Rick Bayless and Burger King - Part 1

[tommy]

if we found out that he resigned from the Board of Overseers (that sounds terribly Star Trekesque) before he took this position, would he still have "sold out"?

i guess i'm trying to understand the definition of a "sell out".

[=Mark]

It would be the equivallent of one of the candidates running for govorner of California, the most eco-friendly, politically correct, green state in the US drove a Hummer.

Um, wait a minute...

[MatthewB]

One dictionary definition of fundamentalism is:

A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.

We're all familar with religious fundamentalism.

But how might "food fundamentalism" manifest itself?

I'm convinced that "food fundamentalism" exists.

[Jinmyo]

One dictionary definition of fundamentalism is:

A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.

We're all familar with religious fundamentalism.

But how might "food fundamentalism" manifest itself?

I'm convinced that "food fundamentalism" exists.

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

[=Mark]

Might the current Raw Food movement be considered fundamentalist? Behavior being dictated by blind faith and adherance to scientifically unproven dogma?

Edited October 5, 2003 by =Mark (log)

[MatthewB]

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here.

Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

[tommy]

if you take a right at fundamentalism you might quickly run into fanaticism.

[Jinmyo]

I would say so. As with vegans also.

However while these fundamentalist stances involve food, they do not derive from anything fundamental t food itself. In the one case, wacky science. In the other, a socio-political idealism.

In any case, regardless of what factions we can divine and how they might relate to each other, the standards applied to say someone like Matthew or tommy or applied by them are not relevant to the standards to which food professionals as vocal as Chef Ricky have been are held by their colleagues. Or the standards that they themselves have promoted and so should hold themselves.

For Chef Ricky to simply say, "Gee, you know. Out of the various things happening in fast food I think Burger King's Sante Fe Chicken Sandwich is a step in the right drection" is fair enough. But to be paid for saying that it's the equivalent of gathering the ingredients and making it yourself simply does destroy the credibility of what one has said so strongly elsewhere.

[Jinmyo]

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here.

Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

And fire grill heretics into confession?

[tommy]

But to be paid for saying that it's the equivalent of gathering the ingredients and making it yourself simply does destroy the credibility of what one has said so strongly elsewhere.

i'm almost afraid of the answer, but has he said that?

and if he wasn't paid and said that would it change anything? and if he was paid by BK but didn't say anything at all, but rather only had his picture taken and put on ads, would that change anything?

Edited October 5, 2003 by tommy (log)

[Jinmyo]

But to be paid for saying that it's the equivalent of gathering the ingredients and making it yourself simply does destroy the credibility of what one has said so strongly elsewhere.

i'm almost afraid of the answer, but has he said that?

and if he wasn't paid and said that would it change anything? and if he was paid by BK but didn't say anything at all, but rather only had his picture taken and put on ads, would that change anything?

Yes, that's what I saw the ad as saying. I don't have a transcript though and have only seen it one and a half times.

Yes, it would.

Hm. Not so much.

In my opinion.

[MatthewB]

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here.

Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

And fire grill heretics into confession?

Nah.

Just create long threads on eGullet denouncing them.

Kinda like the stereotypical "Wednesday morning church-ladies coffee-time."

[Jinmyo]

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here.

Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

And fire grill heretics into confession?

Nah.

Just create long threads on eGullet denouncing them.

Kinda like the stereotypical "Wednesday morning church-ladies coffee-time."

Sure, why not.

I get a penny a click for every thing linked from the Weekend Update.

[=Mark]

I would say so. As with vegans also.

I had originally included Vegans, but decided that there were probably some perfectly valid reasons for someone to follow that route, whether nutritional or social. In fact I regard vegans with much more respect than the so called vegetarians that insist on carrying that label while trying to justify eating fish, cheese or eggs. I haven't decided whether mushrooms count as they are not veggies either...

The Raw Food dogma, however, that somehow fruits and veggies evolved with "enzymes" whose sole purpose is to aid in their being digested by humans is sheer quackery of the highest order.

[Jinmyo]

I see your point, Mark.

[MatthewB]

Hm. What would the fundamental principles be?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here.

Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

And fire grill heretics into confession?

Nah.

Just create long threads on eGullet denouncing them.

Kinda like the stereotypical "Wednesday morning church-ladies coffee-time."

Sure, why not.

I get a penny a click for every thing linked from the Weekend Update.

Because we don't have anything better or more positive to do?

[Jinmyo]

By the way, just in case, the "penny a click" thing was a joke.

Yeah. That's it. Just kidding around. That's the ticket.

[MatthewB]

I get a penny a click for every thing linked from the Weekend Update.

Ahhhh, you've sold-out too.

[tanabutler]

For Chef Ricky to simply say, "Gee, you know. Out of the various things happening in fast food I think Burger King's Sante Fe Chicken Sandwich is a step in the right drection" is fair enough.

Agreed.

if we found out that he resigned from the Board of Overseers (that sounds terribly Star Trekesque) before he took this position, would he still have "sold out"?

