| The Omnivore’s Dilemma | |
|---|---|
| Author(s) | Michael Pollan |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | The Penguin Press |
| Publication date | 2006 |
| ISBN | 978-1594200823 |
| OCLC Number | 62290639 |
| Dewey Decimal | 394.1/2 22 |
| LC Classification | GT2850 .P65 2006 |
| Preceded by | The Botany of Desire |
| Followed by | In Defense of Food |
The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals is a nonfiction book by Michael Pollan published in 2006. In the book, Pollan asks the seemingly straightforward question of what we should have for dinner. As omnivores, the most unselective eaters, we humans are faced with a wide variety of food choices, resulting in a dilemma. To learn more out about those choices, Pollan follows each of the food chains that sustain us; industrial food, organic food, and food we forage ourselves; from the source to a final meal, and in the process writes an account of the American way of eating.
Contents |
Pollan begins with an exploration of the food-production system from which the vast majority of American meals are derived. This industrial food chain is largely based on corn, whether it is eaten directly, fed to livestock, or processed into chemicals such as glucose, often in the form of high-fructose corn syrup, and ethanol. Pollan discusses how the corn plant came to dominate the American diet through a combination of biological, cultural, and political factors. He visits George Naylor's corn farm in Iowa to learn more about those factors. He mentions the fact that human cultivation of corn has greatly benefited the plant, and that corn has come to depend on humans for its survival. He explains that the "cob and husk arrangement... renders the plant utterly dependent for its survival on an animal in possession of the opposable thumb needed to remove the husk, separate the seeds, and plant them" (26-27). [1] The role of petroleum in the cultivation and transportation of the American food supply is also discussed.
A fast food meal is used to illustrate the end result of the industrial food chain. Pollan is highly critical of the industrial model of agriculture. He describes how scientific innovations such as the creation of the Haber process to fix nitrogen allowed a widespread simplification of agriculture. He argues that at one time, farmers applied a cultural knowledge to the growth of plants, but that this "intelligence and local knowledge" (220) [1] has since been removed from their farms and put into the laboratory. He believes that this is a negative development, and that a return to localized agriculture would solve many of the health and environmental problems that have resulted from modern agricultural practices.
In addition to visiting Naylor's corn farm in Iowa, Pollan spends time in a feedlot, observing the conditions in which a steer is kept prior to slaughter. He explains that the steer is fed a corn-based diet, which has a detrimental affect on an animal designed to consume grass. Pollan claims that this unnatural diet detracts from the nutritional value of the meat produced from the steer, not to mention the quality of life of the animal. Additionally, Pollan explains that the excessive use of antibiotics in these feedlots has led to mad-cow disease and drug resistant microbes, neither of which would have become issues if cows were allowed to live under more natural conditions (78). [1]
The following section delves into the principles of organic farming and their various implementations in modern America. Pollan shows that, while organic food has grown in popularity, its producers have adopted many of the methods of industrial agriculture, losing sight of the organic movement's anti-industrial roots. A meal prepared from ingredients purchased at Whole Foods Market represents this food chain at the table. In his discussion of the foods he purchases from Whole Foods Market, Pollan comments on the growing popularity of “supermarket pastoral” (134) literature. [1] He claims that people like to read about free range chickens and cattle grazing in idyllic pastures so that they feel better about purchasing meats.
As a study in contrast, Pollan visits Joel Salatin's minor ecological rotation farm, where natural conditions are adhered to as closely as possible, very few chemicals used, and waste products are recycled back into the system. He then prepares a meal using only local produce from nearby small-scale farmers.
Pollan praises Joel Salatin’s farm, explaining that a system of “relationship marketing” in which customers personally know the farmer from whom they purchase their food will cause farmers to possess greater integrity and produce higher quality products (240). [1] He also speaks of a sense of nostalgia attached to the local farming ideal, quoting one of Salatin’s customers as saying, "'This is the chicken I remember from my childhood. It actually tastes like chicken'" (242). [1] He argues that Americans should attempt to return to a pre-industrial agricultural system based on local foods from family farms like Salatin’s. By promoting this local farming ideal, Pollan is carrying on the tradition of writers such as Wendell Berry.
The final section finds Pollan attempting to prepare a meal using only ingredients he has hunted, gathered, or grown himself. He recruits assistance from local foodies, who teach him to hunt feral pigs, gather wild mushrooms and search for abalone. He also makes a salad of greens from his own garden, bakes sourdough bread using wild yeast, and prepares a dessert from cherries picked in his neighborhood.
In the process of preparing a meal based on hunting and gathering, Pollan grapples with the question of whether or not he should become a vegetarian. He asks if morality, which is “an artifact of human culture devised to help humans negotiate human social relations” (325),[1] should be extended to animals. He ultimately concludes, "If our concern is for the health of nature – rather than, say, the internal consistency of our moral code or the condition of our souls – then eating animals may sometimes be the most ethical thing to do" (327). [1] Pollan justifies this assertion by pointing out that although killing an individual animal is obviously detrimental to that organism, it may be beneficial to the survival of its species as a whole. He explains that humans actually provide an important source of population control for many species, so the elimination of meat from all humans' diets could cause problems with overcrowding for these animals. He also claims that although it does not often happen within the current American meat industry, it is possible to treat an animal humanely and allow it to live a happy life prior to its slaughter.
Pollan concludes that the fast food meal and the hunter-gather meal are "equally unreal and equally unsustainable."[1] He believes that if we were once again aware of the source of our food – what it was, where it came from, how it traveled to reach us, and its true cost – we would see that we "eat by the grace of nature, not industry."[1]
Economist Tyler Cowen argued, "The problems with Pollan's 'self-financed' meal reflect the major shortcoming of the book: He focuses on what is before his eyes but neglects the macro perspective of the economist. He wants to make the costs of various foods transparent, but this is an unattainable ideal, given the interconnectedness of markets."[2]
Washington State University, situated in an agricultural area of Washington state, chose this book to be part of its freshman reading program in 2009, but soon canceled the program. Many in the university's community, including those who run the kinds of industrial farms that The Omnivore's Dilemma discusses, were unhappy with the selection, and speculation was that the cancellation was a result of political pressure. Elson Floyd, president of WSU, claimed instead that it was a budgetary issue, and when food safety expert Bill Marler stepped up to cover the claimed shortfall, the program was reinstated, and Pollan was invited to speak on campus.[3]
The September 2007 issue of The Atlantic included a review of The Omnivore's Dilemma by B.R. Myers. Myers was severely critical of Pollan's attitudes toward vegetarians and the animal rights movement, describing the work as "a record of the gourmet’s ongoing failure to think in moral terms."[4]
In the July 2009 edition of The American, the journal of the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, the article The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-intellectuals by Missouri farmer Blake Hurst critiqued Pollan's book on many points, contrasting his farming experience with Pollan's conclusions. Hurst argues that "some of the largest farms in the country are organic – and are giant organizations dependent upon lots of hired stoop labor." Hurst also points out the benefits of no-till agriculture and of industrially-produced food, including food from confined animal operations.[5]
The New York Times named The Omnivore’s Dilemma one of the ten best books of 2006.[6] and Pollan was also the recipient of a James Beard Award for the work.[7]
Official
Essays
Interviews
Reviews