Raw Food Ridicule in The Oregonian

[Guest guest]

[This article ran simultaneously in the Oregonian's FoodDay with the

article previously posted. I'm hoping that people will write to the

Oregonian to express their feelings about this (any perhaps share

their letters with the group). Annette]

 

Anthony Bourdain turns up the heat on raw foodists and their fear of

good cooking

 

They call us " cooks. " And we — meaning everyone who's ever shaken a

pan in a professional kitchen — can trace our proud lineage to our

ape-like predecessors, clustered around a fire, searing hunks of

flesh over the flame. Through persistence and desperation, using the

knowledge passed down to us by those who came before, we turn tough,

unlovely bits of meat and scrap into beloved national dishes.

 

This thing of ours was always about transformation, about the

strategic application of heat to make what was available somehow

better. But some would have us believe that the flames around which

we've gathered do not make things better. They make them worse. Less

healthy. Less pure. More likely to cause " mucous " (a bad thing),

toxins, lowered enzymes — a generally diminished grooviness.

 

Advocates and practitioners of " raw food " eschew what's cooked for

what is still raw or " living. " Until recently, they've been viewed

as lunatic fringe, espousing a philosophy so extreme and ascetic as

to make ordinary vegans look like pleasure-seeking libertines.

 

One typical work on the subject, Victoria Boutenko's tellingly

titled " 12 Steps to Raw Foods (How to End Your Addiction to Cooked

Food), " assures us that " because cooked food does not have enzymes,

our body cannot use it. Therefore the body treats cooked food as a

toxin and is only concerned with getting rid of it. "

 

Who knew? I always thought my body treated food as a pleasure. She

later claims " our body never makes mistakes. We all know what we

need if we listen to our body. "

 

I can only imagine that if I hear my body calling for a

cheeseburger, signals have somehow been crossed. (Apparently what it

really wants is a Boutenko patty of ground and processed nuts,

carrots, onion, yeast, and banana — thickened with dried herb,

yeast, psyllium husk powder, and ground flaxseeds.)

 

A buffet for the SLA

Fortunately for most, the literature on raw foods has, until

recently, provided unpersuasive visuals: The cover photo of

Boutenko's manifesto displays a truly hideous spread of such

unappetizing, clumsy butt-ugliness as to frighten away any but the

most fervently devoted — as if some `50s era Betty Crocker got

titanically drunk and decided to lay out a buffet for the Symbionese

Liberation Army.

 

Unfortunately, things have changed. Raw food has gone legit.

 

In a startling and ominous development, a few top chefs have

conspired to present raw foods so fiendishly styled and manipulated

as to mimic real food.

 

With the skill and craftsmanship of jewelers — and the guile of a

Hollywood set designer, they have managed to move what was once

rabbit chow from the chicken wire-enclosed pen to the hushed dining

rooms of some of our best restaurants.

 

Last year, Charlie Trotter — a celebrated Chicago chef and the

author of some truly groundbreaking and beautiful cookbooks —

collaborated with Roxanne Klein on " Raw, " a real " cookbook " in which

absolutely nothing is cooked. Klein is a veteran of many fine

kitchens, the chef/owner of Roxanne's in Larkspur, Calif., and

perhaps, the leading innovator and proponent of " raw food. "

 

A poke in the eye

The book is imaginative, pretty to look at and (largely because of

Trotter's pre-eminence), a direct poke in the eye to the entire

culinary profession. It represents a radical (yet aesthetically

compelling) abrogation of the basic principal that " cooks "

presumably cook.

 

Trotter has served a vegetable-tasting menu for some time. Noticing

that most restaurants tended to cobble together a plate of side

dishes when confronted with vegetarian customers, he raised the bar.

Though he surely knew that many of his offerings would taste a lot

better tossed in duck fat, or married to a thick slab of bacon.

 

In his introduction to " Raw, " he makes a careful distinction between

the roles of chef/seeker and that of advocate for some health-

conscious agrarian future. He seems to be saying that raw food can

be a cool thing — but it's not necessarily the only thing. One gets

the impression he is attracted more to the challenge than any

underlying philosophy.

