The internet loves a good food debate, and few topics spark more culinary controversy than the Cube Rule Of Food. This quirky classification system attempts to categorize food based solely on the location of its “structural starch.” But does this seemingly simple rule hold up to scrutiny? Let’s dive in and dissect the delicious details.
The Six Sides of Starch: Understanding the Cube Rule
The Cube Rule proposes six initial categories, each representing a side of a cube:
- Toast: Starch on one side (e.g., pizza, nigiri sushi). Think of it as a foundation of starch.
- Sandwich: Starch on two opposing sides (e.g., quesadilla, classic toast). The starch acts as bookends for the filling.
- Taco: Starch on three sides (e.g., hot dogs, open-faced sandwiches). A starch enclosure with one open side.
- Sushi (Roll): Starch on four sides (e.g., falafel wraps, pigs in a blanket). The starch wraps around the filling, leaving two ends open.
- Quiche: Starch on five sides (e.g., soup in a bread bowl, deep-dish pizza). Almost fully encased in starch.
- Calzone: Starch on all six sides (e.g., burritos, dumplings). A complete starch cocoon.
Beyond these six, the Cube Rule adds three more categories:
- Salad: No structural starch (e.g., steak, soup). The focus is on non-starchy components.
- Cake: Layered starch, parallel to top and bottom (e.g., lasagna, pancakes). Starch provides structure and separation between layers.
- Nachos: Starch embedded within the food (e.g., poutine, fried rice). Starch is interspersed throughout the dish.
The rule also offers specific guidelines for classifying blocks of starch (like muffins) and the ever-ambiguous rice.
Cracking the Crust: Flaws in the Cube Rule
While entertaining, the Cube Rule suffers from significant shortcomings as a reliable classification system:
Mutable Classifications: A Recipe for Confusion
The Cube Rule defines food based on the current state of its starch, leading to changeable classifications. A slice of pie is “toast,” but a whole pie is “quiche.” A burrito transforms from a “calzone” to a “quiche” simply by being partially eaten. This lack of consistency undermines the purpose of classification – to establish a fixed identity.
Specificity Over Generalization: A Case-by-Case Conundrum
The Cube Rule’s dependence on the specific state of a food item prevents generalizations. You can’t classify all burritos as “calzones,” only uneaten ones. This specificity makes the rule impractical for broader applications, such as legal or tax purposes. Imagine trying to classify a restaurant based on this rule!
Lack of Insight: Superficial Classification
The Cube Rule often groups vastly different foods together based solely on starch location, offering little meaningful insight. While a calzone and a pop-tart share a six-sided starch enclosure, they differ significantly in taste, texture, and cultural context. The classification fails to capture the essence of the food beyond its structural form.
Beyond the Cube: A Search for a Better System
Despite its flaws, the Cube Rule sparks interesting conversations about food structure. It highlights the importance of starch in defining culinary categories. Perhaps a future system will incorporate structural elements alongside other factors like ingredients, preparation methods, and cultural significance to create a more comprehensive and insightful classification.
Conclusion: The Cube Rule – A Fun, But Flawed, Food Fight
The Cube Rule of Food, while entertaining, ultimately falls short as a robust classification system. Its mutable categories, reliance on specific examples, and lack of meaningful insight limit its usefulness. However, it serves as a reminder that defining food is a complex and often subjective endeavor. So, the next time you find yourself in a heated food debate, remember the Cube Rule – a fun, but flawed, attempt to bring order to the delicious chaos of the culinary world.
