Gourmet's Backlash Against the Backlash Against Alice Waters or Is Empress Alice Really An Elitist? (Of Course She Is!)
Twitter, well, at least the foodie Tweeple on Twitter, is all a-tweet about Laura Shapiro's Gourmet article in which she decries The War On Alice Waters, as well as other pro- and anti-Waters articles that popped up on the Web today. Shapiro writes, "[T]his is a woman who believes to her heart’s core that local, organic strawberries are always going to be the most practical purchase—no matter what they cost, or how tight your budget—because this is the most important way you can possibly spend money. Okay, it’s not a point of view that leaves a lot of room for canned tuna. But I wouldn’t call it elitism, especially in the larger context of her single-minded determination to change American food systems from the ground up."
Yo, Laura, like it or not, the American food system, good, bad or ugly, is how most people in this country can afford to put enough food on their tables so they don't go hungry. It is also how we moved from being an agrarian nation to an industrial one. If you have some romanticized notion that we were better off when we were a nation of family farms, go see an actual family farm with your own two eyes. They suck and I, for one, am damn glad I don't have to live or work on one. I grew up in an area where family dairy farms were the second most important component of the economy, after coal mining, so I know of what I speak. When a well-off person suggests tearing down a system that has affordably fed our nation for decades in favor of a system that would make food unaffordable for many, if not most, Americans, elitism is a perfect description — especially when there's no way that they or their children would actually have to labor in the fields. If you still have illusions about life on the farm, read The Idiocy of Rural Life by Jeff Pasley, the cover story of The New Republic's December 8, 1986 issue. (The link is to a Google Books posting that reproduces the article, at least in part. I could not find a link to the article on The New Republic's web site.) I read this article when it was first published. My experiences growing up in Western Pennsylvania's dairy farming country corroborate Pasley's findings.
While Shapiro claims, "Once a glorious heroine battling to reclaim our diet from the food industry, today [Waters is] a Gang of One, trashed over and over for a long list of crimes against the revolution," Waters-bashing is, in fact, no new, passing trend. In 2003, the Wall Street Journal named her beloved Chez Panisse one of the most overrated restaurants in America, declaring it "A dinner party thrown by aging hippies with a really great vegetable garden." (Oh, how I love that quote!) We had a great vegetable garden in our backyard when I was a kid. That didn't make my mother a culinary icon or my father an organic, sustainable farmer. (We actually wanted some produce from our garden so we fertilized and not with manure. Have you ever smelled a field that's been freshly spread with manure??? Would you really want that smell in your backyard???)
Moreover, the problem with Empress Alice isn't "crimes against the revolution," it's that the revolution she started is criminal given that, taken to its (il)logical conclusion, it would result in mass starvation and/or homelessness because many people wouldn't be able to afford both food and shelter. Ergo, Anthony Bourdain's observation, "There's something very Khmer Rouge about Alice Waters that has become unrealistic," is closer to the truth than Water's acolytes want to admit, although Bourdain subsequently kinda, sorta, maybe retracted his statement. It's not that anyone believes that Waters would foster a policy of intentional mass murder. However, actually doing what Waters advocates (having all members of society rely on local, organic, non-factory farmed, sustainable agriculture for their food) would force millions of people out of cities and back to farms with predictable, tragic consequences. It is in this sense that there is an appropriate parallel between Waters and the Khmer Rouge. (As a total aside, I love the picture that accompanies the first Bourdain link. I think that Tony's great and I also love the work
of author George Pelecanos.)I, however, prefer to think of Empress Alice as a latter-day Marie Antoinette. Instead of saying, "Let them eat cake," Waters, in effect, says, "Let them eat locally-grown, organic, sustainable food." If either woman had the sense to climb aboard the cluetrain when it stopped in their neighborhood (I'll grant you that it's a stretch to think that the cluetrain ever stops in Berkeley), they'd know that virtually no one outside of their ivory gardens could possibly afford to live that way.
[Endnote re: Bourdain: Tony's comment, "It'd be great if he [Obama] served better food at the White House than what I suspect the Bushies were serving," turns out to be way off the mark. The White House began serving mostly local and organic food during the Clinton administration, a practice that continued during the Bush years.]
It is too easy to call Alice an elitist. By your definition anyone eating other soylent green may so be described.
