Local Craft Brewing in VT

my video!

This is one of many videos I’ve been creating for my internship that explores the businesses and stories of local craft brewers in Vermont.

I chose to post Steve at Drop-In Brewing because he is making a special “local” beer that focuses on involving VT produce that isn’t just hops (hops grow very well in VT).

If you want to see more brewers check out vermontfolklifecenter.org/brewfestival

Food Map, literally!

This week it almost felt like we were presented with a hunger-themed pintrest board. A whole bunch of stories and organizations that probably each have inspiring and notable qualities. While the organization of options and groups was a bit overwhelming to me, there was one aspect of the webpage that I was immediately drawn to – a map. On this particular map there was a location geotag attributed to each article displayed on the page.

The map is the classic google map interface, and the tags become more accurately location based as you zoom in. I found this characteristic very intriguing because while it would make more sense to just show each location at it’s actual location at any scale, thats not really how people tend to think about themes and issues when it comes to food. For example, all the stories from the regional south appear to be located in the state of Virginia at the most zoomed out version of the map, however with one click they quickly all disperse to various states like Oklahoma, Georgia, etc. Compare this with someone’s, usually not from the south, understanding of “southern food”. I personally would not know the difference between Carolina barbecue and texas style barbecue.

So faced with this very intriguing map, of food, I began to think about the food maps we created at the beginning of this whole course. The way we tend to think about food starts out as very general: it’s tasty, we associate it with family and friends, and usually can help mark important moments in our lifetimes. The food maps we created helped explain time as well as our involvement and interest in FoodWorks. The food map on the grassroots why hunger page explained food themes across geographic regions. From these two sources it’s easy to tell that food can offer some pretty profound linkages over multiple mediums.

Thriving Through Tradition

Like Berry’s exploration of grandmother’s homemade pie, this week’s selection of works explored the value of tradition and passed down knowledge in creating sustainable and resilient food systems. LaDuke and Nabhan explore food traditions through the lens of folklore and indigenous survival, something we have yet to investigate in this course. I really enjoyed the points brought up in LaDuke’s talk and Nabhan’s excerpt because it brings in a population that’s sometimes even marginalized from food sovereignty or justice talks. Indigenous peoples like the O’oodham have knowledge of American soil and ecosystems to a much greater extent than any other demographic group in the country – why, as Nabhan highlights, do we continue to provide people with the complete opposite?

Vandana Shiva’s talk is definitely the piece that stayed with me most prominently. She perfectly encapsulates (pun intended) a holistic thinker. Her criticism of monoculture of the mind points out quite succinctly the root of most food issues. Pointing out that many farmers are committing suicide due to an inability to profit from their efforts exacerbates the point that federal efforts generate a cycle where no person, let alone the land can flourish. A lot of the “help” that governments believe they are providing, such as welfare food to the malnourished O’oodham or synthetic fertilizer to desperate soil, are not tapping into the time tested knowledge of tradition.

I do wish that Shiva had expanded on the point that women are a core position in starting, as she calls it, a “food revolution”. Women are often the ‘designated’ homemakers and with that profession comes an incredible knowledge of food and food preparation. This sort expertise is usually very specialized to a specific local or region. Orosco from Nabham’s chapter recited a very unique diet of foods for an ecosystem that to many modern food systems would seem to produce almost no sustenance. Industrial farms in no way could survive in the desert as the O’oodham had. What baffles me is why we are using the vast and specialized knowledge of indigenous peoples, more specifically native women, to figure out how to thrive in even the remotest of places.

There is no need for the extra calories in synthetic dahl a.k.a. modified soybeans when there is millet that, as Shiva describes, reproduces in the millions. A boiled down version of this collection of talks and writing proves the task of specializing and localizing the approaches to providing nutritional and substantive food to not be as difficult as it may seem. Traditions that our ‘monoculture of the mind’ has been blind too, might have already figured out a resilient and sustainable food system!

Terroir vs. Cross-Pollination

I was lucky enough to have a bit of background knowledge while reading Trubek’s Taste of Place chapter on maple syrup. Molly Constanza Robinson is my advisor! Upon discussing the importance of mineral structure in soils and bedrock she discussed her involvement in Trubek’s described investigation of maple syrup. I was enthralled then and just as enthralled while reading the contextual details of Trubek’s piece. I noticed that my enthusiasm mimicked a feeling I had during our 5th day last week while visiting High Mowing Seed Farm in Craftsbury, VT. This organic seed farm particularly peaked my interest because we were learning just how much you could breed for in a seed. Not just disease resistance or size, but color consistency and different taste profiles. As the farmer was explaining, my mind began to swim with all the tracks of qualities they were dealing with at once. What struck me as most poignant was their work to prevent cross pollination.

