Can we talk Michael Pollan?

[Halftime Hope]

I just finished reading The Omnivore's Dilemma and thoroughly enjoyed it.  However, someone on another thread mentioned that they didn't "buy" all of his concepts/statements.  (I should go find it, to see what the poster said, exactly, but the gist is there.)

 

So, what do you think?

 

I'm convinced that food from naturally well-nourished soil is better for us, so that's my card on the table.  I'm just interested in other folks' thoughts and in what they might have problems with in MP's philosophy on food. 

 

Thanks!

[Liz CA]

I have read bits and pieces only of Pollan's books. I am with him on the points I read. It makes sense to me that foods grown in "clean" soil would produce a better product. When I look at statistics and some other indicators, I also think that people had better quality food 100 years ago than we do now because - in the effort to push up the profit margin - we have resorted to using chemicals instead of continuing the more labor intense practices of times gone by. Fortunately, there seems to be a real trend back toward growing good quality food but years of abuse of the soil and water will take time to turn around.

[hornblower]

I read it years ago & have come to like it less each year & think less of him each year - mostly because of his continued dismissal of vegetarian based diets.  Delete 'mostly' from his dictum & he'd be revolutionary.

As it stands, I think people ignore the 'mostly' altogether & all I hear people talk from him is 'eat local, 100 mile diet, small farms, 'humane' meat is great!, wild meat!, variety of meat!'  

I think he's popular because he tells people what they want to hear, he reinforces their desires. I also think he's promoting a completely unrealistic, downright elitist model. There is no way to scale down the type of foodie omnivorous diet that's become popular. You cannot grow that locally or sustainably without huge $ which means the output will be $ which means most people won't be able to afford it.  Globally, more than half of the crops being grown are animal feed. That's a ridiculous abuse of the agricultural capacity of this planet.

I think my biggest problem with him is that fundamentally he's about the people, where I prefer to think of the system, the environment, the animals, *and* the people. 

 

[Jane in NC]

Pollan's philosophy boils down to his line "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants".  By "eat food" he means food with an ingredient list that your grandmother would understand--not some chemical soup.

 

Pollan does not embrace vegetarianism (despite the "mostly plants" part).  He does not embrace eating lots of meat or avoiding grains or whatever the latest fad of the moment is.  Frankly I think he embraces a fairly reasonable path that supports small farmers.

[Jane in NC]

I read it years ago & have come to like it less each year & think less of him each year - mostly because of his continued dismissal of vegetarian based diets.  Delete 'mostly' from his dictum & he'd be revolutionary.

 

As it stands, I think people ignore the 'mostly' altogether & all I hear people talk from him is 'eat local, 100 mile diet, small farms, 'humane' meat is great!, wild meat!, variety of meat!'  

 

I think he's popular because he tells people what they want to hear, he reinforces their desires. I also think he's promoting a completely unrealistic, downright elitist model. There is no way to scale down the type of foodie omnivorous diet that's become popular. You cannot grow that locally or sustainably without huge $ which means the output will be $ which means most people won't be able to afford it.  Globally, more than half of the crops being grown are animal feed. That's a ridiculous abuse of the agricultural capacity of this planet.

 

I think my biggest problem with him is that fundamentally he's about the people, where I prefer to think of the system, the environment, the animals, *and* the people. 

 

 

 

Hmmm...I do think Pollan has much to say on the nation's food system as well as the environment. 

 

Regarding animals...In his most recent book, Cooked, he learns how to cook a sheep's head.  Personally I think the snout to tail philosophy along with less meat consumption in general is a good thing for the planet. 

 

I buy my eggs from two teenage girls who raise chickens as an entrepreneurial project.  Wonderful eggs from a few miles down the road.  I think they are a lovely addition to our diet as well as an example of participation in a local food system that benefits the teens and the land (excellent fertilizer for the farm). 

[Word Nerd]

Not a fan. 

[hornblower]

Hmmm...I do think Pollan has much to say on the nation's food system as well as the environment. 

 

Regarding animals...In his most recent book, Cooked, he learns how to cook a sheep's head.  Personally I think the snout to tail philosophy along with less meat consumption in general is a good thing for the planet. 

 

I buy my eggs from two teenage girls who raise chickens as an entrepreneurial project.  Wonderful eggs from a few miles down the road.  I think they are a lovely addition to our diet as well as an example of participation in a local food system that benefits the teens and the land (excellent fertilizer for the farm). 

 

Yes, but the problem is that there is NO WAY this diet can be eaten by all. Tail to snout is better than wasting it, but mostly it's a panacea to the eater, to make them feel better about what they're doing. The reality is that it's not wasted. The modern food production system eats its own tail, literally. All waste is packaged & sold & either fed back to the animals (oh hello mad cow disease) or another species or to the pet food trade or sold as fertilizer etc.

