Thoughts.

Still working through The Omnivore's Dilemma. It's a great, informational book and is totally changing the way I think and feel about food. Here are some words that have provoked my thoughts:

"Harvey Levenstein, a Canadian historian who has written two fascinating social histories of American foodways, neatly sums up the beliefs that have guided the American way of eating since the heyday of John Harvey Kellog: 'that taste is not a true guide to what should be eaten; that one should not simply eat what one enjoys; that the important components of food cannot be seen or tasted, but are discernible only in scientific laboratories; and that experimental science has produced the rules of nutrition that will prevent illness and encourage longevity.' The power of any orthodoxy resides in its ability not to seem like one and, at least to a 1906 or 2006 American, these beliefs don't seem strange or controversial." (p. 300)

and

"...that orthodoxy regards certain tasty foods as poisons (carbs now, fats then), failing to appreciate that how we eat, and even how we feel about eating, may in the end be just as important as what we eat. THe French eat all sorts of supposedly unhealthy foods, but they do it according to a strict and stable set of rules: They eat small portions and don't go back for seconds; they don't snack; they seldom eat alone; and communal meals are long, leisurely affairs. In other words, the French culture of food successfully negotiates the omnivore's dilemma, allowing the FRench to enjoy their meals without ruining their health." (pp. 300-301)

That's all.

Thoughtfully,

-A.