Blog #3

Is a “Foodie” Really a Foodie?

Oxford Dictionary defines a “foodie” as someone with a particular interest in food, or a gourmet. I disagree. A “foodie” deserves the respectability of being someone of much greater esteem instead of someone with merely an interest in food. No, a foodie is much more extreme. A foodie has a passion, a love for the idea of creating and being a part of something that is second nature, like breathing or eating. Within the work of a true foodie, we see not an interest, but an enthusiastic excitement and devotion to the idea of cuisine. For the past several decades Americans have been entertained and educated by several of these foodies, who have dedicated themselves to developing and establishing a reputation for quality cooking. However, in comparison with today’s cooking television shows, the idea for many is not to demonstrate cooking talent and fervently delve into the magic of what one can do with food. I believe we have accepted the Oxford definition based on what we have been accustomed to viewing and reading on food. When comparing what was considered a “foodie” forty years ago, with what is considered one this day in time, it is clear that foodie culture has changed although still appealing to the same audience.

I like food. I like baking in the hot and steamy kitchen with my mother during the holidays. More than that, I love eating this food. But I am not a “foodie”. My cousin can gourd himself at buffets. My sister has the biggest sweet tooth for chocolate I have ever seen. But neither of them are “foodies”. Yes, each of us have a particular interest in food, as the traditional definition states, but having our own interest in food does not separate us from the billions of people who also possess this interest. What about your grandmother who enjoys making homemade bread, or your dad who is a whiz at the grill? This interest is neither extraordinary nor uncommon. What is uncommon is someone who can prepare a lobster several different ways. What is extraordinary is someone who can make hundreds of meals without using a cookbook and be knowledgeable about each and every topic. This is a perfect illustration of a genuine love and passion and talent for cookery. This is someone like Julia Child. Julia Child was popular mostly during the 1960s and 1970s. She inspired women across America to not see cooking as a chore, but more of an entertainment avenue. She taught people to bring the joy and art of cooking to the table every day of the year and not just on holidays. Julia Child changed the way people, particularly stay at home mothers, looked at food. She brought an art to cooking by challenging viewers or cookbook readers to not just cook meat and potatoes, but to take it a higher level. Julia Child was the first modernizer of the kitchen, as she was on the forefront on showing substitute for foods, the value of the dollar, and the importance of a good, nutritious meal. Julia Child was an inspiration nationwide. Julia Child is a true foodie.

When looking at one of the few television shows available from forty years ago, one could find a weekly Julia Child episode. As the screen rolls, Child demonstrates her ability to cook a variety of different items in various ways. Not only does her talent outshine the average cooks, but her exuberance and excitement in the kitchen is so evident, that it is easy to tell she loves what she does, as opposed to the majority of others who cook as a job. Cooking these days has become more of an idea of entertainment and business than it has for the pure joy of the art of cooking.

“Old time” cooking shows had not been around long enough for it to be a mediocre idea. It was new. It was fresh. People loved it! However, it was not only the viewers who enjoyed what little television they saw, but the advantage was taken by many to teach and inspire. When Julia Child stepped into that kitchen, her excitement to share miniscule information is one of many ways in which the viewers witnessed a unique passion for food. Today we find various scripted cooking shows with story plots and others who may be non-scripted but literally only made famous because of marketing, such as Rachel Rae who appeared on Oprah. When watching food networks it is interesting to see that the majority of chefs have specialties and strong limitations to what they can make in different ways and with different ingredients.

One of the popular chefs on the Food Network is Sandra Lee Christianson. Sandra Lee appears weekly on the Food Network in which she not only demonstrates an authentic cooking ability, but even decorates the dining area with the theme of the meal. Sandra Lee has also, like many others, written several books on “semi-homemade meals” and “20 Minute Meals”. Upon watching a couple of episodes of Sandra Lee, it appears as if she is not ultimately trying to teach people, specifically working mothers or even stay at home parents, how to cook natural and nutritious meals for the family. She neither appears to encourage or inspire viewers to find the art of cooking but instead to find a quick fix that will satisfy both taste and nutrition. She has even been critiqued for this. Amanda Hesser in The New York Times writes, Lee "...seems more intent on encouraging people to create excuses for not cooking than on encouraging them to cook wholesome simple foods," and then concluding that "...she [Lee] has produced two books in which she encourages a dislike for cooking, and gives people an excuse for feeding themselves and their families mediocre food filled with preservatives." Sandra Lee without a doubt has a particular interest in food, but does she exemplify a “foodie”?