 

Backyard chickens are not going to fix anything for highly urbanized cities, which is how the world is moving. It's a small niche thing for rich suburban homes with the space & schedule to look after them.  (I live in one of those houses & Vancouver allows backyard chickens btw). At worst, we will end up with situations like in Asia where high density populations living with poultry is a breeding ground for horrific bird flu scenarios.

 

I just think  Pollan is a salve for the suburban well off foodie elite.

 

[LucyStoner]

I'm somewhat critical of Pollan and also somewhat critical of his critics. In short, I may be a critical person about this issue.

 

Like so many, Pollan dumps the responsibility for what he sees as the downfall to a large degree on women entering the workforce. I dislike sexism, even when wrapped up in easily digestible liberalism.

[Jane in NC]

Hornblower--Thank you for bringing up valid points, particularly for the long term. 

 

The US has never been good at long term policy so while Pollan may not offer perfect solutions, I think he turns attention in the right direction.  Last fall in the Washington Post he wrote:

 

 

The contradictions of our government’s policies around food become clear as soon as you compare the federal recommendations for the American diet, known as MyPlate, with the administration’s agricultural policies. While MyPlate recommends a diet of 50 percent vegetables and fruits, the administration devotes less than 1 percent of farm subsidies to support the research, production and marketing of those foods. More than 60 percent of that funding subsidizes the production of corn and other grains — food that is mostly fed to animals, converted to fuel for cars or processed into precisely the sort of junk the first lady is urging us to avoid.

 

How could one government be advancing two such diametrically opposed goals? By failing to recognize that an agricultural policy is not the same as a food policy — and that the former does not necessarily contribute to public health.

 

These discussions may not appear in the larger culture if it were not for Pollan now, Schumaker and Lappe in previous decades. 

 

Perhaps I am hopeful for baby steps, but I agree that baby steps alone are probably insufficient.

[hornblower]

Like so many, Pollan dumps the reposibility for what he sees as the downfall to a large degree on women entering the workforce. I dislike sexism, even when wrapped up in easily digestible liberalism.

 

Yes, I didn't even want to go there but so much of the foodie stuff is based on highly time intensive food prep done in the home & frankly, I do not have time for that & neither do most of the working people.  There's this real disdain for the prepared food aisles which I think is downright cruel to the people who are working increasingly insane hours just to stay afloat.

 

(fwiw, I would support more regulation of the prepared food aisle and targeting of salt/fat/sugar levels in those foods. But lots of people don't like that because it interferes with free markets & the corporation's right to sell you whatever they want....)

[LibraryLover]

Pollan's mother is writer Corky Pollan, and his wife is a respected artist/painter. He comes from a family of a working mother, and is husband to a working mother.

[regentrude]

Like so many, Pollan dumps the reposibility for what he sees as the downfall to a large degree on women entering the workforce. I dislike sexism, even when wrapped up in easily digestible liberalism.

 

Huh? Where does he do this? I do not recall anything of that sort - please elaborate.

What do women in the workforce have to do with healthy eating?

[mamaraby]

I think Pollan overslimplifies things to a certain extent and brushes over the limitations of grass based farming as a means of feeding some 9 billion people - particularly if we're talking about the sheer quantities of meat Americans eat. I don't have an issue with meat eating per se, but there are reasons why our agricultural system developed the way it did (quantity of food produced, food safety issues, etc). I think Pollan and others like him fall into the "golden age" fallacy.

 

I think, for balance, if one's going to read Pollan than one also should read James McWilliams' "Just Food."

[LibraryLover]

Pollan is anti-GMO. Some scientists have attacked him from this viewpoint.

[FaithManor]

Yes, I didn't even want to go there but so much of the foodie stuff is based on highly time intensive food prep done in the home & frankly, I do not have time for that & neither do most of the working people.  There's this real disdain for the prepared food aisles which I think is downright cruel to the people who are working increasingly insane hours just to stay afloat.

 

(fwiw, I would support more regulation of the prepared food aisle and targeting of salt/fat/sugar levels in those foods. But lots of people don't like that because it interferes with free markets & the corporation's right to sell you whatever they want....)

I agree. I don't like what is in those aisles, but dog gone it, the working hours with commutes and such that the average family endures makes it impossible to embrace crazy food prep.

 

Since I hate to cook, but am trying to do a lot more to keep my family healthy, I have adopted "eat like a rabbit" kind of eating here. Entrees are something that literally is a bunch of raw ingredients dumped in the crock pot if I have time so I don't have to think about it, and fresh veggies and salad on the side. Period. My two weeks in France nearly killed me gastronomically speaking. Simple, good food with little prep, and containing real ingredients while NOT requiring effort has been my norm for a long time and going to the land of "cooking is the ultimate of our existence" just about killed me...well, not to mention the sheer, gigantic amounts of cheese that my sister's friends tried to force on me. OH MY WORD! TMI here, but I honestly wondered if I had permanently gummed up the works. Telling these lovely French people that I would get sick eating in such manner was regarded as rude.

