Friday, February 20, 2015

Response to The Omnivore's Dilemma (up through page 140)

            No one likes to be shamed by their eating habits and what they consume. We’ve all heard the stories about junk food, and we all choose to ignore them because the people who are supplying those stories are usually health nuts who claim they haven’t touched a McNugget (corn) in thirty years. Michael Pollan is not one of those people, which is why I believe The Omnivore’s Dilemma is so successful.
            True, I am only halfway through the book. However, Pollan writes in a comfortable, non-scolding tone that makes you want to listen. I find that Pollan is relatable and he seems to struggle with the decision of “What’s for dinner?” just as much as the next person. Pollan’s relationship with the reader is strengthened by the fact that he himself ate fast food all of the time as a child, and he even took his own son, Isaac, to McDonalds. This way, it seems like Pollan is sharing his explorations with us rather than shaming us for our love of soda (corn.) Pollan even admitted that his trip to the CAFO was not enough to make him want to quit meat altogether, a fact which I find believable and comforting. He is not trying to use scare tactics to teach us about our food—rather he is sharing a personal journey, which is understandable as well as informative. The many experts and farmers that Pollan visits also make the reader more comfortable with listening to Pollan’s finds. It is not just one man spewing off his beliefs about nutrition and corn, but rather a group of people in the food/agriculture industry that have their own experiences and knowledge. The reader is not being asked to conform to one man’s opinions.

            While writing an informational book, I think it is important to write like Pollan does. If an author is truly passionate about spreading a message, they cannot shame the reader into believing it.  I’ll admit, I was scared to read The Omnivore’s Dilemma, expecting the usual diatribe about the poison I am ingesting every day. But I was pleasantly surprised. Pollan makes me want to listen, and has no expectations of the reader quitting fast food (corn) forever. He understands the struggle and does not pretend that he has conquered it.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I definitely share your feelings toward Pollan's writing style. He is informative but non-confrontational. The book, like you said, does feel like a journey that we're taking with him rather than lecture.

However, while Pollan is not writing a textbook (which we would hope to be as impartial as possible) maybe the book could benefit from exploring these food chains from the government perspective a bit more. While he occasionally does discuss the government policies that lead to the complexities of the various food chains I feel that some first-hand accounts from the individuals involved with making those decisions would be quite eye-opening. Some of my favorite passages in the text are the first-hand accounts from people like George Naylor and Joel Salatin. Perhaps hearing from their government counterparts would be equally as informative and entertaining.

Anonymous said...

I think both Michelle and Andrew make good points. I agree with both of you about Pollan's writing style. To me I feel that he writes a journal like book about the food industry sharing both personal accounts and well researched data and statistics.

I also think along the same lines of Andrew. Will Pollan talk to political lobbyist or lawmakers about the laws and regulations being passed upon the food industry? I enjoy reading the first hand accounts from the famers, but I also want more or to see that he is attempting to get some information from people other than the famers. I want to hear the opinions of Washington lobbyists or Monsanto representatives to see what the business end of agriculture thinks of what they are contributing or not contributing to the industry.
I hope he does, but if he doesn't the question I then would ask is did he try and lobbyists and representatives refused or did he choose to withhold information to prove his point. I hope the latter isn't true, but you can never really know.