The Myth of the Foodie

Foodies don't exist. Let's get that straight up front. Instead, there exists a certain group of people who have decided that they have nothing better to do with their spare time than convince other people that they "appreciate food." By "appreciate" of course, they mean "can afford" and by "food" they mean "expensive food." That's the point all foodies want you to realize right away. The fact that they're affluent enough to afford gourmet food. You never see foodies taking pictures or writing blogs about their experiences with mass-produced food, fast food or savoring the latest soup-kitchen fare. Even though the Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines foodie or foody or foo-gives-a-shit as "a person having an avid interest in the latest food fads." The latest food fads, if you've been paying attention, include turning everything that isn't food into food! (I think my favorite part of that last link is the fact that the McDonald's spokesman was named 'Todd Bacon') Where are the foodies lining up to compare and contrast the multitude of fast food offerings that contain various amounts of industrial food stuff? It is after all, a hot topic. One that will certainly affect the outlook of food industries from top-tier to third world countries.

Foodies are also under the impression that they have a special talent for liking food. That they, in secret, have discovered food that has been expertly prepared is "like ya know, good, man." Like they possess sommelier-like powers of taste that can, after biting into a $100 lamb chop, deduce the exact place, date and time a young sheep was put to death. Also, if any lamb relatives were present at the funeral and if they are also currently being served at a nearby table.

So what does it take to become a foodie you ask? Absolutely nothing. How many years must one train themselves before one can pass the foodie test and earn their Michelin stars? (don't bother reading that wiki review, you won't find foodie anywhere) None. Being a foodie is not a skill. Despite what lies they like to tell you, and more importantly themselves, anyone can call themselves a foodie and be just as qualified as any idiot walking down the street. That's right, The Burger King Kids Club has more restrictions than being a foodie has ever had.

All foodies suffer from the delusion that the reason they enjoy gourmet food and the huddled masses enjoy fast food is out of pure choice. They are completely blind to the fact that given the option of a free meal consisting of either their favorite cheap fast food or a four course meal of their choosing prepared by a four-star chef in a five-star restaurant, everyone chooses the fine dining and you don't have to be a food genius to figure it out. They completely ignore the only discernable requirement of being a so-called foodie, price, and spit in the faces of everyone forced to eat below their standards because they believe the ability to buy more expensive food somehow makes you appreciate it more.

You know who truly appreciates food? Homeless people and starving children.They appreciate food so much they beg for it, pray for it and even shed tears over being offered some soup and bread. That's food appreciation. That's putting your heart and soul into enjoying every meal like it's your last.

So go ahead foodies. Waste some people's weekly salary on food that's photogenic and takes an hour to prepare by blind monks flown in from parts unknown. Really, I mean that. Don't stop. I'd hate for all that time and effort and money to go to waste instead of being used to properly inflate the ego of a self-possessed egomaniac who's chosen to add to their own self worth the mundane ability to "appreciate" the one thing most Americans already take for granted because they've realized they're not special.

III,

Tomorrow Today

News flash. The newspaper industry is dying and with it, I fear, journalism. Less and less people are tuning into the local news and 24-hour news has taken over the way people view the world. America has progressed to the point where it is not enough to read about what happened, we have to get an alert when the future is happening now.

The heart and soul of publishing has always been writing, but its blood is advertising, especially in mass production. The massive cost for materials, printing and transportation began to outweigh the revenue from sales and instead of trying to up the cost of words on a page to John Q. Public the industry tapped into advertising. Renting their bodies and becoming a carrier for advertisers to now penetrate the homes of millions of consumers.

The problems started the moment the news left the printed page and jumped onto the glowing screens. The glowing screens sat in our houses, our offices and our laps. The glowing screens were everywhere. The news now came to us; we no longer had to go to the news. Also there was less garbage, less recycling, just less. That’s what America is, more for less, or in this case, less for less.