I'm not a vegan nor an organic crusader. I do like good food that has not been overly manipulated. I spend time every year in Italy where much of what I eat is grown within 20 miles of where I'm eating it. I now live on Maui where I'd severely limit my diet were I a strict locavore but I still think Alice has a great vision and I admire her. I think many of us eat better because of some of the people she has inspired.
My point is that there are many shades of green between Alice and industrialized food industry. I think people tend to settle for whatever the food industry throws at them. I think many people could afford better basic ingredients if they would forgo much of the junk food that fills their baskets. Look at the salad dressing aisle alone. Any cretin can dress a good salad. It doesn't take some food conglomerate's buzzword name "Tuscan Spring" blend of petrochemicals and flavorings to taste good. Make your own inexpensive dressing and spend more on the basic ingredients and you'll come off far ahead.
Today's food industry isn't looking to feed America, it is looking to profit from their ignorance and indifference. It has nothing to do with feeding a nation, that's just an interesting sidebar.
Alice isn't perfect. Her movement has some flaws. Her efforts to provide better food choices, however, should be applauded rather than decried. Eating as she suggests is not cheap but aren't you worth it?
Reply to this
I sense that we have a philosophical disagreement that runs much deeper than our opinions about Waters, Petrini, Pollan, et al.
You say, "Today's food industry isn't looking to feed America, it is looking to profit from their ignorance and indifference. It has nothing to do with feeding a nation, that's just an interesting sidebar." I fundamentally disagree because I believe that markets, for the most part, work, albeit, imperfectly. By my logic, the food industry looks to profit by meeting consumer demand for food products. Feeding the nation isn't a sidebar. If food consumers did not believe that the food industry was meeting their food needs, they would not buy the food industry's products and there would be no profits. If, in this process, the food industry "profit[s] from [consumers'] ignorance and indifference," that's on the consumer, not the food industry. In general, the information required to make informed choices is available if people are willing to take a few minutes to look for it.
This is not to argue that our food system is perfect. However, I think that Waters & Co. are shooting at the wrong targets. First and foremost, I believe that most corrupting influence, one that is so bad that I think it must be dealt with first, perhaps to the exclusion of all other reforms, is the massive transfer of wealth from taxpayers to farmers and agribusiness interests that is mandated by our federal government. The local/organic/sustainable movement is a logical force to oppose this corporate welfare but, in the latest farm bill, they allowed themselves to be co-opted by 30 pieces of silver in the form of funding for local food programs, organic agriculture research, renewal energy initiatives, etc. Note, by the way, that this legislation was enacted with bipartisan support in Congress, overriding two George W. Bush vetoes.
[After Jim posted the comment to which I'm responding, he tweeted me, in essence apologizing for picking a fight on my blog. Not necessary! I welcome, no, encourage dissenting comments and enjoy a vigorous discussion! That goes for everyone.]
Reply to this
Alright, I agree that the choice of whether or not to buy rests with the consumer and it is probably unfair, or at least unrealistic, to expect the food industry to educate and pander at the same time. I see one of the problems being that many people have never seen truly fresh vegetables or learned basic food preparation and therefore consume products instead of food. I like that Alice has programs in schools because those students may learn there is a better way to eat than the way their parents eat.
Maybe we need to teach some different subjects in schools. In addition to the controversial sex education, maybe we could have a curriculum that would include life skills. Hmm. I have to admit even I find that idea rather humorous. The class between Shop and Math might be Caesar Salad 101- the dressing doesn't have to come out of a bottle!
The point I wanted to make in the beginning is that I believe the awareness Alice and others have brought to the table has many people eating in a manner which is more enjoyable and more healthy. I think these culinary overachievers may have a very precious attitue toward food but due to their influence I'm eating better sating American cheeses and better meats and an entire range of products that the food "industry" would never have developed because the profit margin isn't there.
This does not mean that I am in favor of the farm bill. I think the idea of paying someone not to plant or harvest a crop is obscene. Thanks for the link to the very sobering Wikipedia entry.
I originally tweeted my comment about Alice Waters because some of the comments I was reading were 100% opposed to her and what she is advocating and I don't think that fair. She may not be your hero but I think she belongs in the white hat rather than the black.
BTW, I really, really am enjoying this blog.