 

Klein, commendably, urges similar caution, saying, " I think it's

presumptuous for anyone to tell others how they should live their

lives. "

 

Nice words. Nice book. Without question, an answered prayer for

anyone whom religion or personal circumstances has pushed into

veganism.

 

My prejudices against vegetarianism and veganism are well-known and

deeply held — but looking at the gorgeous pictures, I thought surely

any exploration of ways to make food — any food — better is a

positive thing. As intellectual exercise, as gastronomy, as " another

path, " this weird corner of the culinary spectrum might — I thought —

be as worthy of respect as any other.

 

An inspiring moment?

Then I read the opening anecdote of Klein's introduction, an account

of the inspiring moment, the chrysalis of her later immersion into

the mysteries of raw food. She describes a fateful meting in

Thailand with former " Cheers " star and hemp-activist Woody Harrelson.

 

" Every evening our group would sit down to a fantastic feast of Thai

vegetarian curries, noodles, and rice dishes. Woody, however, would

always order a bowl of fruit or a green papaya salad. We tried to

get him to sample the wonderful cooked dishes we were eating, but he

always declined. After more prodding, he explained why he maintained

a diet of raw fruits and vegetables. Michael (Klein's husband) and I

found the philosophy interesting and decided to delve more deeply

into it. "

 

This story is horrifying on so many levels that my enzyme-starved,

toxic-laden, mucous-clogged body shook when I read it.

 

First of all, why would anyone listen to Woody Harrelson about

anything more important than how to be a working Hollywood actor (OK

maybe not that — haven't seen much of Woody lately), or how to make

a bong out of a toilet paper roll and tin foil?

 

And who would listen to anyone who can visit Thailand — a country

with one of the most vibrant, exciting culinary cultures on the

planet (including a rich tradition of tasty vegetarian fare) — and

refuse to sample its bounty? What kind of cramped, arrogant world

view could excuse shutting oneself off totally from the greater part

of an ancient and beautiful culture?

 

It's bad enough when you bump into a curmudgeonly fellow countryman

while on vacation in a foreign land. But to bring his Tao home with

you is another thing. Especially when said curmudgeon's world view

had been shaped in that crossroads of enlightenment — Hollywood.

 

" Raw " is a quantum leap in the realm of what's possible with fruits

and vegetables. But by offering comfort, sustenance and

encouragement to Harrelson and would-be Woodys everywhere, Trotter

and Klein have opened a Pandora's box of fissionable material.

 

At a time in history when Americans, to a greater and greater

extent, have reasons to turn away from this fabulously diverse and

marvelous planet and the millions of proud cooks who live on it — at

a time when people are afraid — of just about everything — the

authors have made willful avoidance and abstinence an ever-more

attractive option.

 

I admire their skills. I really do.

 

But I fear for the planet.

 

 

(Anthony Bourdain is author of " Kitchen Confidential " and " A Cook's

Tour. " )

[Guest guest]

While I respect that different people have different tastes and that one

person's favourite food will not appeal to every other person, the

author of this article is obviously taking nothing but his own opinions

into play when he writes this article. He has included no scientific or

logical evidence to reference his points. I think article should not be

taken with anything more than a grain of salt.

 

It is good, however, to see what other peoples' opinions are on this

subject. Thanks for posting.

 

Graham

 

 

 

> A buffet for the SLA

> Fortunately for most, the literature on raw foods has, until

> recently, provided unpersuasive visuals: The cover photo of

> Boutenko's manifesto displays a truly hideous spread of such

> unappetizing, clumsy butt-ugliness as to frighten away any but the

> most fervently devoted - as if some `50s era Betty Crocker got

> titanically drunk and decided to lay out a buffet for the Symbionese

> Liberation Army.

[Guest guest]

Annette,

 

Do you have the actual date and title of the article? I cannot find

it online. A search turns up nothing. Was it from 3/16/04???

 

Below are some details of contacts at the Oregonian. It is helpful to

have the details of the article when sending comments regarding an

article.

 

Thanks for forwarding the article. It was certainly interesting. I

realize that some people in that industry may be defensive regarding

raw foods, as it could threaten their livelyhood in the long run (as

well as threatening people's own lifestyle.) Hopefully, readers of

such articles will recognize the bias found in their text.