 

Loved the trip, glad to be back at home where I promptly ate a lovely salad of greens, red pepper, mushrooms, celery, pinto beans, black beans, and salsa. I felt my body go, "OH thank the good Lord she came to her senses and is feeding us something we can digest!" LOL Today I had pintos, rice, and a simple veggie and chicken soup made yesterday from throwing a bunch of ingredients into the crock pot and ignoring it for a good long time.

 

Were it not for the crockpot, I think my family would literally have to graze on grass during good weather, and consume hay during bad. :D

 

I think we also need to, as a nation, embrace the concept that meals do not have to be complicated in any way. It is perfectly acceptable to eat a salad, a fresh piece of fruit, and a sandwich or side of legumes every single lunch and dinner. It may not be much variety, but it takes no significant effort and nourishes the body, and the simplicity does not mean that the parent fails to love his or her family dearly. We need to let go of the idea that lots of hot foods is necessary. That makes it easier for working parents to opt away from prepared, pre-packaged foods.

[Alice]

I liked the first couple of books I read by him (Omnivore's Dilemna, Food Rules) but he lost me with Cooked. I think he has good things to say but he's out of touch with how  most people live. After reading Cooked, I felt completely frustrated and like I should just give up and go out and feed my family junk food. The reason is that he is so dismissive (in that book) of anything that is at all processed. He makes some statement about how modern women think it's cooking to boil pasta and heat up a jar of spaghetti sauce and how that is not cooking. I get what he is saying and I'm all for eating less processed foods but the reality is that sometimes it comes down to jarred sauce and boxed pasta served with salad and maybe the sauce gets doctored with veggies. I consider that a pretty good meal. But to Pollan (at least it felt this way to me) it is the equivalent of going through the drive-through. His first book that I read (Omnivore's Dilemna) felt inspiring and I liked that it seemed to have some degree of moderation. Cooked felt like there was no moderation. It's also possible that I just read the two books at different stages in my own life or that I was just grumpy when I read Cooked. I was also influenced by hearing an interview between him and Ruth Reichl on NPR and they both came across as so pretentious it made me want to gag. I like them both and have enjoyed their books so I was excited about the interview but in the end it was just so overly serious. 

 

I think he could inspire more people if he did find ways to recognize that not everyone has the disposable income or time that he has to devote to eating a certain way. 

 

A book I like a lot in comparison is Make the Bread, Not the Butter. The woman got laid off and spends a year going through and making various foods from scratch. She then rates whether or not it's worth making based on cost, difficulty, taste and health. There are things she says that it's worth it to make yourself (bread) and things not worth it (butter). She's very funny and much more moderate. She realizes that most of the time most of us want to eat well but that sometimes we don't for various reasons. My favorite story in her book is one where her husband is out of town and she and her kids are watching the Lord of the Rings. She has a dinner planned but after the first movie she spontaneously decides to get the other two movies and have a marathon and they go out to the video store and stop at KFC to get a giant bucket of fried chicken with all the sides. They spend the rest of the evening watching the movies and eating chicken. She talks about how her kids are amazed that she is allowing them to eat junk and how much they love it. Years later she says they all remembered that weekend as a highlight of their family time and how it never would have happened if she had said "I have to go make dinner." I thought that was a great story of a well-balanced life. 

[LucyStoner]

How does he do this? I've read his books, but don't remember anything like that.

 

https://www.salon.com/2013/04/28/is_michael_pollan_a_sexist_pig/

 

I am really critical of Matchar's book Homeward Bound though, so please don't think I am in total agreement with this article (which is a book excerpt) either. I am pretty sure my utterly scathing review of it is on Amazon or my library site somewhere. 

 

I think that Pollan does romanticize bygone eras.  There is a reason my grandmother, a housewife with 9 children born from 1943 onwards, embraced each new convenience food with gusto. 

 

I enjoy cooking more than average and there are still nights my husband and kids get a sandwich or leftovers so I can keep poring over dem fool books of mine.  Cooking can be fun and it is needed but it is still a freaking chore.  And a chore that people who work more than full-time or who are trying to have pursuits and interests of their own do outsource or skip sometimes.   And that is ok.  that has to be ok. 

 

[Cottonwood]

I'd like elaboration on the mom working thing too.

 

I think he knows that most people can't eat completely as he encourages, but it gives them a GREAT starting place and food for thought (pun intended! LOL).  I started sourcing our food differently years ago while not realizing that I didn't have to do it all at once.  I realized it pretty quick tho.  ONE positive change is a big deal and a great thing.   To say this has little merit b/c it's too hard to do sounds like some think it ALL has to be done.  I used to say and think this way.  One step at a time is all it takes.  And one person making us think is sometimes all some of us need.  So that's how I see him..not someone I take everything as value from, but he definitely makes me think and helps me see the possibilities to change things important to my family.

 

I don't see anything elitist about making positive changes of any kind in our lives and I see Michael Pollen as someone whom I can take encouragement from FOR THE CHANGES THAT MESH with my life.  Any change is a sacrifice, mostly a sacrifice of time, in my kitchen. Where I don't think I can make a sacrifice, I don't and maybe I go in another direction.  You may be able to make the sacrifices I can't but I dunno, I'm not the sort of person to categorize it because it's unlikely for a certain group to implement. 