High Mowing plants that are not self-pollinators are kept miles apart from one another. This way a ‘pure’ strain of seed is produced and no hybrid species occurs. Right next to our little crowd was a patch of crops that the farmer pointed out was let out for infinite cross pollination. This juxtaposition of strict separation and ultimately “wild” crossing reminded me of Trubek’s untangling and mental separation of syrup in combination with the blended brands.

I’m left with the question of what to value more, and even more so why value hierarchically? The French idea of terrior allows a stronger culture and attachment to local foods, but, as we have seen, local food is currently seen as a luxury that isn’t universally accessible by all socio-economic classes. Does the idea of terroir apply too much of a ‘premium’ quality to be as ubiquitous as necessary? Or is it a strong enough connection to tradition that the benefits of conservation are enough?

I feel a little stuck. I’ve always seen cross-pollination with a positive connotation – interdisciplinary is THE definition of my major (and probably Molly Costanza-Robinson’s favorite word). However, pure and traditional have just as beneficial associations. Usually my values lie with what is more sustainable, but I’m not finding any sort of front runner. Food is intrinsically linked with tradition and familiar tastes, as shown through Berry’s piece, although collaboration amongst cultures generates amazing new tastes and practices. Ultimately this is a list of clashing good ideas and I’m not sure which one to choose, or if to choose at all.

Food Justice Narratives

Combining the incredible presentation of Raj Patel the VT site visited last Wednesday and the carefully laid out paper by Shorlette Ammons, I was shown the profound importance of applying food ‘narratives’ to the issues we are tackling this summer. Raj Patel emphasized in his presentation and subsequent comments the importance of putting the joy and feeling back into food as Carlos Petrini did. The cheapness of providing food from starving communities in Africa should not be the bottom line or the deciding factor. The best way to sell the food movement is by catering to peoples’ stomachs, both literally and figuratively.

This point is where I saw Ammon’s 1st step of “changing the narrative” comes into play. Her argument reveals the importance of including unique histories to food justice issues, not only because they expose incorrect assumptions and institutional problems, but also because they can “demonstrate linkages” (6). Food justice deals with food systems, which are just that – systems. As Eric Holt-Giménez points out, systems are not the individual components that are currently the focal points of food movements. Ammons takes a wonderful approach by interviewing various women to get their narratives on food in order to get the most holistic perspective on what food sovereignty and food justice means for marginalized women of the South.

Along with generating new connections and opening new perspectives to populations’ food cultures, narratives also bring back in the feelings associated with food that Raj talked about. The first passage we heard from Wendell Berry described his association with his grandmother’s kitchen and the food it and she produced. Ammons’ interviews perpetuate and support the idea that people are drawn to food issues because food is a topic that everyone has some sort of personal connection to. As interviewee Hermlinda Cortes says, “I’ve always had a real interest in food because of that. It was how we socialized…got together. So that’s how I’ve always held food a little close to my heart because of that.” (8).

So food justice and food issues in general are just as much of a social issue as they are environmental, economically, and political. Ageyman shows the political side, Ammons points to the clash with capitalism and the economic side, and our panel on honeybees reveals the more environmental side. There is just as much of a complex narrative going on, as there is an interconnected system. By investigating narratives based on food, I believe a wider perspective can be utilized, and bringing back the “joy” and “close to the heart” qualities of food can be implemented as well.

What do bees and McDonalds have in common?

What immediately stuck with me from these meetings is Pollan’s point that “the way we eat represents our most profound engagement with the natural world. Daily, our eating turns nature into culture, transforming the body of the world into our bodies and minds” (10). At the end of this academic year I engaged in a, let’s say peeving, conversation with my organic chemistry lab professor. He kept badgering me as to why I would willingly spend my summer working with farms and other food structures, essentially asking the question: why do you care about food?

This answer that I wish I came up with was Pollan’s aforementioned insight, however the best I could craft at the time was, “Everyone has to eat!” What Pollan’s and my response reveal to me upon reading all of this weeks excerpts is that a lot of the fascination with food and the importance of studying food is it’s systematic quality. Food isn’t just fascinating because it tastes good, we can create it from almost nothing, or that it is required for survival, it is ultimately because it is a topic with so many dimensions and subtopics that no one could every get bored by it. Don’t like reading about McDonald’s, fine lets learn about bees.

