Tired of the Michelle Obama backlash?

[Chris Amirault]

• Grilled cheese sandwiches with Campbell's tomato soup
  

←

Ah, the Annie's shells of its day: hearty, good for you (all that bread, cheese, and warm soup), and the kids actually eat the stuff.

[docsconz]

Perhaps preparing food may be a better term than cooking for the purposes of this discussion in relation to Kouign Aman's post.

The discussion in this topic reminds me of the phrase "missing the forest for the trees."

Edited June 4, 2009 by docsconz (log)

[docsconz]

One thing in Hesser's piece that I object to is her assertion that she knows what counts as "real" cooking (hence her derision of "mix-and-eat macaroni and cheese, rice with mix-in flavor pouches and instant pudding").

What makes her the arbiter of what counts as "cooking"? Suppose I told her that she doesn't really "cook" because she doesn't grind her own flour or cure her own sausage, or because she buys bread baked by someone else or beer that she didn't brew herself? I assume she'd object -- just like I object to her telling me I shouldn't buy pre-washed romaine hearts.

←

I read and re-read her piece several times, and I don't understand how you came up with this interpretation that she is telling anyone what "real" cooking is other than cooking something from scratch. You can say that she described what you quoted above as not being real cooking, and of course it is not, even if sometimes it may be appreciated for what it is. The processed stuff may or may not be good, but what is wrong with encouraging people to cook from scratch, which is what she is doing? She complained that the incidence of cooking from scratch in the home appears to be on a continual decline. She never said that one should never use convenience foods or eat out. She would like to see the trend reversed and why not?

The twist, of course, is that convenience foods save neither money nor time. As Marion Nestle pointed out in her 2006 book “What to Eat,” prewashed romaine hearts cost at least $1.50 a pound more than romaine heads. And the 2006 U.C.L.A. study found that families saved little or no cooking time when they built their meals around frozen entrees and jarred pasta sauce.

Hesser didn't say that one shouldn't buy prewashed romaine hearts, she only mentioned them as an example of a convenience food that is not particularly economical. In addition, she never said that cooking need be complicated or time consuming. She suggested that the White House demonstrate how simple and healthful home cooking can be.

They could demonstrate that to feed a family well, all you need to know how to do is boil water, roast and season, three speedy skills that can be applied to almost any food from potatoes to salmon. Getting people to buy local ingredients is a relatively simple matter of changing purchasing behavior; getting them to cook will require a role model who really seems to mean it.

It doesn't have to be difficult and it doesn't have to be a huge chore, though clearly sometimes it can be. I think a lot is being read into her piece that simply isn't there.

[JAZ]

Doc, I think she is saying that -- she comes down on Pillsbury biscuits, pre-washed romaine hearts and flavored rice mixes. She's the one who brought up preparing raw ingredients and cooking from "scratch."

But your apology for her is kind of my point. I mean, I'm all for families eating dinner together, and I'm all for families (and the rest of us) eating -- and cooking -- healthier food. But Hesser seems to demand more. It's not enough for Mom or Dad to come home from an 8+hour day and boil pasta, heat jarred sauce and make a salad, even if the family sits down and eats together. If it's not "raw ingredients," it doesn't count.

I wish that, just for once, someone would say that we don't have to be perfect, that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. That is, whatever moves -- however minor -- we can make to eat better, learn more about where our food comes from and cook with our families are worth striving for. If it means making Hamburger Helper and a salad from pre-washed romaine hearts and sitting down together at the table instead of bringing home KFC to be eaten whenever the kids happen to get home, then hey! don't disparage that behavior, encourage it. Maybe it will lead to more cooking and "better" ingredients -- and even if it doesn't, well, at least the family's eating dinner together, right?

[docsconz]

Doc, I think she is saying that -- she comes down on Pillsbury biscuits, pre-washed romaine hearts and flavored rice mixes. She's the one who brought up preparing raw ingredients and cooking from "scratch."

But your apology for her is kind of my point. I mean, I'm all for families eating dinner together, and I'm all for families (and the rest of us) eating -- and cooking -- healthier food. But Hesser seems to demand more. It's not enough for Mom or Dad to come home from an 8+hour day and boil pasta, heat jarred sauce and make a salad, even if the family sits down and eats together. If it's not "raw ingredients," it doesn't count.

