Paul Bocuse could make French fast food the next nouvelle cuisine
David Appell / For The Times
How do you say 'to go' in French? Superstar chef Bocuse says he 'saw the opportunity to feed thousands of people going to the cinema' -- and others in France are following his lead
LYON, FRANCE - REVERING la bonne cuisine as they do, many French are still fighting the good fight to hold the line against le fast food.
But long gone are the days when the mention of a cheeseburger could earn you a Gallic sneer and protesters drove tractors into a McDonald's; these days, burgers are being served in upscale Paris restaurants. And now, fast food from a Michelin three-star chef?
Yes, while classic French restaurants are making a comeback in Los Angeles (Thomas Keller's highly anticipated Bouchon in Beverly Hills, Anisette in Santa Monica, West Hollywood's Comme Ca), the most legendary chef in France -- and probably the world -- turns around and opens a fast food joint in the country's culinary capital.
Paul Bocuse, whose "back-to-basics" nouvelle cuisine tilted at the culinary establishment of the 1970s and who is a towering pillar of the establishment today, says he "saw the opportunity to feed thousands of people going to the cinema."
Bocuse is based in Lyon, France's elegant second city, two hours southeast of Paris by high-speed train. His "mother ship" remains the high-end, Michelin three-star L'Auberge du Pont de Collonges just outside Lyon, but he's also spent the last decade and a half opening a slew of bistros around town. Well beyond too: Japan, soon Switzerland, and in the U.S., Les Chefs de France, which plays French cuisine's greatest hits at Disney's Epcot theme park in Orlando, Fla.
He also oversees a highly respected culinary academy, and since 1987 his annual Bocuse d'Or competition has been the culinary world's Formula One, Oscars and World Series rolled into one. (By the way, for the next one, in January, the Yanks are coming: For the first time a U.S. team will be competing, headed by Daniel Boulud and Keller, consulting with the likes of Mario Batali and Jean-Georges Vongerichten. Allez, U.S.A.!).
Express service
Yet at age 82, spry Monsieur Paul is far from stuck in the past. Some of his newer bistros are sleek and buzzy, with menus boasting trendy world-cuisine touches. And in January he launched this latest venture, right around the corner from his hippest restaurant, 5-year-old L'Ouest. Attached to a new Pathe movie multiplex in a gentrifying industrial district in the northwest part of town called Vaise, Ouest Express serves up fast food, Bocuse-style -- his boldest step yet into the mass market. As they say, if you can't beat 'em . . . .
And certainly since Wolfgang Puck, the idea of high-end chefs going down-market is hardly a shocker. Tom Colicchio of Craft and Gramercy Tavern fame has even coined the term "fine fast." Even here in more tradition-bound Lyon, "fine casual" is gaining steam: Besides his creative Michelin two-star restaurant, enfant terrible Nicolas Le Bec just opened a laid-back spot called Espace Le Bec -- at the airport.
The new "McBocuse" brings to mind what you might call "Jetsons chic": a large, rounded, fluorescent-lighted space with a high-tech look in white with red accents and a large glowing clock, presumably to underscore the "fast" concept. Red, padded booths and banquettes line a circular dining area, with additional white plastic tables and chairs along the outside and higher chairs along counters facing the floor-to-ceiling windows accented with long, low planters of wheat grass.
The service counters curve around one end of the room, including not only the expected menus above but display cases below, showing off a cavalcade of fresh sandwiches, salads, pastas, quiches, desserts and libations. As with his midrange bistros and "gastronomic" restaurant, Bocuse says, "we insist on good, fresh ingredients. The pasta is cooked in front of the clients, and what really makes the difference for the sandwiches is the bread -- they bake it every two hours."
On the menu
There's not a burger or Happy Meal in sight. Instead, rigatoni with boletus mushroom sauce, a fresh chevre sandwich on sun-dried-tomato ciabatta with olive-tomato tapenade, and a nicely balanced strawberry tart. Other sandwich offerings, all about $6.75, included sweet and prosciutto-style cured ham on pain de campagne (country bread), sliced roast chicken, and smoked Norwegian salmon (both on ciabatta). Crudites are served with tapenade and lemon tartar sauce (about $8.65); the daily entree special on a recent visit was sliced chicken in a French Basque-style sauce of tomatoes, onion and sweet red Espelette pepper, with rice and salad (about $15).
For that same price there are also formules (combo menus) -- sandwich, salad, quiche (such as onions, mushrooms and lardons, or bacon) or pasta (such as farfalle with a seafood sauce made with squid and mussels), plus frites, a drink and dessert. Gaufres, anyone? The waffles are served plain, or with powdered sugar, chocolate sauce or Chantilly cream. Wines include a Guyot Cotes du Rhone and Georges Duboeuf Macon Villages. Service is fairly friendly and the clientele varied -- a recent drizzly weeknight drew a large group of twentysomethings and various twosomes and threesomes ages 16 to 60.
Bocuse says he's been asked by Hilton Hotels Corp. to open branches at a number of its properties. Because he impishly promises, "I will last another 20 years," that still leaves the "Lion of Lyon" plenty of time to keep spreading his gastronomic gospel to the masses.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Congratulations to Class #50!
Class #50 of the Second Helpings Culinary Job Training Program graduated on Friday, July 18, 2008. CONGRATULATIONS to the graduates!
Pictured (front row, left to right): Costale Remarais, Mia Nolcox, Karen Oldham, Dionne Terry, Tamara Ayers (back row): Chef Conway, Michael Sims, Eric Siddall, Chad Fulkerson, Nicholas Grady, and Minkah Becktemba.
Pictured (front row, left to right): Costale Remarais, Mia Nolcox, Karen Oldham, Dionne Terry, Tamara Ayers (back row): Chef Conway, Michael Sims, Eric Siddall, Chad Fulkerson, Nicholas Grady, and Minkah Becktemba.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Dining Destination...BEIJING????
Culture of eating well has blossomed in China
BEIJING, China (AP) -- My last houseguest had 13 restaurants on his to-try list, including three renowned for succulent versions of crisp-skinned Peking duck, one popular for its tongue-tingling Sichuan cuisine and a Uighur joint, known as much for the ethnic minority's cumin-spiced lamb skewers as its exuberant floor show.
"I never thought Beijing would have so many things!" he said hungrily after hours of online research.
Gone are the days when the traditional Chinese greeting "Have you eaten yet?" seemed like a bad joke in the dour capital where, as recently as the 1980s, staples were rationed, state-run canteens dished out the slop of the day in chipped enamel bowls and restaurants were few and far between.
Today's Beijing is packed with eateries at every corner, open at all hours and offering regional cuisines of all kinds -- a reflection of China's stunning economic success after almost three decades of convulsive growth.
And the run-up to the August 8 Beijing Olympics has underscored the quantum leap in the quality and variety of fare on offer, with menus and manners being polished in anticipation of the crowd of 500,000 visitors during the games.
From al dente hand-pulled noodles splashed with bracing black vinegar from Shanxi province in the north, to fingernail-sized chicken pieces buried in a mountain of dried chilies from Sichuan in the southwest, to the rich, sweet braises of the east, there is something to pique every palate. Don't forget the street food -- handmade pork buns, candied fruit and egg, lettuce and crisp fried dough rolled in a freshly made flour crepe, a Chinese burrito of sorts.
And that's just from within the country.
Sushi and sashimi? Ocean fresh. Persian grilled meats and stews? In the heart of the city. Fish and chips? Beer-batter or breadcrumbs, take your pick. Greek, Vietnamese, Italian, German, French, Ethiopian, Spanish, Singaporean, even kosher ... the list goes on.
"Simply put, we've gone from eating just to fill our stomachs to the stage where we are open to the complete pleasures of the dining experience," says Chitty Chung, editor-in-chief of Beijing's Food & Wine magazine.
That includes not only an awareness of a restaurant's environment, the chef's concepts, quality of service, the pairing of food and wine, and nutritional balance, but also a willingness try new things, says Chung, who recommends Dadong Roast Duck Restaurant not only for the namesake fowl, but also for its light modern twist on traditionally heavy Shandong fare.
"People's eyes are opening up and they are becoming more international. They are ready to accept and taste food from other parts of the world," she says. "The choices are far beyond your imagination."
So are the numbers.
There are more than 40,000 restaurants in Beijing, 90 percent of which are privately run -- a far cry from the few thousand state-owned eateries that were found on the streets during the early 1980s, says He Zhifu, secretary-general of the Beijing Association for Food and Beverage Industries.
They run the gamut from the simple (mom-and-pop dumpling place) to the showy (the starkly modern Green T. House, where dishes are decorated with curling tree branches, and the Whampoa Club, where roast spring onion ice-cream can be enjoyed in a dining room that sits beneath a massive glass goldfish pond) to the bizarre (Guo Li Zhuang which serves the penises and testicles of various animals -- dogs, yaks, ox -- cooked in a variety of ways.)
And some of the tastiest -- and most authentic -- regional treats can be found in the restaurants affiliated to the provincial government offices that have set up in the capital.
In all, Beijing's restaurants rake in more than $4 billion annually and the revenues are still growing, a lucrative streak that has boosted the street cred of the city's food scene and drawn big names despite tainted product scares last year. Chef Daniel Boulud -- a cult favorite in New York who has grabbed headlines for his $150 ground sirloin burger filled with short ribs braised in red wine, foie gras and black truffles -- has just set up shop in a compound that used to house the U.S. Embassy. Le Pre Lenotre, sister restaurant of the three Michelin-star Le Pre Catelan in Paris, opened to great buzz in the Sofitel Wanda Beijing.
The also-very-French Fauchon is peddling its gourmet treats in a high-end mall and Philippe Starck designed the trippy, down-the-rabbit-hole Lan club and restaurant. Last month, Zagat, a global dining guide with a fierce hold on the American market, launched its Beijing edition.
"Beijing has a concurrence of circumstance at present," says Malcolm McLauchlan, general manager of 1949, The Hidden City, a cluster of ambitious restaurants overlooking the shady courtyard of a former factory. He checked them off: a rapidly growing middle class, relatively little competition and Olympics-driven tourism.
Prior to the boom, the few and far between restaurants offered just a limited number of dishes. They opened late, closed early and were staffed by servers who seemed to take pride in being as disagreeable as possible. Their favorite phrase was "mei you," loosely translated to mean "we're out." Definitely no Haagen-Dazs, McDonald's or Starbucks.
State-run food stores offered a limited choice of essentials, like meat, flour, oil and eggs. Milk, yogurt, bread, bottled fruit and bai jiu -- China's version of moonshine -- were plentiful. But that's it.
"Now we can eat whatever we like without seasonal and geographical limitations," says Xu Yimin, editor-in-chief of Chinese and Foreign Food magazine, who lists the delicate but juicy dumplings of the Taiwanese chain Din Tai Fung as his favorite.
"Although food prices keep going up, peoples' love for tasty food hasn't changed," he said. "Eating has become a culture."
BEIJING, China (AP) -- My last houseguest had 13 restaurants on his to-try list, including three renowned for succulent versions of crisp-skinned Peking duck, one popular for its tongue-tingling Sichuan cuisine and a Uighur joint, known as much for the ethnic minority's cumin-spiced lamb skewers as its exuberant floor show.
"I never thought Beijing would have so many things!" he said hungrily after hours of online research.
Gone are the days when the traditional Chinese greeting "Have you eaten yet?" seemed like a bad joke in the dour capital where, as recently as the 1980s, staples were rationed, state-run canteens dished out the slop of the day in chipped enamel bowls and restaurants were few and far between.
Today's Beijing is packed with eateries at every corner, open at all hours and offering regional cuisines of all kinds -- a reflection of China's stunning economic success after almost three decades of convulsive growth.
And the run-up to the August 8 Beijing Olympics has underscored the quantum leap in the quality and variety of fare on offer, with menus and manners being polished in anticipation of the crowd of 500,000 visitors during the games.
From al dente hand-pulled noodles splashed with bracing black vinegar from Shanxi province in the north, to fingernail-sized chicken pieces buried in a mountain of dried chilies from Sichuan in the southwest, to the rich, sweet braises of the east, there is something to pique every palate. Don't forget the street food -- handmade pork buns, candied fruit and egg, lettuce and crisp fried dough rolled in a freshly made flour crepe, a Chinese burrito of sorts.
And that's just from within the country.
Sushi and sashimi? Ocean fresh. Persian grilled meats and stews? In the heart of the city. Fish and chips? Beer-batter or breadcrumbs, take your pick. Greek, Vietnamese, Italian, German, French, Ethiopian, Spanish, Singaporean, even kosher ... the list goes on.
"Simply put, we've gone from eating just to fill our stomachs to the stage where we are open to the complete pleasures of the dining experience," says Chitty Chung, editor-in-chief of Beijing's Food & Wine magazine.
That includes not only an awareness of a restaurant's environment, the chef's concepts, quality of service, the pairing of food and wine, and nutritional balance, but also a willingness try new things, says Chung, who recommends Dadong Roast Duck Restaurant not only for the namesake fowl, but also for its light modern twist on traditionally heavy Shandong fare.
"People's eyes are opening up and they are becoming more international. They are ready to accept and taste food from other parts of the world," she says. "The choices are far beyond your imagination."
So are the numbers.
There are more than 40,000 restaurants in Beijing, 90 percent of which are privately run -- a far cry from the few thousand state-owned eateries that were found on the streets during the early 1980s, says He Zhifu, secretary-general of the Beijing Association for Food and Beverage Industries.
They run the gamut from the simple (mom-and-pop dumpling place) to the showy (the starkly modern Green T. House, where dishes are decorated with curling tree branches, and the Whampoa Club, where roast spring onion ice-cream can be enjoyed in a dining room that sits beneath a massive glass goldfish pond) to the bizarre (Guo Li Zhuang which serves the penises and testicles of various animals -- dogs, yaks, ox -- cooked in a variety of ways.)
And some of the tastiest -- and most authentic -- regional treats can be found in the restaurants affiliated to the provincial government offices that have set up in the capital.
