Mark Bittman
The New York Times’ food columnist talks about food policy, learning to cook, and the connection between feminism and cooking.By Kay Steiger
May 26, 2009
Food columnist Mark Bittman. (Photo courtesy markbittman.com)Mark Bittman thought a lot before he wrote the words “eat less meat.” After careful consideration he realized that if we can reduce the amount of meat we eat in this country, even by a little, we all might be better off. This is the premise behind his latest cookbook, Food Matters, and often a central component of his Minimalist columns in The New York Times. Bittman is part of a handful of food writers, alongside Omnivore’s Dilemma author Michael Pollan and some other well-known chefs, who are starting to realize that the choices we make about food, both on an individual and policy level, have a significant impact on the kind of world we live in. Campus Progress caught up with Bittman when he came to the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C. last week for a discussion with local chef José Andrés. He talked about choosing food policies carefully, learning to cook right after college, and, weirdly enough, feminism.
Campus Progress: We’re starting to pay attention to food policy. You clearly have an impact in that debate, as does Michael Pollan and some other chefs like Andrés. Where do you think those voices fit into the public policy debate around food?
Mark Bittman: I think I could say … I have ideas. Some of them are original; most of them probably are not. I thought a lot before saying eat less meat. That’s very simple. It’s easy advice. How does that happen on a policy level? I’m not quite sure. What I do know is that you don’t get every policy change that you want. So let’s make sure we ask for the right stuff and let’s make sure—to the extent that we can be—we’re unified on this and push for it. So until I know what that is—and I don’t, I’m not holding out—I don’t want to say it.
A lot of us on the Internet Food Association started cooking either during college or immediately after college—
Me too.
Do you think that’s the right time to learn how to cook?
Well I think the right time to start learning how to cook is with your parents. I’m happy to say that my kids did that. Look, it’s not that hard. I think the younger the better. I think the ideal situation would be if 50 percent of the population knew how to cook. It used to be you could assume that all women would know how to cook and there was your 50 percent of the population. Now we agree that’s wrong and that’s not going to happen. So that means that some percentage of people needs to learn how to cook, 40 percent, 50 percent, 60 percent … Some people can ignore it if they want to. Most people should know how to cook. How that happens I don’t think matters so much. … It starts with valuing decent cooking.
If you pick up any decent basic cookbook at any age and you pay some attention you’re going to learn how to cook. Whether you’re going become the kind of cook that can go to the refrigerator, open it up and say, “Okay, here’s what I have. I’m going to make this,” or you’re always the kind of cook that says, “What should I have for dinner? I’ll find a recipe. I’ll go buy the ingredients. I’ll make sure I have them…” There are levels between those two things. The second one is a beginning cook… There’s nothing wrong with that. If you cook long enough you’re going to get past that stage, though.
For a long time, I resisted this notion that I should cook because as a feminist blogger and writer I resented the idea that as a woman I’m expected to cook.
I think it’s an unfortunate circumstance; it’s a perfectly understandable circumstance, but I think that’s why in the sixties, seventies, eighties, and well into the nineties food had a problem in this country because women—quite correctly—resented being put in that position. … But maybe in the long run, it’s better. … [Hopefully] you’ll wind up with a partner that either wants to cook or agrees that you’ll cook when you feel like it. That’s the status now and I know where you’re coming from, but you’re not going to not cook either because you like it.
Part of the reason food went downhill in this country, the biggest reason, was this marketing assault on the part of convenience food manufacturers that said, “Well, food needs to be convenient.” But why did people want to hear that? Women wanted to hear that because they were sick and tired of making dinner every night while raising the kids and, increasingly from the seventies on, having jobs. So they wanted to hear, “Oh, you don’t have to work so hard. You can put something in the microwave.” It’s too bad, it’s shit, but that’s the way it goes. But now we have—you know, maybe it’s just my kids—but we have this generation of people who say, “I want to cook. I want decent food and I’m not going to get it if I don’t cook.” Everybody knows you can’t afford to eat out all the time.
You talk about making these small and simple decisions to make the world a better place, food-wise, but there are also many decisions that are ever made before you get to the supermarket—if you can get there. Is that something we can work on in addition to these individual decisions?
Well, it’s a policy question. Look, I went to college in Massachusetts in the late sixties and early seventies. You used to go to supermarkets and really see bad food. You have no idea. Every vegetable was wrapped in Saran Wrap and it all looked weeks old. The broccoli was yellow when you bought it. I go around the country—I go to Vermont a lot because my father-in-law lives there; I go to Cape Cod a lot because I have a little place there. I shop in bad supermarkets in New York because I can’t always get to the good places. I travel around the country and around the world and I just don’t see that it’s that bad. I don’t see that it’s ideal, but every time I go into a supermarket I find stuff I can buy. They’re no better or worse in California than they are here. The mass distribution system does not favor California particularly. The stuff there looks the same as in New York. It’s like, odd, but it’s true.
So you’re saying that we just need to think a little bit more carefully about food?
Look, we can make individual changes very easily. The broccoli and the lettuce and even the tomatoes, are good enough to eat. Can we agree? If there are people that think they’re not good enough to eat, then that’s fine. People can go to farmers’ markets and get the best possible stuff but that is … I think that largely they’re good enough to eat. They’re not ideal. I’m not saying they’re ideal but they’re pretty inexpensive, and they’re generally fresh enough to eat and they’re generally not so laden with pesticides and stuff that they’re poison. That’s not the best place to be but it’s an okay starting place.
Right now [Secretary of Agriculture Tom] Vilsack and those guys are very busy. They’re just getting their feet wet. They’re getting bombarded by requests. There are clearly going to be two camps in this country. There’s going to be the camp that supports industrial agriculture and the camp that would like to see industrial agriculture change. I know which side I’m on; I just don’t know what I want to say about it, right now, out loud, in a policy-oriented way.
Kay Steiger is an associate editor at Campus Progress.
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments