The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals

by Michael Pollan Copywrite 2006
Penguin Books

I am, what they called in the old days (my childhood) a "picky eater". Maybe they still call children that if the child has the termidity to ask, when confronted with a plate of food, "what is this stuff?"

Canned vegetables, lunch meat, Wonder bread, orange juice from concentrate, fish sticks, chocolate milk.....

All that was on the menu when I was a kid, as were small amounts of coca-cola and occassional trips to McDonalds. Yet, my childhood was filled with a LOT more fresh and minimally processed foods than most of my friends'. My Dad put in a garden every year and it produced a lot of food for us. Fresh tomatos, green beans (pick 'em when they're young or you'll know why they're called "string beans!!) lettuce, carrots, radishes, strawberries, white corn, squash, sunflower seeds. Peaches, apples, and pears from trees on or near our property over in the Land That Time Forgot (it had once been an orchard) He even went to Bullocks and bought half a steer each year, seeing the inherent wisdom in buying locally. When I was a teenager I used to can, freeze, and preserve all kinds of stuff without ever batting an eye, let alone carefully consulting the "Ball Blue Book" the way I do now. I'd seen a freshly killed chicken running around without a head. And I still ate chicken. Just not that night.

I knew where my food came from.

But, as The Omnivore's Dilemma makes so clear, fewer and fewer people do these days.

"How did we ever get a point where we need investigative journalists to tell us where our food comes from and nutritionists to determine the dinner menu?" Pollan asks in his introduction, and it's a valid question.

Actually, the scope of the book is much larger. As creatures who can eat almost anything in a society where all manner of food is available at all hours of the night and day what SHOULD we eat? And how should we decide? On the basis of tradition? Should we go by what tastes good? Should we listen to the latest diet book?

Is what we eat, in any way, political? Should we be concerned if our choices cause suffering and economic hardship for our countrymen? Our fellow man? Should we be concerned about the suffering of animals? The rights of animals? Is it better to eat something organicly grown in Argentina then something that might have a had a little help from Cargill from the farm next door?

To somebody like me, who once stopped a whole table full of fellow 2nd graders from drinking the "orange drink" by simply reading out loud the list of ingredients from the carton (the ones I could pronounce) these are worthwhile questions.

Not everyone considers them worthwhile. This book is not for them. Nor is it for anybody who isn't ready to take a really frank look all of the consequences of their choices.

Still, this isn't heavy handed or preachy, at least, not in my opinion. This isn't one of those "we-have-to-all-eat-whole-grain-low-on-the-food-chain-or-we're-all-gonna-die" diatribes. In my opinion, Pollan's sense of humor remains intact as he describes such experiences as reading a book by a prominent proponent of animal rights while eating a steak dinner, working as a farm hand on a "beyond organic" farm, and hunting a wild pig "...Besides, you have to have had a certain kind of dad in order to join the the culture of hunting in America....and in his (father's) opinion hunting was something best left to the gentiles"

Not that the guy doesn't have any opinions. He does and these are made clear in well reasoned ways. They may not turn out to be your opinions though, and he give you plenty of facts and resources to make up your own mind.

If you're somebody for whom the question "what's for dinner?" involves more than just opening up whatever happens to be in the freezer, this is a good read. It'll give you all kinds of ideas that have to do with more than grocery shopping.