In a world of infinite options, how do we remember what to choose?
If you could undo one food decision—what would it be?
What if every bite was a choice? Every plate, a design dilemma?
Eat Ctrl+Z was a hybrid exhibition-meets-edible-experience that placed participants at the heart of the future-of-food paradox. Conceived as part of a design research course, this project invited users to navigate a landscape of aesthetic, ethical, and emotional choices—through menus, moments, and meals.
Held in Ahmedabad, the experience unfolded across two rooms—the White Room and the Dark Room—each simulating possible futures and contrasting ideologies. Participants were handed an envelope containing a fictional currency: 100 Shitcoins. Their task? To navigate this world of limited resources and infinite stimulation, one edible decision at a time.
The intent was never to teach, but to unsettle. Most participants struggled to guess correctly, revealing how distant we’ve become from the raw, the real, the remembered.At its core, Eat Ctrl+Z was not about predicting the future. It was about simulating its presence.
Change is already here.
We are already eating the future—just without fully realising it.
From synthetic branding and greenwashing, to “premium” price tags on native grains, the event surfaced how quickly cultural memory is being traded for convenience. Every transaction at the Simulated Shop asked: What are you truly paying for? 30 Shitcoins for a product with algorithmic branding and no source traceability, or 10 for a humble, local heirloom with a story, but no hype.
The Setup
A world was designed where food wasn’t just food—it was data. Every plate had a price. Every decision came with a cost. Guests entered a simulated café space and engaged with a “This or That” decision menu:
- Nimbu paani or sparkling roselle?
- Herbal handwash or sanitiser?
- Momos from the commons, or a Mars mission taster box?
- Local millet laddoo or 3D-printed dessert pearls?
- Bioengineered smoothie or ancestral khichdi?
Behind each decision was a trade-off, a provocation about consumption, convenience, and identity. The food options were not random—they were symbols of systems: tradition vs trend, nature vs synthetic, memory vs novelty.
Participants who demonstrated mindful, Community driven, value-led choices were subtly ushered into the White Room , a space of quiet provocation. Others entered the Dark Room, a more clinical, stimulus-heavy space mimicking a hyper-commercial future.
The Boxes
In the darker simulation, guests interacted with sensory installations and speculative media:
- A game simulating biowarfare scenarios: Can you protect humanity through your choices?
- A “Neuralink” projection booth: Enter the mind of your future self—what will you eat when memory can be downloaded?
- Square-shaped watermelon: A humorous nod to engineered convenience, underscoring the absurd normalisation of food alteration.
Meanwhile, an interactive tasting booth challenged participants to decode ingredients—often unfamiliar or hyper-processed. Could you identify turmeric if it wasn’t yellow?
The tasting was tough, and intentionally so. Not all flavours were easy. Not all questions were answerable. But that was the point- to make a compelling case for food as a design probe. This course dealt with real-time data on how people perceive value, origin, and future-readiness, that was translated later into another edible experience called Dishcovery, that stirred unexpected moments of reflection, discomfort, humour, and connection.
