Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Listing Tuesdays

Because I joined facebook today, and it's already sucking up ALL MY TIME. CURSE IT.


1. This is a list of the best cookbooks of 2006. I was so sick of cooking the same things over and over. Stir-fry, chicken wraps, grilled chicken, ravioli, shuffle, shuffle, repeat. Breaking out of my cooking rut meant getting inspiration. Try out some of these picks from Epicurious.com.

2. McSweeney's does it again with: "Considered but discarded names for the Indie Band Someone Still Loves you, Boris Yeltsin." Short but sweet. Kudos to Hubster for spotting this gem.

3. I'm not sure I agree with all of the authors conclusions, but this piece from the New York Times (it's past the free window, so you might need to register, sorry!) got me thinking. It's not that I agree with Michael Pollan. Full disclosure, I haven't even read the Omnivore's Dilemma yet, but it's enlightening to learn a little about the laws that wind up determining our food options on supermarket shelves. Growing up in early life in Argentina, I didn't eat a lot of processed food and such because their food supply looks considerably different than ours (especially if you compare the 1980s there and 2000s here and now). When we moved to the States, I didn't really make a point to remember how strange food seemed. I let my mother worry about that. Full disclosure, I was probably obsessing about the last time my brothers broke into my room and hoarded my stuff for ransom. Anyway, it's an interesting piece illuminating a non-glamorous, but increasingly popular issue: how our legal infrastructure informs our health choices.

4. This one's already made some rounds, but in case you missed it, Joshua Bell plays a classical violin set in the Washington Metro system. Interesting results.


J. Morgan Caler said...


Thanks for the updates; you're like a regular highbrow Drudge or something. Many thanks.

Maybe (if you get the chance) you could speak to what it is about Pollan's conclusions that you don't agree with. Full disclosure, I'm pretty radical on farming and food (although admittedly not for health reasons).

E.A.P said...

You're welcome for the linkage, J. Always a pleasure to share.

As to your question, I guess I can partially blame the editting/proofreading aspects of my process here for the problem. I should have said that I don't TOTALLY agree with his conclusions. I made sure to state that I hadn't read all his work, but I neglected to keep a qualifier. I should proof as carefully for content as grammar/punctuation.

Honestly, his views are radical. That's not an outright problem for me, his radical claims, but it means he has a bigger burden of proof. I like most of what I've heard, but I'm not sure I'm ready to back him on everything. I do think if more people in our culture thought along his lines, we could get some great restructuring done.

Really, I wanted to point out that, because this was an opinion article, it was going to be from this one author's perspective even more than most articles. What I think about his perspective is still developing.

Hope that helps!