food. Washing soda mixed with starch, for instance, was sold as butter — it came nicely packaged with a grand name that fooled no one. Ersatz food not only caused an outbreak of physical illness called ersatzkrankheit or “substitute sickness,” it also led to widespread feelings of moral inferiority and insubstantiality among the German people. The unrelenting diet of fake foods made them feel like fake people. “People started applying the term ersatz to everything, even themselves,” writes Wilson. “An Ersatzmensch was a substitute person, a simulacrum of a human being, who was no more real than the Ersatzbutter they spread on their Ersatzbrot.” Germany’s national memory of hunger and debasement in the First World War played no small part in stoking the vengeful rise of Nazism, though the Nazis were themselves to champion ersatz-ism as an act of patriotism during the next war.

The Ersatz Elevator, a children’s adventure novel published in 2001 as part of the enormously popular Lemony Snicket series, is a darkly funny riff on this phenomenon. In addition to a fake elevator door that hides a secret passageway, the story features a couple called the Squalors, an Aqueous Martini (cold water served in a fancy glass with an olive in it), a foul concoction called Parsley Soda, and a restaurant called Café Salmonella. A contemporary children’s mystery might seem an unlikely place for ersatz food to pop up, but the author Daniel Handler’s father was a Jewish German refugee from the Second World War, during which the ersatz phenomenon, cheered on by Goebbels, was at its gruesome peak. Handler’s novel is almost certainly a gloss on those poisonous years. He also pokes fun at the kind of food faddism that promotes cons like aqueous martinis simply by proclaiming them “in.”

The more indigestible irony of our times is that the once-disparaged ersatz butter has come to be regarded as a healthy food. Because of its relatively lower saturated fat content, margarine has gone from being the shortening of those with slender means to the shortening of the slender. No wonder, then, that the cultural theorist Roland Barthes wrote a critique of mass culture called “Operation Margarine.” In the end, he argued, the imitation is always embraced over the original, and precisely for the qualities it lacks.

Share
Single Page
is an independent journalist. She has written for the Times of India, the Guardian, The New Republic, The Los Angeles Review of Books, Guernica, and several other publications.

Get access to 168 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

October 2018

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Printed Word in Peril·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February, at an event at the 92nd Street Y’s Unterberg Poetry Center in New York, while sharing the stage with my fellow British writer Martin Amis and discussing the impact of screen-based reading and bidirectional digital media on the Republic of Letters, I threw this query out to an audience that I estimate was about three hundred strong: “Have any of you been reading anything by Norman Mailer in the past year?” After a while, one hand went up, then another tentatively semi-elevated. Frankly I was surprised it was that many. Of course, there are good reasons why Mailer in particular should suffer posthumous obscurity with such alacrity: his brand of male essentialist braggadocio is arguably extraneous in the age of Trump, Weinstein, and fourth-wave feminism. Moreover, Mailer’s brilliance, such as it was, seemed, even at the time he wrote, to be sparks struck by a steely intellect against the tortuous rocks of a particular age, even though he labored tirelessly to the very end, principally as the booster of his own reputation.

It’s also true that, as J. G. Ballard sagely remarked, for a writer, death is always a career move, and for most of us the move is a demotion, as we’re simultaneously lowered into the grave and our works into the dustbin. But having noted all of the above, it remains the case that Mailer’s death coincided with another far greater extinction: that of the literary milieu in which he’d come to prominence and been sustained for decades. It’s a milieu that I hesitate to identify entirely with what’s understood by the ringing phrase “the Republic of Letters,” even though the overlap between the two was once great indeed; and I cannot be alone in wondering what will remain of the latter once the former, which not long ago seemed so very solid, has melted into air.

What I do feel isolated in—if not entirely alone in—is my determination, as a novelist, essayist, and journalist, not to rage against the dying of literature’s light, although it’s surprising how little of this there is, but merely to examine the great technological discontinuity of our era, as we pivot from the wave to the particle, the fractal to the fungible, and the mechanical to the computable. I first began consciously responding, as a literary practitioner, to the manifold impacts of ­BDDM in the early 2000s—although, being the age I am, I have been feeling its effects throughout my working life—and I first started to write and speak publicly about it around a decade ago. Initially I had the impression I was being heard out, if reluctantly, but as the years have passed, my attempts to limn the shape of this epochal transformation have been met increasingly with outrage, and even abuse, in particular from my fellow writers.

As for my attempts to express the impact of the screen on the page, on the actual pages of literary novels, I now understand that these were altogether irrelevant to the requirement of the age that everything be easier, faster, and slicker in order to compel the attention of screen viewers. It strikes me that we’re now suffering collectively from a “tyranny of the virtual,” since we find ourselves unable to look away from the screens that mediate not just print but, increasingly, reality itself.

Photograph (detail) by Ellen Cantor from her Prior Pleasures series © The artist. Courtesy dnj Gallery, Santa Monica, California
Article
Among Britain’s Anti-Semites·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

This is the story of how the institutions of British Jewry went to war with Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party. Corbyn is another feather in the wind of populism and a fragmentation of the old consensus and politesse. He was elected to the leadership by the party membership in 2015, and no one was more surprised than he. Between 1997 and 2010, Corbyn voted against his own party 428 times. He existed as an ideal, a rebuke to the Blairite leadership, and the only wise man on a ship of fools. His schtick is that of a weary, kindly, socialist Father Christmas, dragged from his vegetable patch to create a utopia almost against his will. But in 2015 the ideal became, reluctantly, flesh. Satirists mock him as Jesus Christ, and this is apt. But only just. He courts sainthood, and if you are very cynical you might say that, like Christ, he shows Jews what they should be. He once sat on the floor of a crowded train, though he was offered a first-class seat, possibly as a private act of penance to those who had, at one time or another, had no seat on a train.

