Saturday, April 19, 2014
This a very interesting photo gallery that illustrates what food might look like if the added dyes were not present (due to their heavy amount of preservatives) (http://gma.yahoo.com/photos/colorful-food-photos-prove-we-eat-with-our-eyes-first-slideshow/colorful-food-photos-prove-we-eat-with-our-eyes-first-photo-1397762244728.html). Blue chicken for dinner any one?
Memory
Food: Brown Rice Casserole
 |
| http://allrecipes.com/recipe/easy-mushroom-rice/ |
Brown Rice Casserole Recipe
You’ll need
· 2 cans of French onion soup
·
2 cans of beef consume
·
2.5 cups of white rice
·
A stick of butter
·
A small jar of chopped mushrooms
Step 1: Combine all four cans of soup with 2.5 cups
of rice
Step 2: Add a full stick of butter (sliced throughout
the dish) and add half of the jar of mushrooms
Step 3: Cook at 325º for 25 minutes
Step 4: Add the rest of the mushrooms and stir the casserole
Step 5: Cook at 325ºfor an additional 20 minutes
Step 6: Stir and serve (best if eaten right out of
the oven, but cooperates well as leftovers too (microwave friendly))
Every holiday I ever
remember as a child, there was brown rice casserole at nearly every meal. I
wouldn’t even look at mushrooms before I tried this dish. The reason for its
appeal is obvious. It is easy to make, doesn’t require a lot of time or
observations, it’s tasty, and it has a WHOLE stick of butter in it. I love to
cook (when I have time) and this was one of the first dishes I ever learned to
make. As soon as I was eight years old, it was my responsibility to bring brown
rice casserole to every holiday. Some of my relatives would even call me to
make sure I was going to bring it to the family gathering. But before all of
this took place and I could make it myself, my mother used to make it for me. I
would ask her as a child, “Are you going to make the mushroom rice for
Christmas?” She would always answer, “Of course, picky butt. It’s not like you’re
going to eat much else when you’re at my Mother’s house any way.” Needless to
say I was and still am a very fastidious eater (but in my defense I am an only
child). This relationship between my mother, this dish, and I made me think
back to Allison’s article “Japanese Mothers and Obentos: The Lunchbox as
Ideological State Apparatus”. In this article, Allison mentions the importance
of obentos and how it forms a bond between mother and child. The mothers spend
lots of time planning, plotting, and creating an attractive display for their children’s
meals at day care (p.84-86). Of course in this article, the mothers are making
the meals attractive not just for their children but for the people watching
their children as well (p.84). There is an understanding that a proper child
with a proper parent eats all of the obentos (p.86). A pretty display aids in
the eating process for a child. But in my life my mother spent lots of time
making things more attractive so I would eat them. She would sneak in veggies
in cuisines and try to camouflage them so I would eat them (it
didn’t often work). But in regards to the article, I’m sure those kids look
back and think about how much time and attention their mothers dedicated to
them when making the obentos (especially once they have kids of their own). The
fathers may not realize it as much since they don’t have to create the obentos
(p.87). But those foods probably still mean a lot to the children like brown
rice casserole means to me.
Friday, April 4, 2014
Associations
with the South’s Favorite Protein Source (Prompt One)
One
of the main staples of the South in the area of cuisine is BBQ. Even right here
in Augusta we have a world famous BBQ joint, Sconyer’s BBQ. This is a very
stereotypical southern dish. Pork is a main staple of protein here in the South.
Whenever my dad’s best friend comes to visit from Michigan, he always has to have
a huge plate of BBQ before he leaves. This dish is clearly a southern staple.
It’s not like you can go to New York and expect to eat at a BBQ restaurant.
BBQ is associated with the Deep South and the southerns that consume it. This cuisine may be thought of as the equivalent of the black man’s fried chicken in William-Forson’s: More than Just the “Big Piece of Chicken”. The Power of Race, Class, and Food in American Consciousness. I say that because in the article the “Big Piece of Chicken” is meant for a man of lower class (working class) that has no power in the work place but instead in the home (p.342-343). This is evident by the mother’s frantic display when the “big piece of chicken” is gobbled up by the children.
BBQ more than likely
originated by similar means as fried chicken. In William-Forson’s article, she
mentions that fried chicken was brought about as a slave meal (p.344-346). The
slave owners had numerous chickens, which they would allow to run free (p.346).
The slaves would then take a chicken or
two as their own (their masters had so many chickens, how would they notice if
one was missing) (p.346). Pork may have been treated in a similar manner.
