It was 'stodge' but it was good!
THE food we eat is a major talking point in newspapers and on television and questions such as are our diets really the best for us, do our children eat the right foods and is junk food just that... junk? Often arise.
How very different to 50 years ago.
Many readers will recall diets which are today regarded as good old English “stodge” being, in fact, very good for us.
In the early 1950s rationing was still in existence, but we ate more bread, vegetables and milk than do the children of today.
A downside, however, was the widespread use of fat rather than the healthier alternatives of unsaturated vegetable oil now used.
Those visiotors to Fabulous Fifties who attended school during the decade will have been among the 50 per cent (70 per cent by 1966) of children who ate school dinners. Pretty good they were, too. A typical offering in local schools would be meat and two veg, macaroni cheese and fish on Fridays. There was always “seconds” too – rice pudding, semolina, tapioca or jam sponge and custard.
The family of 50 years ago had far less choice than that of today, but there was always plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables from British growers and people enjoyed whatever was in season.
Bananas and oranges, which had virtually disappeared during the Second World War, began to reappear in the shops, along with tins of imported pineapple and other out-of-season fruit and vegetables.
Do you remember at Christmas when your stocking always contained that something “special” as a little extra – an orange?
Fruits such as these were real treats.
Keeping food posed problems for busy housewives. Some readers will, no doubt, recall kitchens where eggs (very scarce and rationed in wartime) were kept in a special liquid in a bucket to try to keep them fresh longer.
Meat was put into special “safes” during hot weather. These had a muslin covered front, the aim being to keep flies off the joint.
Put a typical Fifties family meal before children today and the chances are they would turn it down as bland and “tasteless.”
We ate it, though. And thrived on it. “Ordinary” it may have been, but nutritious it certainly was.
Written by The Editor - 09/12/2008 11:37:18
View or add comments on this story