When Corbyn became leader of the Labour Party, the British media, who are used to punching socialists, crawled over his record and found much to alarm the tiny Jewish community of 260,000. Corbyn called Hez­bollah “friends” and said Hamas, also his “friends,” were devoted “to long-term peace and social justice.” (He later said he regretted using that language.) He invited the Islamist leader Raed Salah, who has accused Jews of killing Christian children to drink their blood, to Parliament, and opposed his extradition. Corbyn is also a patron of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and a former chair of Stop the War, at whose rallies they chant, “From the river to the sea / Palestine will be free.” (There is no rhyme for what will happen to the Jewish population in this paradise.) He was an early supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement and its global campaign to delegitimize Israel and, through the right of return for Palestinians, end its existence as a Jewish state. (His office now maintains that he does not support BDS. The official Labour Party position is for a two-state solution.) In the most recent general election, only 13 percent of British Jews intended to vote Labour.

Corbyn freed something. The scandals bloomed, swiftly. In 2016 Naz Shah, Labour MP for Bradford West, was suspended from the party for sharing a Facebook post that suggested Israel be relocated to the United States. She apologized publicly, was reinstated, and is now a shadow women and equalities minister. Ken Livingstone, the former mayor of London and a political supporter of Corbyn, appeared on the radio to defend Shah and said, “When Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.” For this comment, Livingstone was suspended from the party.

A protest against anti-Semitism in the Labour Party in Parliament Square, London, March 26, 2018 (detail) © Yui Mok/PA Images/Getty Images
Article
Nothing but Gifts·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

If necessity is the stern but respectable mother of invention, then perhaps desperation is the derelict father of subterfuge. That was certainly the case when I moved to Seattle in 1979.

Though I’d lived there twice during the previous five years, I wasn’t prepared for the economic boom I found upon this latest arrival. Not only had rent increased sharply in all but the most destitute neighborhoods, landlords now routinely demanded first, last, and a hefty security deposit, which meant I was short by about fifty percent. Over the first week or so, I watched with mounting anxiety as food, gas, and lodging expenses reduced the meager half I did have to a severely deficient third. To make matters even more nerve-racking, I was relocating with my nine-year-old son, Ezra. More than my well-being was at stake.

A veteran of cold, solitary starts in strange cities, I knew our best hope wasn’t the classifieds, and certainly not an agency, but the serendipity of the streets—handmade for rent signs, crowded bulletin boards in laundromats and corner grocery stores, passersby on the sidewalk; I had to exploit every opportunity that might present itself, no matter how oblique or improbable. In Eastlake, at the edge of Lake Union between downtown Seattle and the University District, I spied a shabby but vacant one-story house on the corner of a block that was obviously undergoing transition—overgrown lots and foundation remnants where other houses once stood—and that had at least one permanent feature most right-minded people would find forbidding: an elevated section of Interstate 5 just across the street, attended by the incessant roar of cars and trucks. The house needed a new roof, a couple of coats of paint, and, judging by what Ezra and I could detect during a furtive inspection, major repair work inside, including replacing damaged plaster-and-lath walls with sheetrock. All of this, from my standpoint, meant that I might have found a solution to my dilemma.

The next step was locating the owner, a roundabout process that eventually required a trip to the tax assessor’s office. I called the person listed on the rolls and made an appointment. Then came the moment of truth, or, more precisely, untruth, when dire circumstance begot strategic deception. I’d never renovated so much as a closet, but that didn’t stop me from declaring confidently that I possessed both the skills and the willingness to restore the entire place to a presentable—and, therefore, rentable—state in exchange for being able to live there for free, with the length of stay to be determined as work progressed. To my immense relief, the pretense was well received. Indeed, the owner also seemed relieved, if a bit surprised, that he’d have seemingly trustworthy tenants; homeless people who camped beneath the freeway, he explained, had repeatedly broken into the house and used it for all manner of depravity. Telling myself that inspired charlatanry is superior to mundane trespassing—especially this instance of charlatanry, which would yield some actual good—I accepted the keys from my new landlord.

Photograph (detail) © Larry Towell/Magnum Photos
Article
Checkpoint Nation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Laura Sandoval threaded her way through idling taxis and men selling bottles of water toward the entrance of the Cordova International Bridge, which links Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, to El Paso, Texas. Earlier that day, a bright Saturday in December 2012, Sandoval had crossed over to Juárez to console a friend whose wife had recently died. She had brought him a few items he had requested—eye drops, the chimichangas from Allsup’s he liked—and now that her care package had been delivered, she was in a hurry to get back to the Texas side, where she’d left her car. She had a …
Checkpoint on I-35 near Encinal, Texas (detail) © Gabriella Demczuk

Amount a 2006 defense bill authorized for a daylong “celebration‚” of “success‚” in Iraq and Afghanistan:

$20,000,000

Male orangutans announce their travel plans in advance.

Paul Manafort accepts a plea deal; Brett Kavanaugh accused of sexual assault; Jeff Bezos gets into the kindergarten racketon the clock

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

By

Illustration by Stan Fellows

Illustration by Stan Fellows

“Nowadays, most states let just about anybody who wants a concealed-handgun permit have one; in seventeen states, you don’t even have to be a resident. Nobody knows exactly how many Americans carry guns, because not all states release their numbers, and even if they did, not all permit holders carry all the time. But it’s safe to assume that as many as 6 million Americans are walking around with firearms under their clothes.”

Subscribe Today