It’s been a while since I’ve posted here. Busy with some traveling and with a musical
event. Both kept me from reading much in
the last month. But truth be told, it
also had to do with what I was trying to read.
I’ve been a Michael Pollan fan from the beginning. Botany of Desire is a fascinating book, and
Omnivore’s Dilemma is a classic. In
Defense of Food less good because it doesn’t break new ground but summarizes
and condenses much of the earlier material into a book that smacks of Dr. Oz and
self-help. While I agree with much that
Pollan writes, I don’t find it particularly rewarding to read.
[Igor Stravinsky was once asked why he published so many
revised editions of The Rite of Spring.
He answered at the blackboard, saying ‘because my name is [I]gor
[S]travinsky’, and he drew on the blackboard a superimposed I and S ($).]
Even more so with Pollan’s latest, Cooked. For someone who’s been at the forefront of
the food movement for years, the book is remarkably stale. Has he really never cooked seriously in his
past? If so, why did we take is writing
so seriously? I’m just an average cook,
but I know a good deal about roasting, braising, baking bread, etc. I’ve done all of it more or less seriously
for a long time, and I do have a basic understanding of the theory and science
involved. I don’t need Michael Pollan
for that. But that’s what he
tries to do in Cooked, and I remain bored and disappointed by the book, so much
so that I couldn’t even finish it.
Who exactly is he writing for? I think most foodies already understand this
stuff. We don’t need to be told what
barbeque is, what a braise is, or why and how bread rises. And if we have little interest in cooking we’re
not going to read the book. If we’re not
already sympathetic with the lefty food movement, we’re not going to read the
book either. Are there really a
significant number of left-leaning folks interested in food who know about
Pollan but need a basic introduction to cooking? Feels like a Michael Moore documentary to
me. If you already agree with his point
of view you nod your head but learn little. If you don’t you’ll be offended by
the shallow insider winkiness of the argument, and you’ll be convinced that he’s
another one of those Berkeley nuts. Who
watches MSNBC anyway? Only the liberals
(like me) that seek reinforcement for the liberal brand and who want to feel
part of a group of like-minded folks.
The book is full of logical contradictions and circular
paths of reasoning that will astound and infuriate an outsider. Most insiders will just nod and accept it as
party line. When push comes to shove
this just isn’t a serious book. It’s
fluffy left-wing foodie porn/propaganda, and I don’t think it will do anyone
much good. Except of course for Michael
Pollan, who is busy promoting and building the Pollan brand into an empire.
It hurts to be harsh with someone on my own team. Michael, I think you’ve let us down
here. You raise our spirits in the intrasquad
pre-season games, but when it comes to confronting the real opposition you don’t
have the guts for rigorous argument, genuine introspection, and baffling
complexity. To parody a fun Penny
Marshall movie from the early 90’s, I think you’ve developed ‘A Team of Your
Own’.