I wish that, just for once, someone would say that we don't have to be perfect, that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. That is, whatever moves -- however minor -- we can make to eat better, learn more about where our food comes from and cook with our families are worth striving for. If it means making Hamburger Helper and a salad from pre-washed romaine hearts and sitting down together at the table instead of bringing home KFC to be eaten whenever the kids happen to get home, then hey! don't disparage that behavior, encourage it. Maybe it will lead to more cooking and "better" ingredients -- and even if it doesn't, well, at least the family's eating dinner together, right?

←

Janet, that is precisely what I think she was saying. The romaine hearts are not economical, but she didn't say they weren't any good. She never said that it had to be all or none. She was simply pointing out that some of the reasons don't cook better just don't make it in the end. Pasta with jarred sauce or cooking frozen meals just don't save time in the end compared to a simple meal from scratch, which is likely more nutritious, tastes better and perhaps even less costly, according to her. I agree with this. That doesn't mean that I (or she) never uses short cuts or orders out. I do, but I also cook, even after a busy day at work. When I don't cook, my wife generally does. Some days it is a chore, while others it isn't. It is an important and I think valuable part of our lives, though.

[moosnsqrl]

I think there are two disparate goals/questions here (at least two). Honestly, from a health perspective, your family might be better off going to a reputable local salad bar, eating less-processed foods and discussing how your day went without stressing out the cook (whomever he or she may be) than kidding yourselves into thinking that a "home-cooked" meal consisting of a lot of highly processed foods is the lesser of two evils. From a social perspective, if eating in your home around your own table is more important than the nutritional content, by all means, break out the American Beauty and Ragu and have a nice heart-to-heart with the family. I'd like to think the two aren't mutually exclusive, but I'm a dreamer (and a non-two-legged parent).

I agree with the basic premise that simply growing gardens (for most of us mortals, who do not have staff) is only half of the battle. I have to assume, knowing the Obamas, that the produce from the White House garden will either be used in the feeding of family/guests at 1600 Penn Ave, OR donated to a pantry. Either way, it's a win-win.

[Busboy]

One thing in Hesser's piece that I object to is her assertion that she knows what counts as "real" cooking (hence her derision of "mix-and-eat macaroni and cheese, rice with mix-in flavor pouches and instant pudding").

What makes her the arbiter of what counts as "cooking"? Suppose I told her that she doesn't really "cook" because she doesn't grind her own flour or cure her own sausage, or because she buys bread baked by someone else or beer that she didn't brew herself? I assume she'd object -- just like I object to her telling me I shouldn't buy pre-washed romaine hearts.

←

I think this is, again, nitpicky. We all have a pretty good idea what real cooking is and none of us (to agree with the good doctor above) minds a little prepared food as long as the general thrust is more or less away from microwaved TV dinners or whatever KFC is trying to force on us these days.

And, as someone who has served their kids macaroni and cheese many times, I can assure that it is indeed not real cooking.

←

I don't agree that this is nitpicky. Since "we all have a pretty good idea what real cooking is," maybe you can give me some guidance on the following examples:

• Cake from a cake mix
  
• Tuna casserole made with canned cream of mushroom soup
  
• Tacos made with ground beef and Lawry's Taco Seasoning, chopped fresh onions, tomatoes and lettuce, and bottled taco sauce
  
• Betty Crocker boxed "Au Gratin" potatoes
  
• Green salad with bottled salad dressing
  
• Grilled cheese sandwiches with Campbell's tomato soup
  

These are all things my mother made for us while I was growing up in the 60's and 70's, along with pot roast, fried chicken, homemade macaroni and cheese, and all kinds of other dishes "from scratch." She was a great cook, but I don't doubt for a second that she was very happy to be able to use those and other shortcuts.

So, tell me: what counts as "real cooking"? From Hesser's comments, I can't see that any of those dishes would make her cut.

←

It's nitpicky because you've deliberately ignored the larger thrust of the article: if the First Lady wished to effectively make the point she seems to wish to make, she would go beyond gardening photo ops and maybe say a kind word or two about actually cooking the stuff she's planting, rather than implying (however inadvertantly) that post-harvest food handling be left to mutlinational food processing companies or fast-foost establishments.