Advertising and cost are main concerns but I would argue that the real killer of print and ultimately journalism as a whole is the philosophical change America made from demanding quality reporting to get the whole truth, to sacrificing quality in order to get some truth as soon as possible. The real reason 24-hour news has become so popular is the networks ability to pass off speculation as news. Journalism happens in several stages and it is very rarely instantaneous. There is fact checking, source verification and the arranging of information so as not to be misleading or trivial. The reporting of news is only one step in the process of informing the public. Reporting the news takes up only a fraction of the time in a news program so 24-hour networks fill the extra time with analysis. The problem with this is that only a small amount of news needs to be analyzed passed its original reporting. This is where the real genius of hyper journalism comes into play, when a story is rushed through the journalistic process to the news floor the story comes in broken pieces instead of one fluid entity. This allows the anchors and “experts” to try and predict what direction the story will take.

The 24-hour networks then try and create news of their own by speculating on the events they have reported. Why waste time on a news show that only informs you of the past when there are programs creating a future for you, right in front of your eyes, that you can use to decide how to live and vote and think? This is where journalism will die. We as a people are so time consumed that we are moving closer and closer to the abandonment of fact altogether and the embrace of an educated guess. If we do not decide to hold our information gatekeepers responsible for dealing in fact instead of speculation and demand quality reporting today, then journalism has no future in the world of tomorrow. With no reliable source to aid in discovering the truth, we will have no choice but to accept what the gatekeepers present as important and will continue to be susceptible to fear mongering that is based on shallow premises and a complete and utter indifference towards information that would help create a society of intelligent well-informed individuals capable of thinking for themselves.

III,

Dynamite!

Barack Obama, the 44^th President of the United States, received the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 89 times to 119 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2008 – 96 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations. Since the International Committee of the Red Cross was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1917, 1944 and 1963, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1954 and 1981, that means 96 individuals and 20 organizations have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Given to any other person at any other time and this is a cause for celebration. Only in America can the bestowing of an award meant to recognize the champions of hope and equality be met with derisiveness. The main argument being that President Obama hasn’t accomplished enough in his little over eight months as president. First of all, Barack Obama didn’t have to be president to be nominated for the award, so his accomplishments shouldn’t be confined to his presidency. Secondly, if by accomplished nothing you mean becoming the first minority candidate to be elected President of the United States, at the same time running on a platform of open discussion with all nations both friend and foe, political and ideological differences aside. The award was given to Barack Obama the man, not Barack Obama the President.

The Nobel Peace Prize (NPP) is different from other awards in the Nobel confluence of honors. It’s the only award that takes both the physical body of work as well as the intentional body of work equally into account. Not to say that the body of work and research performed by the laureates in other areas (physics, chemistry, medicine or physiology, literature and economics) won’t have an impact on future generations but these are areas of study where the bulk of the results are tangible. Peace, even when pursued by the most ardent of searchers, remains a constantly fleeting idea, and therefore the concept of peace must be reexamined and reaffirmed. So almost as important as the works themselves is the inspiration and hope that is fostered. The prize has been awarded to individuals as well as organizations such as International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Amnesty International, International Labour Organization and the United Nations. Primarily based on their actions but also in recognition of the mere existence of their work, the fact that in the given times there is an entity willing to serve the harmony of the world whether anyone is listening or not.

In 1994 the NPP was awarded to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. These men are not exactly the leaders of a region known for amicable games of checkers let alone peace. The reason they received the award was because of their participation in the Oslo Accords, at the time a ground breaking effort to form an understanding between Israelis and Palestinians because the two sides were at least speaking in the same room to each other, but hindsight being what it is, the accord has had little to no effect on the stability of the region. Since then, Rabin was assassinated in 1995, Arafat never adhered to ceasefire protocol or realistically attempted to control the radical factions of the PLO and Peres was quoted recently reminding Iran that "it could be wiped off the map," this from a NPP laureate. Basically the award was given in promotion of the idea of peace in the Middle East, a Pavlovian reinforced behavior modification on an international scale. So, the concept of using the award as a reassuring slap on the back instead of a celebration of accomplished works is nothing new.

