Saturday, September 23, 2006

Subway did not invent the sandwich

This sounds like such an old-school rant, the kind of lefty guilt-trip you get from the school of "all multi nationals are evil". I am not the kind of slogan shouting protester who thinks a valid argument against capitalism is to throw a bollard through McDonalds' windows, to call it some how a vital act against the creep of the markets against the little man. That kind of action is vandalism, no matter how many out of context quotes you spiel at me in the name of whatever -ism you are currently preaching.
Sorry, I wanted to start this differently. All this came from buying a chicken salad barm at Glover's in Lostock Hall. My mind began to count how many times I have preferred the big name evil blood suckers over the small baker/sandwich makers... I know Glover's is not a one man band, but there is a different feeling walking out of there than the sense with a bag of 6" "Sub of the Day" from you-know-who. Maybe the subtle difference is all in my head - certainly it is in my pocket, with prices from 50% to 70% cheaper in Glover's. Maybe it is the wet liberal side of me, who prefers the little man but has been hit by guilt now all the small shops are closing. I was asked the very same questions - did I want salad, egg, onions, mayonnaise - just without the "production line" feel. Of course I enjoy Subway, and at 3am when spilling out of a club they are sometimes my saving grace, but....Ah, the word "but".
I know the state we are in means the cards are loaded in the favour of the bigger boys, but a humble chicken barm, served by a nice enough young lady who didn't give me a pre-packaged lump of stodge, or grunt a half-apology for getting my order wrong and did I mind if I got a steak pie with an egg custard, has got me thinking of a different perspective. The man is right, Subway did not invent the sandwich.