Wolfgang Puck will no longer serve foie gras. He's also revised his protein offerings based on how animals are treated before they make it to his table. While I don't agree with his move, I applaud taking a stance with a culinary empire as big as his. I'd rather see chefs make personal decisions as opposed to the government stepping in and telling me what I can and can't eat. This has been done in Chicago, California, and soon New York.Puck and other high profile chefs have been under pressure for years to stop serving foie. I don't see his decision as bowing under pressure to these groups because they have been active for so long. I see it as a headline grabber to attract more customers for whom dinner is a political statement rather than a meal. He's popularized California Cuisine, and is now popularizing the earth friendly mentality born there. I wish the San Andreas fault would really show us what it's capable of!
This article in the Boston Globe quotes Puck as saying happy animals yield tasty food. Didn't I hear that in a cheese campaign? A baby cow that's been running around will not taste like veal but rather bland beef. The Japanese and their love for tuna have proved that seafood that has been put under stress does suffer in quality. If everyone flushed their prozac, would that help? You can have animals running around cage free in masses. If they're eating grass that has had acid rain fall on it, and breathe carbon monoxide, and will still receive lots of antibiotics - it doesn't matter if it had the pleasure of frolicing or not. It costs a lot more to have cousin Billy Bob chase down a chicken to sell than pluck one from to coop, and you can bet that cost will be added on to your dinner at Spago.
1 comment:
I'd rather pay twice the normal price for food that is organic, locally grown and has not been tortured. Taste and cost are both trumped by ethics.
Post a Comment