 

When I hear the elitist POV, my mind goes RIGHT to the farmer I work next to (in exchange for local veggies, we work 50 hours a year).  The person working in the dirt, making no money, only doing so for the concern of people and the SYSTEM...with a humble attitude and work ethic made of steel...  that is the opposite of elite to me.  I get it...  so, so many don't have access this way.  But the elitist POV is only correct in my mind for a PORTION of those who want to eat this way. Most everyone I know who care about the system and the people live the most humble, lowly lives but they eat in the most healthy way I've ever seen as well.  I mean, the lady that sits under those cow udders to provide me with raw milk??  My dictionary defines elite as: people with the most wealth and status in a society.  That doesn't line up for me!  Oh wait, it also says, "the best of a class" and I see these people as eating the best of anyone I know, so maybe in a stretch, it works. LOL

[LibraryLover]

Ruth and Michael are absolutely New Yorkers. Wealthy Ivy east coasters, for sure.  lol  That doesn't always play well. lol I loved the NPR interview, but I absolutely could see how it sounded annoying. They are foodies to the foodie extreme. (Garlic and Sapphires is one of my most favorite books, ever. Loved Tender to the Bone as well.)  I do think Pollan is on the right track. Jamie Oliver says much of the same, but Jamie is 'one of the peopl'e.

[Tsuga]

My first food book was Diet for a Small Planet. I don't think Pollan is revolutionary in any sense of the term nor would he be even if he embraced vegetarianism.

 

I do think that the reason men like Pollan and Alfie Kohn feel okay about making these pretty absolutist statements is that they never had to actually do any of it and work a full-time job. It's like they get the little fun parts but not the drudgery. They don't have to deal with the whining. Alfie Kohn didn't stay home with his kids. Pollen doesn't cook three meals a day, or even one meal a day, for five people, okay? I do.

 

That said I think there's some good stuff in there.

 

 

 

Huh? Where does he do this? I do not recall anything of that sort - please elaborate.

 

He has written a few NYT editorials in which he suggests that now that we don't have time to cook, we've forgotten what food it. He alludes to it and specifically says that when women went to work we stopped cooking as much. He has addressed criticism of this comment by saying he was describing a social phenomenon. But he never comes out and says, "Here is a realistic way that working-class men and women can work together to cook dinner nightly." He never realized that the big problem with unequal home management is that people lack roles and expectations that would meet both partners' needs. In short, he's clueless about why women left the kitchen in the first place and it's flipping irritating. And I do agree--that's sexism. Refusing to acknowledge your own biases and privilege is the start of bigotry.

 

I wouldn't mind him saying, "I finally get it. I get why that comment was wrong. And here's how I'm saying I think a dual-working couple, a man and women, two men, two women, whatever, can work together to eat this way. And it wasn't women going to work, it was that they went to work and men didn't pick up the slack at home though they were happy to have the extra income. It was a failure of job distribution, not a failure of women."

[LibraryLover]

My first food book was Diet for a Small Planet. I don't think Pollan is revolutionary in any sense of the term nor would he be even if he embraced vegetarianism.

 

I do think that the reason men like Pollan and Alfie Kohn feel okay about making these pretty absolutist statements is that they never had to actually do any of it and work a full-time job. It's like they get the little fun parts but not the drudgery. They don't have to deal with the whining. Alfie Kohn didn't stay home with his kids. Pollen doesn't cook three meals a day, or even one meal a day, for five people, okay? I do.

 

That said I think there's some good stuff in there.

 

 

He has written a few NYT editorials in which he suggests that now that we don't have time to cook, we've forgotten what food it. He alludes to it and specifically says that when women went to work we stopped cooking as much. He has addressed criticism of this comment by saying he was describing a social phenomenon. But he never comes out and says, "Here is a realistic way that working-class men and women can work together to cook dinner nightly." He never realized that the big problem with unequal home management is that people lack roles and expectations that would meet both partners' needs. In short, he's clueless about why women left the kitchen in the first place and it's flipping irritating. And I do agree--that's sexism. Refusing to acknowledge your own biases and privilege is the start of bigotry.

 

I wouldn't mind him saying, "I finally get it. I get why that comment was wrong. And here's how I'm saying I think a dual-working couple, a man and women, two men, two women, whatever, can work together to eat this way. And it wasn't women going to work, it was that they went to work and men didn't pick up the slack at home though they were happy to have the extra income. It was a failure of job distribution, not a failure of women."

 Jamie Oliver does this very well. He is much more down -to- earth.  A regular bloke who made the big time. But they are pretty much saying the same thing.

[hornblower]

How does he do this? I've read his books, but don't remember anything like that.

