There Is No American Cuisine, But There Could Be, with Chef Dan Barber
National cuisines tend to be defined by historical precedent influenced by agricultural limitations. As the United States is a young country with rich soil, its own quintessential cuisine never developed.
DAN BARBER is the Chef of Blue Hill, a restaurant in Manhattan's West Village, and Blue Hill at Stone Barns, located within the nonprofit farm and education center, Stone Barns Center for Food & Agriculture. His opinions on food and agricultural policy have appeared in the New York Times, along with many other publications. Barber has received multiple James Beard awards including Best Chef: New York City (2006) and the country's Outstanding Chef (2009). In 2009 he was named one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.
To expand on his philosophy of cooking with sustainably grown, local ingredients, Dan has been working with such organizations as the Kellogg Foundation, Slow Food USA and Earth Pledge to minimize the political and intellectual rhetoric around agricultural policies and to instead maximize the appreciation of eating good food. Focusing on the issues of pleasure, taste and regional bounty-and how these imperatives are threatened-Dan helped create the philosophical and practical framework for Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture and continues to help guide it in its mission to create a consciousness about the effects of everyday food choices.
He is author of the book The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food.
Dan Barber: I think we struggle with a healthy identity because we’ve never been forced into the kind of agricultural realities that almost every culture and cuisine has struggled with over thousands of years. They evolved out of hardship. They evolved out of peasant agriculture and they evolved out of this negotiation that peasants were making with the landscape. How can we get something to harvest out of this soil, this landscape and how can we make it nutritious and delicious for our family and our community? That’s the history of cuisine. Actually the exception is America. I mean we never were forced into that negotiation because well we’re a young country and also because when the settlers came over here they came to the Garden of Eden. I mean you drop a seed in the soil here and then you have, you know, incredible harvests anywhere. You have rainfall. You have temperate climates. You have this unbelievable soil. When you look at the history of this, you start to understand that our poor eating habits in America, some of our health-, diet-related diseases and problems associated with poor eating stem from just a history of poor eating. The expression eating high on the hog is really an American expression because it’s about having the wealth, the agriculture wealth to just eat the loin and the tenderloin of an animal and to, because of the abundance, be able to live off that. And that’s not cuisine. That’s, you know, if you look at any of the great cuisines of the world, they don’t allow you to eat that seven-ounce protein, the steak or chicken breast or filet of fish twice a day, seven days a week. That’s an American phenomenon.
When you look at the cuisine, the Japanese cuisine and you see, you know, a rice culture; well you also see that to get that rice they needed buckwheat to grow the rice. Buckwheat into rice was a famous rotation. Well what did the Japanese do with the buckwheat? In this country we feed the buckwheat — it goes into dog food or it goes into bag feed for chickens. In Japan, it becomes soba noodles, right. And so to eat in Japan is to — it’s to eat a lot of rice, but it’s also to eat soba noodles. And that becomes inculcated into what it means to be Japanese because it’s an agricultural necessity and it becomes a gastronomic necessity as well or a cultural necessity. Well we don’t have any of those kind of negotiations in this country. Every cuisine does; we don’t. And so we’re the exception. And what you learn from studying those other cuisines is they have this advantage of history that’s tethered to an agricultural reality that we never faced. The real advantage of American cuisine for the future — because I think we will land on a cuisine, but it’s going to be hyper regional. It’s going to be you’re going to a certain part of the United States and you’re going to eat because diners are increasingly demanding this. They’re asking for what is special about this place? What is unique about this place? And how can we, through a plate of food or through a meal, experience what it is about this region that’s so special? And that’s where restaurants and chefs can play, I think, a big role.
National cuisines tend to be defined by historical precedent influenced by agricultural limitations. As the United States is a young country with rich soil, its own quintessential cuisine never developed. But that doesn't mean America won't ever boast its own essential menu. Chef Dan Barber, author of the book The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food, believes regional fare is the key to the future of American food.
A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration likely violated the reporter's Fifth Amendment rights when it stripped his press credentials earlier this month.
- Acosta will be allowed to return to the White House on Friday.
- The judge described the ruling as narrow, and didn't rule one way or the other on violations of the First Amendment.
- The case is still open, and the administration may choose to appeal the ruling.
Progressive America would be half as big, but twice as populated as its conservative twin.
- America's two political tribes have consolidated into 'red' and 'blue' nations, with seemingly irreconcilable differences.
- Perhaps the best way to stop the infighting is to go for a divorce and give the two nations a country each
- Based on the UN's partition plan for Israel/Palestine, this proposal provides territorial contiguity and sea access to both 'red' and 'blue' America
The definition of a kilogram will now be fixed to Planck's constant, a fundamental part of quantum physics.
- The new definition of a kilogram is based on a physical constant in quantum physics.
- Unlike the current definition of a kilogram, this measurement will never change.
- Scientists also voted to update the definitions of several other measurements in physics.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.