 

Jeff

 

 

PUBLIC EDITOR

Do you have a comment about fairness, accuracy or other issues in

news coverage or editorial pages of The Oregonian? Contact the public

editor, Michael Arrieta-Walden, at 503-221-8221 or toll-free from

outside the 503 area code at 1-877-238-8221, by fax at 503-412-7060

or send an e-mail to publiceditor.

 

 

Giselle Williams, letters, 503-221-8150, fax 503-294-4193,

letters. Doug Bates , daily op-ed page,

503-221-8174, fax 503-294-4179, oped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Good afternoon,

I'd recommend that replies be positive. I took a friend to Everlasting Life

when I was in DC last week and after visiting with the server and tasting the

food he was excited about trying more.

 

Maybe " Come try it with us " would be a good way to start. He certainly doesn't

give any reason other than prejudice for ridiculing raw food. In Bill Cosby's

new book he makes the important point that on the (Standard American Diet) SAD

we choose foods for what they do for our brain and our taste buds, but neglect

how any other part of the body feels about them.

 

Nick

>

> cloudriver

> 2004/03/22 Mon AM 11:05:26 CST

> RawSeattle

> [RawSeattle] Raw Food Ridicule in The Oregonian

>

> [This article ran simultaneously in the Oregonian's FoodDay with the

> article previously posted. I'm hoping that people will write to the

> Oregonian to express their feelings about this (any perhaps share

> their letters with the group). Annette]

>

> Anthony Bourdain turns up the heat on raw foodists and their fear of

> good cooking

>

> They call us " cooks. " And we — meaning everyone who's ever shaken a

> pan in a professional kitchen — can trace our proud lineage to our

> ape-like predecessors, clustered around a fire, searing hunks of

> flesh over the flame. Through persistence and desperation, using the

> knowledge passed down to us by those who came before, we turn tough,

> unlovely bits of meat and scrap into beloved national dishes.

>

> This thing of ours was always about transformation, about the

> strategic application of heat to make what was available somehow

> better. But some would have us believe that the flames around which

> we've gathered do not make things better. They make them worse. Less

> healthy. Less pure. More likely to cause " mucous " (a bad thing),

> toxins, lowered enzymes — a generally diminished grooviness.

>

> Advocates and practitioners of " raw food " eschew what's cooked for

> what is still raw or " living. " Until recently, they've been viewed

> as lunatic fringe, espousing a philosophy so extreme and ascetic as

> to make ordinary vegans look like pleasure-seeking libertines.

>

> One typical work on the subject, Victoria Boutenko's tellingly

> titled " 12 Steps to Raw Foods (How to End Your Addiction to Cooked

> Food), " assures us that " because cooked food does not have enzymes,

> our body cannot use it. Therefore the body treats cooked food as a

> toxin and is only concerned with getting rid of it. "

>

> Who knew? I always thought my body treated food as a pleasure. She

> later claims " our body never makes mistakes. We all know what we

> need if we listen to our body. "

>

> I can only imagine that if I hear my body calling for a

> cheeseburger, signals have somehow been crossed. (Apparently what it

> really wants is a Boutenko patty of ground and processed nuts,

> carrots, onion, yeast, and banana — thickened with dried herb,

> yeast, psyllium husk powder, and ground flaxseeds.)

>

> A buffet for the SLA

> Fortunately for most, the literature on raw foods has, until

> recently, provided unpersuasive visuals: The cover photo of

> Boutenko's manifesto displays a truly hideous spread of such

> unappetizing, clumsy butt-ugliness as to frighten away any but the

> most fervently devoted — as if some `50s era Betty Crocker got

> titanically drunk and decided to lay out a buffet for the Symbionese

> Liberation Army.

>

> Unfortunately, things have changed. Raw food has gone legit.

>

> In a startling and ominous development, a few top chefs have

> conspired to present raw foods so fiendishly styled and manipulated

> as to mimic real food.

>

> With the skill and craftsmanship of jewelers — and the guile of a

> Hollywood set designer, they have managed to move what was once

> rabbit chow from the chicken wire-enclosed pen to the hushed dining

> rooms of some of our best restaurants.