 

"Growing up, “we had a home cooked meal four or five times a week,†Pollan told PBS NewsHour correspondent Jeffrey Brown, recounting his own childhood. “I could count on sitting down to dinner.â€" source

 

"didn’t take long for me to realize that this Julia Child had improved the quality of life around our house. My mother began cooking dishes she’d watched Julia cook on TV: boeuf bourguignon (the subject of the show’s first episode), French onion soup gratinée, duck à l’orange, coq au vin, mousse au chocolat. Some of the more ambitious dishes, like the duck or the mousse, were pointed toward weekend company, but my mother would usually test these out on me and my sisters earlier in the week, and a few of the others — including the boeuf bourguignon, which I especially loved — actually made it into heavy weeknight rotation. So whenever people talk about how Julia Child upgraded the culture of food in America, I nod appreciatively. I owe her. Not that I didn’t also owe Swanson, because we also ate TV dinners, and those were pretty good, too."  source

 

Sometimes it's subtle, sometimes it's not but really there's this nostalgic look at the past when a parent (let's face it, the woman) stayed home & made meals.

 

if she worked, she rushed from work to the grocery store & still made the big dinner because THAT was what was expected and some husbands would be ok with the wife working so long as the house and meals were still taken care of properly.  (this was my mil, btw. A university educated woman who went back to work when kids were in jr high & was still expected to run the entire house, do laundry & make dinners every night too. But the man coming home gets to sit & put his feet up while a drink magically appears at his elbow...)

 

These days 50% of American full time workers work MORE than 40h/week.   I do not begrudge these people a restaurant meal, take out or a freezer meal or something from the pre packaged aisle. People have huge commutes (average is I think just under an hour/day) so that all makes for very long days. 

 

CAN people do all this and still cook 3 (varied and nutritious and balanced!) meals from scratch/daily  & have backyard chickens & drive out to their csa weekly & grow their own greens in a cold frame on their balcony? Sure. They can. Someone out there is doing it & probably blogging it & instagramming it to rub our noses in it.

 

Some people can also learn 10 languages and run marathons. Most of us can't. 

 

[FaithManor]

Binip, I certainly agree that job distribution is a HUGE issue. Women went back to work and most men were thrilled for the extra income, but it did not equate to sharing the responsibilities at home either. They still expected her to provide the "king of the castle" meal (I know my father, my grandfather, and my uncle most certainly did and all of their extended male relatives felt that regardless of what a woman had on her plate, feeding her man in style better be her top priority along with housework because they weren't going to do that either), and thus, yah....convenience foods became necessary. I mean, if she's going to work 8 to 5 and have a five course meal on the table by 6, it's the only way it is going to happen.

 

In order for it to work, there has to be a more equitable distribution of the domestic labor, and an approach to eating that says it's A OKAY to not have five course meals, and everything hot and fussed over. This is something I have had to work LOOOOOOONG and hard on with my mother. She's 72 and still works. Dad, much as I love him, can stuff it! Literally. He will not roll over and die if he has to make his own sandwich and salad. He does not have to have lasagna and homemade garlic bread, and a specialty cauliflower salad, and a cooked vegetable, and a dessert. Seriously. Dude. Go make yourself a bowl of oatmeal and eat an apple. Don't come walking through the door asking, "What's for dinner?", then act all baby like and disappointed when it isn't roast pork cutlets with mango chutney, grilled vegetables, baked potatoes, and brownies. :banghead:

 

I readily admit that the mindset is hard to break!

[LibraryLover]

Here's an article with a response from Pollan. Makes sense to me.

http://m.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/05/michael-pollan-cooking-gender-and-nostalgia

 

 

He did sort of shoot himself in the foot with that 2009 article. Many of us also have such memories, although we really are not sexist pigs. I am in the kitchen a lot. I make most of our meals (although we eat out more now since we are surrounded by amazing food), and I have talked to my girls about this. I want to do it. I can do it. They might not want to spend as much time in the kitchen.

 

And as for Pollan eating in restaurants?  He does, and often. It's part of his livelihood.  (Just not at Applebee's, kwim?)

[redsquirrel]

Huh? Where does he do this? I do not recall anything of that sort - please elaborate.

What do women in the workforce have to do with healthy eating?

 

 

He focuses in on cooking and stressing that families shouldn't use packaged food, purchased food etc. Now, this isn't a big deal for me b/c I am not the sort to buy premade food often. When Pollan uses terms like 'premade' he means bread, pasta cereal etc., but he also means not buying a roasted chicken at the supermarket to serve alongside a bagged salad. He writes that instead of buying that sort of thing it should be made at home.

 

Well, for a lot of families, buying a cooked chicken and bagged salad and bottled salad dressing is the better choice than delivery pizza or fast food. Honestly, I don't see the big deal or judgement about that.  But a lot of critics say that when he talks about 'families cooking more' he means women. The task of cooking, managing the family's diet, falls to women. That is the reality for the vast majority of families. We can all rush to say that our husbands do all or half the cooking etc etc, but statistically it is women. Supermarkets and 'big food' know this and that is the focus their business.  So, when Pollan says "make your own bread"..when he says 'your own' he means women.  Well, a lot of women don't have time to make bread because they are teachers and lawyers doctors and business owners and even farmers, and that needs to be ok. Or maybe they don't like making bread and raising chickens and canning their own tomato sauce. Or maybe they have better things to do with their time. And he can be dismissive about this criticism.