What I don't understand is the disdain and in some cases acrimony towards this man for receiving an honor, which some people don't believe he deserves simply because of a difference in policy, this being America after all. Any American should be proud that the elected leader of our country has, arguably, by his mere position, demeanor, and ideology impacted the view of the international community towards America in a positive way, especially in light of events in the past decade. The only way this country, or any country for that matter, will survive is through active cooperation with the other nations of the globe. Any attempt to cross social, political, economic and religious boundaries in an attempt to unite the world against the problems facing all of humanity not just individual countries should be acknowledged and supported. Hunger, fear, climate-control and social equality have no political affiliation or agenda. It will take everyone working together and communicating in peace.

III,

(Source: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/)

Shredded Tweet

So, I have a problem. I find myself faced with an uncontrollable need to let my friends, family and co-workers know exactly what I'm up to all the time. I mean sometimes I'll just be walking along and I'll think of something really ironic about my t-shirt or the fact that I think stickers could save the economy or maybe just feel the need to quote a random song that makes people wonder what's really going on under my skin in this crazy mixed up world. But alas, I guess I'll have to settle with updating my Facebook status whenever I'm around my computer, laptop or cell phone. Oh if there was only a place I could go on the Internet that was accessible from my computer, laptop and cell phone that allowed me to post my inner thoughts, fears, song lyrics, mindless ramblings, comments on the weather and uneducated misinformed theories on deeply social and philosophical ideas. I don't want to deal with profile information, photos, videos or invites to social and political events, no, I just want to tell people what I'm thinking right now or they'll never truly understand or accept me. 

Ladies and gentlemen, there is such a place in cyberspace. A place where self-indulged celebrities and self-indulged joe somebodies alike can post messages to anyone who has nothing else to do but be spoon fed quips from people they know or wish they knew. The amorphous blob that is devouring the consciousness of America and the ultimate downfall of privacy and originality is Twitter.

The fundamental problem I have with Twitter is who cares? Do you really think your friends need to know what you watched on television last night? Another question I have is when did we develop this desire to let people into our lives on a moment by moment basis? Has reality TV invaded so much of our culture that even when no one respects reality TV we all have this secret desire to be "on" all the time? Do we really feel the need to behave like cameras and microphones are constantly rolling waiting to capture that "gem" of wit or social humor? Sadly, that would almost be acceptable, if Twitter was a place for the exchange of social and cultural witticisms and cynicisms between people of all classes and walks of life. It is not however, instead it is a place for people who get upset at the prospect of the government wiretapping and violating their right of privacy, spray painting their every mundane utterance all over one of the most non secure forums outside of a bulletin board in a frat house, the Internet. 

Finally, the introduction of celebrities into the fray of the masses. The art of "Buzz Marketing" strikes again. Buzz marketing was invented by companies who were too tired of creating something original for the consuming public that they advised a way to poll the populace to try and figure out what alternative, non-mainstream, fad, consumers were interested in. Then, the big companies would either 1) buy out the fad or 2) create their own knock-off polished commercialized version. All of this in an attempt to remain relevant. As enticing as the allure is of "following" (never mind the stalker lingo) a celebrity on Twitter to see what makes them tick, the truth behind why they have allowed themselves to be viewed in this forum is lost. Celebrities have to keep you interested in their lives because that's how most of them make money. When celebrities "tweet" they are reminding you that they are still out there (as if we didn't know) and not to forget how funny and candid, or eccentric the parts of their lives they shared with you are, the next time they have a project up for sale. 

So the next time you think of something culturally relevant to say, or have a moment of clarity in this ever increasingly serious world, save it. Get together with your friends in a social space (not Myspace) for some non-Facebook, face time and exchange ideas the old fashioned way, with good conversation. Take the time to formulate an opinion or cultivate a philosophy before splattering it for all the world to see. Realize that maybe not everyone should be privy to your whereabouts at all times. And finally, come to terms with your own self worth, be your own person, and not a mindless Twit.

Oscar Night in L.A.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences held the 81st Academy Awards this past Sunday, February 22nd. I am a huge film fanatic and consider myself a bit of a film geek. Hugh Jackman hosted for the first time and being a natural born performer he did very well. The show decided to change its format which was a good thing after so many years. Not all the changes will stick around but I hope one in particular will. The awards for best actor and actress in both the leading and supporting categories were presented by five award winners from previous years. Each previous winner introduced and explained a little bit about the nominee they were representing. 

