Why are Americans so quick to
proclaim their country the best? It is all too frequent to hear Americans refer
to their country as the “greatest in the world.” Xenophobic and racist
connotations aside, that phrase, along with a whole host of others (“land of
the free,” “the American dream,” “the land of opportunity”), are gross
misstatements, whose utterance continues despite mass dissatisfaction with the
status quo. The recent Occupy Movement has exposed the exclusivity of the
American dream and the disheartening remoteness of sustainable economic
opportunity for the majority of young Americans. Yet in one sense, America may
still reign supreme.
America
may no longer produce as many goods, possess the same caliber of public
education, or command the same diplomatic respect as other superpowers, but the
“great melting pot” (one hackneyed description whose accuracy is indisputable),
does contain the greatest offering of ethnic cuisines in the world. Chinatown, Little Tokyo, Little
Armenia, Little Haiti, Koreatown, Little Italy, Filipinotown, Little Saigon,
Mexican Town, Greektown, “Curry Hill,” Russian Hill, these are some of the
neighborhoods that have historically provided the most piquant and exotic
culinary delights in cities across the United States. The dishes of once distant cultures, along with their
diverse ingredients and tastes, now form a cornucopia of affordable and
high-end offerings, given further visibility by the Internet and television.
One need only consider the ubiquity of pizza (in all of its variations), lo
mein, or tacos to demonstrate the
globalization of cuisine. Moreover some of the most profitable fast-food chains
(Taco Bell, Yoshinori, Panda Express) and pre-made food producers are based on
American interpretations of “ethnic foods.”
An
oft-used proverb states that in order to tell where one is going, they must
know where they came from. The globalization of cuisine over the past 150 years
has undoubtedly expanded our taste buds and taught us much about disparate
cultures, yet at what cost? The constant mixing, re-inventing, and mass
reproducing of what were once local delicacies has no doubt produced fantastic
results, but it has also obscured the specific history of certain cuisines.
There is no denying the influence of haute cuisine and Italian cooking on
Western Culture, but while most Americans could probably tell you that pizza
came from Italy, could they also recognize its Neopolitan origins or appreciate
its traditional ingredients?
Culinary
globalization has also had profoundly negative environmental consequences.
Delicious curry, tantalizing mole sauce, and authentic gazpacho all require
ingredients from different climates, whose plastic packaging and global
transport pollute our ecosystems. Furthermore, demand for exotic foods has
changed the complexion of countless ecosystems. In order to maximize profits,
food growers are often forced to depend on monocultures, or else clear large
parcels of land to rear livestock, both of which compromise local biodiversity
and ultimately, the health of global ecosystems. Twentieth century capitalism’s
never-ending addiction to the “logic” of supply and demand contains little
space for environmental or cultural considerations, yet for all of its
destructiveness, it is impossible to unilaterally condemn globalization.
Instead, it exerts both positive and negative influences with varying
consequences (creating and destroying jobs, damaging the environment, giving rise
to new dishes and preparations, culinarily educating, refocusing on local
provisions etc.).
The local food movement of the past decade, although not
universally accessible, or even viable in colder, harsher climates is an
important alternative to a dependence on unsustainable food production. Local foods not only offer not a more
healthful and environmentally sound alternative, but can also retain financial
benefits within a smaller community, and thereby decrease dependence on
imported, mass-produced foods. Yet local food production, like most
cutting-edge trends, remains socially exclusive, and often more expensive than
non-local food. Writing
this from Los Angeles, California, a veritable Mecca of inexpensive ethnic
food, I am truly grateful for the diversity that has resulted from large-scale
immigration, itself a consequence of globalization. Having also worked at an
organic permaculture-style farm in Kona, Hawaii for the past three months, I
understand the importance of growing one’s own food and remain committed to
supporting local agriculture.
Mason and I building a garden bed
Something
as simple as eating, then, is made infinitely more complex by the variety of
options and consequences that arise from making gustatory decisions. Unlike Michael Pollan, however, I will
not advise you what to eat. I can
only relate my own experiences while working on a farm – growing and consuming
food 200 feet from my bed, without pesticides, fungicides, or insecticides, was
the best that I’ve physically felt and among the simplest, yet most delicious
food that I’ve tasted. I also realize that growing one’s own food is not always
possible, yet considering the myriad hazards posed by imported, unregulated,
and genetically-modified foods it will become crucial that we at least
understand how to do so while shifting our resources towards local food
production.
Kale, lettuce, taro, and our nursery in the mandala garden of Ginger Hill Farm
Really good article. Like the two viewpoints and the acknowledgement of the difficulties posed that prevent some from eating in the most desirable/environmentally friendly manner. Good pics too
ReplyDelete