HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >

Discussion

Fooding

  • 9

Can someone summarize the philosophy of the Fooding movement in France as explained by
Adam Gopnik in the current issue of New Yorker. I cannot..
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/20...

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Yes.

    Food should not be bound by tradition

    5 Replies
    1. re: Harters

      Good, thank you, sounds right. I think movement-wise, Slow Food movement has a more compelling point but they are not mutually exclusive.

      1. re: serious

        I see Slow Food as having more of a "political" agenda than the article about Le Fooding (which I'd not heard of before - even though they're only 32km away). Have now found their website which has some interesting bits:
        http://www.lefooding.com/guide.htm

        1. re: Harters

          I was interested in the idea that if you ask someone in the States how they eat, you can know their politics but not so relative to the proponents of le Fooding. (Actually in the states, political affiliation has more predictors than in Europe.)
          Isn't slow food having more of a social rather than political agenda?

          1. re: serious

            I find it impossible to separate social agendas from political agendas. But certainly when the Slow Food movement talks about food being "good, clean and fair", I believe they are addressing issues which require political resolution - at least I hope they are, otherwise I'm wastng my time lobbying my representatves.

          2. re: Harters

            This fooding, I'm not so sure it's a clear idea. A little like defining fusion. In my opinion as soon as someone from a small village incorporates a way of doing something with food or using an ingredient not used previously in the first village , from another small village, it's fusion.

      2. Even after reading the article, I am not sure what this Fooding business is. The people who actually started the idea don't really know either, by what I had read. Interesting thought though.

        1 Reply
        1. re: Phaedrus

          I had the same reaction to the article, I didn't come away with any clearer notion than I had had to begin with. Perhaps that was Gopnik's point. (I also find the term itself annoying but that's just me.)

        2. Here is another article and perspective on the matter, this one on salon.com:
          http://www.salon.com/food/feature/201...

          It seems to me that 'fooding' is a movement defined by opposition, which means that they don't have to define what they're in favor of all that well, just what they're against. In this case, their opposition would be against stasis and hierarchy (I guess) in French food culture.

          This would seem to make a sort of sense in light of what I've heard about French food culture, but I haven't been there personally.

          Some of the comments in the New Yorker article by the movement's leader (?) are interesting in that he seems to resent technique and 'technicians of the table,' appealing instead to hazy notions of cooking with one's entire soul. This is where a lot of populist food sentiments lose me entirely. I understand wanting food that creates an emotional reaction, but the notion that technical skill somehow hinders that emotional response is (IMO) silly.