Confessions of an Errant Mind

In my class this morning, I talked a little bit about the ban on trans fats recently passed in New York City. A couple of related stories came across my desk this morning. New Jersey is considering a similar ban. And Denmark has had an even stiffer ban for several years.

Trans fat isn't the only banned food in the news in the last year. Chicago made headlines for their law against foie gras, a luxery item made from fattened goose or duck livers. The methods used to produce this food, which include using a stick to force food down a bird's throat, are considered inhumane by many.

Should the government be in the business of determining what's safe or ethical for us to eat? There's arguments on either side. Personally, on the trans fat ban, I'm persuaded by arguments on how the public health benefits lower health insurance premiums--there's a collective interest in people staying healthy. Foie gras is a little trickier--I wouldn't eat it (for cost as much as ethics), but should my preference be legislated? I'm not so sure.

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 09:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I had an interesting discussion today in one my sections. Several students brought up the oft-quoted "Ignorance is bliss" issue when it comes to the food they consume. Basically, that if it tastes good, they won't worry about it. As one students said, "What I don't know doesn't hurt me." (Though in the case of E. Coli contamination, that's not exactly true.)

I pressed them on this a bit. Specifically, I brought up the division in capitalist societies between producers and consumers, and how that gap often allows for abuse to occur. With food, that might mean working conditions in slaughterhouses or animal cruelty issues.

The responses students gave to this point were interesting. One said that it was just these people's roles and that's how life is. Basically, that there will always be the oppressed among us, and we should just accept the system. Another brought up a variation on that, that immigrants (using that slaughterhouse issue) will always be oppressed. A third student asked, "But are you saying we're to blame for that?"

In a word, yes. What amazed me about the discussion was the lack of empathy students felt for those working at the other end of the food chain. What mattered to them was convenience, cost, and flavor, not bigger ethical issues. It makes me wonder if this is how an economic system like ours sustains itself, by reducing producers and consumers to abstract ideas, not flesh and blood people like us. To a certain extent, this might be a defense mechanism, since so often we feel quite powerless to change the system--we have neither the time, money, or opportunity to do so. Yet to defer blame for this is disingenuous. We feed this system with our money--if we chose to buy more expensive, yet ethical products, the system itself would change. But without real connection, a sense that we are all in this together in some way, and the time and resources to care, it's a tough road.

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 02:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

About four weeks ago, the folks in one of my sections and I started off in a experiment. We took two twinkies, unwrapped one, and let them sit to see what would happen. The results after a month? The unwrapped twinkie could pass for cardboard, but there is absolutely no sign of mold or decay on either one. Will that happen before the semester's over? Let the betting begin. Pictures below:

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 03:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yet another study on the merits of red wine consumption. A lot of the literature I've seen says that it has to do with the grape skins themselves, and that wine isn't necessarily the best source of these substances. But I don't see that here. Certainly, drinking wine has more gut appeal (no pun intended) than another study on eating our fruits and veggies...

There's also a good article from one of my current favorite authors, Michael Pollan, in the NY Times today--on the spinach related E. Coli outbreak. Definitely worth a look.

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 02:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

That's the question for me right now. Over the last six months or so, I've been doing a fair amount of soul searching and conversations. I've talked with at least a half dozen professors and the same number of grad students about their experiences in different departments. I'm still not sure what's next for me professionally. But here's what I do know:

First, I will need to make a change. I enjoy my current position at the U quite a bit, but I'm assuming that my chances of having something close to this once Sarah finishes her degree and we have to move will be minimal. Most people who do what I do are adjuncts at community colleges--doing a lot of work for bad pay. I did that for 2 1/2 years in Iowa, and it's not something I really want to go back to. The best case scenario might be a full time community college position, but even that isn't very attractive right now. I've become accustomed to the freedom, resources, and scholarship of life at the U, and I don't really want to go back.

Second, if I do go back to school now, it would be in Geography. I've thought about several other options, including American Studies and Public Health most recently. They're not as good a fit, both practically and academically, as Geography is. The program here at the U is strong, especially in what's called human geography (i.e., studying primarily people, not nature) and in urban studies, which is my broadest niche. There's not anyone focusing on food (my most specific interest) in the department, but there are three in the History department two floors up, and I think I can make it work. I'm taking a Geography class this semester, which I'm mostly enjoying. I've realized that this is really a natural environment for me, talking theoretically about academic stuff. While at times I've fought against the lack of practical value in fields like human geography, I'm just not someone who's going to work in a heavily applied field. I'm encouraged by a conversation I had with a history professor this week who said that she's had more opportunities to teach and work with a public audience over food than she ever has with migration, her main interest.

Third, there are many benefits to doing school now. If I take a course at a time, the U will pay my tuition. After this year, Sarah will be doing prelims and her dissertation for the next few years, which means her schedule will be relatively flexible. And I like being a student--it gives me a sense of direction for my career and keeps me sharp academically as a teacher. It's good for my teaching to be learning new things as a student, so my thinking doesn't go stale.

Fourth, we want another child. Here's where it gets complicated. I know from experience that being an only child has its benefits. However, there are plenty of drawbacks as well. For the same reasons that the next three or so years offer the flexibility for school, they also offer the best window for child #2 to come along. Sarah's life and schooling will still be fairly complicated, and part of my role right now is to help support her. And having another baby and a second child will surely complicate our lives in ways we're not even aware of. Still, Micah, the sequel, trumps my school aspirations. I can always wait 'til the last one reaches kindergarten.

Fifth, what about spare time? Now, given our histories, this is probably not realistic. Sarah and I seem to find a way to overcommit ourselves no matter what we do. But if I just put in my time as an instructor and said that my private life was the real priority, it's possible we wouldn't always feel as overwhelmed as we sometimes do right now. This semester has been pretty dang busy. I'm not sure if I'm not thinking of selling my soul for the sake of my career (and my children's happiness).

So that's where things stand. Right now, I plan to take another course in the spring and make a firmer decision next summer, when we know more what Sarah's schedule post-coursework will look like. I'm also going to be shifting departments again next year, to the new Writing Studies program, so the amount and kind of work I will be doing will change in ways I don't know now. But essentially, the tension I'm feeling is between school and family. I'm not sure it has to be one or the other, but it's something I want to be sure to think through. This has been a lesson that has become increasingly clear as I grow older--that the gap between what we want to do and what we can do can be quite large. The task is to choose the better part and be content with that.

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 09:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There's a great piece in Business Week this week about the changes in the organic food market. It sounds like a real sea change--moving to a much more corporately dominated enterprise. I've increasingly felt that the real meaningful label is local, fostering a relationship between producer and consumer. Not that all mass produced food is bad, but when you know where you food comes from, I think that makes a difference.

Here's a quote:

Hence the organic paradox: The movement's adherents have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, but success has imperiled their ideals. It simply isn't clear that organic food production can be replicated on a mass scale. For Hirshberg, who set out to "change the way Kraft (KFT ), Monsanto (MON ), and everybody else does business," the movement is shedding its innocence. "Organic is growing up."

Posted by Jerry Shannon at 12:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)