"The Roman writer Livy once warned that when society's chefs come to be regarded as consequential figures, it is a sure sign that society is well down the road to decadence," wrote Michael Pollan in The Omnivore's Dilemma.
On the other hand, chefs are responsible for new food trends, buying of all their restaurant's food, and can, in some cases, get politically involved. Barton, for instance, is planning to testify next month before the National Organic Standards Board, to oppose the idea of allowing farmed salmon to be labeled as organic.
Obviously, this is wonderful. Barton is not only a trendsetter, but a model citizen. Anyone's involvement in their industry and passion for their work is admirable. Across this nation, from Alice Waters of Berkeley's Chez Panisse to Molly Katzen of upstate New York's Moosewood, are chefs making a difference? And is Livy right? Where are we as a society if chefs have gained so much prestige?
Environment
Comments
Remember how Douglas Adams defined the stages of development of a civilization by the central question each stage's members have to answer:
How can we eat?
What shall we eat?
Where shall we have lunch?
Posted by: Ktesibios | December 4, 2007 2:41 PM
Every year as I watch Top Chef and other chef reality shows I cringe when the sea bass makes it onto the menus. I wish that the Food Network and Bravo would commit to endorsing sustainable fisheries choices, given the influence they're having on the celebrity chef culture.
Posted by: ~summer~ | December 4, 2007 7:40 PM
Great points. Ktesibios, I don't recall the Doug Adams definitions. Do you happen to know the specific reference? I'd love to read the whole section...
Posted by: Jennifer L. Jacquet | December 5, 2007 9:12 AM
According to wikiquote the quotes in question are from chapter 35 of HHGTTG and 20 of Restaurant at the End of the Universe
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/TheHitchhiker'sGuidetotheGalaxy#Chapter35
Posted by: tacticus | December 13, 2007 8:37 AM