In the documentary Soul Food Junkies by Byron Hurt, pork is
a common component of the food mentioned in the film. The film also mentions
the slave origins of soul food and how that shaped African American southern
cuisine. Soul food became a staple for the newly freed African Americans
because it was cheap and what they knew how to make. The food may not have been
good for you, but instead “good to you”. This seems to include BBQ as well.
So both fried chicken
and BBQ have stereotypical roles attached to them in just about the same areas
(except for race). But obviously black people do not only eat fried chicken,
and white people do not eat only BBQ (white folks can put away fried chicken as
well and vice versa). Both dishes are attached to lower class means because
they are unhealthy, cheap, and have easy access. But one thing is for sure, BBQ
and fried chicken are both very representative of the South and the stereotypes
associated with the South.
Saturday, March 22, 2014
Thanksgiving
Traditions (Option One)
I began my collegiate
journey 2.5 years ago, and that is also when I began to have my own job as
well. So this means I have not been to a family Thanksgiving in 2.5 years, and
so many things will have changed since I’ve attended this holiday with my
family (people have had kids, gotten married, etc.). So instead I’ll talk about
the Thanksgiving traditions I have at work and at home alone.
Every
year on Thanksgiving Day I either have to wait tables or write a paper. So on the occasions that I work, we do not
have a traditional Thanksgiving feast at the restaurant. The cooks fix
breakfast for us. We normally have biscuits, cheese grits, eggs, and donuts.
These are “American” foods, but not foods for Thanksgiving (traditionally).
Then once we’ve all filled our plates to the brim we all sit in the bar and
watch the Macy’s day parade. You may wonder how we have time for this on a work
day. Well our restaurant is open, but we do not serve traditional Thanksgiving
fare. So obviously we are not a hot spot on that holiday. If people go out to
eat on Thanksgiving they typically go out to find a traditional meal without
the dishes. That traditional meal is one of the things that makes this holiday
so special. You get to eat foods that you or someone else doesn’t prepare every
day. It is also a time to reflect on the blessings you have. On the
Thanksgiving days that I have a paper due instead, I just sit at home and write
the paper while watching the Macy’s Parade, the dog show, Charlie Brown’s Thanksgiving, and Garfield’s Thanksgiving (I’m a huge cartoon fan). Last year I
worked on my drag queen study paper (which I presented at PKP last week). There
isn’t really any food until my parents come home and I get some of the left
overs. To top it all off I’m usually the one to make the turkey or ham the day
before Thanksgiving since my Mom always works that Wednesday. So my
Thanksgivings are never traditional any more in the sense of Siskind’s The
Invention of Thanksgiving: A Ritual of American Tradition.
In
Siskind’s article she explains the traditional Thanksgiving layout (pg. 20-22).
Women cook the food, which is not the case for me. At the restaurant most of
our cooks are men. She also says men watch violent games on TV, and this does
happen at the restaurant. When men want to get away from the family or don’t
have one, they come in on Thanksgiving and watch football. But they don’t order
anything (too stuffed), but instead they just drink beer. She also
suggests that it is a time for giving thanks and being with others. On Thanksgiving
I may not be with my family and enjoy a turkey, but I do take time to say a
long prayer and thank God for everything that I have. I know without Him I
would have nothing. So a traditional Thanksgiving is not necessary, and the main
point of the day is to give thanks. As long as that’s done, the rest doesn’t
really matter. Siskind’s view on a traditional Thanksgiving may be relevant to
some, but not so for many.
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Manuel’s
Response
On Thursday my class
and I went to Manuel’s Bread Café in North Augusta. The first thing I noticed
on my way into the restaurant was how adorable and simple the scenery was. It
was so nice and quiet with beautiful shops and houses lining the street. My
entire family and I work in North Augusta and none of us has ever seen or heard
of this rare gem in the city. Compared to other restaurants, Manuel’s really
puts an emphasis on knowing where your food comes from and obtaining pure food.
Manuel’s grows a lot of its own produce on their Blue Clay Farm and uses them
in several of their dishes. They plot and plan a garden every year and prepare
it so that it will have the biggest yield of crops possible. They grow
everything they can all natural. So they keep away from pesticides or harsh
chemicals for their crops. Manuel’s also has a mini animal farm where they have
goats, ducks, and chickens. None of these animals are slaughtered however. The
chickens are there for their egg production. But they make sure to treat the
chickens well to get optimal egg production.
