@RitaCamill: What, you don't want to smell like BLAAAAAAKE? Every morning I wake up and rub cigarette butts and cotton balls soaked in whiskey on my pulse points in the hopes of achieving eau de Winehouse.
Girls! Pick a Twilight Team! Would you rather be stalked by a creepy vampire who, with your knowledge or consent, watches you while you sleep, or be kissed by a werewolf after you've already told him no, because no secretly means yes? Both are SO INCREDIBLY ROMANTIC.
@CurtCole: I don't know what your problem is! He wasn't in love with the infant, he was just felt an instant, incredibly strong connection to her and is destined to marry her when he grows up. NOTHING WEIRD ABOUT THAT.
@Annabellie: I don't get the team-picking thing in general. Aren't you supposed to do that with stuff like Jen and Angie, where it could potentially go either way? The books are over (thank god), she picked Edward, and who cares. I'm not about to go placing bets on the 2007 World Series, you know?
My main issue with Alice Waters is with her seeming inability to recognize how much food, food education and food production can only be effective when they are egalitarian. It's very easy to insist that everyone should eat organic food -- it's been empirically proven that food grown without pesticides carries less risk of allergic reaction (to said pesticides), that food from the ground and the trees are better for you, more nutruitious, and that processed foods with long shelf-lives are, truly, barely recognizable as food.
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.
So where is the outrage over Bourdain also referring to Sandra Lee's cooking as a "war crime"?
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?
@sallyfloyd: I'm not so sure that Sandra Lee is a good example of doing the best you can with cheap ingredients. A lot of the pre-packaged items she uses, like pesto, really aren't that cheap and there is a big problem with people eating too much processed food with high fat and high sodium content.
I think Rachel Ray is a much better example for that, annoying as many people find her. A lot of her recipes are very cheap and quick without being totally processed.
I find all this hand-wringing kind of funny. I live two blocks from Chez Pannisse, and while I can't really afford to go there all that often, I remain a huge fan of Alice Waters and the work she's put into helping us to understand the connections between the worlds on either side of supermarket doors. However, if I traveled back to my kinda-rural hometown back East and asked people how they felt about Alice Waters, I can guarantee that 90% of them wouldn't know who the hell I was talking about. I have a feeling that if you're railing against how "elitist" Alice Waters and her breathren are, you're most likely part of the "elite" yourself, and should be thankful you have such problems to rant about.
I think Alice Water's mistake was making it sound as if the issue was what the Obamas were eating. I don't think that was her actual point- her actual point was that the president should support local agriculture and set an example for home gardening.
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.
To put Bourdain (who I love, and all of whose books and cookbooks I own), in context, he objects to Waters's call for legislation banning certain additives and preservatives. He wasn't comparing her to the Khmer Rouge for liking her arugula clean, but for wanting to legislate the ingredients of food...
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.
@Vermontboy: Thank you for providing the context. You're absolutely correct -- Bourdain was referring to Waters in a very specific situation, and to portray his comment as applying to her organic sensibilities in general is misguiding.
There's something very Stalinesque about Anthony Boudoin comparing an organic food lover (maybe a slightly misguided organic food lover, who lacks perspective but means well) to the Khmer Rouge.
@morninggloria: Seriously. Misguided and goofy sure, but I defy anyone to show me where Alice Waters has said "I would like all rich people to have fresh foods, but fuck all those poors."
I love organic food and if I had my way I'd eat it but when 'value' cans of tomatoes are 17p and organic ones are almost 80p, I have to go for value. I earn hardly anything and don't have the time to trawl markets for fresh veg daily, what with my 3hr round trip commute and my working 9 till 6 each day. I hate the idea that I am letting the side down because I can't afford it, and yes I know that food isn't supposed to be that cheap, and the only reason it is is because of genetic farming, but do we really want to go back to lower income families living on bread and broth, and being malnourished? Surely a franken-carrot is better than no carrot?
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
Jondalar is a Cro-Magnon.
*takes off glasses*
07/23/09
07/23/09
Team George Hamilton!
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....: Team Willem Dafoe!
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....: Team Gary Oldman! Hey-YO!
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....: Team Gerard Butler!
07/23/09
@CurtCole: I think this is what you mean when you say "Team Gary Oldman."
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....: Team Klaus Kinski!
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....: Klaus Kinski never gets the love.
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
*sigh* Images still not working. (Although I see from the other "team members" that I am the problem.)
07/23/09
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs....:
Team David Bowie!
07/23/09
03/31/09
03/31/09
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.
03/31/09
03/31/09
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?
03/31/09
I think Rachel Ray is a much better example for that, annoying as many people find her. A lot of her recipes are very cheap and quick without being totally processed.
03/31/09
03/31/09
03/31/09
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.
03/31/09
03/31/09
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.
03/31/09
03/31/09
03/31/09
03/31/09
Am I going to have to go all Darfur on his ass?
03/31/09
You may need to. Please sell tickets to the show.
03/31/09
"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?"
03/31/09