In all, Beijing's restaurants rake in more than $4 billion annually and the revenues are still growing, a lucrative streak that has boosted the street cred of the city's food scene and drawn big names despite tainted product scares last year. Chef Daniel Boulud -- a cult favorite in New York who has grabbed headlines for his $150 ground sirloin burger filled with short ribs braised in red wine, foie gras and black truffles -- has just set up shop in a compound that used to house the U.S. Embassy. Le Pre Lenotre, sister restaurant of the three Michelin-star Le Pre Catelan in Paris, opened to great buzz in the Sofitel Wanda Beijing.
The also-very-French Fauchon is peddling its gourmet treats in a high-end mall and Philippe Starck designed the trippy, down-the-rabbit-hole Lan club and restaurant. Last month, Zagat, a global dining guide with a fierce hold on the American market, launched its Beijing edition.
"Beijing has a concurrence of circumstance at present," says Malcolm McLauchlan, general manager of 1949, The Hidden City, a cluster of ambitious restaurants overlooking the shady courtyard of a former factory. He checked them off: a rapidly growing middle class, relatively little competition and Olympics-driven tourism.
Prior to the boom, the few and far between restaurants offered just a limited number of dishes. They opened late, closed early and were staffed by servers who seemed to take pride in being as disagreeable as possible. Their favorite phrase was "mei you," loosely translated to mean "we're out." Definitely no Haagen-Dazs, McDonald's or Starbucks.
State-run food stores offered a limited choice of essentials, like meat, flour, oil and eggs. Milk, yogurt, bread, bottled fruit and bai jiu -- China's version of moonshine -- were plentiful. But that's it.
"Now we can eat whatever we like without seasonal and geographical limitations," says Xu Yimin, editor-in-chief of Chinese and Foreign Food magazine, who lists the delicate but juicy dumplings of the Taiwanese chain Din Tai Fung as his favorite.
"Although food prices keep going up, peoples' love for tasty food hasn't changed," he said. "Eating has become a culture."
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Move Over "Ugly Americans"
Remember the tightwad tourist whose baggy shorts, frequent complaining and shouted questions about why none of the locals spoke any English made the ugly American the world's Visitor From Hell?
Well, it's time for Archie Bunker to move over and make way for Petulant Pierre.
According to a recent international survey, the French are now considered the most obnoxious tourists from European nations, and behind only Indians and the last-place Chinese as the worst among all countries worldwide. And it's not only the rest of the world that have a gripe with the Gallic attitude: the French also finished second to last among nations ranking the popularity of its own tourists who vacation at home.
But it's the unflattering image being reflected from abroad that may give pause to the millions of French travelers now heading off to summer vacation destinations across the globe. Will that move them to improve behavior the poll characterized as impolite, prone to loud carping and inattentive to local customs?
If so, that's just the start: the study also describes the voyageur français as often unwilling or unable to communicate in foreign languages, and particularly disinclined to spending money when they don't have to — including on those non compris tips. Over all, French travelers landed 19th out of 21 nations worldwide, far behind the first-place Japanese, considered most polite, quiet and tidy. Following the Japanese as most-liked tourists were the Germans, British and Canadians. Americans finished in 11th place alongside the Thais.
The survey was carried out among employees in 4,000 hotels in Germany, the U.K., Italy, France, Canada and the U.S. for the French travel website Expedia.fr. The study asked respondents to rank clients by nationality on criteria of general attitude, politeness, tendency to complain, willingness to speak local languages, interest in sampling local cuisine, readiness to spend money, generosity, cleanliness, discretion and elegance. Many replies simply conformed to long-established reputations: Italians, for example, were deemed most style-conscious, and the French the best-dressed tourists.
American tourists fared well in some surprising ways: despite being notoriously language-limited, for example, they top the list of tourists credited with trying to speak local languages the most, with the French, Chinese, Japanese, Italians and Russians coming in last in the local language rankings. Does that mean Americans are the most polyglot tourists on the planet?
Maybe not, says Expedia's marketing director for Europe, Timothée de Roux, who notes the poll's focus on hotel operators may explain the counter-intuitive outcome.
"Most hotel staffs around the world speak English, meaning they'll communicate far more easily with native English-speaking American or British clients than with French or Italians who — it's true — are pretty bad with foreign languages," de Roux says.
De Roux explains how external factors similarly account for why Americans wind up as the biggest-spending and best-tipping tourists, while Germans and the French are among the worst penny-pinchers. "Our findings show the average French employee will get 37 vacation days spread over seven trips in 2008, versus 14 for an American — who won't even take them all," de Roux believes. "That means the French tourist will more tightly budget his or her spending over more trips, while the American spends freely on the one or two vacations taken all year."
By contrast, poll finds the French and Americans similar in being perceived as critical and rude when they travel — though for different reasons. The same local attractions that make France the world's top destination for 92 million foreign visitors each year, says de Roux, also explains why over 85% of French vacation in-country — and wind up spoiled by it when they leave.
"When they go abroad, French travellers demand the same quality they'd get at home, de Roux says. "Americans, by contrast, demand the same exceptional service they are used to at home, which is why they rank as the loudest, most inclined to complain, and among the least polite."
Well, it's time for Archie Bunker to move over and make way for Petulant Pierre.
According to a recent international survey, the French are now considered the most obnoxious tourists from European nations, and behind only Indians and the last-place Chinese as the worst among all countries worldwide. And it's not only the rest of the world that have a gripe with the Gallic attitude: the French also finished second to last among nations ranking the popularity of its own tourists who vacation at home.
But it's the unflattering image being reflected from abroad that may give pause to the millions of French travelers now heading off to summer vacation destinations across the globe. Will that move them to improve behavior the poll characterized as impolite, prone to loud carping and inattentive to local customs?
If so, that's just the start: the study also describes the voyageur français as often unwilling or unable to communicate in foreign languages, and particularly disinclined to spending money when they don't have to — including on those non compris tips. Over all, French travelers landed 19th out of 21 nations worldwide, far behind the first-place Japanese, considered most polite, quiet and tidy. Following the Japanese as most-liked tourists were the Germans, British and Canadians. Americans finished in 11th place alongside the Thais.
The survey was carried out among employees in 4,000 hotels in Germany, the U.K., Italy, France, Canada and the U.S. for the French travel website Expedia.fr. The study asked respondents to rank clients by nationality on criteria of general attitude, politeness, tendency to complain, willingness to speak local languages, interest in sampling local cuisine, readiness to spend money, generosity, cleanliness, discretion and elegance. Many replies simply conformed to long-established reputations: Italians, for example, were deemed most style-conscious, and the French the best-dressed tourists.
American tourists fared well in some surprising ways: despite being notoriously language-limited, for example, they top the list of tourists credited with trying to speak local languages the most, with the French, Chinese, Japanese, Italians and Russians coming in last in the local language rankings. Does that mean Americans are the most polyglot tourists on the planet?
Maybe not, says Expedia's marketing director for Europe, Timothée de Roux, who notes the poll's focus on hotel operators may explain the counter-intuitive outcome.
"Most hotel staffs around the world speak English, meaning they'll communicate far more easily with native English-speaking American or British clients than with French or Italians who — it's true — are pretty bad with foreign languages," de Roux says.
De Roux explains how external factors similarly account for why Americans wind up as the biggest-spending and best-tipping tourists, while Germans and the French are among the worst penny-pinchers. "Our findings show the average French employee will get 37 vacation days spread over seven trips in 2008, versus 14 for an American — who won't even take them all," de Roux believes. "That means the French tourist will more tightly budget his or her spending over more trips, while the American spends freely on the one or two vacations taken all year."
By contrast, poll finds the French and Americans similar in being perceived as critical and rude when they travel — though for different reasons. The same local attractions that make France the world's top destination for 92 million foreign visitors each year, says de Roux, also explains why over 85% of French vacation in-country — and wind up spoiled by it when they leave.
"When they go abroad, French travellers demand the same quality they'd get at home, de Roux says. "Americans, by contrast, demand the same exceptional service they are used to at home, which is why they rank as the loudest, most inclined to complain, and among the least polite."
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Cooking Up A Storm Branches Out
The introductory culinary program of The Jonathan Thompson Performing Arts School, Cooking Up A Storm, is designed to introduce students to basic culinary skills and to enhance their interest in education and career opportunities in the culinary or foodservice industries.
Class instruction, led by Chef Carl G. Conway with assistance from graduates of the Second Helpings Culinary Job Training Program, provides for interactive participation and is designed to teach basic culinary skills and nutrition, empower participants to make better and healthier food choices, explore educational and career opportunities in foodservice, and aid character development in young participants, all while having a lot of fun.
Chef Conway and company will offer a twelve week culinary experience for teens ages 14-19 starting Thursday, June 12th, 2008. Sessions will be held every Thursday from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at the C.A.F.E. Center, located at 8902 East 38th Street.
See our registration page to sign up, or (317) 890-3288, extension 19 for more information. We look forward to seeing you there!
Class instruction, led by Chef Carl G. Conway with assistance from graduates of the Second Helpings Culinary Job Training Program, provides for interactive participation and is designed to teach basic culinary skills and nutrition, empower participants to make better and healthier food choices, explore educational and career opportunities in foodservice, and aid character development in young participants, all while having a lot of fun.
Chef Conway and company will offer a twelve week culinary experience for teens ages 14-19 starting Thursday, June 12th, 2008. Sessions will be held every Thursday from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at the C.A.F.E. Center, located at 8902 East 38th Street.
See our registration page to sign up, or (317) 890-3288, extension 19 for more information. We look forward to seeing you there!
Friday, June 13, 2008
Kroger and Second Helpings Partner to Feed the Hungry
INDIANAPOLIS, IN – At a Sunday evening June 8th dinner in honor of Second Helpings' 10th anniversary, Kroger Central Division Public Affairs Manager John Elliott announced a major perishable food partnership between Kroger and Second Helpings as part of Kroger’s national Perishable Donation Partnership (PDP).
"For far too long food banks, food rescue organizations and local food pantries have operated with the food that people choose to donate, rather than being able to provide enough healthy, nutritious meals that include meat, seafood, fruit, vegetables and other perishable foods," said Bob Moeder, president of Kroger Central Division. "Just because a family is temporarily unable to purchase their meals in retail food stores, that should not mean they have to accept a lower quality standard or inadequate nutritional value."
Second Helpings and Gleaner's Food Bank will share access to a significant quantity of healthy, nutritious perishable food donations from nearly 50 Central Indiana Kroger stores. Second Helpings and Gleaners have just completed a successful pilot of the program for Kroger's Central Division, working with four stores each. Prior to the pilot, both organizations had to undergo thorough evaluations, including food safety evaluation and other certifications.
Kroger's cash contribution on June 8th includes $5,000 in support of Second Helpings' highly respected chef training academy, as well as $5,000 that is unrestricted. Kroger made a contribution of $15,000 earlier this year to underwrite costs associated with a special insert in "Indianapolis Woman" magazine promoting the mission and programs of Second Helpings.
The partnership with Second Helpings' Culinary Job Training Program, headed by Chef Carl Conway, will include Kroger's hiring graduates of the program, supporting curriculum and content of the training program, access to Kroger stores during training sessions and other shared expertise in what is projected to be a mutually-beneficial exchange of talent and ideas.
Kroger enthusiastically supports helping organizations that provide food to those in need. The donations of nutritious perishable food will be especially important to children for healthy growth and development.
According to Mr. Moeder, "Kroger does not do this alone. We rely heavily on partners in every community to feed the hungry. I personally visited Second Helpings and share my colleagues' great enthusiasm for the quality and effectiveness of their organization. We were so impressed that we sought special approval from our corporate headquarters in Cincinnati to allow Second Helpings to be the first food rescue organization in the nation to participate in the PDP. I am especially pleased that our division’s leading expert on food safety, Melissa Miller, has agreed to lead this PDP for us. Kroger is very committed to making this perishable food program just as successful as the many other programs comprising our 125 year history of feeding the hungry in our local communities."
Cindy Hubert, CEO of Second Helpings added, "Second Helpings is honored to have been chosen to be part of Kroger's perishable food partnership and receive the wonderful financial support from Kroger. The confidence Bob Moeder and Kroger's leadership team have shown to Second Helpings to allow us to be the first food rescue organization certified within the nation is priceless. We are looking forward to a long and rewarding alliance with Kroger to feed the hungry within our community."
Background:Nationally, 40% of the $160.5 million Kroger donates in local communities goes to hunger relief. These donations are primarily dry grocery products and can goods. "This is an exciting opportunity to bring even more food and hope to hungry people," said Lynn Marmer, Kroger’s Group Vice President of Corporate Affairs and a member of the national board of directors of America’s Second Harvest. "This initiative not only increases the amount of fresh food Kroger donates, it will help improve the diets of individuals and families who depend on hunger relief programs by giving food banks access to a variety of nutritious meats, fruits and vegetables."
Kroger has launched the PDP as a company-wide project to increase the number of stores that donate safe, perishable food to America's Second Harvest food banks across the country. As part of the PDP program, Kroger has dedicated a senior staff person in the corporate headquarters, Kathleen Wright, as Director of the Company’s PDP. Under Wright’s leadership, Kroger’s PDP will expand to include not only the current 30 million pounds per year of non-perishable food donations, but an additional 50 million pounds of nutritious, fresh food to food banks across the country. In terms of meals, this represents an increase from 22 to 59 million meals annually. The safe handling of perishable foods will make food bank and food pantry operations more complex, so Kroger’s efforts will include expertise and resources to prepare local food banks for the safe and efficient handling of perishable foods.
Kroger's Central Division, based in Indianapolis, supported six food banks in Indiana and two in Illinois during 2007 with more than $2 million in cash contributions, donated transportation, event support and donated food. Kroger actively engages its customers and the communities in which its employees live and work in its hunger relief efforts by supporting food drives throughout the year. Kroger is a major sponsor of the Boy Scouts of America's "Scouting for Food" program and leads a "Share Your Feast” food drive during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays each year. Kroger’s financial contributions are reinforced by substantial non-cash support such as donated equipment; professional expertise and considerable volunteer hours.