From these mentioned
ambiances of Manuel’s it is obvious that they are aiming for two things when it
comes to their guests. The first is that they are an education haven for those
not aware of where their food comes from and what may have happened to it
before it reached their plate. They are aiming to be an area where those that
are looking for organic and natural sources of food can dine. This is the South
so there aren’t many places where one can find all natural, healthy, and tasty
foods. But this opens an even bigger issue in not just the South, but in the
entire nation and this issue is GMO foods.
GMO foods are foods
that have been genetically altered. This means fruits and vegetables can have
their genes modified to make them bigger, hold more water, grow faster, produce
more flavor (supposedly), and many other things. Sounds great right? I’m sure
if you’ve heard of GMO foods, it has a negative connotation attached to it.
This is because there is so much uncertainty about GMO foods? Do they cause
cancer/other diseases? Are they as nutritious and healthy as normal produce?
Should these foods be labeled so consumers know what their buying? Does this
damage soil? There are so many unknowns surrounding these foods, and these
unknowns have very big consequences if they are proven true.
According to Clapp’s: The
Political Economy of Food Aid in an Era of Agricultural Biotechnology,
several countries that are in severe famine will not accept food aid from the
US because we are one of the main countries that consumes and gives away GMO
foods (pg.1-2). We also do not label these foods. Even though the countries that
are offered our aid are in such dire straits, they will not accept food from us
because it can ruin their agriculture and they are terrified of the
consequences that may ensue from consuming the food (pg.4-6). Most countries
give food aid in the form of money, but the US has ties to its farmers that
produce GMO wheat (p.11-16). Subsidies in the US make this an easy solution to
give away the wheat. The farmers need to make money to survive and the US
government needs political allies and strategies brought by assisting others.
So the government buys the wheat and sends it to places such as Africa that
need it. But these countries would rather not make a bad problem (famine) worse
with GMO products. They just use the aid from countries that offer money or
non-GMO foods.
In America we also have
conflicts with GMO foods. When you go to the grocery store you don’t know if
you’re buying a GMO product or not. Organic doesn’t mean that it isn’t GMO. We
face a lot of conflicts here at home as well since so little is known about
these foods and their effect on health. It is also no secret that GMO foods don’t
taste nearly as good as the real untouched product would. This could be due to
the fact that some GMO foods are designed to hold more water and/or grow much
bigger than normal, and thus dilute the flavor.
This brings me back to
Manuel’s. Manuel’s constructs an ambiance of simple food. To serve food that
has come from the ground and is hormone, GMO (maybe), and pesticide free. They
strive to serve the educated consumer and the uneducated consumer (and teach
them along the way). The idea they present is to keep everything as close to
home as possible, to know where your food began and ended. They do not try to
tie into the global community, so that they may reduce their carbon footprint.
Overall, they aim to serve you simple, healthy, and good food.
Friday, March 7, 2014
Complicating the Obesity Epidemic
Complicating
the Obesity Epidemic
There
is a constant epidemic in America that is getting bigger and bigger (no pun
intended). This epidemic is obesity. However, this is not a simple problem of
overeating. Economics, biology, and society all play a role. There are severe
consequences to obesity. Health is significantly declined, in some cases
negative psychological implications can occur, the cost placed on society to
take care of these individuals later in life, and the pressures society will
place on the obese as well. I will touch on a few of these issues concerning
the obesity epidemic and give evidence that the obesity epidemic is much more
complex than meets the eye.
Society
sees obesity as a simple matter of eating too much coupled with a severe lack
of exercise. While in some instances this is exactly the case, but in the vast
majority it is not. In Mead’s: Why Do We Overeat, society views obesity
as an immoral lifestyle. Society says clothes are not made for them, they
cannot fit in furniture, and the obese are outcasts. Mead goes on to say
society says obesity “is a lack of character, a disregard for health and a
blatant lack of self-discipline”. We place such a heavy emphasis on what people
should look like based on the images that are flung at us every day. These
images clearly have an impact. In Bordo’s: Not Just a White Girl’s Thing,
countries (where not many eating disorders were present) that recently began
promoting images or television shows that display stick thin women. After this
media surfaced in these countries, diets, body consciousness, and eating
disorders sky rocketed. We place such an emphasis on these stimuli, and think
it is what we should be. This only causes more problems such as eating
disorders and low self-esteem. This is not going to solve the problem but
simply make it worse for everyone (obese or not).