The show also stuck to its basic principal of excluding blockbusters from the major awards. I will be the first person to stand up and say that I would rather see an independent passion project with a smaller budget than another cookie cutter, dumbed down, action flick. The point remains that good film making isn't restricted to dramas or the flavor of the multicultural week. Two films unjustly prejudiced against were The Dark Knight, as well as Chris Nolan not receiving a best director nod, and Wall-E. Having not seen Wall-E I can't fully speak on it's behalf but I have heard from reliable sources that it is more than just another Pixar triumph and addresses the human condition in an open and frank way. The Dark Knight was a great film. If you take away the mask and the costumes The Dark Knight is a great crime film regardless of the superhero aspect. The direction is good, the score (another gyp) is amazing and the acting by all involved serves some really great performances. When will the academy learn that budget and subject matter do not always predict good content or process?

After having been outside the Shrine Theatre for the S.A.G. Awards and being able to see the red carpet and even a few A-listers, I was really excited about the prospect of staking out the Kodak Theatre for the Oscars. Alas, duty called and I helped The Dust work on his first project of film school and thus missed the red carpet.

After enjoying the show I learned something that changed my view on missing out on the red carpet. As it turns out, representatives from the infamous Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) from Topeka Kansas were picketing the event on the corner of Sunset and Highland. WBC makes it their duty to picket the funerals of homosexuals who have died as a result of hate-crimes or the AIDS virus. At a time of celebration these people held signs depicting Heath Ledger and the words "Heath in Hell." They also held signs depicting president Obama as Satan and signs reading "God Hates America." The church has also taken to protesting the funerals of soldiers from Iraq. On the official website the church claims the reason soldiers joined the military was because "they are lazy, incompetent idiots." The church has picketed the funeral of Fred "Mr." Rodgers, Coretta Scott King and Jerry Falwell. It is important to note that WBC is not officially linked with any baptist convention or organization.

Everyday it still amazes me that we live in a country that is so proud of its freedom and society and yet we still turn a blind eye to those who are not free. We celebrate our freedom of speech but are often quick to condemn anyone who speaks their mind. We celebrate our freedom of religion but anyone who does not believe exactly as we do are considered evil and wrong. Only in a country as free as ours can a person defend their "rights" one day and do all they can to restrict the "rights" of others the next. The ultimate hypocrisy in this country is our egotistical sense of the freedom to be right, even if only in our own minds, no matter what. 

I am a christian man. I believe in the bible and the lord Jesus. I believe that the most misunderstood person in history was Jesus. A life and a message so simple and so profound that has been more misinterpreted by so many I cannot think of. I have many christian friends that cannot believe the state of the world. They are shocked day by day at the horrors of our society. They wonder in amazement how so many people disregard Christianity. To this I say look no further than WBC. How can we hope to live in peace and spread the word of love when there are so many spreading the word of hate in His name. 

I saw an advance screening of the documentary film "Religulous" by HBO political commentator Bill Maher. The film was touted for asking the tough questions many religious people today aren't willing to answer. The film really focuses on Bill's own fear of people who don't care whether they live or die because of their beliefs, making decisions that effect people who do care whether they live or die. I went to this film for the same reason many religious people did not, I wanted to hear these questions. What I saw was a well formatted series of ultimate questions intended to make even the most ardent theological scholar slip up. Though I came out of the film confident that upon opportunity I could very easily explain the majority of the questions posed, I was discouraged at the sheer blindness and unwillingness to participate in discussion by many religious people. This was the brass ring for believers, this was a chance to stand up confidently and passionately and explain the fundamentals of our faith for the dominantly non-religious audience. Yet they were no where to be found. Only regurgitated slogans and scriptures that have no meaning to people who don't have a base in the faith. 

I'm not in favor of abandoning religious beliefs or compromising what you believe to be right but the point is that we are instructed to lead by example. We cannot force anyone to believe as we do just as we would not want to be forced to believe anything we didn't agree with. All of us, religious and not have got to realize that we are all in this world together. We cannot call ourselves the land of the free if we continue to restrict the freedom of others.