 

He has listened and he seems to have toned it down recently, and I appreciate it. I don't personally think that it invalidates what he says, but it does temper my enthusiasm. You can agree or not, but it is a criticism that has been leveled at Pollan and the whole 'get back in the kitchen' movement. 

 

If you want to read more, just google his name and sexism or criticism and you will get a lot of hits.

 

Again, I think it is part of a larger conversation about our families and how we divide labor, but to just dismiss the concerns of women about loading them up with more work, more guilt, more baggage about being a 'good mom' well, I think it is something to pay attention to. I am sure that many of us will announce we don't care about such things, and great, but there is also the reality of culture and messages sent by culture to the people that live in it.

[LibraryLover]

Katie Couric has also taken heat for calling for people (women, mostly, as it stands) to cook at home more often, when she was promoting her film Fed Up.

 

But then again, Katie is another divisive personality. ;)

 

(ETA: Wow, that's an ugly sentence. lol I'll need more coffee to tackle it.)

[Halftime Hope]

In my family, spouse does zero cooking, but he cleans bathrooms, does ALL the laundry, and regularly will do chores I don't feel like tackling.  I'll keep him and not fault his lack of cooking.  When I needed it (for years when we had littles) he did the dishes--he initiated taking on that chore because he could do it in 20 minutes while it took me hours with all the evening interruptions.   I've seen equitable distribution of work in both previous generations (parents and in-laws), so our family's situation may be different from others. (It was religiously motivated--i.e. serving as a form of loving--for my dad. He washed every dish for 50 years.)

 

In my kids, two are foodies and cook--one of each gender; only one of my kids doesn't give a whit about food, and I predict he will purchase everything from fast food and the frozen section at the store when he no longer lives around my cooking.

 

Anecdotal, but our experience.

 

 

 

[FaithManor]

Oh, and if you have a teenage son who is an extreme food worshipper, you can use this to your advantage. I do. That youngest boy makes some to die for tacos! LOL

[LucyStoner]

I've read his books, I own most of them.  The thing is that criticism doesn't mean condemnation. 

 

Unlike my view of Matchar's book Homeward Bound which does definitely border on condemnation.  So annoying and hasty.  

[LucyStoner]

The idea that men are, overall en masse, heading to the kitchen is just not born out by the statistics.  No matter how many meals men are making right now, the cold hard truth is that in het families with children, most of the housework, including the cooking is far more likely to be done by the woman than men.  I like feminist men, I am married to one.  But dude just isn't the norm.  Additionally, even in houses where he is cooking, and they both work, she is still doing a disproportionate share of the drudge work. 

[Tsuga]

Here's an article with a response from Pollan. Makes sense to me.

http://m.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/05/michael-pollan-cooking-gender-and-nostalgia

 

Great article:

 

"She says: "I grew up in the teens and '20s, when most people had—middle class people—had maids or someone to help."

 

And who were the maids? Black people. Black people and Hispanic people who were expected to work for less than a living wage. I do not fault Julia Child for the omission in the context. But it's an important omission.

 

The personal is political. 

[Alice]

I've read his books, I own most of them.  The thing is that criticism doesn't mean condemnation. 

 

Unlike my view of Matchar's book Homeward Bound which does definitely border on condemnation.  So annoying and hasty.  

 

This. I like a lot of what Michael Pollan says but either he's gotten less moderate or I've become more tolerant. 

[Jane in NC]

Great article:

 

"She says: "I grew up in the teens and '20s, when most people had—middle class people—had maids or someone to help."

 

And who were the maids? Black people. Black people and Hispanic people who were expected to work for less than a living wage. I do not fault Julia Child for the omission in the context. But it's an important omission.

 

The personal is political. 

 

The "help" in my mother in law's New England home prior to the Depression were Irish.  I believe that in some New England communities Portuguese immigrants were often in low paying jobs. 

 

Unfortunately lots of folks have been stepped upon.

 

[Pam in CT]

Omnivore's Dilemma provoked me to change our patterns, bit by slow bit, toward more whole-ingredient food, more organic, and less meat.  (Four of the five of us do still eat meat.  But a good deal less than we used to.)

 

I agree with Jane that he started what has slowly emerged as a conversation about our national food policies and what they actually support. 

 

 

But at the same time, I do take the detractors' it-works-best-for-the-well-off, and wistful-nostalgia-for-the-good-old-days-when-women-were-firmly-in-the-kitchen points.  And that national food policy conversation has a loooooooong way to go, still.