It could be my own scientifically minded biases projecting onto the topics of our readings, but systems literally make up all of human life, society, and culture so they must have some sort of intellectual popularity. After reading the excerpts form Pollan, Schlosser, and McKibben I, as a classic liberal arts student, immediately attempted to find their unifying connections and figure out why John Elder has grouped them together. This task proved trickier than normal, but I think I’ve come up with something rather clever. Each excerpt illuminates a different definition of what exactly a system encapsulates.

Pollan likens the food system as food chain, whether industrial, organic, or hunter-gatherer. Schlosser than describes a food system that is much more economic and corporate, consisting of consumers and a business that provides goods. Finally, McKibben gives us familiar with Vermont a ‘local’ example of a system, though one on a somewhat small scale. Keeping bee colonies is like looking after the welfare of a miniature, yet incredibly complex, system. It is quite the “profound engagement with the natural world” because harvesting honey is reaping the benefits of the work of other organisms, while beekeepers attempt to make the process as easy as possible. While the more intrusive efforts to help might not the most effective, this symbiosis of sorts illuminates just how direct humans’ interaction with food systems can be. Food, namely the idea of food systems, gives bees and McDonald’s a linking quality. Maybe that’s why I decided to spend my summer doing this.

What do bees and McDonalds have in common?

What immediately stuck with me from these meetings is Pollan’s point that “the way we eat represents our most profound engagement with the natural world. Daily, our eating turns nature into culture, transforming the body of the world into our bodies and minds” (10). At the end of this academic year I engaged in a, let’s say peeving, conversation with my organic chemistry lab professor. He kept badgering me as to why I would willingly spend my summer working with farms and other food structures, essentially asking the question: why do you care about food?

This answer that I wish I came up with was Pollan’s aforementioned insight, however the best I could craft at the time was, “Everyone has to eat!” What Pollan’s and my response reveal to me upon reading all of this weeks excerpts is that a lot of the fascination with food and the importance of studying food is it’s systematic quality. Food isn’t just fascinating because it tastes good, we can create it from almost nothing, or that it is required for survival, it is ultimately because it is a topic with so many dimensions and subtopics that no one could every get bored by it. Don’t like reading about McDonald’s, fine lets learn about bees.

It could be my own scientifically minded biases projecting onto the topics of our readings, but systems literally make up all of human life, society, and culture so they must have some sort of intellectual popularity. After reading the excerpts form Pollan, Schlosser, and McKibben I, as a classic liberal arts student, immediately attempted to find their unifying connections and figure out why John Elder has grouped them together. This task proved trickier than normal, but I think I’ve come up with something rather clever. Each excerpt illuminates a different definition of what exactly a system encapsulates.

Pollan likens the food system as food chain, whether industrial, organic, or hunter-gatherer. Schlosser than describes a food system that is much more economic and corporate, consisting of consumers and a business that provides goods. Finally, McKibben gives us familiar with Vermont a ‘local’ example of a system, though one on a somewhat small scale. Keeping bee colonies is like looking after the welfare of a miniature, yet incredibly complex, system. It is quite the “profound engagement with the natural world” because harvesting honey is reaping the benefits of the work of other organisms, while beekeepers attempt to make the process as easy as possible. While the more intrusive efforts to help might not the most effective, this symbiosis of sorts illuminates just how direct humans’ interaction with food systems can be. Food, namely the idea of food systems, gives bees and McDonald’s a linking quality. Maybe that’s why I decided to spend my summer doing this.

Slow Food

Amongst the various readings assigned for this week I found a common trend to the idea of “slow food”. The slow food movement seemed to discover, or rediscover the benefit of a greater knowledge or closeness to the sustenance that we put into our bodies. It’s definitely another movement that appears as if it is highlighting a revolutionary way of thinking or acting, when in reality what is happening is just a regeneration of practices that were the standard in previous times. For example, Michael Pollan describes one of his ‘rules’ of eating as “don’t eat anything with an ingredient your grandmother hasn’t heard of”. While this succinct advise leaves out some important subtleties, it gets the point across that the slow food movement is not something entirely new.