Our society condemns
the obese, but in some cases obesity may be the cause of factors beyond their
control. Genetics are a central part of the obesity epidemic. Genetics dictate
what kind of body type you will have. We are all different. Some are naturally
skinny, tall, short, or chubby. I understand. No matter how much weight I lose
I am always going to have these boobs, this butt, and these thighs. Body type plays
a significant role in metabolism and where you store fat (which the individual
cannot control, no matter diet choices). Epigenetics is a new sub-field of genetics that may hold the
answers to some cases of obesity. Epigenetics is a very interesting field
because it does not deal with gene mutations, but instead with gene
modifications that can be turned on or off. This is done by methylating a gene
which can inhibit or express the gene in question (though most of the time it
inhibits the gene). These genes can be methylated or un-methylated on a regular
basis in the body. If you don’t think genes are a big deal, well they are. They dictate
every molecule your body makes and how you react to it. Genes can make you
store more fat, sugar, or salt molecules. So if your genes are requiring your
body to store more fat, sugar, or salt molecules, it doesn’t really matter what
you eat or how much of it. Your body is still going to hold onto the molecules
that you only want in moderation.
You may ask why
epigenetics have never had a link to obesity until now. This is possibly
because of added pressures in recent decades. These stressors can be the new
diet that has developed over the decade (full of cheap foods that are high in
salt, fat, and sugar). These foods are some of the only options for over worked
individuals with low incomes. Produce prices continue to rise and unemployment
keeps rising (so healthy foods aren’t an option). Families can buy one bushel
of bananas or two Happy Meals for the same price (obviously the Happy Meals
would provide more bang for the buck). The heavy emphasis on body image
mentioned above offers no relief either.
In conclusion, the
obesity epidemic is much more complicated than just food and exercise habits.
Genetics, society, and diet all play their roles for each case. There is never
going to be just one singular cause of obesity. Every case is different, just
like every body type is different. Several factors influence body size. So
solving the obesity epidemic is either going to be a long way off or we are
going to have to have a major overhaul on our views of diet and the “ideal”
body.
Sunday, February 16, 2014
The
Super Meats: Ozeki Response
According
to the documentary “Food Inc.”, the meat that you eat now is significantly
different than the meat your great grandparents consumed (Food Inc. 2009). The
chickens and cows also look very different than during that time period (Food
Inc. 2009). The reason for this is because animals are now receiving hormone
injections to make them grow faster and produce more fat and muscle tissue
(Food Inc. 2009). This has been in practice for several decades now. While the
idea behind this may sound great (more meat for my money, bigger portion sizes), it has very adverse
consequences. The animals get so big they can barely walk around (some can’t at
all) and their living conditions are horrendous (Food Inc. 2009). This also
increases the risk for contaminated and unhealthy meat. Plus, the animals are
given antibiotics to combat the disgusting living conditions they endure. These
antibiotics can easily be transferred into human systems through consumption.
That increases disease resistance and makes them harder to treat. The hormones
that are injected into the animals can also be transferred to humans. These hormones
do allow more meat to be produced and more money to be made, but these benefits
do not outweigh the bad consequences. The meat increases in quantity, but loses quality because of the way the meat is raised. The meat is not developed naturally so that decreases the quality.
According to Ozeki’s “My
Year of Meats” novel, there has not been any direct proof yet of a connection
between human hormone changes and meat (but I’m sure it’s only a matter of
time). However, in Ozeki’s novel she mentions that men have half the sperm
count they had fifty years ago and that about half of the sperm they do produce
is deformed. It definitely checks out as infertility rates continue to be a
prominent issue. DES is also mentioned in the novel. DES is a hormone that was
deemed illegal in most meat except beef. DES is linked with infertility of
offspring, physically deformed offspring, inability of consumer to reproduce, etc.
Ozeki even tries to link her fertility issues with the DES hormone.
Adams’ “Sexual Politics of Meat” also touches on these areas mentioned above. The first chapter is about the distinctions made between eating meat for men and women. Men are considered men if they eat meat. Women are considered to eat more along the lines of veggies and dairy. The chapter mentions that men NEED meat and become more fertile and manly through its consumption. This theory obviously contradicts the two other sources I’ve mentioned above. In Adams book, meat is also a source of power and is what is believed to have brought the West to prominence (because they had and consumed more meat). Soldiers required more meat than any one because of the complex carbs and proteins it contained. This left little meat for the citizens of the US during the prior wars. Meat is considered a manly food, but yet the women must cook it. In the society’s that rely heavily on meat there is an increase in sexual segregation at work (women do more work than mean, but it has less value), the women are responsible for childcare (a lot more than the men), and a patriarchal system is often present. In plant-based societies things are a bit more equal or at least a bit more egalitarian. Past presidential campaigns included comparing meat and veggies to running candidates (the candidate that was supposed to be the meat was the one that should get your vote).
