"If I ever saw her getting trashed on Old Crow, pistol-whipping a vegan after a bar crawl, I would think, 'That's an interesting woman. I would like to know her.'"
I agree that that one line is quite funny, but the rest of the article leaves a bad taste in my mouth, not even because I am veg. I think he is just speaking strictly for the shock value of the conversation, at least I hope. In his broad, sweeping statements, he manages to ignore some really important facts about the benefits of buying hormone-free, free-range, etc. He acts as if it can never happen because not everyone can afford it, but that's the problem, we need to create the demand so that it becomes mainstream and more affordable. I thought it was silly of him to imply that because there are other injustices in the world, ones involving humans, that we should simply give up and accept it as a fact of life. It's that kind of attitude that changes nothing and breeds complacency. Sorry, I know that it was a lighthearted post, but he really struck me as a butthead. :)
A lot of the commentors on Salon about this article were right with you on Bourdain's being insensitive, particularly about the crustacean comments. I like him because, like Jem, he's truly outrageous, and he'll eat anything. I think he's frankly unfair to Rachel Ray, although I do agree with him that Food Network is slipping by featuring more gimmicks and fewer cooking shows that emphasize technique.
Ultimately, like professional wrestling, I think he's primarily an entertainer, and so his opnions need to be filtered for the stuff he says to stir things up - like the quote above. He does have a point that decent food is really beyond the ability of most people to procure, but I'm with you that giving up is a really bad idea. All this said, I do think it's a great line.
2 comments:
I agree that that one line is quite funny, but the rest of the article leaves a bad taste in my mouth, not even because I am veg. I think he is just speaking strictly for the shock value of the conversation, at least I hope. In his broad, sweeping statements, he manages to ignore some really important facts about the benefits of buying hormone-free, free-range, etc. He acts as if it can never happen because not everyone can afford it, but that's the problem, we need to create the demand so that it becomes mainstream and more affordable. I thought it was silly of him to imply that because there are other injustices in the world, ones involving humans, that we should simply give up and accept it as a fact of life. It's that kind of attitude that changes nothing and breeds complacency.
Sorry, I know that it was a lighthearted post, but he really struck me as a butthead. :)
A lot of the commentors on Salon about this article were right with you on Bourdain's being insensitive, particularly about the crustacean comments. I like him because, like Jem, he's truly outrageous, and he'll eat anything. I think he's frankly unfair to Rachel Ray, although I do agree with him that Food Network is slipping by featuring more gimmicks and fewer cooking shows that emphasize technique.
Ultimately, like professional wrestling, I think he's primarily an entertainer, and so his opnions need to be filtered for the stuff he says to stir things up - like the quote above. He does have a point that decent food is really beyond the ability of most people to procure, but I'm with you that giving up is a really bad idea. All this said, I do think it's a great line.
Post a Comment