[Alice]

Ruth and Michael are absolutely New Yorkers. Wealthy Ivy east coasters, for sure.  lol  That doesn't always play in Peoria. I loved the NPR interview, but I absolutely could see how it sounded annoying. They are foodies to the foodie extreme. (Garlic and Sapphires is one of my most favorite books, ever. Loved Tender to the Bone as well.)  I do think Pollan is on the right track. Jamie Oliver says much of the same, but Jamie is 'one of the peopl'e.

 

Hmm....not sure how to read this. I'm definitely not in Peoria and consider myself a fairly sophisticated listener and eater. :) And although they are both New Yorkers in a way, I'm pretty sure Reichl actually spent a lot of time in California/Berkeley and Pollan lives in northern California, I believe. I get the idea though, it's similar culturally. 

 

 I love Ruth Riechl's books as well. (Except for her recent fiction one which I thought was just ok.) I understand she and Pollan are "foodies to the foodie extreme" but I just think they could do more good if they were a little more realistic about the way people outside their socioeconomic group live. Pollan at least appears to desire to make a difference with the types of books he writes and they both talk the talk about wanting to change the way society eats and thinks about food. I think they could do that more effectively if they weren't quite so dismissive about people who might have to make compromises (like buying jarred tomato sauce once in awhile) in order to feed their families. 

[LucyStoner]

Great article:

 

"She says: "I grew up in the teens and '20s, when most people had—middle class people—had maids or someone to help."

 

And who were the maids? Black people. Black people and Hispanic people who were expected to work for less than a living wage. I do not fault Julia Child for the omission in the context. But it's an important omission.

 

The personal is political. 

 

And "the help" have always had their own families they were leaving during the day to care for other people's homes, elders and young.  Roughly 1/3 of mothers were in the workforce already when The Feminist Mystique was written, mostly because they needed to be in order to put food on their own tables.  

 

[Hyacinth]

Fun fact: Michael Pollan's sister is married to Michael J. Fox (aka Alex P. Keaton).

 

This is probably old news to most people, but I just learned it and needed to share.

[Caroline]

Fun fact: Michael Pollan's sister is married to Michael J. Fox (aka Alex P. Keaton).

 

This is probably old news to most people, but I just learned it and needed to share.

And she was on Family Ties with him.

 

I like Pollan's simple message. I haven't thought about it much beyond eating real food, more veggies than meat.

[Joyofsixreboot]

I think his advice is at least in the realm of possibility. Many here may embrace food " philosophies" but in my rurally poor area, the idea you shouldn't eat from a box, can or fast food and should cook at home is a leap. Many see cooking and gardening as some weird thing their grandparents did/do. I don't know how things changed so fast.

[Tsuga]

Not our grandparents (I am Generation X) but great- or even great-great-grandparents had kitchen gardens! My grandmother cooked from a can. SAHM, raised 7 kids, all on canned vegetables and bland meat from the supermarket and pasta. Instant rice to her was like, amen and hallelujah. My other grandma did not garden but she cooked.

[Tsuga]

The "help" in my mother in law's New England home prior to the Depression were Irish.  I believe that in some New England communities Portuguese immigrants were often in low paying jobs. 

 

Unfortunately lots of folks have been stepped upon.

 

 

Indeed. I am talking about the majority of "helpers" during that time. Certainly oppression knows no bounds... 

[SparklyUnicorn]

He seems ok to me.  More sane than a lot of other crap I've read.

 

I would not be able to do well on a vegetarian diet.  I have some blood sugar issues.  I do best controlling carbs.  That would be pretty difficult as a vegetarian and impossible as a vegan.  Plus frankly, while I don't think it's unhealthy, I don't think eating meat is unhealthy either.

 

I believe real food is best, but the configuration of ideal probably varies from person to person. 

 

 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Not our grandparents (I am Generation X) but great- or even great-great-grandparents had kitchen gardens! My grandmother cooked from a can. SAHM, raised 7 kids, all on canned vegetables and bland meat from the supermarket and pasta. Instant rice to her was like, amen and hallelujah. My other grandma did not garden but she cooked.

 

My mother did a lot of canned veg.  I see nothing wrong with canned veg other than I don't think it tastes as good as fresh.  After awhile she bought more and more frozen.  Fresh?  Almost never.  She hated vegetables and they were an afterthought to her. 

 

We gardened a little, but where we live gardening is a hit or miss and certainly not something we can rely on.

 

My mother was not a purist in the kitchen, but she did cook because it's way less expensive than eating out regularly. 

[Jane in NC]

Not our grandparents (I am Generation X) but great- or even great-great-grandparents had kitchen gardens! My grandmother cooked from a can. SAHM, raised 7 kids, all on canned vegetables and bland meat from the supermarket and pasta. Instant rice to her was like, amen and hallelujah. My other grandma did not garden but she cooked.

 

Gosh I feel like an antique!  Perhaps geography and family background influenced who was gardening (as well as the rise of housing communities that dictated no laundry hanging and what kinds of plants could be planted).  My mother grew up on a farm.  My father was the son of immigrants whose urban yard had minimal grass--most of it was devoted to vegetables, raspberry bushes and flowers.  Growing up, we always had a vegetable garden and fruit trees.  We bought additional fruits from a farm for canning--a family project.  And I lived in a city.

