Carynne
Registered: 01/13/08
Posts: 67
|
| | 03/24/08 at 06:54 AM | Reply with quote | #1 |
|
Has anyone read this? I'm about two-thirds finished, but I am getting so annoyed at him that I wanted to see what others thought.
I had heard a lot about Pollan before reading the book, and I've actually seen him speak (he's a really compelling speaker, you sort of loose track of the actual argument!). The first part of the book is really good--an investigation into the whole industrial food system (he focuses on corn). But I just finished the chapter on organic/sustainable farming, and I am so fed up with him! It just seems SO clear to me that he has a lot of personal guilt over eating animals, but at the same time he really loves meat, so he is trying desperately to find a way to justify his cravings! He talks all about "happy" meat, how great it is that the chickens he eats (after he personally kills them!) got to "live like chickens" (before he slit their throats, which is obviously a normal event in the life of a chicken!). On top of all the problems with the whole happy meat theory, Pollan completely idealizes the conception of small, organic farms. He implies that everyone should be eating all their food as local as possible, and it should all be grown on really small farms. While I get that small farms are really good in a lot of ways, this concept just doesn't work. We have SO many people in this country (not to mention the world), and there is no way we can feed everyone from small farms. And Pollan's elitist assumptions that buying (more expensive) happy meat is investment everyone should be willing to make completely ignores the fact that most people can't afford to spend that extra money, drive out to the local farms, etc. Also, he seems to suggest that we should ONLY eat local food (although of course he makes an exception for his personal non-local favorite, coffee), which I take issue with, because I think that diversification of food is one of the really good things about globalization.
Argh...this has turned into a disorganized rant...and I haven't even gotten to his section on boar-hunting and the chapter entitled "The Vegan Utopia."
Has anyone else read this and feel like contributing to the anti-Pollan rant?...
__________________
http://veganmusings.wordpress.com |
| Loading... | |
ascentofscandal
Registered: 01/03/08
Posts: 179
|
| | 03/24/08 at 05:18 PM | Reply with quote | #2 |
|
Hi Carynne,
I have not read the entire book but I have read bits and pieces. To me it seems very obvious that Pollan is trying to make every excuse in the world so that he can eat meat and feel good about it. You're absolutely right, over 95% of the meat eaten in this country comes from factory farms, not from these "ideal" mom and pop small farms Pollan speaks of. But, even if "meat" came from these farms, what does it say about our humanity if we're willing to take a life just because we like the taste? Pollan is smart enough to know that humans don't require animal foods in order to be healthy and thrive.
Perhaps the most absurd thing is that Michael Pollan lives in Berkeley, CA... one of the most veg friendly cities in the country. Not to sound harsh, but I find Pollan's argument for eating meat really pathetic.
__________________
http://www.ascentofscandal.com/
http://arionthedaily.com/ |
| Loading... | |
cherylopal
Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 253
|
| | 03/28/08 at 02:12 PM | Reply with quote | #3 |
|
Well, this is the book that got me started! I had been hearing about it on another board that I'm on- and hearing things about omega 3's and 6's and so had to read this book esp in light of the changes that I've seen in the classroom. So I read this book and learned a bit about kids and attention but really started down the whole foods and vegan road. I hear what you say about how he justifies eating animals even the well written part about that farm in VA but I just kept on going until I hit vegan. Maybe others will as well.
|
| Loading... | |
Sparrow
Registered: 03/03/08
Posts: 44
|
| | 03/29/08 at 11:37 AM | Reply with quote | #4 |
|
I haven't read any Pollan, but I watched the film "King Corn" and he speaks a fair bit in that. At the end of the film, the presenters had a raffle and gave away an autographed copy of Pollan's book.
Pollan appears to be something of a hero to the local co-op crowd . . . which might explain why there is so much floor space dedicated to meats. It's a real culture shock for me because I'm used to food co-ops having "free range" meats, but I'm used to them being in a little chest freezer tucked in a back corner of the store and a bit less socially accepted than the rest of the food but in the co-op here where I live now there's a huge, glass-front meat cooler and lots of signs all over the place advertising the meats. Plus, the restaurant that's attached to the co-op has lots of meat dishes. I'm used to vegetarian restaurants attahed to co-ops.
I do wonder how much Pollan is responsible for my co-op not looking like the ones I grew up with. I think he makes people feel more "green" and "conscious" about their choice to continue eating meat. Bleh.