Given that this is a Washington-centric discussion it's appropriate that you're using a fairly standard inside-the-Beltway ploy -- seize on the smaller issue to obscue the larger one (note that -- so far -- opposition to the current Supreme Court nominee centers not on what may or may not be significant and legitimate legal and philosophical problems but on a single paragraph uttered years ago). And we could certainly dig up a copy of the 1972 edition of the Betty Crocker Cookbook (I belive my mother still has hers) and go through, recipe-by-recipe, giving the thumbs up or the thumbs down. But it wouldn't prove anything.

I don't have a problem, nor do I think Hesser does, with any of those dishes you mention in moderation, though the casserole and the potatoes are pushing it. But when my mom was serving them to me -- aside from the potatoes, which I had only on backpacking trips as a Boy Scout, all of those dishes are familiar from her table -- they all tended to be parts of a larger whole with, over the course of a day, fruit, vegetables (usually frozen, admittedly), whole grains and real meat. As I have said before, while Hesser nudges us to go beyond that, I read nothing that condemns those who fall back on such dishes when needed.

This is a real Rorscharch test here. I first stumbled across this column on the Jezebel site (which I read in a desperate attempt to keep up with my wife and teenage daughter and get in touch with my inner politcally active party girl) and all the comments were about the "racism" and "sexism" of telling Michelle to get back in the kitchen.

Here, it's a little more subtle, but she seems clearly to have pushed a button.

Let me be clear, I am no Recession Mom, but I do have kids. I do live in a house where both parents work and both parents cook and clean and chauffer and so on. This is not an abstraction to me.

I think this is clearly a shot at "fast" and processed food, at our overreliance thereon and at Michelle Obama's failure to close the loop on her own message, failing in ways that actually damage the message she wants to get out. You can't realistically be for good food and against cooking.

If you think that Hesser is laying a guilt trip on parents (always mom in these discussions; interesting, that) who fail to reach some ideal you are probably reading too much of yourself into her words.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Busboy (log)

[djyee100]

If cooking for your kids is so important for their physical and emotional health, why isn't anyone asking Barak to get busy in the kitchen?

Michelle Obama was being honest when she said cooking is not her thing, and that's important. If your heart isn't in it, that's how it is. The bottom line is to put tasty, nutritious meals in front of your kids--somehow. Where I live, I notice that working parents rely on frozen & premade foods during the week, then try to make meals from scratch on weekends--usually grilled meat and fresh veg salads. They're trying.

[JAZ]

It's nitpicky because you've deliberately ignored the larger thrust of the article: if the First Lady wished to effectively make the point she seems to wish to make, she would go beyond gardening photo ops and maybe say a kind word or two about actually cooking the stuff she's planting, rather than implying (however inadvertantly) that post-harvest food handling be left to mutlinational food processing companies or fast-foost establishments.

←

I realize that the points that are being made here in this discussion are good ones. I teach beginners to cook and I love doing it (although I don't do it for free, as Amanda suggests). But let's return to the actual piece that Ms. Hesser wrote, and not what we think about cooking and families and convenience foods.

The fact is that Ms Hesser wrote a poorly constructed and poorly argued op-ed. It wanders; it makes claims and fails to back them up; it sets up straw men and can't even knock them down.

Her first point is that Michelle Obama is responsible for making cooking seem like it's not a chore. She says: "Though delivered lightheartedly, and by someone with a very busy schedule, the message was unmistakable: everyday cooking is a chore" and "Americans have been told repeatedly that cooking is a time-consuming drag."

Then she makes the point that home cooking has decreased, and that 32 families have been polled and they think that cooking from scratch is a "rarefied hobby." She states that "Companies like Kraft and General Foods promoted mix-and-eat macaroni and cheese, rice with mix-in flavor pouches and instant pudding. Pillsbury, the flour maker, became Pillsbury the biscuit, pie and cookie dough maker: baking just by turning on the oven." The implication is that a word from the First Lady could change this.

To finish, she says that "convenience foods save neither money nor time."