Adams’ “Sexual Politics of Meat” also touches on these areas mentioned above. The first chapter is about the distinctions made between eating meat for men and women. Men are considered men if they eat meat. Women are considered to eat more along the lines of veggies and dairy. The chapter mentions that men NEED meat and become more fertile and manly through its consumption. This theory obviously contradicts the two other sources I’ve mentioned above. In Adams book, meat is also a source of power and is what is believed to have brought the West to prominence (because they had and consumed more meat). Soldiers required more meat than any one because of the complex carbs and proteins it contained. This left little meat for the citizens of the US during the prior wars. Meat is considered a manly food, but yet the women must cook it. In the society’s that rely heavily on meat there is an increase in sexual segregation at work (women do more work than mean, but it has less value), the women are responsible for childcare (a lot more than the men), and a patriarchal system is often present. In plant-based societies things are a bit more equal or at least a bit more egalitarian. Past presidential campaigns included comparing meat and veggies to running candidates (the candidate that was supposed to be the meat was the one that should get your vote).
Ozeki’s and Adams’
works are not exactly expressing the same viewpoint from the areas of the texts
I have mentioned. But it shows that human perceptions of meat and what is
associated with eating meat is far different from the suspected realities. Eating
meat does not necessarily equal manliness, in fact it can equate to just the
opposite. As far as Biology is concerned, what makes a male is based on how
much he reproduces. The paradox is, if a man is eating meat that is loaded with
hormones he probably will not produce as much sperm and thus not as many offspring.
Eating meat makes him less of a man according to Biology.
References
Food Inc., Kenner, 2009 (Documentary)
Friday, February 7, 2014
The
Oppression Fast Food Workers (Particularly Women)
We eat it all the time.
It’s quick, easy, and cheap. Yes, you know what I’m talking about… fast food. The
fast food industry has been around for quite some time. However, not much has
changed since their origins, particularly their working conditions. According
to the film “Fast Food Women” (1992), 90% of the workers in the restaurants
featured were women. “Fast Food Women” explores Louisville, Kentucky and
several fast food restaurants within it. These ladies have little to no
benefits, hardly any sick days or vacation time, and the pay is awful for the amount
of time they have spent working there (years). Often the ladies are injured on
the job; burns are one of the more common injuries. The women cannot get
medical care for the injury because they do not have insurance, they cannot
afford to miss the hours at work, and if they inform a manager they could lose
their job. Job security is not guaranteed and for every working woman “there
are five women waiting out of the door to replace them”. This fact alone gives
management tremendous power over its workers. If the employee complains about
wages, injuries, hours, treatment, etc. then they can be easily replaced by
someone that won’t make those complaints. The upper management staff of one of
the restaurants was featured, and a key thing to notice is that they were all
men. Not just that, but they appeared to be clueless as to who works for them.
They appeared to be under the impression that only teenagers worked for them
that didn’t need benefits because they have their parent’s benefits. The women’s
labor is invisible because management has supposedly devised a system where the
workers don’t even have to think, just do the motions to get the work done.
Management thinks the jobs are wonderful and require low skill, so everyone
should be happy.
You may ask “Why don’t these
women just quit and work somewhere else?” Well they can’t exactly. They are
very poorly educated, their husbands are often unemployed, and they obviously
cannot afford to go back to school. Several of the women have worked for the
same restaurant for over ten years and only make 15 cents above minimum wage. These
women are simply parts of a machine so that coupled with lots of people willing
to replace them, squashes all individualism. Another factor that contributes to
the high number of women in the fast food work force is the region where the
film takes place. In Louisville, there are not many occupations for uneducated
women. The main occupations are teaching and nursing, which of course require
significant education. Food service is pretty much their only option in that
rural area.
This concept of fast
food women reminds me of the women taken hostage in Wilk’s “Home Cooking in the
Global Village”. These women are taken from their native lands and put on a
boat with buccaneers that require them to cook and clean for them. Obviously
these women do not have much of a choice in the matter, and the same is true
for the fast food women. The men probably don’t pay much attention to them
until they need something and the same is true for the fast food women and
their situation. The buccaneer women know they can be replaced, but in that
replacement they may be killed or left in a random place abandoned.
A lot of these themes
are echoed in the book “Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American
Meal” by Eric Schlosser (2001). However, this book looks more at the issues
young workers face, not just women like the film mentioned above (Schlosser
2001). But it also addresses the low pay, how they are “a dime a dozen”, and
other similar issues and concerns (Schlosser 2001).
