W8: A Response to B. R. Myers' "Crusade"

            You would be forgiven for thinking that the title of B. R. Myers’ piece, “The Moral Crusade Against Foodies,” initially sounds like a satirical look at some obscure, on-going critique of the poorly-defined group of American epicureans known as “foodies.” After all, “moral crusades” have never ended well historically and in contemporary society seem to belong primarily to the bigoted and the mentally unstable. While Myers is neither, his crusade is unironic to the point of being unsettling.

            This could have been remedied if the “moral” element of his passage had been elaborated on in a way that clearly defined the goal of his crusade, but early on it is made clear that Myers has little interest in elaborating on his views in a constructive way. The passage invites us to infer that the author is a vegan and then confirm our suspicion—maybe too condescending of a word—via the internet, and subsequently accept that he stands firmly on the moral high ground as a matter of fact. If the author had intended for anything else, perhaps he would have spent more time justifying veganism—of the militant variety, if his petulant tone signifies anything—as a remotely plausible 21^st century lifestyle for anyone but affluent Western society and the comfortable middle-class.

            Of course, that argument would inevitably read like the doe-eyed appeal of a naïve idealist, rather than the scornful preaching of a jaded ascetic. As such, Myers instead chooses to satisfy our love of unhinged fury with by indignantly re-labeling foodie-ism as a form of gluttony—a foodie is hazily defined for the reader in-text as a modern, affluent glutton best represented in literature by the likes of Anthony Bourdain, Alice Waters and Michael Pollan. I enjoy mocking the entitled and pretentious as much as the next self-respecting man, but without any courage on the part of the author to make a serious personal argument—of any damn kind—the passage gets tedious fast. It’s difficult to enjoy Myers’ humorous put-downs of Bourdain and Waters while trying to chew on his overwrought, pseudo-religious “Moral Crusade” against gluttony, which in Myers’ eyes is the sin of treating food as anything other than form of sustenance—pleasure or artistry are highly discouraged.

            Perhaps the most frustrating thing about Myers’ article is the casual way he disregards his subjects. I’ll accept that mining for damning quotes is an integral part of Professional Criticism, but cherry-picking quotes from The Omnivore’s Dilemma to illustrate instances of gluttonous thought in food writing seems a bit shortsighted to me. Personal hypocrisies aside—thought I’d argue such hypocrisies exist primarily in Myer’s mind—Pollan’s book is, at least, a responsible and informed look at America’s food culture and its future. Myers’ article, as stated, offers little when it comes to serious discussion of the food culture he seemingly abhors and fills in its blanks with character assaults. In one short passage, with a swift motion of his hands, Myers disregards the authors featured in The Best Food Writing 2009: “Seven pages on sardines. Eight pages on marshmallow fluff! The lack of drama and affect only makes the gloating obsessiveness more striking.”

Had Myers actually read Liesener’s marshmallow fluff article, he might have recognized that it and much of its sister stories use food writing as a vehicle to discuss the human condition and food’s role in culture and society. Of course, as a viewer of eating as little more than an exaggerated primal act, Myers would likely feel alienated by that interpretation, much like everyone who isn’t B. R. Myers feels alienated by his writing. Teasing aside, Myers’ ranting makes for pleasurable reading, but at seven pages of length, one wonders if it wouldn’t be better for him to calm down, step away from his least favorite subculture, and address what’s really bothering him.

In closing: infuriating lapses in good judgment and dedication to straw man arguments aside, B. R. Myers’ article manages to entertainingly assault the smug, self-assured doctrines of foodie gluttons by means of smug, self-assured criticism. It’s a shame, however, that he was unable to make a statement of any real substance in the process.