Please respond to one of the following questions:
A. How can we characterize Ireland and English based on their reaction to the potato? Or, what do we learn about a culture from its food choices (for instance, what can we say about America based on our penchant for fast food)?
B. In what ways is genetic engineering a good thing?
C. On pages 195-96, Pollans writes that nature has always exercised a kind of veto over what culture can do with a potato; now, however, man can actually produce variability. He writes: “For the first time, breeders can bring qualities at will from anywhere in nature into the genome of a plant” (196). How does this new-found power redefine what it means to be a "plant?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nature is no longer in control one could say. That plants are losing their power. Plants that are gentically modified are no longer really plants of nature but of humans, thay areour property. The whole thing about breeders puting a gene from the firefly into a plant to make it grow, just becuase they can. It is scary the things that are being done our food these days. I feel that have of it just mostly chemicals. The potatoes like Pollen said cna reflect a culture and it the united states or food and the food that is being grown definitly reflect our culture. As a person who eats as much organic foods as possible i am scared where our society is going wiht genetically modified food. Plants that are being changed do I believe still have some power. Nature is a lot more powerful then we think. What we are doing now will have major reprecussions later down the road because nature controls us no matter what we think.
ReplyDeleteA.
ReplyDeleteGiven Ireland and England’s long history against each other, it seems natural that a plant that gave so much life to the Irish would make the English sneer at it, and given it is a root plant, allow them to look down upon it even more, as it is “dirtier”. And although the potato did allow for Ireland’s population to grow (and then drop with the famine), for England to not except a nutritionally good vegetable based on aesthetics and national rivalry was a frankly poor choice on their part, and perhaps even makes them look a little pretentious on their part.
Looking at our food choices today, however, shows a different kind of battle – a battle between countries over customary plants and genetically modified plants. The only GM crop permitted for human consumption in the European Union is Monsanto’s corn, and even that is still banned in countries like France. GM food in the European Union must be labeled. Contrarily, laws labeling food in the United States have yet to be passed, despite consumers’ wants. Furthermore, we have at least four main crops being genetically modified. The same thing can be said about American penchant for bad fast and highly processed foods compared to the rest of the world. What does this say about our culture? Are we too lackadaisical about everything, so much that we put our health in jeopardy? Or for a very developed country do we have more censure than we imagine there being; is the information we need hidden out of site from us by government and large corporations? Does the mass majority of people not really understand how food comes about, or even have the means to find out? Are we really that lazy that we would prefer the cheapest, easiest way out of eating?
I wish I understood or could answer those questions, but as someone immersed in this culture, I have also fallen victim to these cultural food choices. But I can at least partly answer one question: while working at the schoolyard at our local Lakewood Elementary, I have realized that many of these children did not even know what a garden was – what a garden was used for. So perhaps the difference between rich and poor areas could affect our food choices, or perhaps access and understanding of how to make these choices is one of our cultural faults.
Analyzing a country based on how it reacts to a particular food offers good insight into their culture. It is quite evident that Ireland and England had very different perceptions of the potato. England’s superiority was a major characteristic that the potato made apparent. Their culture thought the potato was inferior because it was closer to nature than to human. This theory was based on the fact that their staple crop (wheat) required much more processing and labor than potatoes did, therefore making wheat a more suitable for humans. The potato was very low maintenance and once harvested, it only needed to be boiled before eaten, and making it much more similar to eating like a wild animal might.
ReplyDeleteIrish culture became very reliant on the potato; survival would have been challenging without it. The potatoes presence in Ireland allowed them to live without depending on wheat grown in England and changes in market prices. They could easily grow enough food to support a large family and livestock on potatoes alone. The Irish were more concerned with making a living and having large families than with their self-image. The English thought that the potato was destroying and corrupting Ireland’s civilization by premising them to greatly expand their population without using the market as a determining factor as to whether they could afford a larger family.
When looking at the United States, we can see how fast food defines our culture. We are fast-paced, impatient, and lazy. We like everything to be made for us already and there when we want it. One might compare our culture to that of England’s when looking at how our market determines food prices and how most Americans find it weird to eat any food straight from a garden or when it hasn’t been processed. We might compare ourselves with the Irish when looking at how the cheap food that we have on the market has allowed us to either have larger families or just become larger people. In any case, food is a great determinant to what a culture values.
When you first think of Ireland, you may unconsciously associate the Irish the heavy drinking, poverty, and probably potatoes – illustrating just how big the potato influx was in Ireland. Potatoes, being cheap and easy to grow and eat became abundant in this impoverished country for these very reasons. The Irish thrived on potatoes for many centuries because they did provide all of the essential vitamins and were extremely accessible.
ReplyDeleteWhen you first think of England, you probably think of royalty, tea and in general fanciful things. The potato is not one of them. “The English usually depicted the potato as mere food, primitive, unreconstructed, and lacking in any cultural resonance” (Pollan pg. 203). While Europe did go through a potato phase (after all, it was practical to feed the poor) it was ultimately seen as a food for the poor, “animal fuel.”
Because of the way that these countries both reacted to the potato it more or less assigned them a status. The more sophisticated (aka the English) went through a process to grow wheat and make bread, while the unsophisticated Irish pulled bulbs out of the dirt and ate them. What was of interest to me was William Cobbett’s view that the potato was not a blessing at all for the Irish, but a curse; “while it was true that the potato fed the Irish, it also impoverished them, by driving up the country’s population – from three million to eight million in less than a century – and driving down its wages.”
From the food choices in America one can derive that Americans are obese (more so than any other culture presently) and lazy (tending to lean towards foods that can be prepared quickly and at their service). The way that Americans eat is a direct result of our attitude toward our bodies, our money, and our culture. Fast, easy and cheap is sadly common motto here.
There are many different opinions to the question of is genetic engineering a good thing? I don't really think I like genetic engineering, but there are some benefits to it. Since it is essentially a technique of some type of molecular cloning and an transformation to genes directly there are some good things to come about that. Genetic engineering can help us gain information for future study and potential alteration. The Human Genome Project is a perfect example because it is the study of our genes and our DNA and our genes have to be broken up and manipulated in order to gain information.
ReplyDeleteGenetic engineering helps improve crop technology because it has helped farmers ward off pests from eating their crop and they don't have to worry that bugs will destroy their plants (which is what round about does), it has made it easier and faster for farmers to harvest, attracts new wildlife I read in an interview about all the new animals that have wondered onto this man's farm since using certain products, there has been a plant increase with biotech seeds which has increased production, has made plants more resistant to disease, reduce the use of pesticides, plants have learned how to protect themselves, and has helped raise farmers incomes, reduced insectisides, and illnesses. There are still many moral questions involved with any type of genetic engineering, but I think in Pollen's case it was to help him understand more about the plant itself and to see how it really worked.
I am really upset with everything being done to change these plants. I think the best way to describe what will happen to humans is "you are what you eat", we will be effected by what we are putting into these plants and have to in turn adapt to become immune to the different genes. It is so unsettling that we hold all of the power and are creating such brilliant plants for the wrong reasons. The things genetic engineers are doing and creating are incredible, but they are hurting the consumers and the land and the farmers. It reminds me of robots and how they are supposed to make life so much easier until they turn around and start controlling or destroying their creators.
ReplyDelete