I interpret all of that to say: Michelle Obama is wrong for saying that she doesn't like to cook because it sets a bad example; no one cooks from scratch and that's bad, because rice with mix-in flavor packets and frozen biscuits are bad products -- and, presumably the cause of childhood obesity; pre-washed romaine hearts aren't worth the money and we should all buy whole romaine heads. I don't think I'm out of line with this interpretation. I'm not reading evil intentions into her article: these are the points she makes.

Ms. Hesser has said elsewhere that she's not saying that Michelle Obama should get into the kitchen and cook. If that's the case, then why end with the whimsical daydream that "it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself"?

[maggiethecat]

Ms. Hesser has said elsewhere that she's not saying that Michelle Obama should get into the kitchen and cook. If that's the case, then why end with the whimsical daydream that "it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself"?

←

Fist bump!

I've defended Amanda Hesser here and elsewhere -- she's a good writer and a smart cookie. This piece was misguided . The Obamas are busy privileged people. So what if Michelle doesn't cook? Laura didn't cook, Barbara didn't cook, Hillary didn't cook, Nancy didn't cook, Rosalind didn't cook. Maybe Abigail Adams cooked. The Prez has commented often how much he loves to walk to family dinner every night. I'm sure it's a terrific dinner, and there's time for family chat.

And yes, maybe they'll eat a First Tomato.

[djyee100]

Hesser says that Michelle Obama should advocate home cooking. But she hasn't thought through the implications. If Michelle Obama were to advocate cooking, when she doesn't particularly like to cook and doesn't have to cook, people will say she's being elitist. Then we could merge this thread with the "Backlash Against Alice Waters" thread.

Maybe Abigail Adams cooked.

Postscript: Abigail Adams did not cook. Not when John was ambassador to England...

(page 81)

http://books.google.com/books?id=cLwub0cpA...snum=5#PPA81,M1

Not when John was president, either...

(page 250)

http://books.google.com/books?id=3Qzb-xM-2...num=8#PPA250,M1

But check out one of my favorite First Ladies, Dolly Madison:

(page 478)

http://books.google.com/books?id=mwJ3AAAAM...ly+madison+cook

With successful husbands--even before the presidency--, I doubt if any of the First Ladies spent much time in the kitchen, except to supervise. They were upper-class women. For most of history, home cooking wasn't just women's work, it was often considered menial work. So that says something, doesn't it?

[Busboy]

If cooking for your kids is so important for their physical and emotional health, why isn't anyone asking Barak to get busy in the kitchen?

Michelle Obama was being honest when she said cooking is not her thing, and that's important. If your heart isn't in it, that's how it is. The bottom line is to put tasty, nutritious meals in front of your kids--somehow. Where I live, I notice that working parents rely on frozen & premade foods during the week, then try to make meals from scratch on weekends--usually grilled meat and fresh veg salads. They're trying.

←

Ms. Hesser has said elsewhere that she's not saying that Michelle Obama should get into the kitchen and cook. If that's the case, then why end with the whimsical daydream that "it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself"?

←

Fist bump!

I've defended Amanda Hesser here and elsewhere -- she's a good writer and a smart cookie. This piece was misguided . The Obamas are busy privileged people. So what if Michelle doesn't cook? Laura didn't cook, Barbara didn't cook, Hillary didn't cook, Nancy didn't cook, Rosalind didn't cook. Maybe Abigail Adams cooked. The Prez has commented often how much he loves to walk to family dinner every night. I'm sure it's a terrific dinner, and there's time for family chat.

And yes, maybe they'll eat a First Tomato.

←

Read the article. She never says that Michelle, or Barak, should "get back in the kitchen." To say or imply that she does is to have misread or to consciously distort the article. Hesser says things like:

Which is why Mrs. Obama might want to expand her food message to include cooking. Just as she highlighted American fashion by wearing the clothes of young designers, she could call attention to cooking by bringing America’s talented young chefs to the White House for a food summit meeting. Then she could turn them into a national task force, asking them to reach out in their communities and give free cooking lessons to the next generation of cooks and eaters. (Her involvement might also focus the energies of her husband’s cabinet — his secretaries of agriculture, education and health, say — to embrace the cause.)

You know, First Lady stuff, nor chief cook and botle washer stuff.