My final thought is that the management teams seem
to think they have everything figured to a science when it comes to their
employees. However, this is clearly not the case when time and time again it
has been proven that if employees are treated fairly and respectfully they will
exceed performance because they are more invested and motivated in the success of
those around them. So if the management teams would actually follow through
these principles they would have a significantly lower turnover rate and have
better/happier employees that perform at an exceptional pace/rate.
References
Eric Schlosser, Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of
the All-American Meal, Houghton Mifflin Company; 1 edition (January 17, 2001)
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Coffee Buzz (Option One): How Coffee Affects the Lives of Those That Grow It
In the
documentary film “Black Gold”, several coffee farmers are shown as well as an
individual that is a higher official that fights to get farmers more money for
his country's coffee farmers. The background information for the film is that
coffee farmers in Ethiopia are making next to nothing for their coffee (but yet coffee sells for $2.90 a cup and the "middle men" reap the rewards when the farmers do the hard, backbreaking work). Since
these farmers live in a third world country there are no subsidies to assist
these farmers with their small incomes. Their only income is that dictated by the buyer of their coffee
(they have no choice but to accept the price presented to them or sell nothing at
all). One of the personal stories that
caught my attention was the tale of a generation farmer (his father was a
coffee farmer, etc.). He had been selling coffee his whole life and was living in,
what looked like, extreme poverty. He had 15 people living people with him that
he was trying to support. The coffee is selling for less and less in Ethiopia
each year, so this farmer’s situation is doing the same. By the end of the
film, they show him destroying his coffee fields so that he may plant another
crop called chat. Chat is an addictive narcotic that is popular in Africa and
sells fast (for a lot more money than coffee). He explains that he doesn’t
want it to be this way, but he has to or he and his family will die. He has no
other choice. This reflects the injustice of the exchange because he has to compromise
his morals just to survive. He also has to compromise his fields because he will
make no income at all while transitioning the fields from coffee to chat.
Coffee consumers would obviously overlook this because this personal story
doesn’t really affect them. In the consumers mind, they just see that one more
coffee farmer has left the business.
Another personal story that
caught my attention was that of the child at the feeding oasis. There was a
major famine in the area and a feeding station was set up. A child came in
that was very clearly malnourished, but she was turned away because “she was
moderately malnourished but severely malnourished”. They did not mention how
far her family had travelled to get there, but I’m sure it was no easy trek. So
this child will probably die. They also did not mention if any of her family
was in the coffee business, but it was mentioned that several families there
were. It was so awful to see the starving children being turned away and their
poor families can do nothing. The families are making hardly any money from the
coffee trade. The families have to make the tough decision of feeding their
child and feeding themselves so that they can work and bring in their little
income. The injustice with the trading association is that there are
representatives that travel and tell other coffee capitals that they are
experiencing famine, poverty, etc. and that if the farmers were given more
wages (a small increase would change their lives) then a lot of the issues in
the region would dissolve, but still not much is done. Coffee consumers would overlook
the famine issues because famine is rampant in a lot of third world countries. The coffee consumer would ration that this
happens in a lot of areas whether the wages of coffee are the cause or another
crop, it would happen anyway.
This brings up a viewpoint from Wilk’s
“Home Cooking in the Global Village”. He sort of argues that we should want to
know where our food comes from because of the effects it may have on the people
that grow/make it. The people that grow and make the products often do not get
to use them because they are too expensive. He also mentions how some cultures
are lost due to heavy industrialization/ globalization. We should care because often abused,
battered, and severely underpaid workers are preparing our grub. Sick animals may
also be harvested and served on your plate. He also mentions several other
reasons, but these reasons correlate to the coffee farmers in Ethiopia. It
should pull out our compassion for the workers now that we know their
circumstances. In conclusion, there is a severe injustice being served with
your cup of coffee and they come in the forms of malnourished children and
poverty stricken coffee farmers and their families.
References
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Wilk
Response: How Far Does My Food Travel Before It Reaches My Plate
While
currently reading Wilk’s “Home Cooking in the Global Village”, I am reminded of how far the food on my place has come from to get to me. Wilk mentions
a can of Fuze fruit juice to make these connections. Ingredients of the drink came
from various places abroad and contain several preservatives to get them to our
grocery stores. However, the actual packaging mentions nothing of how “exotic”
the drink is. Instead the beverage claims that it is “an energizing and stress reducing”
product (yeah, right). He mentions the ingredients in the drink and where they
may have come from (Brazil, India, Ecuador, China, etc.). These are simply
educated guesses though because actually finding out where your food comes from
leads to dead ends and more questions.