(Are food co-ops everywhere experiencing this sort of transformation or is it merely a case of mine being in Idaho where the state is so "red" that our Democrats are farther to the right than D.C. Republicans?)
|
| Loading... | |
sangie
Registered: 03/24/08
Posts: 75
|
| | 03/30/08 at 06:08 PM | Reply with quote | #5 |
|
I had placed this book on hold from my local library and one day I heard the podcast where Colleen reads an essay that opposes this book. In the podcast, she reads excerpts from the book and I was completely disgusted and appalled and did not want to get myself worked up from reading his book.
So when I got home I jumped on line and canceled my hold. I don't think I'll be compelled to read it anytime soon.
|
| Loading... | |
chrissyb
Registered: 01/31/08
Posts: 33
|
| | 03/30/08 at 07:59 PM | Reply with quote | #6 |
|
i havent read this book because this is something people always mention when trying to start something with me that is less than productive; they ask me if i have read it in a very challenging tone, then proceed to judge me bc i havent read it - and am vegan. HUH? it sure gets tiresome sometimes. pretty simple - i am committed to reducing the suffering to animals. it's as if people think i havent made an informed decision bc i havent read this book - PUH-LEEEEZE!
__________________
christine SF CA |
| Loading... | |
Carynne
Registered: 01/13/08
Posts: 67
|
| | 04/02/08 at 06:21 AM | Reply with quote | #7 |
|
Cherylopal, I am so glad to hear that you had a different reaction to Pollan. Part of what I found so ridiculous about the book was that he had so many good arguments and yet in the end he dismissed them all. I felt like it was written for Pollan and others like him who just want to find a way to justify eating meat--but hopefully more readers came to it with an open mind and really took his arguments seriously.
I have a longer discussion of the book on my blog if anyone is interested. I do think it is a good thing to read if you are already vegetarian but want to understand the omni (and particularly local/sustainable/happy meat) argument--which was why I read it in the first place.
__________________
http://veganmusings.wordpress.com |
| Loading... | |
cherylopal
Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 253
|
| | 04/02/08 at 09:03 AM | Reply with quote | #8 |
|
He does justify eating meat- and I was really taken with the farm in Virginia. Wow- how well they treated the animals and how everything and every animal worked togethe the cows eating real cow grass then the chickens coming along behind- the whole senario sounded so perfect...
...until they killed the chickens. I didn't care for that at all and it blew the whole picture for me- that's how I kept going til I hit veganism!
|
| Loading... | |
f451dana
Registered: 03/22/08
Posts: 13
|
| | 04/05/08 at 05:19 AM | Reply with quote | #9 |
|
Michael Pollan is one of the authors people mention to me when they want to justify their own meat eating. I also hear about Nina Planck's thoughts on eating "Real Food" and I hear about the evils of soy as explained in "The Whole Soy Story." (Thank you, Colleen, for the soy podcast.) I completely agree with eating real, whole, organic, locally grown food. However, other sentient beings do not fall into that category.
Pollan is a key figure in the excusatarian movement which is making a desperate attempt to show that eating animals can be ethical and is natural for us humans. But, as Colleen has said, we do not salivate as we drive by a field where cows are grazing.
One of Pollan’s wildest arguments is that the animals have entered into an agreement with us where we allow them to survive, in turn they sacrifice themselves to be our food. Here is a quote from Pollan: Domestication happened when a small handful of especially opportunistic species discovered through Darwinian trial and error that they were more likely to survive and prosper in an alliance with humans than on their own. Humans provided the animals with food and protection, in exchange for which the animals provided the humans their milk and eggs and -- yes -- their flesh. Both parties were transformed by the relationship: animals grew tame and lost their ability to fend for themselves (evolution tends to edit out unneeded traits), and the humans gave up their hunter-gatherer ways for the settled life of agriculturists. (Humans changed biologically, too, evolving such new traits as a tolerance for lactose as adults.)
(Source: http://www.organicconsumers.org/organic/010403_organic.cfm )
I believe those of us on this message board know it is not right to murder other sentient beings solely so we can taste their flesh nor is it right to exploit them for their secretions. For those of you who haven’t yet read his book, you can read the introduction and first page of the Omnivore’s Dilemma on Pollan’s website: http://www.michaelpollan.com/omnivore.php
|
| Loading... | |
Cider
Registered: 02/07/08
Posts: 130
|
| | 04/15/08 at 09:02 PM | Reply with quote | #10 |
|
I just finished reading Omnivore's Dilemna this weekend. And I have to say I really enjoyed it. There were parts that made me cringe and other parts such as when he explained pig tail docking that really upset me. (I had heard it before but each time I come across a description of the practice my heart just kind of sinks to my shoes.) It was also filled with things I was stunned to discover I don't know and I think of myself as someone who spends a lot of time thinking and reading about food. As an example the scientist who discovered how to make synethic nitrogen but then used some of that research aid the Nazis. Also the whole section on mushrooms and Andrew Weil's idea that perhaps they derive some of their energy from the moon!