Remember, this is an issue that Obama chose:

“The whole point of this garden for us is that I want to make sure that our family, as well as the staff and all the people who come to the White House and eat our food, get access to really fresh vegetables and fruits,” she said. “I found with my girls, who are 10 and seven, is that they like vegetables more if they taste good, right?”

From the Wall Street Journal:

Not since Eleanor Roosevelt’s World War II-era “Victory Garden,” has an administration eaten what it has grown on the White House grounds. Obama policy adviser Jocelyn Frye said the garden fits into the first lady’s broader agenda of promoting a healthy work-life balance for families. “She and the president thought hard about it,” Frye told reporters following the event.

Associate White House Chef Sam Kass, who as the newly crowned “food initiative coordinator” will help oversee the garden’s maintenance, stepped in: “The message is that food is really important with the health crisis we’re in,” Kass said. “Cooking is a big part of that.”

“Let’s hear it for vegetables!” Obama cheered. “Let’s hear it for fruits!”

And, from the Times

The first lady, who said that she had never had a vegetable garden, recalled that the idea for this one came from her experiences as a working mother trying to feed her daughters, Malia and Sasha, a good diet. Eating out three times a week, ordering a pizza, having a sandwich for dinner all took their toll in added weight on the girls, whose pediatrician told Mrs. Obama that she needed to be thinking about nutrition.

Even Obama herself seems to imply that home cooking is important -- when she's not stepping on her own message by making it out to be a chore.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Busboy (log)

[Busboy]

Her first point is that Michelle Obama is responsible for making cooking seem like it's not a chore. She says: "Though delivered lightheartedly, and by someone with a very busy schedule, the message was unmistakable: everyday cooking is a chore" and "Americans have been told repeatedly that cooking is a time-consuming drag."

No. Her point is that Obama is repeating a meme that has echoed through advertising for many years, and are counterproductive to her own efforts.

Then she makes the point that home cooking has decreased, and that 32 families have been polled and they think that cooking from scratch is a "rarefied hobby." She states that "Companies like Kraft and General Foods promoted mix-and-eat macaroni and cheese, rice with mix-in flavor pouches and instant pudding. Pillsbury, the flour maker, became Pillsbury the biscuit, pie and cookie dough maker: baking just by turning on the oven." The implication is that a word from the First Lady could change this.

If you have better stats, go for it. UCLA is a decent school. This study, while hardly comprehensive, shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Further, there's no implication that Obama can wave a magic wand. In fact Hesser outlines a rather painstaking course of action. And, as you walk through this, you skip the core argument: that Obama has set herself out to promote better eating. Talking about cooking will further this goal.

To finish, she says that "convenience foods save neither money nor time."

A valid, if arguable, point.

I interpret all of that to say: Michelle Obama is wrong for saying that she doesn't like to cook because it sets a bad example; no one cooks from scratch and that's bad, because rice with mix-in flavor packets and frozen biscuits are bad products -- and, presumably the cause of childhood obesity; pre-washed romaine hearts aren't worth the money and we should all buy whole romaine heads. I don't think I'm out of line with this interpretation. I'm not reading evil intentions into her article: these are the points she makes.

Yes: she is saying that the modern diets too many people eat are bad for you and their consumption is predicated on false premises (that they are as healthy, cheaper and more convenient than real cooking). So? This is hardly savage criticism of Michelle Obama or moden parents and is also correct. Not that she says that Obama is "wrong" in a moral sense. She says that Obama is failing to support her broader message -- that she's wrong tactically.

Ms. Hesser has said elsewhere that she's not saying that Michelle Obama should get into the kitchen and cook. If that's the case, then why end with the whimsical daydream that "it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself"?

Why not? She's not telling Obama to cook, she's just saying she might have a good time. Another hobbyist looking to share the luv -- just like women who knit and guys who fly those remote control airplanes.

[djyee100]

If cooking for your kids is so important for their physical and emotional health, why isn't anyone asking Barak to get busy in the kitchen?

Ms. Hesser has said elsewhere that she's not saying that Michelle Obama should get into the kitchen and cook. If that's the case, then why end with the whimsical daydream that "it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself"?

