“So, you cook this same meal every Tuesday, right?”
“Correct.” I listed the eight major advantages of the Standardized Meal System.
1. No need to accumulate recipe books.
2. Standard shopping list – hence very efficient shopping.
3. Almost zero waste – nothing in the refrigerator or pantry unless required for one of the recipes.
4. Diet planned and nutritionally balanced in advance.
5. No time wasted wondering what to cook.
6. No mistakes, no unpleasant surprises.
7. Excellent food, superior to most restaurants at a much lower price (see point 3).
8. Minimal cognitive load required.
On my first date with Rosie Jarman, the woman who would, incredibly, become my (remainder of) life partner, I was unsure of her retention capabilities and selected the number of items according to Miller’s (1956) “seven plus or minus two” rule. Had I known she was at the high end of neurotypical memory function, I would have added:
9. Rationalization of kitchen equipment – no cupboards and drawers full of items that are “hardly ever used.” The financial savings allow me to own a smaller set of high-quality cooking tools and invest in leading-edge barbecue technology.
10. Ability to optimize recipes, quantities, and cooking times through continuous feedback.
I would not have added “Improved mental health through reduced anxiety and the comfort of routine,” as I was not conscious of that benefit at the time.
Nor was I aware of the disadvantages of the Standardized Meal System. Rosie and our son, Hudson, filled that gap in my knowledge. The problems included (note past tense):
1. Failure to accommodate a partner who did not want to eat lobster every Tuesday. After my first attempt at rectifying the problem, Rosie clarified that this quite clear and specific statement was to be interpreted as not wanting any immutable meal assigned to any day of the week, and “certainly not forever.”
2. No allowance for partner’s, child’s, or guests’ food preferences, allergies, or ethical restrictions.
3. Perception of the Standardized Meal System as a symptom of rigidity rather than efficiency.
4. Inability to expose a child (or adult) to a wide variety of foods.
5. No allowance for random, short-notice decisions by partner to invite guests or eat out.
6. No contingency plan in the event of disasters such as unavailability of a key ingredient, child-related crisis, or university meeting scheduled during time allocated for shopping or cooking.
7. No process for ongoing evolution of the system.
All problems have now been solved. In the case of item 3, no change to the system was required; instead, I stopped worrying about what unrelated people thought of me. Virtually all meals now allow for variants; no meal is current for more than thirteen weeks (a season); emergencies and dining out are explicitly catered for; and there is provision for both incremental improvement and the introduction of new meals.
Also, since the publication of the three Rosie memoirs, multiple people have contacted me, not to call me rigid or boring or obsessive, but seeking details of how to implement the Standardized Meal System. Hence this book, applying thirty-six years of experience and feedback to what was already an excellent design.
I recommend this fully revised Standardized Meal System as a tool for modifying the behavior of people who irrationally and compulsively devote unnecessary resources to food shopping, meal design, and cooking, with consequent negative impact on their performance in social, occupational, or other important areas.