The Kroger Central Division has 154 food stores, 129 pharmacies and 51 fuel centers operating under five banners; Kroger, Scott's, Owen’s, Hilander and Pay Less, with locations primarily in Indiana and Illinois, in addition to five stores in Missouri, one in Michigan and one in Ohio. Kroger Central Division is dedicated to supporting every local community it serves, contributing more than $7 million annually to local organizations, primarily focusing on hunger relief, K-12 education, health causes and diversity. At Kroger we value: honesty, respect, inclusion, diversity, safety and integrity.
Source: The Kroger Company- Central Division
"For far too long food banks, food rescue organizations and local food pantries have operated with the food that people choose to donate, rather than being able to provide enough healthy, nutritious meals that include meat, seafood, fruit, vegetables and other perishable foods," said Bob Moeder, president of Kroger Central Division. "Just because a family is temporarily unable to purchase their meals in retail food stores, that should not mean they have to accept a lower quality standard or inadequate nutritional value."
Second Helpings and Gleaner's Food Bank will share access to a significant quantity of healthy, nutritious perishable food donations from nearly 50 Central Indiana Kroger stores. Second Helpings and Gleaners have just completed a successful pilot of the program for Kroger's Central Division, working with four stores each. Prior to the pilot, both organizations had to undergo thorough evaluations, including food safety evaluation and other certifications.
Kroger's cash contribution on June 8th includes $5,000 in support of Second Helpings' highly respected chef training academy, as well as $5,000 that is unrestricted. Kroger made a contribution of $15,000 earlier this year to underwrite costs associated with a special insert in "Indianapolis Woman" magazine promoting the mission and programs of Second Helpings.
The partnership with Second Helpings' Culinary Job Training Program, headed by Chef Carl Conway, will include Kroger's hiring graduates of the program, supporting curriculum and content of the training program, access to Kroger stores during training sessions and other shared expertise in what is projected to be a mutually-beneficial exchange of talent and ideas.
Kroger enthusiastically supports helping organizations that provide food to those in need. The donations of nutritious perishable food will be especially important to children for healthy growth and development.
According to Mr. Moeder, "Kroger does not do this alone. We rely heavily on partners in every community to feed the hungry. I personally visited Second Helpings and share my colleagues' great enthusiasm for the quality and effectiveness of their organization. We were so impressed that we sought special approval from our corporate headquarters in Cincinnati to allow Second Helpings to be the first food rescue organization in the nation to participate in the PDP. I am especially pleased that our division’s leading expert on food safety, Melissa Miller, has agreed to lead this PDP for us. Kroger is very committed to making this perishable food program just as successful as the many other programs comprising our 125 year history of feeding the hungry in our local communities."
Cindy Hubert, CEO of Second Helpings added, "Second Helpings is honored to have been chosen to be part of Kroger's perishable food partnership and receive the wonderful financial support from Kroger. The confidence Bob Moeder and Kroger's leadership team have shown to Second Helpings to allow us to be the first food rescue organization certified within the nation is priceless. We are looking forward to a long and rewarding alliance with Kroger to feed the hungry within our community."
Background:Nationally, 40% of the $160.5 million Kroger donates in local communities goes to hunger relief. These donations are primarily dry grocery products and can goods. "This is an exciting opportunity to bring even more food and hope to hungry people," said Lynn Marmer, Kroger’s Group Vice President of Corporate Affairs and a member of the national board of directors of America’s Second Harvest. "This initiative not only increases the amount of fresh food Kroger donates, it will help improve the diets of individuals and families who depend on hunger relief programs by giving food banks access to a variety of nutritious meats, fruits and vegetables."
Kroger has launched the PDP as a company-wide project to increase the number of stores that donate safe, perishable food to America's Second Harvest food banks across the country. As part of the PDP program, Kroger has dedicated a senior staff person in the corporate headquarters, Kathleen Wright, as Director of the Company’s PDP. Under Wright’s leadership, Kroger’s PDP will expand to include not only the current 30 million pounds per year of non-perishable food donations, but an additional 50 million pounds of nutritious, fresh food to food banks across the country. In terms of meals, this represents an increase from 22 to 59 million meals annually. The safe handling of perishable foods will make food bank and food pantry operations more complex, so Kroger’s efforts will include expertise and resources to prepare local food banks for the safe and efficient handling of perishable foods.
Kroger's Central Division, based in Indianapolis, supported six food banks in Indiana and two in Illinois during 2007 with more than $2 million in cash contributions, donated transportation, event support and donated food. Kroger actively engages its customers and the communities in which its employees live and work in its hunger relief efforts by supporting food drives throughout the year. Kroger is a major sponsor of the Boy Scouts of America's "Scouting for Food" program and leads a "Share Your Feast” food drive during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays each year. Kroger’s financial contributions are reinforced by substantial non-cash support such as donated equipment; professional expertise and considerable volunteer hours.
The Kroger Central Division has 154 food stores, 129 pharmacies and 51 fuel centers operating under five banners; Kroger, Scott's, Owen’s, Hilander and Pay Less, with locations primarily in Indiana and Illinois, in addition to five stores in Missouri, one in Michigan and one in Ohio. Kroger Central Division is dedicated to supporting every local community it serves, contributing more than $7 million annually to local organizations, primarily focusing on hunger relief, K-12 education, health causes and diversity. At Kroger we value: honesty, respect, inclusion, diversity, safety and integrity.
Source: The Kroger Company- Central Division
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
The Trouble With Harry
A first-grade teacher, Ms. Brooks, was having trouble with one of her students.
The teacher asked, 'Harry, what's your problem?'
Harry answered, 'I'm too smart for the 1st grade. My sister is in the 3rd grade and I'm smarter than she is! I think I should be in the 3rd grade, too!'
Ms. Brooks had had enough. She took Harry to the principal's office. While Harry waited in the outer officer, the teacher explained to the principal what the situation was. The principal told Ms. Brooks he would give the boy a test. If he failed to answer any of his questions, he was to go back to the 1st grade and behave. She agreed.
Harry was brought in and the conditions were explained to him and he agreed to take the test.
Principal: 'What is 3 x 3?'
Harry: '9.'
Principal: 'What is 6 x 6?'
Harry: '36.'
And so it went with every question the principal thought a 3rd grader should know.
The principal looks at Ms. Brooks and tells her, 'I think Harry can go to the 3rd grade.'
Ms. Brooks says to the principal, 'Let me ask him some questions.' The principal and Harry both agreed. Ms. Brooks asks,
'What does a cow have four of that I have only two of?'
Harry, after a moment: 'Legs.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What is in your pants that you have, but I do not have?'
The principal wondered why would she ask such a question!
Harry replied: 'Pockets.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a dog do that a man steps into?'
Harry: 'Pants.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What starts with a 'C', ends with a 'T', is hairy, oval, delicious, and contains thin, whitish liquid?'
Harry: 'Coconut.'
The principal sat forward with his mouth hanging open.
Ms. Brooks: 'What goes in hard and pink then comes out soft and sticky?'
The principal's eyes opened really wide and before he could stop the answer,
Harry replied, 'Bubble gum.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a man do standing up, a woman does sitting down, and a dog does on three legs?'
Harry: 'Shake hands.'
The principal was trembling.
Ms. Brooks: 'What word starts with an 'F' and ends in 'K' that means a lot of heat and excitement?'
Harry: 'Firetruck.'
The principal breathed a sigh of relief and told the teacher, 'Put Harry in the fifth-grade, I got the last seven questions wrong.'
The teacher asked, 'Harry, what's your problem?'
Harry answered, 'I'm too smart for the 1st grade. My sister is in the 3rd grade and I'm smarter than she is! I think I should be in the 3rd grade, too!'
Ms. Brooks had had enough. She took Harry to the principal's office. While Harry waited in the outer officer, the teacher explained to the principal what the situation was. The principal told Ms. Brooks he would give the boy a test. If he failed to answer any of his questions, he was to go back to the 1st grade and behave. She agreed.
Harry was brought in and the conditions were explained to him and he agreed to take the test.
Principal: 'What is 3 x 3?'
Harry: '9.'
Principal: 'What is 6 x 6?'
Harry: '36.'
And so it went with every question the principal thought a 3rd grader should know.
The principal looks at Ms. Brooks and tells her, 'I think Harry can go to the 3rd grade.'
Ms. Brooks says to the principal, 'Let me ask him some questions.' The principal and Harry both agreed. Ms. Brooks asks,
'What does a cow have four of that I have only two of?'
Harry, after a moment: 'Legs.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What is in your pants that you have, but I do not have?'
The principal wondered why would she ask such a question!
Harry replied: 'Pockets.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a dog do that a man steps into?'
Harry: 'Pants.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What starts with a 'C', ends with a 'T', is hairy, oval, delicious, and contains thin, whitish liquid?'
Harry: 'Coconut.'
The principal sat forward with his mouth hanging open.
Ms. Brooks: 'What goes in hard and pink then comes out soft and sticky?'
The principal's eyes opened really wide and before he could stop the answer,
Harry replied, 'Bubble gum.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a man do standing up, a woman does sitting down, and a dog does on three legs?'
Harry: 'Shake hands.'
The principal was trembling.
Ms. Brooks: 'What word starts with an 'F' and ends in 'K' that means a lot of heat and excitement?'
Harry: 'Firetruck.'
The principal breathed a sigh of relief and told the teacher, 'Put Harry in the fifth-grade, I got the last seven questions wrong.'
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Sleeping On The Job - A Good Thing?
(LifeWire) -- At Jason Keith's last job, he discovered a colleague sound asleep at work -- head back, mouth open, snoring loudly -- while his co-workers laughed and snapped photos with their cell phone cameras.
"At first I thought he was faking it, but he was completely passed out," says Keith, 31, who works for a digital printing company outside Boston, Massachusetts. "He left the company about a month after that episode."
Caryn Melton, 43, has nodded off during meetings, at her desk and even during a corporate event. Melton, who works for a marketing firm in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, says she doesn't sleep well at night so she is often tired during the day.
"I love napping. I turn my chair around so my colleagues can't see me, but I have been caught before. Luckily, I haven't gotten in trouble. I just get teased by my colleagues," she says.
A Sleep-deprived Nation
Melton isn't alone in her struggle to stay awake on the job.
One-third of those surveyed for the National Sleep Foundation's annual "Sleep in America" poll had fallen asleep or become sleepy at work in the past month. The telephone survey questioned 1,000 adults in the continental United States and was conducted between September 25, 2007, and November 19, 2007.
The poll also found that Americans are working more and sleeping less. The average amount of sleep was six hours and 40 minutes a night. The average workday? Nine hours and 28 minutes. Calculate your weekly sleep hours and work hours »
"We are a sleep-deprived nation," says Rubin Naiman, a sleep specialist with a doctorate in clinical psychology and the director of sleep programs at Miraval, a health and wellness center in Tucson, Arizona. "We need at least seven to nine hours of sleep a night for optimal health."
Serenity Now
Recognizing that on-the-job sleepiness can affect the bottom line -- the Sleep Foundation puts the annual cost at $100 billion in lost productivity, health care costs and employee absences, among other factors -- companies are coming up with novel ways to boost employees' energy levels. Watch how sleep loss can harm the brain
"You would be surprised how many companies are providing nap rooms," says Sara Mednick, a sleep researcher with a doctorate in psychology from Harvard University and author of "Take a Nap! Change Your Life." "Although it is still somewhat of a stigma for some companies, it's a growing trend."
Maureen Lippe, founder of New York public relations agency Lippe Taylor, doesn't offer just one nap room for her tired employees. She has three. "We call them serenity rooms. I put one on each of the three floors," she says.
Outfitted with large sofas, blankets and comfortable chairs, the rooms are phone- and BlackBerry-free zones. "A lot of people nap in our serenity rooms, even me," Lippe says.
Other companies forgo beds and blankets and focus instead on creating an environment that emphasizes wellness and relaxation, reasoning that such a setting will keep employees refreshed and alert.
OPNET Technologies, a software company with headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, provides a "Zen computer garden" with plants, Internet access, couches, lounge chairs and other amenities where staff can enjoy downtime. The Fruit Guys, a San Francisco fruit-delivery company, doesn't have a nap room, but its employees enjoy unlimited fresh fruit.
Mednick says that although meditation, fresh fruit and other healthy benefits are great, naps should be part of the equation. She encourages companies to create a workplace napping policy.
"Napping doesn't have to happen just because you are not getting enough sleep," Mednick says. "There is often a dip in your body, physically, in the afternoon when your concentration is low, and a nap can increase alertness." Mednick suggests that companies provide dark, isolated rooms where people can stretch out horizontally.
A 'Band-Aid' solution?
While some people favor napping on the job, others are skeptical.
"I think that napping at work is a Band-Aid solution. It's trendy for companies, it makes it seem like your employer is concerned, but it doesn't really go to the heart of the real problem, which is that people are not getting enough sleep," says Dale Read, president of the Specialty Sleep Association, a nonprofit trade and industry group representing manufacturers and retailers of air, foam and other types of beds.
Although Read isn't against napping, he compares a 20-minute nap to "drinking a shot of sugar soda" -- it wakes you up in the moment but doesn't equal good nutrition in the long run.
Naiman disagrees. "There is ample data confirming that naps are refreshing, improve mood, enhance performance and lower blood pressure. Naps are an important part of the solution to our sleep-deprived culture."
Tips for a good night's sleep
One thing all the experts agree on? A good night's sleep is essential. They recommend the following:
• Institute a sleep routine: Go to bed at a specific time every night, take a warm shower, read a book or meditate to relax.
• Consume caffeine and alcohol in moderation. Naiman recommends avoiding caffeine after lunch. About alcohol, he says, "Less is better, earlier is better and with food is better."
• Don't go to bed full or famished. "A light snack a few minutes before bed consisting of natural or complex carbs such as a piece of fruit or some nut bread is ideal," Naiman says.
• Make sure your room is cool and dark.
• Find a comfortable mattress and pillow.
