Skip to main content

Pollan's book Cooked (2013) is quite interesting but has too much information to write about or narrow down. What are the basic ideas and the...

In Michael Pollan's Cooked, the author, motivated by a desire to cook healthier food for his family and reduce their reliance on large corporations, uncovers the physical processes that create food. His central idea is that cooking is a "defining human activity" (page 5). By this, he means that cooking is at the center of the development of our civilization. It not only keeps our bodies healthy and active, it also creates communities and is an important shared activity. In fact, he says that "cooking... is one of the most interesting and worthwhile things we humans do" (page 11). His questions are motivated by the desire to have "a deeper understanding of the natural world and our species' peculiar role in it" (page 2). 


As the author regards cooking as so vital to our lives, he is perplexed by what he calls the Cooking Paradox--the fact that we spend more time watching food being prepared on television than actually preparing it. People are riveted by cooking shows, yet they tend to rely on prepared foods that involve very little actual cooking. To restore our idea of what cooking is and its importance, the author devotes his book to the study of four vital physical processes that create food: cooking with fire, cooking with water (braising); baking bread (using air); and the creation of fermented food (using the earth). He believes that if we can understand and master the physical processes of cooking, we will return to this fundamental activity rather than simply watching it on television. As a result, we will be healthier and more connected to other people.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.