Reply to this
When I was in school (many more years ago than I'd like to admit), I learned about nutrition in health class. Granted, the education was flawed but at least they made a good-faith effort. Based on learning about the four food groups, I argued that pepperoni pizza was the perfect food (actually, pepperoni pizza IS the perfect food but that's another story entirely) because it contained ingredients from each of the four food groups -- cheese from the dairy group, crust from the bread/cereal group, tomato sauce from the fruit vegetable group and pepperoni from the meat group. My (fourth-grade, I think it was, I was a bit precocious as a wee lad) teacher disagreed with me but couldn't really articulate why. The evils of saturated fat weren't exactly common knowledge in the 1960s.
I took home-ec, which was offered to boys in my high school when they were seniors (generally, this class was reserved for the girls, expectations of gender roles in the 1970s not being what they are today). Also, my mother would allow me to strike deals with her where I'd plan a meal and set a budget to which she'd agree. She'd give me the money and I'd be responsible for buying the groceries and cooking the meal. I got to keep any leftover cash. So, between home-ec class and my mother, I learned at least of few of the basics of cooking.
Having no children of my own, I don't know the current state of the educational system. And I realize that not everyone is fortunate enough to a) have a mother who actually does cooking beyond heating things that come out of cans and b) is willing to let their kid watch and working in her kitchen. But, I believe that these two elements, the school system and parents, are the essential ingredients to teaching life skills.
If nutrition and cooking are not taught in school systems today, it's a shame and a situation that should be remedied ASAP. But my support is contingent on accepting two principles. First, nutrition education must not extend into teaching value judgments about food politics. I.e., I'm all in favor of teaching the virtues of eating fruits and vegetables as well as the dangers of consuming too much saturated fat and too many simple carbs. I'm opposed to teaching that organic/local/sustainable is somehow better for you (or for the environment, for that matter) because I don't believe that there's any objective proof that this is true (in fact, I suspect that the opposite may be true for reasons I've expressed elsewhere in this blog). Second, we must recognize that the school system is not a substitute for good parenting and must refrain from attempting to make the school system a surrogate parent, even when children's actual parents do not adhere to the dominant political or societal values.
Thanks for reading the blog...I truly appreciate it and also appreciate that you've taken the time and effort to comment.
Reply to this
I agree with most/much of what you say. Schools are no substitue for good parenting - unless that is the only parenting a child receives. I've no wish to make myself the food police. I have once, and only once, so please forgive me, eaten a deep fried snickers bar. Unfortunately, you have to recognize that in some cases, if a child does not learn about nutrition in school, he may never learn it from his crackhead parents. Good for you in home ec. When I was in school, the only guys who did ec were masochists in the making. The jocks would lie in wait in the corridors and unless the guy come out with pot brownies, he got a major wedgie. I'm not talking about an elective course. I think there should be some basics taught in schools about how to accomplish certain tasks. Open a bank account, dress for a job interview, clean a human body, a house and one's teeth because even on Maui, I see kids who do not have a clue. They think a Big Mac in nutritionally sound which we all know is false though I agree with you about pepperoni pizza.
Anyway, I do like your blog. I am looking forward to enjoying it even more when my partner and I next vist San Francisco. Thanks for all your efforts.
Did all the make sense? It's beerthirty here and I sometimes ramble. Aloha.
Reply to this
Made perfect sense. And remember, it's always beerthirty somewhere!
Reply to this
Howdy! I followed you here from Serious Eats... in part because most people seem to have no idea how powerful the farm lobby is (!) and how nice it is to read a comment from someone who has some knowledge of the midwest (I'm making an assumption on that part based on your comment about coal and dairy; northern MN?)
I grew up in Houston and now live in the midwest. And it was a total shock in terms of awareness of agricultural practices. I now know people who run family farms... in addition to their day jobs. You couldn't pay me enough to work a farm - I'll stick to my gardening, thanks. I do wish there was more talk about the logistical side of the local foods movement. I'm an idealist, but sometimes I think we forget that we live in a world of practicality. In any case, thanks!
Reply to this
Western Pennsylvania, actually, about mid-way between Pittsburgh and State College. You're right about family farmers needing other jobs -- if I remember correctly, every one of the bus drivers for our school district was a family farmer earning extra income.
Your comment about gardening made me realize that much of passes for organic, local "farming" is probably better described as large-scale gardening -- nice to do as a hobby for some extra cash but hardly an activity that can pay the bills without another income.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Reply to this