But if all else fails, follow Jason Keith's example. "When I take a nap at work, I do it in my car," he says.
"At first I thought he was faking it, but he was completely passed out," says Keith, 31, who works for a digital printing company outside Boston, Massachusetts. "He left the company about a month after that episode."
Caryn Melton, 43, has nodded off during meetings, at her desk and even during a corporate event. Melton, who works for a marketing firm in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, says she doesn't sleep well at night so she is often tired during the day.
"I love napping. I turn my chair around so my colleagues can't see me, but I have been caught before. Luckily, I haven't gotten in trouble. I just get teased by my colleagues," she says.
A Sleep-deprived Nation
Melton isn't alone in her struggle to stay awake on the job.
One-third of those surveyed for the National Sleep Foundation's annual "Sleep in America" poll had fallen asleep or become sleepy at work in the past month. The telephone survey questioned 1,000 adults in the continental United States and was conducted between September 25, 2007, and November 19, 2007.
The poll also found that Americans are working more and sleeping less. The average amount of sleep was six hours and 40 minutes a night. The average workday? Nine hours and 28 minutes. Calculate your weekly sleep hours and work hours »
"We are a sleep-deprived nation," says Rubin Naiman, a sleep specialist with a doctorate in clinical psychology and the director of sleep programs at Miraval, a health and wellness center in Tucson, Arizona. "We need at least seven to nine hours of sleep a night for optimal health."
Serenity Now
Recognizing that on-the-job sleepiness can affect the bottom line -- the Sleep Foundation puts the annual cost at $100 billion in lost productivity, health care costs and employee absences, among other factors -- companies are coming up with novel ways to boost employees' energy levels. Watch how sleep loss can harm the brain
"You would be surprised how many companies are providing nap rooms," says Sara Mednick, a sleep researcher with a doctorate in psychology from Harvard University and author of "Take a Nap! Change Your Life." "Although it is still somewhat of a stigma for some companies, it's a growing trend."
Maureen Lippe, founder of New York public relations agency Lippe Taylor, doesn't offer just one nap room for her tired employees. She has three. "We call them serenity rooms. I put one on each of the three floors," she says.
Outfitted with large sofas, blankets and comfortable chairs, the rooms are phone- and BlackBerry-free zones. "A lot of people nap in our serenity rooms, even me," Lippe says.
Other companies forgo beds and blankets and focus instead on creating an environment that emphasizes wellness and relaxation, reasoning that such a setting will keep employees refreshed and alert.
OPNET Technologies, a software company with headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, provides a "Zen computer garden" with plants, Internet access, couches, lounge chairs and other amenities where staff can enjoy downtime. The Fruit Guys, a San Francisco fruit-delivery company, doesn't have a nap room, but its employees enjoy unlimited fresh fruit.
Mednick says that although meditation, fresh fruit and other healthy benefits are great, naps should be part of the equation. She encourages companies to create a workplace napping policy.
"Napping doesn't have to happen just because you are not getting enough sleep," Mednick says. "There is often a dip in your body, physically, in the afternoon when your concentration is low, and a nap can increase alertness." Mednick suggests that companies provide dark, isolated rooms where people can stretch out horizontally.
A 'Band-Aid' solution?
While some people favor napping on the job, others are skeptical.
"I think that napping at work is a Band-Aid solution. It's trendy for companies, it makes it seem like your employer is concerned, but it doesn't really go to the heart of the real problem, which is that people are not getting enough sleep," says Dale Read, president of the Specialty Sleep Association, a nonprofit trade and industry group representing manufacturers and retailers of air, foam and other types of beds.
Although Read isn't against napping, he compares a 20-minute nap to "drinking a shot of sugar soda" -- it wakes you up in the moment but doesn't equal good nutrition in the long run.
Naiman disagrees. "There is ample data confirming that naps are refreshing, improve mood, enhance performance and lower blood pressure. Naps are an important part of the solution to our sleep-deprived culture."
Tips for a good night's sleep
One thing all the experts agree on? A good night's sleep is essential. They recommend the following:
• Institute a sleep routine: Go to bed at a specific time every night, take a warm shower, read a book or meditate to relax.
• Consume caffeine and alcohol in moderation. Naiman recommends avoiding caffeine after lunch. About alcohol, he says, "Less is better, earlier is better and with food is better."
• Don't go to bed full or famished. "A light snack a few minutes before bed consisting of natural or complex carbs such as a piece of fruit or some nut bread is ideal," Naiman says.
• Make sure your room is cool and dark.
• Find a comfortable mattress and pillow.
But if all else fails, follow Jason Keith's example. "When I take a nap at work, I do it in my car," he says.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
True Confessions of A Vegetarian
First, A DISCLAIMER:
Chef is not now, has never been, and probably never will be a vegetarian. However, some of my best friends are. I'm even friendly with a vegan or two. So this is not about ME. If you're one of those who is absolutely clueless about what a vegetarian is or why any sane person would want to be one, read on.
Meatless Like Me
I may be a vegetarian, but I still love the smell of bacon.
By Taylor Clark
Every vegetarian remembers his first time. Not the unremarkable event of his first meal without meat, mind you. No, I mean the first time he casually lets slip that he's turned herbivore, prompting everyone in earshot to stare at him as if he just revealed plans to sail his carrot-powered plasma yacht to Neptune. For me, this first time came at an Elks scholarship luncheon in rural Oregon when I was 18. All day, I'd succeeded at seeming a promising and responsible young man, until that fateful moment when someone asked why I hadn't taken any meat from the buffet. After I offered my reluctant explanation—and the guy announced it to the entire room—30 people went eerily quiet, undoubtedly expecting me to launch into a speech on the virtues of hemp. In the corner, an elderly, suited man glared at me as he slowly raised a slice of bologna and executed the most menacing bite of cold cut in recorded history. I didn't get the scholarship.
I tell this story not to win your pity but to illustrate a point: I've been vegetarian for a decade, and when it comes up, I still get a look of confused horror that says, "But you seemed so … normal." The U.S. boasts more than 10 million herbivores today, yet most Americans assume that every last one is a loopy, self-satisfied health fanatic, hellbent on draining all the joy out of life. Those of us who want to avoid the social nightmare have to hide our vegetarianism like an Oxycontin addiction, because admit it, omnivores: You know nothing about us. Do we eat fish? Will we panic if confronted with a hamburger? Are we dying of malnutrition? You have no clue. So read on, my flesh-eating friends—I believe it's high time we cleared a few things up.
To demonstrate what a vegetarian really is, let's begin with a simple thought experiment. Imagine a completely normal person with completely normal food cravings, someone who has a broad range of friends, enjoys a good time, is carbon-based, and so on. Now remove from this person's diet anything that once had eyes, and, wham!, you have yourself a vegetarian. Normal person, no previously ocular food, end of story. Some people call themselves vegetarians and still eat chicken or fish, but unless we're talking about the kind of salmon that comes freshly plucked from the vine, this makes you an omnivore. A select few herbivores go one step further and avoid all animal products—milk, eggs, honey, leather—and they call themselves vegan, which rhymes with "tree men." These people are intense.
Vegetarians give up meat for a variety of ethical, environmental, and health reasons that are secondary to this essay's goal of increasing brotherly understanding, so I'll mostly set them aside. Suffice it to say that one day, I suddenly realized that I could never look a cow in the eyes, press a knocking gun to her temple, and pull the trigger without feeling I'd done something cruel and unnecessary. (Sure, if it's kill the cow or starve, then say your prayers, my bovine friend—but for now, it's not quite a mortal struggle to subsist on the other five food groups.) I am well-aware that even telling you this makes me seem like the kind of person who wants to break into your house and liberate your pet hamster—that is, like a PETA activist. Most vegetarians, though, would tell you that they appreciate the intentions of groups like PETA but not the obnoxious tactics. It's like this: We're all rooting for the same team, but they're the ones in face paint, bellowing obscenities at the umpire and flipping over every car with a Yankees bumper sticker. I have no designs on your Camry or your hamster.
Now, when I say that vegetarians are normal people with normal food cravings, many omnivores will hoist a lamb shank in triumph and point out that you can hardly call yourself normal if the aroma of, say, sizzling bacon doesn't fill you with deepest yearning. To which I reply: We're not insane. We know meat tastes good; it's why there's a freezer case at your supermarket full of woefully inadequate meat substitutes. Believe me, if obtaining bacon didn't require slaughtering a pig, I'd have a BLT in each hand right now with a bacon layer cake waiting in the fridge for dessert. But, that said, I can also tell you that with some time away from the butcher's section, many meat products start to seem gross. Ground beef in particular now strikes me as absolutely revolting; I have a vague memory that hamburgers taste good, but the idea of taking a cow's leg, mulching it into a fatty pulp, and forming it into a pancake makes me gag. And hot dogs … I mean, hot dogs? You do know what that is, right?
As a consolation prize we get tofu, a treasure most omnivores are more than happy to do without. Well, this may stun you, but I'm not any more excited about a steaming heap of unseasoned tofu blobs than you are. Tofu is like fugu blowfish sushi: Prepared correctly, it's delicious; prepared incorrectly, it's lethal. Very early in my vegetarian career, I found myself famished and stuck in a mall, so I wandered over to the food court's Asian counter. When I asked the teenage chief culinary artisan what was in the tofu stir-fry, he snorted and replied, "Shit." Desperation made me order it anyway, and I can tell you that promises have rarely been more loyally kept than this guy's pledge that the tofu would taste like shit. So here's a tip: Unless you know you're in expert hands (Thai restaurants are a good bet), don't even try tofu. Otherwise, it's your funeral.
As long as we're discussing restaurants, allow me a quick word with the hardworking chefs at America's dining establishments. We really appreciate that you included a vegetarian option on your menu (and if you didn't, is our money not green?), but it may interest you to know that most of us are not salad freaks on a grim slog for nourishment. We actually enjoy food, especially the kind that tastes good. So enough with the bland vegetable dishes, and, for God's sake, please make the Gardenburgers stop; it's stunning how many restaurants lavish unending care on their meat dishes yet are content to throw a flavorless hockey puck from Costco into the microwave and call it cuisine. Every vegetarian is used to slim pickings when dining out, so we're not asking for much—just for something you'd like to eat. I'll even offer a handy trick. Pretend you're trapped in a kitchen stocked with every ingredient imaginable, from asiago to zucchini, but with zero meat. With no flesh available, picture what you'd make for yourself; this is what we want, too.
For those kind-hearted omnivores who willingly invite feral vegetarians into their homes for dinner parties and barbecues (really! we do that, too!), the same rule applies—but also know that unless you're dealing with an herbivore who is a prick for unrelated reasons, we don't expect you to bend over backward for us.
In fact, if we get the sense that you cooked for three extra hours to accommodate our dietary preferences, we will marvel at your considerate nature, but we will also feel insanely guilty. Similarly, it's very thoughtful of you to ask whether it'll bother me if I see you eat meat, but don't worry: I'm not going to compose an epic poem about your club sandwich.
Which leads me to a vital point for friendly omnivore-herbivore relations. As you're enjoying that pork loin next to me, I am not silently judging you. I realize that anyone who has encountered the breed of smug vegetarian who says things like, "I can hear your lunch screaming," will find this tough to believe, but I'm honestly not out to convert you. My girlfriend and my closest pals all eat meat, and they'll affirm that I've never even raised an eyebrow about it. Now, do I think it strange that the same people who dress their dogs in berets and send them to day spas are often unfazed that an equally smart pig suffered and died to become their McMuffin? Yes, I do. (Or, to use a more pressing example, how many Americans will bemoan Eight Belles' fatal Kentucky Derby injury tonight at the dinner table between bites of beef?) Would I prefer it if we at least raised these animals humanely? Yes, I would.
Let's be honest, though: I'm not exactly St. Francis of Assisi over here, tenderly ministering to every chipmunk that crosses my path. I try to represent for the animal kingdom, but take a look at my shoes—they're made of leather, which, I am told by those with expert knowledge of the tanning process, comes from dead cows. This is the sort of revelation that prompts meat boosters to pick up the triumphant lamb shank once again and accuse us of hypocrisy. Well, sort of. (Hey, you try to find a pair of nonleather dress shoes.) My dedication to the cause might be incomplete, but I'd still say that doing something beats doing nothing. It's kind of like driving a hybrid: not a solution to the global-warming dilemma but a decent start. Let's just say that at the dinner table, I roll in a Prius.
Finally, grant me one more cordial request: Please don't try to convince us that being vegetarian is somehow wrong. If you're concerned for my health, that's very nice, though you can rest assured that I'm in shipshape. If you want to have an amiable tête-à-tête about vegetarianism, that's great. But if you insist on being the aggressive blowhard who takes meatlessness as a personal insult and rails about what fools we all are, you're only going to persuade me that you're a dickhead. When someone says he's Catholic, you probably don't start the stump speech about how God is a lie created to enslave the ignorant masses, and it's equally offensive to berate an herbivore. I know you think we're crazy. That's neat. But seeing as I've endured the hassle of being a vegetarian for several years now, perhaps I've given this a little thought. So let's just agree to disagree and get on with making fun of Hillary Clinton's inability to operate a coffee machine.
Because, really, peace and understanding are what it's all about: your porterhouse and my portobello coexisting in perfect harmony—though preferably not touching. We're actually not so different, after all, my omnivorous chums. In fact, I like to think that when an omnivore looks in the mirror, he just sees a vegetarian who happens to eat meat. Or, no, wait, maybe the mirror sees the omnivore through the prism of flesh and realizes we all have a crystalline animal soul, you know?
This is excellent weed, by the way, if you want a hit. Hey, while you're here: Have I ever told you about hemp?
Taylor Clark is a writer based in Portland. His first book, Starbucked: A Double Tall Tale of Caffeine, Commerce, and Culture,was published in November.
Chef is not now, has never been, and probably never will be a vegetarian. However, some of my best friends are. I'm even friendly with a vegan or two. So this is not about ME. If you're one of those who is absolutely clueless about what a vegetarian is or why any sane person would want to be one, read on.
