Weekly Wrap

Must-read of the week goes to a lengthy piece in The Atlantic that just murders foodies. It’s healthy to remind oneself that not everyone views the world – and the world of food – as you do. The screed is absurd, for all the reasons Robert Sietsema points out and more, but nonetheless worth reading.

Onto other things: Restaurants, this is what we want when we visit your website. The guy pushing you to do Flash, music, etc? He’s padding the contract. Everyone consider Mike Odette’s charcuterie class. Some Mizzou students played snow beer pong last week (well done, gentlemen, well done). The local cooking blog formerly known as Adventures in Cooking is now I Cook, Therefore I Am. A Gourmet blogger wonders: “Whatever happened to the dinner party?” Mark Bittman asks if eating real food is unthinkable, Benihana sued a blogger and the oyster had a pretty good run while it lasted. Finally, we’ll be out of town, but consider hitting Mojo’s next Wednesday night, February 16 when a high school friend of Mrs. SMEs plays her first Columbia show.

Advertisements

Author: Scott

I am a married father of two. I graduated from Rock Bridge High School and then Mizzou before spending six years in the Washington, D.C. area. We returned to Columbia, Missouri in 2006.

3 thoughts

  1. Michael Pollan was asked about that article in The Globe and Mail. I thought his response was particularly well put:

    IB: What do you make of the complaints of B.R. Myers, who has aesthetic and moral objections to foodies in the latest Atlantic Monthly?

    MP: His aesthetic problem is an ethical problem, and that’s that he’s a vegan. And if you look at the way he writes about these issues…everything he dismisses as gluttony always involves eating an animal. So there’s a few agendas mixed up in that, and he’s not completely open about what they are.

    One of the things that strikes me about foodie-ism, to use a term that I really despise, is that it is ethically inflected in a way that other forms of past interest in food have not been. And I’m sure you noticed this amongst the chefs you were with. What’s very striking about the current interest in food is that it’s not purely aesthetic. It is not purely about pleasure–people are very interested in the system that they’re eating from. And they’re very interested in the way the food was produced and the story behind it. People are mixing up aesthetics and ethics in a very new way, that some people are uncomfortable with, frankly. The idea that you could take any pleasure from politics, that you could mix those two terms, is a very un-American idea. We see it as you’re either indulging yourself, or you’re doing the world good. The fact is, slow food and other elements of the food movement are proposing that the best choice, the most beautiful choice, is often the most sustainable choice. It might be more expensive, and that’s a problem that we need to work on. But I think the industry is feeling very threatened right now by the fact that so many people are asking hard questions about their food. And so there’s an effort underway to discredit the food movement.

  2. I agree…that’s a pretty good response. As an Atlantic subscriber, I don’t think it reflected the quality of their publication.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s