 

Of course, I was the kid who traded homemade cookies for Oreos which my parents did not buy.

 

What was very different about my childhood than today is the variety of produce available year round, as well as the selection.  A number of things were regional or ethnic choices.  But since I buy from local farmers, I tend to eat now as I did in childhood:  seasonally. The items have changed since I live in a different area of the country and because the American palate has changed too, I think. 

[weddell]

I really like Omnivore's Dilemma, but I also completely agree with the criticisms.  I honestly have little interest in day-to-day cooking. Sometimes I enjoy making something special, especially baking, but I would give up the daily cooking in a heartbeat. There are things I would rather be doing-I'm just not interested in cooking as a hobby (and I know other people are). I'm responsible for all weekday meals. My DH works long hours that he doesn't always enjoy and of course it makes sense for me to make sure there is some type of meal on the table even if I don't enjoy it. I'm lucky in that he is happy with whatever I make even if it is simple pasta or taco night again. He never complains or asks for fancier meals. On the weekends I'm more than happy to help the kids make sandwiches, pull leftovers out of the frig, heat something frozen, or call for pizza, but I'm not using that time to cook big meals after being responsible for meals all week. My dh thinks cooking is a fun hobby because he only does it when he wants (on weekends and only when he feels like it). And that is kind of the attitude that I get from Michael Pollan, of course it's fun, it's his hobby (and career) and he only has to actually cook when he wants. It's not fun when you just finished picking up the kids from their afternoon activities, it's already night and everyone is hungry, you didn't have time to spend hours cruising the Whole Foods for the freshest ingredients, and your 5 year old only wants a hot dog.

 

I read something in the NYTimes where he and another food writer went to the store together and then went home and made lunch together. Between the shopping and cooking it was 2-3 hours for one meal and they had quotes like "how could anyone think this is work!" Plus it was something my kids would never touch. It just made me roll my eyes.

 

In contrast I either read or saw a quote from the editor of Cooks magazine, Christopher Kimball. And he basically said that the day to day constant demands of cooking were hard work and were not that fun. The point of his magazine and show were to give people recipes that always worked so that they could make things as easily as possible.

 

I'd honestly be happy making bread in the breadmaker and pulling out toppings (meat, cheese, whatever), fruit, and veggies and calling it a meal.

[regentrude]

I'd honestly be happy making bread in the breadmaker and pulling out toppings (meat, cheese, whatever), fruit, and veggies and calling it a meal.

 

That is a fine balanced meal. For generations, that has been the traditional evening meal in my home country.

There is nothing magical about cooked food.

[SparklyUnicorn]

The idea that men are, overall en masse, heading to the kitchen is just not born out by the statistics.  No matter how many meals men are making right now, the cold hard truth is that in het families with children, most of the housework, including the cooking is far more likely to be done by the woman than men.  I like feminist men, I am married to one.  But dude just isn't the norm.  Additionally, even in houses where he is cooking, and they both work, she is still doing a disproportionate share of the drudge work. 

 

Yeah my husband does not cook.  I like cooking, but honestly if I had to work full time we'd be eating more convenience foods.  We'd probably be eating out more too.

[Jane in NC]

 

 

In contrast I either read or saw a quote from the editor of Cooks magazine, Christopher Kimball. And he basically said that the day to day constant demands of cooking were hard work and were not that fun. The point of his magazine and show were to give people recipes that always worked so that they could make things as easily as possible.

 

I'd honestly be happy making bread in the breadmaker and pulling out toppings (meat, cheese, whatever), fruit, and veggies and calling it a meal.

 

Personally I think Chris Kimball is over the top!  I believe the goal of recipes in Cooks Illustrated is less ease than qualitative consistency of the final product.  Some of his ideas are geared toward everyday fare but many involve hours of prep.

 

Bittman has good ideas for simple, healthy meals.

[weddell]

Personally I think Chris Kimball is over the top!  I believe the goal of recipes in Cooks Illustrated is less ease than qualitative consistency of the final product.  Some of his ideas are geared toward everyday fare but many involve hours of prep.

 

Bittman has good ideas for simple, healthy meals.

 

Yeah, I know I referred to him, but I actually agree with you! I just was so surprised by this one comment that it stuck with me. My kids have food allergies and I'm a vegetarian so basically nothing from Cooks Illustrated ever gets made in our house...

[SparklyUnicorn]

Personally I think Chris Kimball is over the top!  I believe the goal of recipes in Cooks Illustrated is less ease than qualitative consistency of the final product.  Some of his ideas are geared toward everyday fare but many involve hours of prep.

 

Bittman has good ideas for simple, healthy meals.

 

Huh, I have gotten Cooks Country for years and I think many of the recipes are pretty simple. 

 

I have some of Bitman's books.  I have found his How to Cook Everything unreliable with some stuff (baked goods is a big one).  Although I do like his approach generally.