Embodied Memory, Affective Imagination, and Vigilance: Navigating Food Allergies in Japan

Abstract

''Food is relationships isn't it,'' Yamada san stated in 2017, neatly capturing the importance of food in social life. This article, drawing on the experiences of people with severe food allergies in Japan, illustrates the complexities of safely managing allergies when food-and the importance of sharing the same food-is so important to social life. In particular, I argue that individuals develop and practice skills of vigilance and situational awareness to mitigate physical and social risk which emerge through an affective imagination of what they feel could happen in the future, built on embodied memories of what has been experienced prior (e.g., severe allergic reactions and difficult social experiences with food). The development and enactment of these skills of vigilance happen through an 'education of attention' (Gibson in The ecological approach to visual perception, Psychology Press, New York, 1979; Ingold in The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill, Routledge, London, 2000) developed over time and in different social settings and constitute a somatic mode of attention (Csordas in Cult Anthropol 8:135-156, 1993) which shapes social interactions and aims to mitigate against any potential perceived social costs for not being able to eat everything.

Historical and social science perspectives on food allergy

“…53 Moreover, Cook has argued that allergic individuals do not perceive these risks on their own. 54 Instead, their perception is entangled in their response to particular physical and social environments, including the influence of other people. 55 An individual, for instance, might be more willing to poke around and sniff a takeaway meal consumed at home, than they would in a busy restaurant or at a dinner party.…”

Anthropological and sociological perspectives on food allergy

“…Studies of how youth and adults manage the risks of food allergies illustrate how space and place is an integral element of managing food allergy risks -both physical and social -in different socio-cultural contexts. 43,47,51,58,59 Cook has illustrated in the United Kingdom and Japan that tensions emerge between conformity and individuality, and the perception and management of risk among parents and individual adult sufferers are influenced by interactions with social and material environments in different contexts. 43,47 The social aspects of managing food allergy risks have also been explored by Schelly et likewise illustrate this in their exploration of risk in U.S. college dining halls.…”

“…43,47,51,58,59 Cook has illustrated in the United Kingdom and Japan that tensions emerge between conformity and individuality, and the perception and management of risk among parents and individual adult sufferers are influenced by interactions with social and material environments in different contexts. 43,47 The social aspects of managing food allergy risks have also been explored by Schelly et likewise illustrate this in their exploration of risk in U.S. college dining halls. Given that two-thirds of their respondents said that safe foods were not always available to them, they suggested that the focus should primarily be on the structural, institutional issue of safe food not being available rather than on the individual taking risks.…”

“…The perception and experience of risk have been shown to be inherently relational in food allergy experiences 13,43,45,47–51,53–56,58–61 . For example, DeSoucey and Waggoner 48 have argued that there are several different food allergy ‘risk frames’ that collide in shared spaces 52 .…”

“…There have also been some explorations of epidemiology, the hygiene hypothesis and the rise in allergy attributed to changes in food production, 36–41 as well as the potential protective role of food taboos on human health 42 . Since the early 2000s, research in socio‐cultural anthropology and sociology on food allergy has primarily explored experiences of risk and stigma, 13,43–62 aspects of morality related to management, illness and parenting behaviour, 51,59,60,63–71 explorations of gender, 38,65,70 social class and income, 45,55,65,69 disability and justice, 51,54,72 race and ethnicity, 51,65 interactions with the physical and material environment, 38–40,43,44,46,47,57,73–75 sensory, affective and embodied aspects of food allergy experience, 47,74,76 food allergy as a governing project 77,78 and issues of ethics in food allergy treatments 64,79,80 . This review focuses primarily on the socio‐cultural anthropological and sociological research (Figure 2), with some final comments about clinical implications and what an anthropological perspective on food allergies can bring to the table for researchers and clinicians.…”