Michael Pollan is a very brave man. In fact, anybody who has the courage to slaughter an animal must be brave - either that, or highly disturbed. In chapter twelve of "The Omnivore's Dilemma," though, Pollan describes the slaughtering process as "economic, ecological, political, ethical, and even spiritual." Who knew all of that was behind the slaughter scene?
Because Michael Pollan had already experienced every other part of the food production process first hand, he felt it necessary to personally kill a chicken for consumption. As he looked into the chicken's eyes, he did not see any signs of fear, and the death was quick and hopefully painless. Pollan notes that after slaughtering about a dozen chickens, the work began to feel almost mechanical - which is a scary thought. How could such an act become almost perfunctory so quickly? Nobody should have to kill animals on a daily basis - but doing it once in a while, or even just once, gives a sense of appreciation, respect, and knowledge.
In addition to describing the slaughter processes, Pollan also talks about the obstacles imposed by the USDA in regard to the "clean food movement." The USDA is so concerned about preventing the spread of illness and blood-borne pathogens that they squelch safe methods of production that allow for richer flavors. Very unfortunate. And even worse, this gives smaller farms a lot of trouble, preventing us as consumers from tasting richer meat that hasn't been mass produced. Is this government involvement really necessary to ensure our safety? Despite USDA approval, can foods that are chemically enhanced for safety really be considered natural and fit for use?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You raise an important question about the appropriateness of the technological solutions that are in use--this is a recurring question in many aspects of the food system that we're covering this semester. As for the question of the government's role in food safety, it will be interesting to see others' response to this questions. Food safety is quite serious--it can literally be a life and death issue--yet people are wary of government involvement, often thinking it's either too much or not enough. Asking what the appropriate role is is an important question.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I thought I commented last week on your post about the Salvation Army, but I don't see it there so in case you didn't get it, I'm glad to see that you've been enjoying your involvement there! It sounds like a lot of fun! I'm still waiting to hear from them about getting other students involved there--hopefully that will work out for others as well.
And finally--I was glad to see your post about the NY Times op-ed from this week. Nice job bringing that into your discussion on the blog! I saw that earlier this week as well, and I'm planning on having the class debate the issues it raises when we discuss genetic engineering.