If he had done that, we would know. If he had done that, his name wouldn't be on their website. If he had done that, they might have answered the e-mails asking "What the?!"

It's been weeks.

and if he wasn't paid and said that would it change anything? and if he was paid by BK but didn't say anything at all, but rather only had his picture taken and put on ads, would that change anything?

Not to me. It's called "Sleeping with the enemy." There is so little redemptive in that sandwich.

I have wondered (can anyone say?): do you think they fed Rick Bayless a custom-made sandwich and asked his opinion? Like one of the fancy, pretty ones they show in the commercials?

I am not a food fundamentalist. (I'm not exactly an omnivore, because there are some things I just don't like. But I'm not a vegan [and I am not a vegan who wears leather, one of my favorite permutations of the hypocrite].)

The central issue here is that Bayless is on the Board of Overseers at Chefs Collaborative. And he made a commercial for a huge multi-national corporation that is the antithesis of their values. For the people who were boycotted for their involvement with Rain Forest beef, among other egregious offenses to the environment.

[tommy]

The central issue here is that Bayless is on the Board of Overseers at Chefs Collaborative. And he made a commercial for a huge multi-national corporation that is the antithesis of their values. For the people who were boycotted for their involvement with Rain Forest beef, among other egregious offenses to the environment.

to me that does seem a bit hypocritical, although i know nothing of this "movement" or whatever it is. and i suppose members or followers would feel betrayed that satan himself is cutting bayless a check.

i'm not so sure about the other points that have filled up these pages, though.

[tanabutler]

He's not Satan.

I'm jealous of the money.

He still sold out. I didn't think that "sell out" is nebulous or vague or anything. I know one when I see one. The analogy upthread of Mary Tyler Moore (herself a diabetic, and a spokesperson for their organization) doing a commercial for Twinkies or something...that was a good one.

[SWoodyWhite]

Frankly, if I were Bayless or anyone else connected with the Chef's Collective, I would not respond to any e-mails from anyone connected with eGullet because of the overall tone of this thread, which has been vindictive and snide. What bothers me is that they may choose to disregard any correspondance from eGullet in the future, based on what they have seen here. And that will be our loss, not theirs.

[Richard Kilgore]

Tommy -- If you don't know anything about the Chef's Collaborative, then you have not been following the points that most people here have been making, not bothered to follow the links to it to find out.

While some people have been offering very strong opinions, I am not sure how anyone comes up with labeling them "fundamentalist" or "fanatic". I don't feel nearly as strongly as some, partly because Rick Bayless has not been a persoanl ideal for me and I knew nothing about the Chef's Collaborative until this thread. But I have had a few reactions to the thread contents. The first is that after reading the detail on the contents of BK Whoppers and the Sante Fe Chicken Sandwich, I have a hard time stopping for any fast food outlet even when very pressed for time. Second, I did try the sandwich and found the chicken itself edible, but the sauce, onions, peppers and bread pretty miserable. Third, while I still have not seen the TV adv, and so am a little reluctant to comment, from the news interviews and Jinmyo's report of the adv content -- it is a very odd career move and I can't but think that he would do this knowing full well that people who are interested in sustainable local foods and good cooking would be anywhere from upset to outraged. Fourth, people do make judgements of people based on how they make money all the time: judges who take bribes; doctors who write prescriptions for addicts to make a couple of obvious examples of people who publicly advocate a high standard while doing something quite different. Fourth, I still think Fat-Guy made the critical point when he said early on something to the effect that you can sell your reputation...but then you don't get to keep it. Fifth, this may all blow over in a year and I doubt it will effect RB's restaurant business much if at all, but I have a hard time imagining it will have no effect on his career at all in some way. For all I know, he could do very well financially doing TV promotions for all sorts of frozen or processed Mexican foods, his brand or others BK, Taco Bell, Taco Bueno, Chipolte Grill). But I don't think he can do those things and still present himself as a standard bearer for locally grown, sustainable, unprocessed, well cooked foods.

[tanabutler]

I think that's a very well-balanced and thoughtful post, Richard.

I have a serious question.

Is it possible that BK fed a custom-made sandwich to Rick Bayless when they asked his opinion? I don't know how these things work. I would assume that would be illegal, and I wouldn't put it past any corporate marketing department.

All I know is the sandwich I bought didn't look like it contained 1/3 the chicken and filling as the ones in the ads.

[MatthewB]

While some people have been offering very strong opinions, I am not sure how anyone comes up with labeling them "fundamentalist" or "fanatic".

One comes up with fundamentalism via the definition that I quoted which notes, "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

If one takes, for example, the Chef's Collaborative Mission & Principles and then extrapolates those norms into specific applications in order to judge Rick Bayless, well . . . that's a form of food fundamentalism. Fundamentalism typically confuses moral norms with the application of said norms. That's why "judgment" is such a tricky & subtle process.