←

I've defended Amanda Hesser here and elsewhere -- she's a good writer and a smart cookie. This piece was misguided . The Obamas are busy privileged people. So what if Michelle doesn't cook?

←

Read the article. She never says that Michelle, or Barak, should "get back in the kitchen." To say or imply that she does is to have misread or to consciously distort the article.

Agreed, Hesser never says directly that either or both of the Obamas should get into the kitchen and cook for their kids. But Hesser does say:

"Which is why Mrs. Obama might want to expand her food message to include cooking."

"And it wouldn’t be surprising if, with a little exposure to the kitchen, Mrs. Obama took to cooking herself. Her progress could be our progress.And with those arms, she could out-whisk anyone."

Duh. I don't feel a hammer hitting me on the head, but what was that thing brushing by my forehead?

And I'll reiterate: if Michelle Obama takes Hesser's advice, and advocates more home cooking to busy working parents, she had better get into the kitchen herself. Otherwise she risks a potential public relations problem. (cf. elitism, Alice Waters, asking people to bear the pain for your ideals, etc., etc.)

Edited June 4, 2009 by djyee100 (log)

[Florida]

I don’t think the original article was a scathing criticism. It seemed like Hesser was offering a suggestion more so than criticizing.

Would also say, I do believe, despite Mrs. Obama not specifically mentioning “cooking,” there is certainly the implication she was not growing the vegetable garden for the pleasure of gardening and for one to enjoy the benefits of growing your own vegetables, you will need to cook/eat them. And while my opinion of the intelligence of the average American is not very high, I do think most people would understand the basic message she is trying to convey: eat healthier.

From another AP article:

Mrs. Obama said she didn't focus on the issue until her daughters' pediatrician suggested she make changes in their diet. As a busy parent, and then during the presidential campaign, she said she often resorted to feeding her family with take-out and processed foods.

"We started to see that taking a toll on our health," she said, adding that such simple changes as adding more fruits and vegetables to their plates and eliminating processed foods made the difference.

I don’t think she needs to bludgeon us over the head with actually cooking the items she is growing in order for her to get the message across. If Hesser wants to encourage people to cook she is more than welcome, but I don’t see where Mrs. Obama’s lack of desire to cook negatively affects her core message of eating more fruits and vegetables.

[zoe b]

I think the most interesting thing in the piece is that when Michelle Obama was asked about her favorite thing to make and about cooking in general that she answered TRUTHFULLY that it isn't her thing.

How many hideous ladies' magazine articles have there been over the years touting a First Lady's favorite recipe for something--something that we could suspect was written by a pr person, not treasured and made often by the First Lady.

She is going to be herself come what may, --just the fact that the Obamas love good food and support locally grown is a gigantic step forward.

The White House garden is a wonderful start--focussing on the idea of having fresh food available in communities is big--I've been to towns where there are just a few sad withered pieces of vegetation in the produce section in supermarkets in poorer sections--let's make fresh food available first--later we can whip people into cooking it for themselves--one thing at a time, please.

I didn't love the piece--thought it was kind of an attention grabber sort of thing to write--a little too Maureen Dowdish for me.

[annecros]

I can't imagine that there will not be a very well publicized dinner at some point, probably sooner than realistic than later, that will feature a "First Tomato" or some such nonsense, course.

This is a very fine page taken from Prince Charles' playbook in the UK. He really was an early proponent, that gets no credit vs. Alice Waters and such. Under appreciated, I think.

All that being said, I get the jist of Hesser's argument, and agree with her overall. Keep the pressure on.

If it doesn't go from dirt to hand to mouth - it is really impossible to understand. Teaching it takes much more effort than anyone seems to have the patience for these days. But any exposure, like planting a seed and going through the whole process and recognizing that the vegetable is actually the seed - well you gotta see it to believe it. They really are blank slates - and you never know what might click for them.

Agricultural Sciences used to be a well respected segment of the educational system. We've gotten too far away from that. It has been some time since I heard of a kid in grade school hatching a chick.

Then going to Home Ec and making a souffle!

Amazing the people who don't want fresh eggs because "they come from a chicken's butt!" - not sure where the people who purchase the two month old eggs off the shelf that came from a chicken who knew no happiness in her life comes from~