Meatless Like Me
I may be a vegetarian, but I still love the smell of bacon.
By Taylor Clark
Every vegetarian remembers his first time. Not the unremarkable event of his first meal without meat, mind you. No, I mean the first time he casually lets slip that he's turned herbivore, prompting everyone in earshot to stare at him as if he just revealed plans to sail his carrot-powered plasma yacht to Neptune. For me, this first time came at an Elks scholarship luncheon in rural Oregon when I was 18. All day, I'd succeeded at seeming a promising and responsible young man, until that fateful moment when someone asked why I hadn't taken any meat from the buffet. After I offered my reluctant explanation—and the guy announced it to the entire room—30 people went eerily quiet, undoubtedly expecting me to launch into a speech on the virtues of hemp. In the corner, an elderly, suited man glared at me as he slowly raised a slice of bologna and executed the most menacing bite of cold cut in recorded history. I didn't get the scholarship.
I tell this story not to win your pity but to illustrate a point: I've been vegetarian for a decade, and when it comes up, I still get a look of confused horror that says, "But you seemed so … normal." The U.S. boasts more than 10 million herbivores today, yet most Americans assume that every last one is a loopy, self-satisfied health fanatic, hellbent on draining all the joy out of life. Those of us who want to avoid the social nightmare have to hide our vegetarianism like an Oxycontin addiction, because admit it, omnivores: You know nothing about us. Do we eat fish? Will we panic if confronted with a hamburger? Are we dying of malnutrition? You have no clue. So read on, my flesh-eating friends—I believe it's high time we cleared a few things up.
To demonstrate what a vegetarian really is, let's begin with a simple thought experiment. Imagine a completely normal person with completely normal food cravings, someone who has a broad range of friends, enjoys a good time, is carbon-based, and so on. Now remove from this person's diet anything that once had eyes, and, wham!, you have yourself a vegetarian. Normal person, no previously ocular food, end of story. Some people call themselves vegetarians and still eat chicken or fish, but unless we're talking about the kind of salmon that comes freshly plucked from the vine, this makes you an omnivore. A select few herbivores go one step further and avoid all animal products—milk, eggs, honey, leather—and they call themselves vegan, which rhymes with "tree men." These people are intense.
Vegetarians give up meat for a variety of ethical, environmental, and health reasons that are secondary to this essay's goal of increasing brotherly understanding, so I'll mostly set them aside. Suffice it to say that one day, I suddenly realized that I could never look a cow in the eyes, press a knocking gun to her temple, and pull the trigger without feeling I'd done something cruel and unnecessary. (Sure, if it's kill the cow or starve, then say your prayers, my bovine friend—but for now, it's not quite a mortal struggle to subsist on the other five food groups.) I am well-aware that even telling you this makes me seem like the kind of person who wants to break into your house and liberate your pet hamster—that is, like a PETA activist. Most vegetarians, though, would tell you that they appreciate the intentions of groups like PETA but not the obnoxious tactics. It's like this: We're all rooting for the same team, but they're the ones in face paint, bellowing obscenities at the umpire and flipping over every car with a Yankees bumper sticker. I have no designs on your Camry or your hamster.
Now, when I say that vegetarians are normal people with normal food cravings, many omnivores will hoist a lamb shank in triumph and point out that you can hardly call yourself normal if the aroma of, say, sizzling bacon doesn't fill you with deepest yearning. To which I reply: We're not insane. We know meat tastes good; it's why there's a freezer case at your supermarket full of woefully inadequate meat substitutes. Believe me, if obtaining bacon didn't require slaughtering a pig, I'd have a BLT in each hand right now with a bacon layer cake waiting in the fridge for dessert. But, that said, I can also tell you that with some time away from the butcher's section, many meat products start to seem gross. Ground beef in particular now strikes me as absolutely revolting; I have a vague memory that hamburgers taste good, but the idea of taking a cow's leg, mulching it into a fatty pulp, and forming it into a pancake makes me gag. And hot dogs … I mean, hot dogs? You do know what that is, right?
As a consolation prize we get tofu, a treasure most omnivores are more than happy to do without. Well, this may stun you, but I'm not any more excited about a steaming heap of unseasoned tofu blobs than you are. Tofu is like fugu blowfish sushi: Prepared correctly, it's delicious; prepared incorrectly, it's lethal. Very early in my vegetarian career, I found myself famished and stuck in a mall, so I wandered over to the food court's Asian counter. When I asked the teenage chief culinary artisan what was in the tofu stir-fry, he snorted and replied, "Shit." Desperation made me order it anyway, and I can tell you that promises have rarely been more loyally kept than this guy's pledge that the tofu would taste like shit. So here's a tip: Unless you know you're in expert hands (Thai restaurants are a good bet), don't even try tofu. Otherwise, it's your funeral.
As long as we're discussing restaurants, allow me a quick word with the hardworking chefs at America's dining establishments. We really appreciate that you included a vegetarian option on your menu (and if you didn't, is our money not green?), but it may interest you to know that most of us are not salad freaks on a grim slog for nourishment. We actually enjoy food, especially the kind that tastes good. So enough with the bland vegetable dishes, and, for God's sake, please make the Gardenburgers stop; it's stunning how many restaurants lavish unending care on their meat dishes yet are content to throw a flavorless hockey puck from Costco into the microwave and call it cuisine. Every vegetarian is used to slim pickings when dining out, so we're not asking for much—just for something you'd like to eat. I'll even offer a handy trick. Pretend you're trapped in a kitchen stocked with every ingredient imaginable, from asiago to zucchini, but with zero meat. With no flesh available, picture what you'd make for yourself; this is what we want, too.
For those kind-hearted omnivores who willingly invite feral vegetarians into their homes for dinner parties and barbecues (really! we do that, too!), the same rule applies—but also know that unless you're dealing with an herbivore who is a prick for unrelated reasons, we don't expect you to bend over backward for us.
In fact, if we get the sense that you cooked for three extra hours to accommodate our dietary preferences, we will marvel at your considerate nature, but we will also feel insanely guilty. Similarly, it's very thoughtful of you to ask whether it'll bother me if I see you eat meat, but don't worry: I'm not going to compose an epic poem about your club sandwich.
Which leads me to a vital point for friendly omnivore-herbivore relations. As you're enjoying that pork loin next to me, I am not silently judging you. I realize that anyone who has encountered the breed of smug vegetarian who says things like, "I can hear your lunch screaming," will find this tough to believe, but I'm honestly not out to convert you. My girlfriend and my closest pals all eat meat, and they'll affirm that I've never even raised an eyebrow about it. Now, do I think it strange that the same people who dress their dogs in berets and send them to day spas are often unfazed that an equally smart pig suffered and died to become their McMuffin? Yes, I do. (Or, to use a more pressing example, how many Americans will bemoan Eight Belles' fatal Kentucky Derby injury tonight at the dinner table between bites of beef?) Would I prefer it if we at least raised these animals humanely? Yes, I would.
Let's be honest, though: I'm not exactly St. Francis of Assisi over here, tenderly ministering to every chipmunk that crosses my path. I try to represent for the animal kingdom, but take a look at my shoes—they're made of leather, which, I am told by those with expert knowledge of the tanning process, comes from dead cows. This is the sort of revelation that prompts meat boosters to pick up the triumphant lamb shank once again and accuse us of hypocrisy. Well, sort of. (Hey, you try to find a pair of nonleather dress shoes.) My dedication to the cause might be incomplete, but I'd still say that doing something beats doing nothing. It's kind of like driving a hybrid: not a solution to the global-warming dilemma but a decent start. Let's just say that at the dinner table, I roll in a Prius.
Finally, grant me one more cordial request: Please don't try to convince us that being vegetarian is somehow wrong. If you're concerned for my health, that's very nice, though you can rest assured that I'm in shipshape. If you want to have an amiable tête-à-tête about vegetarianism, that's great. But if you insist on being the aggressive blowhard who takes meatlessness as a personal insult and rails about what fools we all are, you're only going to persuade me that you're a dickhead. When someone says he's Catholic, you probably don't start the stump speech about how God is a lie created to enslave the ignorant masses, and it's equally offensive to berate an herbivore. I know you think we're crazy. That's neat. But seeing as I've endured the hassle of being a vegetarian for several years now, perhaps I've given this a little thought. So let's just agree to disagree and get on with making fun of Hillary Clinton's inability to operate a coffee machine.
Because, really, peace and understanding are what it's all about: your porterhouse and my portobello coexisting in perfect harmony—though preferably not touching. We're actually not so different, after all, my omnivorous chums. In fact, I like to think that when an omnivore looks in the mirror, he just sees a vegetarian who happens to eat meat. Or, no, wait, maybe the mirror sees the omnivore through the prism of flesh and realizes we all have a crystalline animal soul, you know?
This is excellent weed, by the way, if you want a hit. Hey, while you're here: Have I ever told you about hemp?
Taylor Clark is a writer based in Portland. His first book, Starbucked: A Double Tall Tale of Caffeine, Commerce, and Culture,was published in November.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Chicago Lifts Ban On Foie Gras
CHICAGO (AFP) — For nearly two years, foie gras fans in Hogtown slipped into "duckeasies" to indulge in a banned delight.
That all changed Wednesday when Chicago's city council repealed a prohibition on the sale of the fatty duck and goose liver dish.
"It's fabulous!" said chef Didier Durand. "Break out the champagne!"
Durand has been a vocal opponent of the ban on the French delicacy and, like a handful of other renegade restaurateurs, got around the ordinance by serving it for free.
"Yes, I was a duckeasy," he admitted furtively, nervous about potential problems with a pending liquor license.
The word is a play on Chicago's famed 'speakeasies,' which secretly sold spirits during the 1920-1933 Prohibition era when alcohol sales were banned in the United States.
"We also had a club called Turtle Soup where people were handing (us) turtle business cards and that meant they wanted foie gras," Didier told AFP.
The French delicacy, which is made by force-feeding ducks and geese so their livers become enlarged, has been the focus of an intense international campaign against animal cruelty.
Force-feeding birds has been banned in 15 countries, including Germany, Italy, Israel and Britain, according to animal rights activists Farm Sanctuary which runs the nofoiegras.org website.
But Chicago -- which garnered the nickname Hogtown because of its once sprawling slaughter houses -- was the only governmental body in the world to impose a ban on the actual sale of foie gras.
Chicago's ban followed a bill introduced in California in 2004 that bans the sale and production of foie gras by 2012.
While the ban was passed by a vote of 48-to-1 after animal rights activists won over a city council committee, few fines were imposed on the defiant restaurants which continued to serve a dish that has been granted cultural heritage status by the French parliament.
The ban became a cause celebre among those who opposed government intervention in culinary decisions. One hot dog joint even named a wiener after the alderman who sponsored the bill and topped it with foie gras. It was among the few fined.
Mayor Richard Daley has repeatedly called the ban "silly" and said it made Chicago "the laughingstock of the nation" but was, until now, unable to convince council members to repeal the ban.
The Illinois Restaurant Association also failed to have the ban overturned in court.
The repeal passed Wednesday over the shouted objections of the ordinance's original sponsor by a vote of 37 to six after a council member forced it out of committee.
Alderman Joe Moore said he objected to the fact that the repeal was passed without debate and said he continues to support the ban despite the ridicule.
"It's a form of abject cruelty," he told AFP. "I felt and I still feel it is important to speak out against such forms of cruelty. Chicago's ordinance did just that. Unfortunately it was a step back for civilization."
Animal rights activists were equally dismayed.
"To reverse a compassionate and admirable decision under pressure from political bullies and special interests shows a cowardly brand of cynicism unlike any we have seen in our efforts to give voice to the most vulnerable beings in our society - animals raised for food," said Julie Janovsky, director of campaigns for animal rights group Farm Sanctuary.
The ban will be stricken from the municipal code on June 10, city officials said.
That all changed Wednesday when Chicago's city council repealed a prohibition on the sale of the fatty duck and goose liver dish.
"It's fabulous!" said chef Didier Durand. "Break out the champagne!"
Durand has been a vocal opponent of the ban on the French delicacy and, like a handful of other renegade restaurateurs, got around the ordinance by serving it for free.
"Yes, I was a duckeasy," he admitted furtively, nervous about potential problems with a pending liquor license.
The word is a play on Chicago's famed 'speakeasies,' which secretly sold spirits during the 1920-1933 Prohibition era when alcohol sales were banned in the United States.
"We also had a club called Turtle Soup where people were handing (us) turtle business cards and that meant they wanted foie gras," Didier told AFP.
The French delicacy, which is made by force-feeding ducks and geese so their livers become enlarged, has been the focus of an intense international campaign against animal cruelty.
Force-feeding birds has been banned in 15 countries, including Germany, Italy, Israel and Britain, according to animal rights activists Farm Sanctuary which runs the nofoiegras.org website.
But Chicago -- which garnered the nickname Hogtown because of its once sprawling slaughter houses -- was the only governmental body in the world to impose a ban on the actual sale of foie gras.
Chicago's ban followed a bill introduced in California in 2004 that bans the sale and production of foie gras by 2012.
While the ban was passed by a vote of 48-to-1 after animal rights activists won over a city council committee, few fines were imposed on the defiant restaurants which continued to serve a dish that has been granted cultural heritage status by the French parliament.
The ban became a cause celebre among those who opposed government intervention in culinary decisions. One hot dog joint even named a wiener after the alderman who sponsored the bill and topped it with foie gras. It was among the few fined.
Mayor Richard Daley has repeatedly called the ban "silly" and said it made Chicago "the laughingstock of the nation" but was, until now, unable to convince council members to repeal the ban.
The Illinois Restaurant Association also failed to have the ban overturned in court.
The repeal passed Wednesday over the shouted objections of the ordinance's original sponsor by a vote of 37 to six after a council member forced it out of committee.
Alderman Joe Moore said he objected to the fact that the repeal was passed without debate and said he continues to support the ban despite the ridicule.
"It's a form of abject cruelty," he told AFP. "I felt and I still feel it is important to speak out against such forms of cruelty. Chicago's ordinance did just that. Unfortunately it was a step back for civilization."
