But, at the same time, insistance upon organic above all else -- above local, above small-farmer, above independent production -- immediately alienates well over half the American population. The crusade to get Americans to eat all organic all the time is noble, but unrealistic without major shifts in our agricultural industries. It means we must depend less on shipping produce (organic foods do not have the chemical hardiness of some of the genetically manipulated seed breeds, nor have they built up a "tolerance" due to pesticides, and can sometimes not handle being shipped far very well), which means we need to depend less on large-scale farming, which means we need to reinvest in independently owned farms in our own areas in order to create even the foundation of a food culture in which buying local seasonal food is acceptable and the norm -- from there you have a stepping stone to buying local organic produce, with government subsidy incentives being offered for farmers who will grow 100% locally, etc. I think organic must go hand-in-hand with local to make any difference at all (in our health, in our farming practices, in our planet, in our habits) and I don't think Alice Waters really cares about that. She's so involved in her preaching that she forgets about aiding in the establsihment of the fundamentals.

 Reply

While I personally think her recipes suck ass, betray a tin palate and do not teach anyone anything about cooking, she is the most visible Food Network person out there who deals with the fact that many people are cooking on extremely limited budgets. For lots of people, their primary cooking task is to make the best of the preprocessed crap they can afford. Sandra uses their ingredients.

You can argue that Sandra's actually trying to address a working-class issue. So why is it okay to repeatedly call what she does "war crimes"? Isn't that also elitist?

 Reply

In this economy, I think it would be very useful for Obama to give Alica Water's some kind of honorary position to encourage home gardens in the US. Lots of people are working on this issue, but a little federal push even without any real money spent would be worth it. So many people could easily grow food, but they don't. I manage to grow herbs in my NYC apartment, your average suburban american could easily grow tomatoes and berries.

 Reply

The whole debate is kind of silly- both Bourdain and Waters are mostly, but not entirely right. We are always gonna have laws about what you can put in food. That's how we recall deadly jars of peanut butter. Where we draw the line as to what unhealthy ingredient should be banned will always be a matter of debate. Salmonella is obvious, but how about trans-fats, fugu sushi, or a fatty steak... Waters is concerned about how Americans in general eat and what kind of toxins are in our food, she'd like to see legislation to address that. Bourdain likes to eat lots of stuff and hates it when the gov't interferes with what he eats. He probably wouldn't be picking on Waters if not for recent (ridiculous) bans on foie gras and trans=fats. In that context, he has a legitimate point.

The funny thing is that Bourdain's cookbook and his general style of cooking is probably more similar to Waters's than to any other chef with a book on my kitchen shelf. They are mostly in agreement on issues of food. Both think that the best food features a few excellent ingredients, simply prepared. Both think that America and "food capitalism" are largely responsible for most of the bad food that people eat. Both think that people should have a real connection to the food that they eat, and think that eating should be a significant and special part of our lives. All of that is reflected in everything that the both of them write.

Ramblings of a former serious line cook.

 Reply

Am I going to have to go all Darfur on his ass?

 Reply

"You know, Rover, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but your constant slobbery excretions are not very endearing. Perhaps you could drool less?"

 Reply