Before reading this I
did have somewhat of an idea of the connections between extortion and our food.
For those that aren’t aware, a vicious cycle goes on to obtain our food at the
prices we do (Diaz 2009). The citizens of developing countries have back-breaking jobs that
pay very little (pennies on the day for some) (Diaz 2009). These jobs cannot be filled by
people that actually consume the product because they will not take them
(because they don’t pay enough for such hard work) (Diaz 2009). These jobs then get
outsourced to other countries for low wages (Diaz 2009). The workers live in poverty and
work several hours a day (way more than eight) (Diaz 2009). The irony is that they are
working to harvest food for the richer and more powerful countries, but do not
have enough food to feed themselves or their families (Diaz 2009). I learned this from
watching a documentary for an Honor’s Sociology class last semester. The
documentary is titled: “The End of Poverty” (http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=pktOXJr1vOQ&list=TLIid086AUfgI).
I will admit that the documentary is very biased, but it does contain copious
amounts of truth. I’m over simplifying the cycle here, but this gets to the jest.
The documentary explains the cycle very well, but not many people have one hour
and forty five minutes to explore such a depressing topic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=pktOXJr1vOQ&list=TLIid086AUfgI
While taking Wilk’s concept about the Fuse drink into consideration, I decided to tie this to a more local arena (me). I love mandarin oranges! They are so tangy and wonderful, plus they provide a giant amount of Vitamin C. So I decided to look at a can of them and see where its origins may lie according to the can. The can said it was “a product of China” and was “manufactured for Dole® Packaged Foods, LLC, Westlake Village, CA”. So clearly this was not totally grown in the USA. The actual oranges probably came from China. The processes to make them sweeter and prettier probably happened in California. So this links my oranges to two very far away distances. Why couldn’t the oranges come from Florida? Florida is the orange state after all. This is most likely due to the price increase that would result from Americans harvesting the oranges. The imaging on the can claims of "green" production, healthy eating, and freshness but does not make a big claim as to where it came from. So while I’m eating and enjoying my oranges, I realize that what I am munching on has been to more continents than I have.
Sources
Phillipe Diaz. Film: "The End of Poverty". http://www.youtube.com/movie/the-end-of-poverty. 2009.
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Did Cooking Make Us Human?
Did Cooking Make Us Human?
The
question proposed has some interesting aspects that were mentioned in the
documentary “Did Cooking Make Us Human?”. The documentary displayed many
different experiments that showed how our diets were different than our
previous ancestors, how cooked food provided more energy, how we digest raw and
cook food, and many other contributions to the question. The film tried to
answer if cooking contributed to the evolution of a primate/human hybrid link
becoming more human like due to the advantages of cooking (if cooking was the
extra push that contributed to our ancestors becoming more human). I found the
snake and rat experiment most interesting. The snake experiment was geniusly
designed. Obviously, it’s going to take less amino acids and digestive enzymes
to break down something that is already cooked (denatured) than something that
is raw and has to denature significantly more muscle and tissue fibers. I never
would have thought to use pythons to find digestive energy patterns. The mice experiment
was intriguing as well. Again, it was another obvious outcome, but greatly
designed. Not too complicated but still answered a very complex question. I’m
beginning my thesis now and I have to design my own experiment so watching
their experiments definitely gave me some inspiration for what I want to do.
For
my own personal taste I prefer cooked food. Everything tasted better if it is
cooked. It releases more sugars which increases tastiness. Raw vegetables are a
no-no for me. When you chew a raw vegetable it just gets bigger and bigger in
your mouth and more and more unappetizing. Cooked broccoli is great though.
Fruit is a special exception. It can be raw or cooked and it’s still delicious.
It already has a high sugar content when it’s raw so it does not need to be
cooked to be classified as appetizing. Meat must be cooked! I will not eat
anything uncooked (not even sushi). There are so many toxic microbes in raw
chicken, pork, and beef that make it a must on the cooked list. Plus, it is so
unappealing in its raw form. Our digestive systems would not handle raw meat
well any way, and not just from the microbes. Our bodies would not take well to
it because we are not used to eating it. All of these opinions are highly
influenced by personal preference. The film did not change any of my opinions
on raw or cooked food.
Based
on the film I learned that cooking was a huge mechanism for humans to advance.