>

> Last year, Charlie Trotter — a celebrated Chicago chef and the

> author of some truly groundbreaking and beautiful cookbooks —

> collaborated with Roxanne Klein on " Raw, " a real " cookbook " in which

> absolutely nothing is cooked. Klein is a veteran of many fine

> kitchens, the chef/owner of Roxanne's in Larkspur, Calif., and

> perhaps, the leading innovator and proponent of " raw food. "

>

> A poke in the eye

> The book is imaginative, pretty to look at and (largely because of

> Trotter's pre-eminence), a direct poke in the eye to the entire

> culinary profession. It represents a radical (yet aesthetically

> compelling) abrogation of the basic principal that " cooks "

> presumably cook.

>

> Trotter has served a vegetable-tasting menu for some time. Noticing

> that most restaurants tended to cobble together a plate of side

> dishes when confronted with vegetarian customers, he raised the bar.

> Though he surely knew that many of his offerings would taste a lot

> better tossed in duck fat, or married to a thick slab of bacon.

>

> In his introduction to " Raw, " he makes a careful distinction between

> the roles of chef/seeker and that of advocate for some health-

> conscious agrarian future. He seems to be saying that raw food can

> be a cool thing — but it's not necessarily the only thing. One gets

> the impression he is attracted more to the challenge than any

> underlying philosophy.

>

> Klein, commendably, urges similar caution, saying, " I think it's

> presumptuous for anyone to tell others how they should live their

> lives. "

>

> Nice words. Nice book. Without question, an answered prayer for

> anyone whom religion or personal circumstances has pushed into

> veganism.

>

> My prejudices against vegetarianism and veganism are well-known and

> deeply held — but looking at the gorgeous pictures, I thought surely

> any exploration of ways to make food — any food — better is a

> positive thing. As intellectual exercise, as gastronomy, as " another

> path, " this weird corner of the culinary spectrum might — I thought —

> be as worthy of respect as any other.

>

> An inspiring moment?

> Then I read the opening anecdote of Klein's introduction, an account

> of the inspiring moment, the chrysalis of her later immersion into

> the mysteries of raw food. She describes a fateful meting in

> Thailand with former " Cheers " star and hemp-activist Woody Harrelson.

>

> " Every evening our group would sit down to a fantastic feast of Thai

> vegetarian curries, noodles, and rice dishes. Woody, however, would

> always order a bowl of fruit or a green papaya salad. We tried to

> get him to sample the wonderful cooked dishes we were eating, but he

> always declined. After more prodding, he explained why he maintained

> a diet of raw fruits and vegetables. Michael (Klein's husband) and I

> found the philosophy interesting and decided to delve more deeply

> into it. "

>

> This story is horrifying on so many levels that my enzyme-starved,

> toxic-laden, mucous-clogged body shook when I read it.

>

> First of all, why would anyone listen to Woody Harrelson about

> anything more important than how to be a working Hollywood actor (OK

> maybe not that — haven't seen much of Woody lately), or how to make

> a bong out of a toilet paper roll and tin foil?

>

> And who would listen to anyone who can visit Thailand — a country

> with one of the most vibrant, exciting culinary cultures on the

> planet (including a rich tradition of tasty vegetarian fare) — and

> refuse to sample its bounty? What kind of cramped, arrogant world

> view could excuse shutting oneself off totally from the greater part

> of an ancient and beautiful culture?

>

> It's bad enough when you bump into a curmudgeonly fellow countryman

> while on vacation in a foreign land. But to bring his Tao home with

> you is another thing. Especially when said curmudgeon's world view

> had been shaped in that crossroads of enlightenment — Hollywood.

>

> " Raw " is a quantum leap in the realm of what's possible with fruits

> and vegetables. But by offering comfort, sustenance and

> encouragement to Harrelson and would-be Woodys everywhere, Trotter

> and Klein have opened a Pandora's box of fissionable material.

>

> At a time in history when Americans, to a greater and greater

> extent, have reasons to turn away from this fabulously diverse and

> marvelous planet and the millions of proud cooks who live on it — at

> a time when people are afraid — of just about everything — the

> authors have made willful avoidance and abstinence an ever-more

> attractive option.

>

> I admire their skills. I really do.

>

> But I fear for the planet.

