"And in light of the past year, and the extreme hospitality expected from workers during a global pandemic, it might be helpful to think of it that way again. Ancient ideas of hospitality were in place to protect pilgrims, travelers, immigrants and others who looked to strangers for food and shelter on the road. At the root of hospitality is the Latin word 'hostis,' wrote the philosopher Anne Dufourmantelle, which means guest, but also enemy.... Writing about the ethics and politics of hospitality, another philosopher, Jacques Derrida, claimed that 'unconditional hospitality is impossible.' It’s never been reasonable to expect infinite generosity, but that idea has still shaped the industry in countless ways.... The art critic John Berger often talked about hospitality as necessary to his understanding of art and culture, to the act of storytelling, to being human. Hospitality, to him, was a continuous and conscious choice — to listen, to be kind, to be open. If an exchange relied on someone’s exploitation? That wasn’t hospitality at all."
FROM THE EMAIL: SGT Ted writes:
The author is conflating the modern Hospitality Industry of restaurants and hotels, which is a broad marketing term, with the ancient cultural notions of traveling guest/host relationships to force a political point. The latter is a social contract meant to foster peaceful relations between strangers and the former is an expectation of a particular level of service based on whatever the level of service is being sold. A fancy restaurant has a level of expected hospitality that is far above that of a cheap diner or a hotdog stand. Then, the article tries to expand the definition of hospitality in order to tie employer/employee relationships, working conditions and wages with the term hospitality. Those things have nothing to do with that word. The logic fails.
Yes, I excerpted the part I found interesting, but most of the article is a plea for better pay for restaurant workers.