Animal rights activists were equally dismayed.
"To reverse a compassionate and admirable decision under pressure from political bullies and special interests shows a cowardly brand of cynicism unlike any we have seen in our efforts to give voice to the most vulnerable beings in our society - animals raised for food," said Julie Janovsky, director of campaigns for animal rights group Farm Sanctuary.
The ban will be stricken from the municipal code on June 10, city officials said.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Sharing In The Office: How Much Is Too Much?
Posted on Forbes.com
Tara Weiss, 05.06.08, 5:00 PM ET:
The Monday morning ritual of asking co-workers what they did over the weekend isn't as ubiquitous as it used to be. If you're a Facebook user, you likely already know from reading their status updates and seeing photos posted throughout the weekend.
Not everyone is a Facebook user, but that same spirit of over-sharing is infecting the workplace. Thanks to Facebook, reality TV and personal blogs, it seems that a life not publicized isn't worth living.
Remember to think before you speak, or, er, post. Sure, sharing personal stories is vital to forming bonds at the office. But sharing too much, particularly inappropriate details of your life, can affect how you're viewed professionally.
The same goes for not sharing at all.
"Your colleagues are your professional family," says Barbara Pachter, co-author of New Rules @ Work and a business etiquette expert. "You want that connection, but ultimately you're also there for your career. That's where the balance needs to come in."
It also helps people understand who you are and where you come from. "It provides co-workers with insights and helps others deal with you," says Beverly Langford, author of The Etiquette Edge: The Unspoken Rules for Business Success. "If I know things about you it helps me know how to treat you. It also helps people form bonds because of commonalities. You realize that someone is more than just the person in finance or he's the marketing guy."
Pachter recalls working with a company where the sales manager rarely shared any personal details. He likely thought he was keeping a professional veneer, but when he left for a long weekend to get married and didn't tell any of his co-workers, they were offended. His co-workers didn't feel comfortable with him and, whenever possible, avoided working with him. As a result, he didn't get promotions and ultimately wound up leaving the company.
"What you're doing by not sharing is creating a sheet of black ice, and there's no way for anyone to feel connected to you," says Pachter. "In the absence of information, people will make things up that [are] often worse than the truth."
But be careful what you share. It's widely known that managers check social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace as part of the vetting process during hiring. Many say it's their way of examining a potential employee's ability to make sound choices. Blatant bad behavior aside, consider this: Do you want your boss or a potential boss to see images of you making out with your significant other or reading that blog post about your credit card debt? Don't think so.
"We leave a digital footprint that follows us wherever we go," says Dov Seidman, author of How: Why How We Do Anything Means Everything…in Business (and in Life).
Since we spend so much time at the office and with co-workers, it's practically impossible not to share intimate personal details. But someone who is a friend at the same professional level as you today might be your boss tomorrow. If you frequently come into the office hung over and brag about how much you partied, you might not be their first choice for a teammate on an important project.
The same goes for sharing the details of a breakup. If you tell a colleague that you fall to pieces and require several days off after breakups, that person might avoid working with you.
When sharing with co-workers there are some guidelines. First, always be honest. You don't want to be branded untrustworthy.
Stay away from discussing politics with people with whom you aren't extremely close. Sharing deeply held political beliefs "can change people's opinions of you," says Pachter. Also, steer clear of issues that might start heated debates at work. It ratchets up the tension level with someone you have to see daily.
It might seem obvious, but stay away from talk of sex. Feel free to mention a nice date or that you're interested romantically in someone. But anything that involves taking clothes off is off-limits. Some people might take innocent sharing as sexual harassment. Also, news tends to travel fast in an office, so be prepared to have those intimate details shared with others you didn't intend to hear.
Religion is another touchy subject. It's fine to mention spending the holidays with family or that you're taking time off for a religious day, but don't go much deeper than that. Many consider religion extremely personal and don't want to be part of a conversation on a topic. But also, for those that aren't religious, hearing about your belief in God might change their opinion of you.
Finally, don't be the office complainer. There's nothing that turns a group of people off more than the office downer.
Tara Weiss, 05.06.08, 5:00 PM ET:
The Monday morning ritual of asking co-workers what they did over the weekend isn't as ubiquitous as it used to be. If you're a Facebook user, you likely already know from reading their status updates and seeing photos posted throughout the weekend.
Not everyone is a Facebook user, but that same spirit of over-sharing is infecting the workplace. Thanks to Facebook, reality TV and personal blogs, it seems that a life not publicized isn't worth living.
Remember to think before you speak, or, er, post. Sure, sharing personal stories is vital to forming bonds at the office. But sharing too much, particularly inappropriate details of your life, can affect how you're viewed professionally.
The same goes for not sharing at all.
"Your colleagues are your professional family," says Barbara Pachter, co-author of New Rules @ Work and a business etiquette expert. "You want that connection, but ultimately you're also there for your career. That's where the balance needs to come in."
It also helps people understand who you are and where you come from. "It provides co-workers with insights and helps others deal with you," says Beverly Langford, author of The Etiquette Edge: The Unspoken Rules for Business Success. "If I know things about you it helps me know how to treat you. It also helps people form bonds because of commonalities. You realize that someone is more than just the person in finance or he's the marketing guy."
Pachter recalls working with a company where the sales manager rarely shared any personal details. He likely thought he was keeping a professional veneer, but when he left for a long weekend to get married and didn't tell any of his co-workers, they were offended. His co-workers didn't feel comfortable with him and, whenever possible, avoided working with him. As a result, he didn't get promotions and ultimately wound up leaving the company.
"What you're doing by not sharing is creating a sheet of black ice, and there's no way for anyone to feel connected to you," says Pachter. "In the absence of information, people will make things up that [are] often worse than the truth."
But be careful what you share. It's widely known that managers check social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace as part of the vetting process during hiring. Many say it's their way of examining a potential employee's ability to make sound choices. Blatant bad behavior aside, consider this: Do you want your boss or a potential boss to see images of you making out with your significant other or reading that blog post about your credit card debt? Don't think so.
"We leave a digital footprint that follows us wherever we go," says Dov Seidman, author of How: Why How We Do Anything Means Everything…in Business (and in Life).
Since we spend so much time at the office and with co-workers, it's practically impossible not to share intimate personal details. But someone who is a friend at the same professional level as you today might be your boss tomorrow. If you frequently come into the office hung over and brag about how much you partied, you might not be their first choice for a teammate on an important project.
The same goes for sharing the details of a breakup. If you tell a colleague that you fall to pieces and require several days off after breakups, that person might avoid working with you.
When sharing with co-workers there are some guidelines. First, always be honest. You don't want to be branded untrustworthy.
Stay away from discussing politics with people with whom you aren't extremely close. Sharing deeply held political beliefs "can change people's opinions of you," says Pachter. Also, steer clear of issues that might start heated debates at work. It ratchets up the tension level with someone you have to see daily.
It might seem obvious, but stay away from talk of sex. Feel free to mention a nice date or that you're interested romantically in someone. But anything that involves taking clothes off is off-limits. Some people might take innocent sharing as sexual harassment. Also, news tends to travel fast in an office, so be prepared to have those intimate details shared with others you didn't intend to hear.
Religion is another touchy subject. It's fine to mention spending the holidays with family or that you're taking time off for a religious day, but don't go much deeper than that. Many consider religion extremely personal and don't want to be part of a conversation on a topic. But also, for those that aren't religious, hearing about your belief in God might change their opinion of you.
Finally, don't be the office complainer. There's nothing that turns a group of people off more than the office downer.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Could "Healthy Eating" Lead to Malnutrition?
From The Times
May 2, 2008
Too much healthy eating is as bad for children as too much junk
It is no surprise that children love junk food. Its makers go to great lengths to make sure that their offerings deliver a full-on, unsubtle assault on taste buds, with plenty of salt or sugar to create the sense that it is “tasty”.
But a significant proportion of our nation's children are worryingly chubby and heading for potential obesity problems in later life, it seems that others are suffering from “muesli belt malnutrition”: the overzealous application of “healthy eating” rules imposed on their daily food intake. A recent study warns us that too much fibre and too little fat can lead to vitamin deficiencies and stunts growth in the under-fives.
This means that young children who have wholemeal bread, brown pasta and piles of fruit imposed on them are getting too full too quickly and do not have room for enough foods such as dairy products, meat, eggs and fish, which have vital nutrients for growth and development.
So how do we strike a balance? Children thrive on a good variety of foods, which includes grains and potatoes such as bread, pasta, noodles, rice and all varieties of potatoes; calcium-rich foods such as milk, yoghurt, fish canned with edible bones such as pilchards; protein-rich foods such as eggs, chicken and turkey, red meat and Quorn products; plus a variety of different fruit and vegetables. The million-dollar question is how much should they have of each at various ages.
This to some extent varies with the size and appetite of your child. The World Health Organisation has provided some useful parameters.
Lower-fat milk
You can start giving toddlers semi-skimmed milk from the age of 2. Fully skimmed milk is not suitable as a main drink until they are 5, because it doesn't contain enough calories for a growing child.
Fish
Because oily fish such as mackerel, salmon and sardines contain residues of pollutants such as dioxins and PCBs, the Food Standards Agency advises that you can give boys up to four portions a week, but that girls should have no more than two a week, because the residues can build up in their bodies over the years and can affect reproductive functions in later life. Shark, swordfish and marlin contain relatively high levels of mercury, which may affect a child's developing nervous system, so these should be avoided.
Eggs and nuts
Toddlers should have their eggs well cooked until the white and yolk are solid to avoid salmonella, while nuts for children under 5 should be given only crushed or flaked to reduce the risk of choking.
Wholegrain foods
Definitely do not add bran to children's foods and avoid giving very young children wholemeal pasta and brown rice. Too much fibre can sometimes reduce the amount of minerals, such as calcium and iron, that they can absorb and leave them feeling bloated and too full to finish their meal. By the time they are 5, young children can gradually be weaned on to wholegrain versions of cereals.
What about salt?
There is no need to add salt to the food of children under the age of three. Children in the UK manage to chomp their way through as much as 10-12g of salt daily and yet under the age of 7, children should have no more than 3g of salt each day and those between 7 and 10 no more than 5g. Once over 11, like adults, they should have no more than 6g of salt daily. Current high intakes can damage their developing kidneys and store up potential blood pressure and heart disease problems.
How much sugar?
Our children are getting about 17 per cent of their daily calories from sugar when they should, like adults, be getting no more than 10per cent. This means that four to six-year-olds should eat no more than 40g of sugar a day; seven to ten-year-olds no more than 46g and 11 to 14-year-olds no more than 50g.
If you limit children's consumption of sweets, chocolate and biscuits, along with fizzy drinks and squashes, you will cut their sugar intake. But honey in flapjacks, fruit syrup added to “orange drinks”, glucose syrup in breakfast cereals and dextrose in fromage frais all also count towards sugar intake and also need to be watched.
A good rule of thumb is to look on the nutrition label. Foods and drinks with less than 2g per 100g of sugars (this figure will include all the various forms in which sugar comes) is low in sugar, while any with more than 10g is high.
May 2, 2008
Too much healthy eating is as bad for children as too much junk
It is no surprise that children love junk food. Its makers go to great lengths to make sure that their offerings deliver a full-on, unsubtle assault on taste buds, with plenty of salt or sugar to create the sense that it is “tasty”.
But a significant proportion of our nation's children are worryingly chubby and heading for potential obesity problems in later life, it seems that others are suffering from “muesli belt malnutrition”: the overzealous application of “healthy eating” rules imposed on their daily food intake. A recent study warns us that too much fibre and too little fat can lead to vitamin deficiencies and stunts growth in the under-fives.
This means that young children who have wholemeal bread, brown pasta and piles of fruit imposed on them are getting too full too quickly and do not have room for enough foods such as dairy products, meat, eggs and fish, which have vital nutrients for growth and development.
So how do we strike a balance? Children thrive on a good variety of foods, which includes grains and potatoes such as bread, pasta, noodles, rice and all varieties of potatoes; calcium-rich foods such as milk, yoghurt, fish canned with edible bones such as pilchards; protein-rich foods such as eggs, chicken and turkey, red meat and Quorn products; plus a variety of different fruit and vegetables. The million-dollar question is how much should they have of each at various ages.
This to some extent varies with the size and appetite of your child. The World Health Organisation has provided some useful parameters.
Lower-fat milk
You can start giving toddlers semi-skimmed milk from the age of 2. Fully skimmed milk is not suitable as a main drink until they are 5, because it doesn't contain enough calories for a growing child.
Fish
Because oily fish such as mackerel, salmon and sardines contain residues of pollutants such as dioxins and PCBs, the Food Standards Agency advises that you can give boys up to four portions a week, but that girls should have no more than two a week, because the residues can build up in their bodies over the years and can affect reproductive functions in later life. Shark, swordfish and marlin contain relatively high levels of mercury, which may affect a child's developing nervous system, so these should be avoided.
Eggs and nuts
Toddlers should have their eggs well cooked until the white and yolk are solid to avoid salmonella, while nuts for children under 5 should be given only crushed or flaked to reduce the risk of choking.
Wholegrain foods
Definitely do not add bran to children's foods and avoid giving very young children wholemeal pasta and brown rice. Too much fibre can sometimes reduce the amount of minerals, such as calcium and iron, that they can absorb and leave them feeling bloated and too full to finish their meal. By the time they are 5, young children can gradually be weaned on to wholegrain versions of cereals.
What about salt?
There is no need to add salt to the food of children under the age of three. Children in the UK manage to chomp their way through as much as 10-12g of salt daily and yet under the age of 7, children should have no more than 3g of salt each day and those between 7 and 10 no more than 5g. Once over 11, like adults, they should have no more than 6g of salt daily. Current high intakes can damage their developing kidneys and store up potential blood pressure and heart disease problems.
How much sugar?
Our children are getting about 17 per cent of their daily calories from sugar when they should, like adults, be getting no more than 10per cent. This means that four to six-year-olds should eat no more than 40g of sugar a day; seven to ten-year-olds no more than 46g and 11 to 14-year-olds no more than 50g.