When watching someone such as Julia Child and then watching someone like Sandra Lee for instance, it is evident that there is something more, something stronger within Child. Is it the fact that she worked as a passionate chef long before she appeared on television? Is it the fact that she has written several books on cooking recipes? Maybe it is not that today’s chefs do not have a love for the food, but this love tends to be clouded by the desire to be a star, or become famous. Money and business motivate so much of what Americans do. It is has almost even become a fad now to be involved with cooking. The media has influenced, promoted, and marketed so many people. This strategy has allowed many to make others believe that they are a chef. People are making careers out of this glamorization. Not to put every modern day chef into the same category, but there are so many who are in this profession for the money and publicity, not for the love. Are these “foodies” to be placed in the same category as one like Julia Child? I did not think so, either. However, if this is so, the Oxford dictionary must also be redefining passion from a compelling desire to a positive feeling.

In acknowledgement to the other section of Oxford Dictionary’s definition of “foodie”, “a gourmet”, a gourmet is an epicure of refined taste who may or may not be a professional chef in the food industry. Foodies on the other hand are amateurs who simply love food for consumption, study, preparation, and news. Gourmets simply want to eat the best food, whereas foodies want to learn everything about food, both the best and the ordinary, and about the science, industry, and personalities surrounding food. For this reason, foodies are sometimes viewed as obsessively interested in all things culinary. This is the definition of a foodie and gourmet given by Nicole Weston in her article “What is a Foodie Anyway?”. As Weston establishes what a foodie is, the question then arises yet again, if this is how you depict a foodie, then, are our chefs today accurate illustrations? Do today’s chefs really strive to know everything about food, “both the best and the ordinary”? And if a foodie really is a gourmet, as Oxford claims, well then are we not all foodies? Do we not all want to eat the best food? We may all, in this sense, be gourmets but we are definitely not all foodies. Few people today are.

So, what has brought about this diminished sense of “foodie” culture? Foodie Culture began a long time ago when people became fascinated with the idea of being creative and knowledgeable with food. This happened long before the age of television, even cookbooks. Cookbooks soon became a way of expressing this love and exuberance for cookery. Then came some of the more popular and recorded foodies that still make an impact today, such as Julia Child. Child exemplified the idea of a foodie lifestyle. To her, it was a calling. She wrote several books and developed many ideas that not only contributed to the library of cooking resources we have today, but also inspired women to love the art of cookery. Child appealed to a variety of audiences, from stay at home mothers to working parents to those entertaining for a party. Her works, including television and written books, are a testament that she was one “who simply loves food for consumption, study, preparation, and news.” She knew “both the best and the ordinary” foods for all economic statuses.

Forty years allows for a lot of time for social, economic, and technological developments. This kind of foodie today may seem extreme. Society has been modernized and conditioned to the point where our values and standards have lessened, concerning what we accept as suitable and excellent. Americans today have this mindset that In the 1960s someone like Sandra Lee would never have been put in the same league as Julia Child. Child appealed to the average family of that time. She helped them seek the joy in the art of cooking with effective meal plan, all the while making their family life more enjoyable. She was the Martha Stewart of today. This day in time, the food gurus are appealing to the same audiences, and the socioeconomics of society really have not changed at all. The most targeted audiences of both then and now is still typically the middle class family, particularly the mother, or whoever may cook for the household. What is different are the social roles played by this caretaker. During the 1950s, ‘60s, and ‘70s, food experts like Child appealed to the middle class wives who were stay at home mothers. This day in time, women have sought more than this typical role in society and have gained success in their education and careers. Thus, society does not need a “foodie” like Julia Child because the stay at home parenting population has significantly decreased. Our standards for what is acceptable have fallen, as the typical family searches for those “quick fixes” for the table, hence all the popular “30 Minute Meals”, etc. There is not near the value placed on family togetherness and well put together meals as there was forty years ago.

Amanda Hesser’s critique on chef Sandra Lee “…seems more intent on encouraging people to create excuses for not cooking than on encouraging them to cook wholesome simple foods," and continuing to say that "...she [Lee] has produced two books in which she encourages a dislike for cooking, and gives people an excuse for feeding themselves and their families mediocre food filled with preservatives” seems even more appropriate. This is the way our social roles have developed over the years. What else can we expect out of our foodie culture? A passion and love for something may not be enough anymore to survive the economics of it all.