Visible Fruits of Accomplishment: Stagiaire, Modern Day Apprentices The Hidden Trade of the Kitchen
Origins
Medieval
baker, photo by Cabecera historia cuisine francesa
The roots of the stage could be traced back to the
medieval guilds of Europe. Guilds, in its earliest forms, were associations of
artisans, merchants or experts in their respective fields. The guild’s expertise
as an association allowed them a significant control of authority which was
recognized by the local institutions. One of the earliest known record of the
usage of guilds
were first mentioned in documents dating back to 1106 when Bishop Adalbert of
Mainz granted 23 fishermen hereditary right to catch and trade in fishes.[1]
The appearance of artisans as autonomous and organized associations of the 12th
century, brought new vigor in the trading and crafting world. This was seen as an
exceptional achievement then, and of course, a breakaway from old traditions.[2]
Guilds possessed their own statutory requirements as well. The representatives
of the guilds were often required to draft guild statutes in the presence of a
notary, which then had to be approved by the urban councils and central
authorities.[3]
Following which, they will then publicize the statutes to their assembled
members upon approval.[4] Officials from the guilds
acted as intermediaries between its members and the authorities, and as such
were vested with the authority to collect fines and taxes, ensure quality
produce and goods, as well as impose punishments on any form of disputes that
arose from the guild.
Today, the common understanding of the guild would be in the shape of
imparting technical knowledge through the system of apprenticeship, which for
the most part of it, is true. These apprentices would toil and work in their
guilds, learning the craft. Epstein provides a clear approach of this
interpretation, in which the passing of such skills through the apprenticeship
system was an exclusive operation within each guild; knowledge acquired from
the master craftsmen passed down to the journeyman or apprentice.[5]
Unlike apprentices, journeymen were a different class of learners. The
journeyman, derived from the French words for 'day' (jour and journée),
were able to work for more than one master, unlike their apprentice
counterparts, and generally, were paid by the day and thus called day
labourers.[6] They were usually skilled
apprentices, who after working in a particular guild for a period, were given
certifications by their guilds to travel into other towns and countries to
learn. These journeys were in essence unofficial methods of communicating new
skills and techniques from one localities to another. [7]
As such, statutes were necessary within guilds as they ensured that
contractual relations between the master and the learner were fair and
enforceable, thereby ensuring proper succession of the skills, regardless of
the rank of the learner; be it that of an apprentice or journeyman.[8] Opportunism by both
parties made it necessary for a form of a contractual obligation, which could
potentially be a long and winding process to discuss.[9]
The 18th
century however, saw a drastic decline in the guild system. With the appearance
of Adam Smith’s classical free market theory, an industrialization &
modernization of trade and industry leading to new laws such as the French décret
d'allarde of 1791 which banned the conferring of masterterships, guilds were
slowly forced into losing their place – their trade secrets were inadvertently
made transparent to the public and thus were expounded upon.[10]
This brings us
back to France, and with the decline of the Ancien Regime with the
French Revolution in the late 18th Century. Restaurants as we know
now, did not formally make an appearance until the time of the revolution as recorded
by Gault and Millau, “But with the revolution, and especially after 1792, these
great chefs…took their savings and opened restaurants.”[11]
The experience of dining evolved in the form of the restaurant, one set within
a paradigmatic urban institution of change.
The rules of
apprenticeships were thus forced to follow these changes. The apprenticeship
law of 22 February 1851 tried to improve the working conditions of those still
practicing the apprenticeship system after its regulation in the 1792 through
proper written contractual documentation to ensure fairness. However, with
heavy punishments in place for breaking these laws, the system was in a steady decline.
Out of the 19 000 apprentices that the Paris Chamber of Commerce surveyed,
nearly 14 000 relied on oral agreements, with the numbers plummeting lower year
by year.[12]
By 1903, only three percent of written contracts were known to have been
documented.[13]
From the late 19th
century, onwards it was no longer possible to discern those in the
apprenticeship system and that of other forms of technical training such as
those offered by professional training schools and general municipal programs.[14]
Such changes effectively brought an end to the apprenticeship system,
eventually giving rise to the concept of ‘interning,’ as first seen in the 20th
century.
LYCHEExMARJORAM
[1] Wissell,
Rudolf, Des alten Handwerks Recht und Gewohnheit, vol. 1, 2d ed. Berlin:
Colloquium, 1971.
[3] Gabriella
Lombardo, Guilds in Early Modern Sicily. Causes and consequences of their
weakness, ProQuest LLC, 2001. 1.
[4] Gabriella
Lombardo, Guilds in Early Modern Sicily. Causes and consequences of their
weakness, ProQuest LLC, 2001. 1.
[5] S.R.
Epstein, Craft Guilds, Apprenticeship and Technological Change in Preindustrial
Europe, Journal of Economic History 58, 1998. 688.
[6] Ogilvie, Sheilagh, Institutions and European Trade:
Merchant Guilds, 1000–1800. Cambridge University Press. 2011.
[7] Ogilvie, Sheilagh,
Institutions and European Trade: Merchant Guilds, 1000–1800. Cambridge
University Press. 2011.
[8] S.R.
Epstein, Craft Guilds, Apprenticeship and Technological Change in Preindustrial
Europe, Journal of Economic History 58, 1998. 691.
[9] S.R.
Epstein, Craft Guilds, Apprenticeship and Technological Change in Preindustrial
Europe, Journal of Economic History 58, 1998. 692.
[10] Steven L. Kaplan, Cynthia J. Koepp, Work
in France: Representations, Meaning, Organization, and Practice, Cornell University Press, 1986. 457.
[11] Henri
Gault and Christian Millau, A Parisian’s Guide to Paris, New York: Random
House, 1969. 8.
[12] Steven L. Kaplan, Cynthia J. Koepp, Work
in France: Representations, Meaning, Organization, and Practice, Cornell University Press, 1986. 459.
[13] Steven L. Kaplan, Cynthia J. Koepp, Work
in France: Representations, Meaning, Organization, and Practice, Cornell University Press, 1986. 459.
[14] Steven L. Kaplan, Cynthia J. Koepp, Work
in France: Representations, Meaning, Organization, and Practice, Cornell University Press, 1986. 458.