If you limit children's consumption of sweets, chocolate and biscuits, along with fizzy drinks and squashes, you will cut their sugar intake. But honey in flapjacks, fruit syrup added to “orange drinks”, glucose syrup in breakfast cereals and dextrose in fromage frais all also count towards sugar intake and also need to be watched.
A good rule of thumb is to look on the nutrition label. Foods and drinks with less than 2g per 100g of sugars (this figure will include all the various forms in which sugar comes) is low in sugar, while any with more than 10g is high.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Congratulations to Class #49!
Class #49 of the Second Helpings Culinary Job Training Program graduated on Friday, May 2, 2008. CONGRATULATIONS to the graduates!
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Do We Vote What We Eat?
What’s for Dinner? The Pollster Wants to Know
By Kim Severson
IF there’s butter and white wine in your refrigerator and Fig Newtons in the cookie jar, you’re likely to vote for Hillary Clinton. Prefer olive oil, Bear Naked granola and a latte to go? You probably like Barack Obama, too.
And if you’re leaning toward John McCain, it’s all about kicking back with a bourbon and a stuffed crust pizza while you watch the Democrats fight it out next week in Pennsylvania.
If what we eat says a lot about who we are, it also says something about how we might vote.
Although precincts and polls are being parsed, the political advisers to the presidential candidates are also looking closely at consumer behavior, including how people eat, as a way to scavenge for votes. The practice is called microtargeting, as much political discipline as buzzword. The idea is that in the brand-driven United States, what we buy and how we spend our free time is a good predictor of our politics.
Political strategists slice and dice the electorate into small segments, starting with traditional demographics like age and income, then mixing consumer information like whether you prefer casinos or cruises, hunting or cooking, a Prius or a pickup.
Once they find small groups of like-minded people, campaigns can efficiently send customized phone, e-mail or direct mail messages to potential supporters, avoiding inefficient one-size-fits-all mailings. Pockets of support that might have gone unnoticed can be ferreted out.
“This is essentially the way Williams-Sonoma knows which of its catalogs to send you,” said Christopher Mann of MSHC Partners, a political communications firm, which has used microtargeting to help dozens of successful candidates, including Gov. Christine Gregoire of Washington and Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia.
Although gender, religion and other basic personal data are much more valuable for pollsters, information about eating — along with travel and hobbies — are in the second tier of data used to predict how someone might vote, he said.
So, for example, Mr. Mann knows that someone who subscribes to lots of gourmet cooking magazines is more likely to be a Democrat or at least more open to progressive causes. That can help a campaign decide if it’s worth spending money courting that person’s vote.
Although Karl Rove was not the first to use microtargeting in a campaign, he brought it to new levels of sophistication and prominence, dividing swing voters into groups like “tax and terrorism moderates.” The strategy helped send George Bush back to the White House in 2004. Matthew Dowd, the former chief strategist for President Bush who is now a political commentator for ABC, helped orchestrate that effort. The Bush team studied food preferences, among dozens of other traits, as a shortcut to finding independents who might lean Republican, he said.
For example, Dr Pepper is a Republican soda. Pepsi-Cola and Sprite are Democratic. So are most clear liquors, like gin and vodka, along with white wine and Evian water. Republicans skew toward brown liquors like bourbon or scotch, red wine and Fiji water.
When it comes to fried chicken, he said, Democrats prefer Popeyes and Republicans Chick-fil-A.
“Anything organic or more Whole Foods-y skews more Democratic,” Mr. Dowd said.
But consumer information has to be studied in context. “I don’t know how much you can use food or drink alone to determine how they will vote,” he said. “You can’t have a candidate with a Pepsi-Cola and Pizza Hut box and think that’s going to win an election for you.” Jeff Navin, managing director of American Environics, a progressive research and strategy firm, agrees.
“Knowing that your base drinks gin doesn’t give you a clear idea on how to communicate with them effectively on issues,” he said. “But if you take it a level deeper and say, are there psychological drivers that will help understand the values behind the behavior, you can speak to those values and persuade voters.”
Mr. Navin offers an example from his firm’s ongoing survey that periodically asks 1,800 people in-depth questions about their lives. In last summer’s polling, the latest available, Mrs. Clinton scored high among voters who also had favorable views of McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Starbucks.
That led his team to conclude that Clinton supporters put a high value on national brands.
Although the landscape in the Democratic race has shifted since the poll was conducted, Mr. Navin said, back then the name Clinton was the most popular national Democratic brand.
Mark Penn, a microtargeting expert who was dismissed as chief strategist for the Clinton campaign last week, wrote a book on the subject: “Microtrends: The Small Forces Behind Tomorrow’s Big Changes” (Twelve, 2007).
Although Mr. Penn, who claims credit for coining the term “soccer mom,” didn’t specifically seek out research on the dining habits of voters, he does use food as a way to define the candidates.
Specifically, he points to Mr. Obama’s comments about the rising price of arugula at Whole Foods during a campaign stop in Iowa. “He has more of the arugula vote,” he said in an e-mail message last week. “Senator Clinton’s voters are more likely to be making ends meet and so they do a lot more cooking at home and a lot less eating out at expensive restaurants.”
Although Mr. Obama’s team is also using consumer data to target voters, the campaign is focusing more on what one adviser called “macrotargeting.” The idea is to build a unified, all-encompassing Obama brand that works well across all kinds of media platforms. “I would say we’re old-fashioned in that you have to look at America as a whole,” said Bill Burton, Mr. Obama’s national press secretary.
That’s not to say they don’t have specific information about voters, he said. And the campaign isn’t above using food to gain an edge. After the founders of Ben and Jerry’s endorsed Mr. Obama, the campaign blog quickly suggested a new ice cream flavor that plays off of a favorite campaign slogan: Yes, Pecan!
Whether a campaign uses a lot or a little consumer information, it can cause trouble if not interpreted correctly, some political veterans cautioned.
An environmentally minded independent who trends Democratic might buy organic milk, but so might an independent conservative who is more concerned about the health of her children than the state of the earth. They buy the same product, but for different reasons. Send an environmental message to the conservative and you could lose her vote.
That’s why some, notably James Carville, a Democratic strategist and CNN political commentator, see microtargeting as a waste of time and money. Although he believes the cost of food is a fast-rising issue among voters, knowing what they eat doesn’t win elections.
“Suppose I found out people who drink cappuccinos are Democrats and black coffee drinkers are likely to vote Republican?” he asked. “So what? All kinds of other things are more predictive and less expensive to find out.”
Besides, the lines between who eats what continues to blur. Republicans are not necessarily red-meat-eating bourbon swillers, and not all Democrats are carrying their lattes to the farmers’ market.
Mr. Mann recently saw someone on a Metro train in Washington with a Bush/Cheney sticker on his bag reading “Animal, Vegetable, Miracle,” Barbara Kingsolver's meditation on eating local food.
Some people who cook and serve food have been students of microtargeting for years. JoAnn Clevenger, the owner of the Upperline restaurant in New Orleans, doesn’t need a data set to identify how customers might vote. She just watches what they order.
“The Republicans are more formal and have more attention to structure when they eat,” she said. The classic example would be her delicate trout meunière.
Democrats tend to order earthy, down-home food with lots of juice for sopping, like Cane River country shrimp with garlic, bacon and mushrooms.
But lately she’s seen a lot of interest from both sides for her Oysters St. Claude. The oysters are coated with corn flour, gently fried and then slipped back into their shells and covered with an adventurous, Morrocan-style sauce seasoned with ground whole lemons, garlic, cayenne and paprika.
It’s the ultimate crossover dish, and she believes it’s popular this year because voters are being pulled in several directions.
“You have a respect and a yearning for the past,” she said, “but a feeling like you want something new and exciting that says let’s go all the way.”
By Kim Severson
IF there’s butter and white wine in your refrigerator and Fig Newtons in the cookie jar, you’re likely to vote for Hillary Clinton. Prefer olive oil, Bear Naked granola and a latte to go? You probably like Barack Obama, too.
And if you’re leaning toward John McCain, it’s all about kicking back with a bourbon and a stuffed crust pizza while you watch the Democrats fight it out next week in Pennsylvania.
If what we eat says a lot about who we are, it also says something about how we might vote.
Although precincts and polls are being parsed, the political advisers to the presidential candidates are also looking closely at consumer behavior, including how people eat, as a way to scavenge for votes. The practice is called microtargeting, as much political discipline as buzzword. The idea is that in the brand-driven United States, what we buy and how we spend our free time is a good predictor of our politics.
Political strategists slice and dice the electorate into small segments, starting with traditional demographics like age and income, then mixing consumer information like whether you prefer casinos or cruises, hunting or cooking, a Prius or a pickup.
Once they find small groups of like-minded people, campaigns can efficiently send customized phone, e-mail or direct mail messages to potential supporters, avoiding inefficient one-size-fits-all mailings. Pockets of support that might have gone unnoticed can be ferreted out.
“This is essentially the way Williams-Sonoma knows which of its catalogs to send you,” said Christopher Mann of MSHC Partners, a political communications firm, which has used microtargeting to help dozens of successful candidates, including Gov. Christine Gregoire of Washington and Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia.
Although gender, religion and other basic personal data are much more valuable for pollsters, information about eating — along with travel and hobbies — are in the second tier of data used to predict how someone might vote, he said.
So, for example, Mr. Mann knows that someone who subscribes to lots of gourmet cooking magazines is more likely to be a Democrat or at least more open to progressive causes. That can help a campaign decide if it’s worth spending money courting that person’s vote.
Although Karl Rove was not the first to use microtargeting in a campaign, he brought it to new levels of sophistication and prominence, dividing swing voters into groups like “tax and terrorism moderates.” The strategy helped send George Bush back to the White House in 2004. Matthew Dowd, the former chief strategist for President Bush who is now a political commentator for ABC, helped orchestrate that effort. The Bush team studied food preferences, among dozens of other traits, as a shortcut to finding independents who might lean Republican, he said.
For example, Dr Pepper is a Republican soda. Pepsi-Cola and Sprite are Democratic. So are most clear liquors, like gin and vodka, along with white wine and Evian water. Republicans skew toward brown liquors like bourbon or scotch, red wine and Fiji water.
When it comes to fried chicken, he said, Democrats prefer Popeyes and Republicans Chick-fil-A.
“Anything organic or more Whole Foods-y skews more Democratic,” Mr. Dowd said.
But consumer information has to be studied in context. “I don’t know how much you can use food or drink alone to determine how they will vote,” he said. “You can’t have a candidate with a Pepsi-Cola and Pizza Hut box and think that’s going to win an election for you.” Jeff Navin, managing director of American Environics, a progressive research and strategy firm, agrees.
“Knowing that your base drinks gin doesn’t give you a clear idea on how to communicate with them effectively on issues,” he said. “But if you take it a level deeper and say, are there psychological drivers that will help understand the values behind the behavior, you can speak to those values and persuade voters.”
Mr. Navin offers an example from his firm’s ongoing survey that periodically asks 1,800 people in-depth questions about their lives. In last summer’s polling, the latest available, Mrs. Clinton scored high among voters who also had favorable views of McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Starbucks.
That led his team to conclude that Clinton supporters put a high value on national brands.
Although the landscape in the Democratic race has shifted since the poll was conducted, Mr. Navin said, back then the name Clinton was the most popular national Democratic brand.
Mark Penn, a microtargeting expert who was dismissed as chief strategist for the Clinton campaign last week, wrote a book on the subject: “Microtrends: The Small Forces Behind Tomorrow’s Big Changes” (Twelve, 2007).
Although Mr. Penn, who claims credit for coining the term “soccer mom,” didn’t specifically seek out research on the dining habits of voters, he does use food as a way to define the candidates.
Specifically, he points to Mr. Obama’s comments about the rising price of arugula at Whole Foods during a campaign stop in Iowa. “He has more of the arugula vote,” he said in an e-mail message last week. “Senator Clinton’s voters are more likely to be making ends meet and so they do a lot more cooking at home and a lot less eating out at expensive restaurants.”
Although Mr. Obama’s team is also using consumer data to target voters, the campaign is focusing more on what one adviser called “macrotargeting.” The idea is to build a unified, all-encompassing Obama brand that works well across all kinds of media platforms. “I would say we’re old-fashioned in that you have to look at America as a whole,” said Bill Burton, Mr. Obama’s national press secretary.
That’s not to say they don’t have specific information about voters, he said. And the campaign isn’t above using food to gain an edge. After the founders of Ben and Jerry’s endorsed Mr. Obama, the campaign blog quickly suggested a new ice cream flavor that plays off of a favorite campaign slogan: Yes, Pecan!
Whether a campaign uses a lot or a little consumer information, it can cause trouble if not interpreted correctly, some political veterans cautioned.
An environmentally minded independent who trends Democratic might buy organic milk, but so might an independent conservative who is more concerned about the health of her children than the state of the earth. They buy the same product, but for different reasons. Send an environmental message to the conservative and you could lose her vote.
That’s why some, notably James Carville, a Democratic strategist and CNN political commentator, see microtargeting as a waste of time and money. Although he believes the cost of food is a fast-rising issue among voters, knowing what they eat doesn’t win elections.
“Suppose I found out people who drink cappuccinos are Democrats and black coffee drinkers are likely to vote Republican?” he asked. “So what? All kinds of other things are more predictive and less expensive to find out.”
Besides, the lines between who eats what continues to blur. Republicans are not necessarily red-meat-eating bourbon swillers, and not all Democrats are carrying their lattes to the farmers’ market.
Mr. Mann recently saw someone on a Metro train in Washington with a Bush/Cheney sticker on his bag reading “Animal, Vegetable, Miracle,” Barbara Kingsolver's meditation on eating local food.
Some people who cook and serve food have been students of microtargeting for years. JoAnn Clevenger, the owner of the Upperline restaurant in New Orleans, doesn’t need a data set to identify how customers might vote. She just watches what they order.