>

>

> (Anthony Bourdain is author of " Kitchen Confidential " and " A Cook's

> Tour. " )

 

[Guest guest]

I don't believe they put it online. It was on the front page of the

Oregonian's FOODday section on Tuesday, March 16, 2004. There were

only two articles on that page. The one posted earlier by Emily Puro

and this one by Anthony Bourdain.

 

The editor of the FOODday section is listed as Chris Christenson,

503-294-5191, FOODday

 

Annette

 

 

RawSeattle , Jeff Rogers <jeff@t...> wrote:

> Annette,

>

> Do you have the actual date and title of the article? I cannot

find it online. A search turns up nothing.

[Guest guest]

Well, thanks to I see that the email address for the editor

was truncated, so....

 

FOODday at news.oregonian.com

 

substituting " @ " for " at " of course!

 

 

Annette

 

 

RawSeattle , cloudriver wrote:

>

> The editor of the FOODday section is listed as Chris Christenson,

> 503-294-5191, FOODday@n...

>

> Annette

[Guest guest]

I was wondering what that was about, I seen it but didn't get to read it. Thank

you for sharing.

 

 

 

Lucretia

 

Today I feel

 

" Sugar cravings increase because they deplete the body of necessary elements it

needs " -Janet Maccaro

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hopefully, the readers of the Oregonian will see the author for what he is,

and will loudly criticize the newspaper for printing such an obviously

biased, insulting piece of ranting. This type of writer/person will not

listen to any kind of logic that any of us can give. His mind is made up,

don't confuse him with the facts!

 

Sue

 

While I respect that different people have different tastes and that one

person's favourite food will not appeal to every other person, the

author of this article is obviously taking nothing but his own opinions

into play when he writes this article. He has included no scientific or

logical evidence to reference his points. I think article should not be

taken with anything more than a grain of salt.

 

 

 

> A buffet for the SLA

> Fortunately for most, the literature on raw foods has, until

> recently, provided unpersuasive visuals: The cover photo of

> Boutenko's manifesto displays a truly hideous spread of such

> unappetizing, clumsy butt-ugliness as to frighten away any but the

> most fervently devoted - as if some `50s era Betty Crocker got

> titanically drunk and decided to lay out a buffet for the Symbionese

> Liberation Army.

[Guest guest]

The writer himself admits that he is prejudiced against raw food. To

say (as he did) that there is a conspiracy in the recent raw books

that have come out is typical thinking for those who have closed

minds. Those who have found the raw lifestyle and better health

write these books to benefit mankind and he thinks that they

conspired to write them to harm him. Let him talk, he is just

showing what kind of person he is. Don't stoop to his level and

fight back with the same spirit. Who knows, he may change his mind

some time in the future if he is treated kindly.

 

Ron Koenig

Bellevue

 

RawSeattle , " Sue Aberle " <sue@a...> wrote:

> Hopefully, the readers of the Oregonian will see the author for

what he is,

> and will loudly criticize the newspaper for printing such an

obviously

> biased, insulting piece of ranting. This type of writer/person

will not

> listen to any kind of logic that any of us can give. His mind is

made up,

> don't confuse him with the facts!

>

> Sue

>

[Guest guest]

My disappointment about the article was this: When the FOODday

usually runs a feature on a particular topic, most of the section is

given to that topic. Several articles, lots of recipes and hints,

all geared toward " selling " that topic. I've seen all kinds. One

week it was on low-budget meals. The articles advocated buying meat

in family packs and freezing it to have on hand, and the recipes

seemed to all be for meat and potato or meat and rice dishes. Not a

word anywhere by some some doctor, chef, or other " authority " about

the " diet " not being acceptable. Then when they run a feature on raw

foods, they run one article and even that has caveats within it. On

the same page, the only other article is one that ridicules the

diet. They give a total of four recipes, three of which are from a

book by Jeremy Safron. (How did they find that?) With all the raw

resources and great chefs in Portland, not to mention Oregon! The

back page of the section is on slow cooking (6 recipes). I would

have liked to see " fair time " given to raw.

 

Annette

[Guest guest]

It may be that that was the arangement. Perhaps it was agreed that

they would have a raw food article if they had the other as well.

 

I prefer Annettes's idea of devoting one issue to raw.

 

Jeff