It increased energy given by the food and reduced energy required to digest the
food. This increase in energy provided an avenue for the species to evolve over
generations into a more fit organism. Cooking also has an effect on culture. It
is clear that food is not just associated with a biological necessity, but
sometimes a social event. We are the only organism that cooks our food. Food
can be a source of sadness, happiness, etc. It’s not just an energy source, but
a component of emotion, memories, etc. I don’t think other organisms correlate
those things to food, and if they do it is not as strong as ours.
The
Goody reading showed how foods were made more readily available for people from
other regions. Some of these techniques for doing so were freezing, excessive
salting or pickling, new transportation machines and routes, and retailing. In
the article it showed that traditional cooking (open flame) was not required to
make new foods. Worcestershire sauce was made through chemical implications. Later
on, it wasn’t just about meat and preserving. The sauce also required a
fermentation process to taste edible to its makers. Fermenting whine has been
around for a very long time, but fermented sauces seem to be at an introductory
stage during the time period in the reading. It also introduces today’s concept
of how we get our food. We don’t really get foods much on street corners any
more, but we do purchase most of our food from stores and restaurants. From
this reading, the way we get food has changed significantly from the techniques
discussed in the film.
The
Yasmeen reading discussed how restaurants, servants, and grocery stores are
primary ways the citizens of Thailand get their food. Cooking is still a
central part of meal time. It just isn’t prepared by the people eating it very
often. This isn’t that different from us and our culture. Working people often
get food from grocery stores due to lack of time to cook it themselves, but yet
they still eat with their families. The social aspect of food is still there,
but they just aren’t cooking it. Functionality is also a central part of food
in today’s world. Cooking isn’t as primary to the average person as it used to
be. Everyone always has somewhere to go or be so you grab food that is already prepared
for you. It seems that Thailand is adopting a lot of the “got-to-go” urgency of
our culture. The coffee cart ad is an example of that. They never had coffee carts,
but the ad indicates so. I guess to bring a trendier feel to it. The
relationship to food seems to be the same, they just aren’t making it. Access
is also another significant change with the article in our relationship to
food. Food is much cheaper (depending on the kind of food), and portion sizes
are significantly bigger. Food isn’t as scarce as it used to be. In the film it
is celebrated when the tribesmen catch a porcupine. We don’t really celebrate
when someone brings home a pizza.
So in conclusion, cooking helped our ancestors to evolve due to the energy component in the cooked food and digestion. New techniques in food transportation and preservation aided in food availability, access, and introduced new foods to other regions. In today's world we are connected to our food, just not the way it is made. For some (where food is not easily accessible) it is celebrated when they do have something to cook. For others, when we do cook it is a celebrated event.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Instagram Your Lunch
This is what I had for dinner as of January 7, 2014. It is a grilled cheese sandwich, chicken noodle soup, and water. My
dinner reflects my identity as a student (obviously there will be no caviar
here). The meal also illustrates my temporary identity as a flu victim (I have
had the flu since Friday). It has also been very cold the last few days, so the
meal reflects that as well. Relating to Salazar’s study, visualization was not
a huge part of this meal (like the children in the study); it was more about
function. The children complained of the eco-friendly boxes that were
used as trays because their food would mix. My soup reflects a
similar aspect, I am a college student (currently taking 22 hours) so I don’t have
time to deal with a bowl. The drinkable soup works best for my routine and that
is shaped by the crazy amount of material and homework my professors have me
study. Plus, according to our culture it is common to have soup with a meal when ill. In the Allison reading, the obentos are a product of doting mothers that are trying to show that they care for their children and are willing to spend ours of meticulous planning and cooking to do what is expected of them by the daycare workers too. My meal is sort of the opposite. It displays how humble and small in quantity it is, so that I can have more time to dedicate to my studies. This in turn will hopefully impress my professors and result in good grades on my work. Like the mothers want to be received as caring and proper for their work.You can’t see it in the photo, but I am drinking water. If I had my way
I would have something caffeinated, but I have an 8 o’clock class the next day
so that limits my drink choices. If I drink something caffeinated or sugary I
will not sleep well for my class in the early morning. The cold shapes my
choice for the grilled cheese sandwich. I was just in the mood for something
hot and gooey for my scratchy throat. Culture indicates that I should have something
to drink with my meal so that is why it presented with the meal. I did not use
silverware with this meal as culture dictates (I’m a rebel sometimes). The meal
is not large in quantity either. This is because I didn’t really have a lot of
time to eat, because of all the homework I had to accomplish. So at the end of
the day GRU shapes my meals and most plans I make when the semester is in
session. I am a student slave to GRU.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)