“The Republicans are more formal and have more attention to structure when they eat,” she said. The classic example would be her delicate trout meunière.
Democrats tend to order earthy, down-home food with lots of juice for sopping, like Cane River country shrimp with garlic, bacon and mushrooms.
But lately she’s seen a lot of interest from both sides for her Oysters St. Claude. The oysters are coated with corn flour, gently fried and then slipped back into their shells and covered with an adventurous, Morrocan-style sauce seasoned with ground whole lemons, garlic, cayenne and paprika.
It’s the ultimate crossover dish, and she believes it’s popular this year because voters are being pulled in several directions.
“You have a respect and a yearning for the past,” she said, “but a feeling like you want something new and exciting that says let’s go all the way.”
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Earthquake Safety
Do you know what to do during or immediately after an earthquake? Take this short (10 question) quiz to assess your knowledge of earthquake safety procedures.
http://www.nwcn.com/sharedcontent/features/flash/quake/during.html
http://www.nwcn.com/sharedcontent/features/flash/quake/during.html
Monday, April 14, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
A Chat with Julia Child's Nephew
By APRIL LISANTE Philadelphia Daily News
For the Daily News
SHE WAS brining, roasting, kneading and sautéing when Emeril Lagasse was in diapers, and Rachael Ray wasn't even a gleam in her parents' eyes.
At a time when cooking wasn't cool - and certainly not on television - Julia Child single-handedly pioneered a new gastronomic course for the world. But the familiar, larger-than-life persona of her celebrity years had humble beginnings as a shy, awkward, sometimes inept culinary student.
Though she is known mostly for the television fame she gained late in life, her love affair with French cooking began as a lark, a thirtysomething's determination to learn a few dishes to please her new husband.
Some of her most intimate culinary experiences as a young woman are captured in the memoir "My Life in France" (Knopf, $25.95), based on Child's dictations to her great-nephew, Alex Prud'homme, in the days before her 2004 death from kidney failure at age 91.
Prud'homme also used old letters, photos and handwritten recipes from Child and her husband, Paul, that passed through the family for decades to recreate Child's years in France, from 1948 to 1954, when she learned to cook.
She went to France with her worldly husband, a U.S. State Department employee who was 10 years her senior. Child's efforts to remedy her ineptitude in the kitchen and her lack of knowledge of French cuisine sparked an obsession that produced, well, historical results.
Prud'homme's book, published in 2006, has just been optioned by Sony Pictures for a movie starring Meryl Streep as Julia and Stanley Tucci as Paul. Nora Ephron - no slouch in the kitchen herself, and writer/director of films such as "Sleepless in Seattle" and "Heartburn" - will write and direct the film, scheduled for a 2009 release.
We chatted with Prud'homme, a freelance journalist and novelist who lectured at the Free Library of Philadelphia last month about the book, the movie and life with Child.
Q: Julia sort of fell into cooking, and in the book she is almost like an alien landing on another planet when she arrives in France. Tell me about what that was like for her.
A: These are stories she'd always talked about - the five years of her life when she was living in France with Paul after the war. She arrives not speaking French and not able to cook more than pancakes. And in typical Julia fashion, she signs up for French lessons. She becomes obsessed.
After a year, she signs up at the Cordon Bleu [cooking school] and learns to cook and how to teach and how to shop in the French way, which means not just buying a piece of meat wrapped in plastic. It means talking to the butcher and asking him about the weather and his daughter.
This was an important life lesson for her and for me. There are lessons embedded in these stories. We try not to hit the reader over the head with them, but they are simple and they can be applied to life. Take time, do things carefully, and, above all, have fun. It's a simple statement, but profound . . . I think it's going to be one of her enduring legacies, this positive, rigorous approach to life . . .
Q: Why are only the years from '48 to '54 the focus of the book?
A: This was the moment of epiphany for her. She arrives as a blank slate in her mid-'30s, she doesn't know what she wants to be when she grows up. She is with her husband, a sophisticated man, and he takes her to this important place at this moment in history.
Q: In the beginning of the book, she talks about her first meal in France when she arrives. It is bizarre to hear Julia Child talk about not knowing what a shallot is, or hearing about her shock that they drank wine at lunch.
A: She always referred to this meal [in the town of Rouen] in a dreamy way that she'd play in her mind over and over. One thing that was fascinating was how memory works. She was 91 at that point when she was talking about it, and her health was not great. Sometimes she could not remember what she did the day before, but she could remember specifics from 50 years earlier - the texture and taste of food and people and places she had seen.
Q: Did you get to know her well from this book-writing process?
A: I thought I knew her pretty well, but when you spend intense time going over things from 50 years ago . . . yes.
Q: What was it about French cooking in particular that drew her?
A: I could never get her to articulate what it was about French food that rang her bell. She loved Chinese food second best, but there was something about French food. We talked around this question, but she said it is the seriousness with which the French take the food - the ritual, the rules and the great pleasure in it.
Q: In the forward of the book, you mention that she and her husband talked about writing this book for a long time, and that you waited a long time for her to agree to do it. How did you finally convince her? Do you think it was her husband's death [in 1994] that convinced her?
A: The book is dedicated to Paul, and his photos illustrated her book. He had already experienced Paris in the 1920s as an artist. He really encouraged her [to learn to cook]. He pushed her. He was a teacher and important influence on her life. She was hoping to meet his high standards, but she took it and ran for it.
At first, I had a hard time getting her to tell me these stories . . . I'd say, "Julia tell me about your first building in Paris where you stayed." She'd say it was a building. It was odd because here's a person who spent her life on the stage performing, but she was actually a modest person who never talked about herself. She never got around to writing the book because she didn't want to toot her own horn.
Q: You were able to write the book mainly because of the letters Paul sent to your grandfather, his twin brother, during these years in France. How was it having all these letters to work with?
A: Paul was a wonderful writer, very descriptive. It was almost like he'd written these letters for us to use to write this book 50 years later. I felt like a pirate discovering a pile of gold coins. I was able to unlock Julia by reading her sections of Paul's letters and it would sort of transport her. . . . I think it was just luck that we were able to work on this thing together. Paul's stories got her going.
Once we got her ideas down on paper, I would go out to Santa Barbara and we'd do interviews in her little apartment from January 2004 to August for a few days each month. [Julia died two days after she and Prud'homme had met about the book for the last time.]
Then I took another year to finish the book and essentially be a ventriloquist. I had to take off my journalist hat and take on her voice. I just used stories she wanted to use. The tone we wanted to set was you [the readers] are sitting at a café table with Julia, and she is telling stories about her life.
Q: What do you think Julia would want the book to convey?
A: She was always modest and would downplay her evolution in American gastronomy. . . . She wants to inspire people. She wants people to love food and cooking and do it with others - to take food more seriously and to take the time to do it right. And above all, have fun.
Q: Are you excited about the movie?
A: Sony Pictures has optioned it and combined it with a book written by Julie Powell ["Julie & Julia: 365 Days, 524 Recipes, 1 Tiny Apartment Kitchen," Little, Brown & Co.]. Powell spent a year recreating every recipe from Child's "Mastering the Art of French Cooking." I am happy about that. I think Julia would be pleased. *
For the Daily News
SHE WAS brining, roasting, kneading and sautéing when Emeril Lagasse was in diapers, and Rachael Ray wasn't even a gleam in her parents' eyes.
At a time when cooking wasn't cool - and certainly not on television - Julia Child single-handedly pioneered a new gastronomic course for the world. But the familiar, larger-than-life persona of her celebrity years had humble beginnings as a shy, awkward, sometimes inept culinary student.
Though she is known mostly for the television fame she gained late in life, her love affair with French cooking began as a lark, a thirtysomething's determination to learn a few dishes to please her new husband.
Some of her most intimate culinary experiences as a young woman are captured in the memoir "My Life in France" (Knopf, $25.95), based on Child's dictations to her great-nephew, Alex Prud'homme, in the days before her 2004 death from kidney failure at age 91.
Prud'homme also used old letters, photos and handwritten recipes from Child and her husband, Paul, that passed through the family for decades to recreate Child's years in France, from 1948 to 1954, when she learned to cook.
She went to France with her worldly husband, a U.S. State Department employee who was 10 years her senior. Child's efforts to remedy her ineptitude in the kitchen and her lack of knowledge of French cuisine sparked an obsession that produced, well, historical results.
Prud'homme's book, published in 2006, has just been optioned by Sony Pictures for a movie starring Meryl Streep as Julia and Stanley Tucci as Paul. Nora Ephron - no slouch in the kitchen herself, and writer/director of films such as "Sleepless in Seattle" and "Heartburn" - will write and direct the film, scheduled for a 2009 release.
We chatted with Prud'homme, a freelance journalist and novelist who lectured at the Free Library of Philadelphia last month about the book, the movie and life with Child.
Q: Julia sort of fell into cooking, and in the book she is almost like an alien landing on another planet when she arrives in France. Tell me about what that was like for her.
A: These are stories she'd always talked about - the five years of her life when she was living in France with Paul after the war. She arrives not speaking French and not able to cook more than pancakes. And in typical Julia fashion, she signs up for French lessons. She becomes obsessed.
After a year, she signs up at the Cordon Bleu [cooking school] and learns to cook and how to teach and how to shop in the French way, which means not just buying a piece of meat wrapped in plastic. It means talking to the butcher and asking him about the weather and his daughter.
This was an important life lesson for her and for me. There are lessons embedded in these stories. We try not to hit the reader over the head with them, but they are simple and they can be applied to life. Take time, do things carefully, and, above all, have fun. It's a simple statement, but profound . . . I think it's going to be one of her enduring legacies, this positive, rigorous approach to life . . .
Q: Why are only the years from '48 to '54 the focus of the book?
A: This was the moment of epiphany for her. She arrives as a blank slate in her mid-'30s, she doesn't know what she wants to be when she grows up. She is with her husband, a sophisticated man, and he takes her to this important place at this moment in history.
Q: In the beginning of the book, she talks about her first meal in France when she arrives. It is bizarre to hear Julia Child talk about not knowing what a shallot is, or hearing about her shock that they drank wine at lunch.
A: She always referred to this meal [in the town of Rouen] in a dreamy way that she'd play in her mind over and over. One thing that was fascinating was how memory works. She was 91 at that point when she was talking about it, and her health was not great. Sometimes she could not remember what she did the day before, but she could remember specifics from 50 years earlier - the texture and taste of food and people and places she had seen.
Q: Did you get to know her well from this book-writing process?
A: I thought I knew her pretty well, but when you spend intense time going over things from 50 years ago . . . yes.
Q: What was it about French cooking in particular that drew her?
A: I could never get her to articulate what it was about French food that rang her bell. She loved Chinese food second best, but there was something about French food. We talked around this question, but she said it is the seriousness with which the French take the food - the ritual, the rules and the great pleasure in it.
Q: In the forward of the book, you mention that she and her husband talked about writing this book for a long time, and that you waited a long time for her to agree to do it. How did you finally convince her? Do you think it was her husband's death [in 1994] that convinced her?
A: The book is dedicated to Paul, and his photos illustrated her book. He had already experienced Paris in the 1920s as an artist. He really encouraged her [to learn to cook]. He pushed her. He was a teacher and important influence on her life. She was hoping to meet his high standards, but she took it and ran for it.
At first, I had a hard time getting her to tell me these stories . . . I'd say, "Julia tell me about your first building in Paris where you stayed." She'd say it was a building. It was odd because here's a person who spent her life on the stage performing, but she was actually a modest person who never talked about herself. She never got around to writing the book because she didn't want to toot her own horn.
Q: You were able to write the book mainly because of the letters Paul sent to your grandfather, his twin brother, during these years in France. How was it having all these letters to work with?
A: Paul was a wonderful writer, very descriptive. It was almost like he'd written these letters for us to use to write this book 50 years later. I felt like a pirate discovering a pile of gold coins. I was able to unlock Julia by reading her sections of Paul's letters and it would sort of transport her. . . . I think it was just luck that we were able to work on this thing together. Paul's stories got her going.
Once we got her ideas down on paper, I would go out to Santa Barbara and we'd do interviews in her little apartment from January 2004 to August for a few days each month. [Julia died two days after she and Prud'homme had met about the book for the last time.]
Then I took another year to finish the book and essentially be a ventriloquist. I had to take off my journalist hat and take on her voice. I just used stories she wanted to use. The tone we wanted to set was you [the readers] are sitting at a café table with Julia, and she is telling stories about her life.
Q: What do you think Julia would want the book to convey?
A: She was always modest and would downplay her evolution in American gastronomy. . . . She wants to inspire people. She wants people to love food and cooking and do it with others - to take food more seriously and to take the time to do it right. And above all, have fun.
Q: Are you excited about the movie?
A: Sony Pictures has optioned it and combined it with a book written by Julie Powell ["Julie & Julia: 365 Days, 524 Recipes, 1 Tiny Apartment Kitchen," Little, Brown & Co.]. Powell spent a year recreating every recipe from Child's "Mastering the Art of French Cooking." I am happy about that. I think Julia would be pleased. *
Second Helpings Celebrates 10 Years!
2008 marks the tenth anniversary of Second Helpings! Thanks to the great support of people like you, we are able to continue providing vital services to organizations in the Greater Indianapolis area. To celebrate our tenth year we are spreading the news about our mission of eliminating hunger and empowering people. Look for us in the following:
April issue of Indianapolis Woman magazine
Radio spots on 92.3 WTTS during the week of April 21, May 5, June 9, and June 23.
Television spots, in limited markets, during the week of April 14, April 28, June 2, and June 16 on the following networks:
History Channel
Discovery Channel
TBS
CNN
Don't forget to continue checking us out on the Web at ww.secondhelpings.org!
April issue of Indianapolis Woman magazine
Radio spots on 92.3 WTTS during the week of April 21, May 5, June 9, and June 23.
Television spots, in limited markets, during the week of April 14, April 28, June 2, and June 16 on the following networks:
History Channel
Discovery Channel
TBS
CNN
Don't forget to continue checking us out on the Web at ww.secondhelpings.org!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
