This piece will most likely be extremely helpful in the collaborative research project. Wendell Berry seems to be on a bit of a rant...although an informative rant, in his article "The Pleasures of Eating". From interpreting his language, I feel that this piece was meant to shock it's readers into becoming informed. He has made urban dwellers have been his main target and - although I have to question his idea of what exactly an urban dweller is - I can see his point.
Berry claims that "urban shoppers" are simply consumers who don't see themselves as part of the agricultural process - they eat whatever is easiest for them to get a hold of and whatever takes the least amount of preparation with little regard to what it took to get their food to that state. They see it as a product, and don't appreciate or are unaware of the agricultural processes that are at the root of the product.
We have to face facts - I'm sure that this is not entirely the consumer's fault. I'm sure inorganic farmers and corporate food production companies are banking on this. They have recognized the psychological force behind their buyers, and use it fully to their advantage. As long as the consumers who they have removed from the agricultural processes (through making their products cheaper easy to prepare) are seeing results, they will continue to turn a blind eye to the ethics of agriculture and what issues are prevalant with their food. This is why "urban shoppers" are passively dependent upon corporate and inorganic food companies. As long as they are blindly dependent, companies will continue to push through with their products. Since the 1950s when mass production of food started to become commo, this cycle has been building and picking up more steam along the way.
This piece has left me with several questions that will pertain to our research project.
1. Are urban shoppers more likely to be pro-GMOs?
2. How can we make the "local farmer" more accessible to those who do live in cities?
3. is it even feasible for urban families to afford to stick to local farmers, given the common SES among ur
Berry claims that "urban shoppers" are simply consumers who don't see themselves as part of the agricultural process - they eat whatever is easiest for them to get a hold of and whatever takes the least amount of preparation with little regard to what it took to get their food to that state. They see it as a product, and don't appreciate or are unaware of the agricultural processes that are at the root of the product.
We have to face facts - I'm sure that this is not entirely the consumer's fault. I'm sure inorganic farmers and corporate food production companies are banking on this. They have recognized the psychological force behind their buyers, and use it fully to their advantage. As long as the consumers who they have removed from the agricultural processes (through making their products cheaper easy to prepare) are seeing results, they will continue to turn a blind eye to the ethics of agriculture and what issues are prevalant with their food. This is why "urban shoppers" are passively dependent upon corporate and inorganic food companies. As long as they are blindly dependent, companies will continue to push through with their products. Since the 1950s when mass production of food started to become commo, this cycle has been building and picking up more steam along the way.
This piece has left me with several questions that will pertain to our research project.
1. Are urban shoppers more likely to be pro-GMOs?
2. How can we make the "local farmer" more accessible to those who do live in cities?
3. is it even feasible for urban families to afford to stick to local farmers, given the common SES among ur