On the one hand I think the book is about so much that the way Pollan structures it into three food chains, three meals, etc. is really great writing. On the other hand I think that structure maybe constrains him and the book. It also seems like the book is trying to be so many kinds of books. It's part memoir, part food writing, part journalism, and part academic writing. As a memoir it sort of reminds me of Eat Love Pray (again structured into three parts) and like Eat, Pray, Love or any memoir, the degree to which you enjoy it is highly dependent upon whether you decide to like the author. Also like Elizabeth Gilbert does in Eat, Pray, Love, Pollan brilliantly anticipates your reactions then intervenes to say "now you might be thinking this" but...like when he is describing the hunt and then goes oh my god I sound like another hunter porn writer.
I think it is sort of ironic that one of his arguments for ethical meat eating is the idea of thinking about the individual animal as opposed to the species but he devotes nearly the entire conclusion of his book to him the person rather than to people, the society. I was trying to explain his meat eating (which I think is really the weakest part of the book - I think the strongest part is his explanation of corn and how industrial models and free market capitalism don't neccessarily work with food production) arguments and mentioned the whole morality is a human construct and perhaps folly to apply to nature line. And my husband came back with "I'm not applying my morality to nature, I'm applying my morality to myself." (I just love my husband.)
Anyway those were a few of my rambling thoughts on the book. If anyone is interested Joel Salatin the farmer who he visits in Virginia can be heard speaking on the deconstructing dinner episode "Bioneers I." Also slate magazine produces an audio bookclub podcast and they discuss Omnivore's Dilemna in one of their episodes that is worth a listen. (I listen to podcasts at work since I do something that's detail-oriented but boring and work mostly by myself.)
|
| Loading... | |
cmurphy
Registered: 07/25/10
Posts: 1
|
| | 07/26/10 at 03:36 PM | Reply with quote | #11 |
|
I read this book a few years ago and actually really liked it. I know that people who were vegan when it came out and saw it get so much acclaim were understandably frustrated. I was not vegan. After reading it I tried to go to the farmer's market and get very expensive grass fed meat. Once you do this for a while you realize that everytime you buy meat you are thinking about the animals and whether or not they had a life that wasn't too cruel. You are no longer forgetting where that flesh came from. Michael Pollan continuously tries to make it clear that people would eat a lot less meat (which is what he wants), especially in interviews and such. But people don't or can't focus on that. They hear oh so its ok to eat meat and never learn how to make a single vegetarian meal. Anyway, it really led me down the path of thinking about where my food comes from and I think had a major role in my becoming vegan.
|
| Loading... | |
maryveggie
Registered: 09/03/10
Posts: 5
|
| | 09/03/10 at 09:14 AM | Reply with quote | #12 |
|
I also enjoyed this book even though I obviously couldn't agree with the chicken killing. I think, however, it is an important book for vegans to read in general for its information and for its insight into the mind of meat-eater who is also trying to be a more conscious eater. I could sympathize with Pollan for admitting that he likes meat, but dealing with his guilt. I see this in very very few meat eaters, so it was helpful to see him grapple with it publicly.
Now, the fun part comes when you do speak to a meat-eater who uses his book to justify eating meat!
So now you could ask, "So how is that going for you? Where are you buying your meat?" Uh....
"So I guess you don't buy much processed food any more, do you?" Um...
My favorite:
"So you don't go out to eat much any more, do you?" or "So you order vegan at restaurants, right?" Well....
I certainly haven't met any "happy meat" believers that can answer any of those questions with confidence because they just don't always think their behaviors through all the way down to the sandwiches they order at delis or chicken fingers they order at Applebees in which no doubt there are factory farmed animals. That's when they realize their behaviors do not match their supposed new found consciousness.
Then you could kindly remind the person that Pollan's message was indeed to eat much less meat, and only from the sources he features in his book, thus making that kind of meal few and far between and never available at a restaurant (unless it's a specialized place).
|
| Loading... | |