As Pollan and Petrini emphasize, today’s food industry involves a lot more ignorance and distance – we buy food from a grocery store possibly 15 minutes away from our home, but the distance the banana we bought for breakfast might be ten fold. In addition, one has to sift through a whole slew of smoke and mirrors when it comes to deciding what food strays away from the industrial feedlot standard. One of the talks I attended at the Slow Living Summit this Thursday revealed that many cereal companies purposefully put BoxTops (a cause that supposedly helps raise money for schools) on only their most sugar packed cereals. There are marketing ploys everywhere to make people think that food has some sort of special benefit.

Pollan’s very succinct and marketable set of rules aids in this struggle, however the trade off to the easily translatable advice is the lack of depth and detail they provide. Encouraging everyone to do their grocery shopping at farmers markets is a rather idealistic approach because it leaves out the topic of food justice, and suggesting that we should rarely eat meat lacks different cultural perspectives. Given these deficiencies I personally preferred Petrini’s categorical approach to judging the quality of food.

Carlo Petrini named three major categories for the expectations of food: good, clean, fair. As he outlines it, using these broader headings allows for a more ‘knowledgeable’ and informed perspective by which to judge food and food culture. I think another term that could be added to this list is “real”, mostly because it is something I am familiar with due to my work with Middlebury’s EatReal club. The Real Food Challenge describes this sort of food something that fits into two of the following for categories: local, fair, humane, or ecologically sound. Because categories like humane or sustainable have been well defined, one can compare the food they are purchasing to such categories in order to make a more informed decision for themselves. For example, if I learn that a box of strawberries has traveled from large monoculture, pesticide fed farm in Ecuador I can realize that this food does not fall into the categories of “local” or “ecologically” sound. From this point I probably won’t be buying the strawberries. What I believe I’m amounting to is the importance of knowledge and experience that the slow food movement highlights. Food has so much more of a journey, and requires so much more effort than a simple plate to mouth trip.

Slow Food

Amongst the various readings assigned for this week I found a common trend to the idea of “slow food”. The slow food movement seemed to discover, or rediscover the benefit of a greater knowledge or closeness to the sustenance that we put into our bodies. It’s definitely another movement that appears as if it is highlighting a revolutionary way of thinking or acting, when in reality what is happening is just a regeneration of practices that were the standard in previous times. For example, Michael Pollan describes one of his ‘rules’ of eating as “don’t eat anything with an ingredient your grandmother hasn’t heard of”. While this succinct advise leaves out some important subtleties, it gets the point across that the slow food movement is not something entirely new.

As Pollan and Petrini emphasize, today’s food industry involves a lot more ignorance and distance – we buy food from a grocery store possibly 15 minutes away from our home, but the distance the banana we bought for breakfast might be ten fold. In addition, one has to sift through a whole slew of smoke and mirrors when it comes to deciding what food strays away from the industrial feedlot standard. One of the talks I attended at the Slow Living Summit this Thursday revealed that many cereal companies purposefully put BoxTops (a cause that supposedly helps raise money for schools) on only their most sugar packed cereals. There are marketing ploys everywhere to make people think that food has some sort of special benefit.

Pollan’s very succinct and marketable set of rules aids in this struggle, however the trade off to the easily translatable advice is the lack of depth and detail they provide. Encouraging everyone to do their grocery shopping at farmers markets is a rather idealistic approach because it leaves out the topic of food justice, and suggesting that we should rarely eat meat lacks different cultural perspectives. Given these deficiencies I personally preferred Petrini’s categorical approach to judging the quality of food.

Carlo Petrini named three major categories for the expectations of food: good, clean, fair. As he outlines it, using these broader headings allows for a more ‘knowledgeable’ and informed perspective by which to judge food and food culture. I think another term that could be added to this list is “real”, mostly because it is something I am familiar with due to my work with Middlebury’s EatReal club. The Real Food Challenge describes this sort of food something that fits into two of the following for categories: local, fair, humane, or ecologically sound. Because categories like humane or sustainable have been well defined, one can compare the food they are purchasing to such categories in order to make a more informed decision for themselves. For example, if I learn that a box of strawberries has traveled from large monoculture, pesticide fed farm in Ecuador I can realize that this food does not fall into the categories of “local” or “ecologically” sound. From this point I probably won’t be buying the strawberries. What I believe I’m amounting to is the importance of knowledge and experience that the slow food movement highlights. Food has so much more of a journey, and requires so much more effort than a simple plate to mouth trip.