Why So Few Women Are Great Chefs ...

[Carrot Top]

   There are very few high profile jobs in this industry that don't require a 100% commitment, and just based on the traditional gender roles in society, i think it was then, and still is now, very difficult for a woman to find the kind of support that would allow her to put in the 3-5 years at 6-7 days a week 14 hours a day that 4 star and european style kitchens require.

←

I was refering to this statement in my previous post.

←

Thank you. I did not focus in on this within the body of the original post.

[Carrot Top]

It's not bad to aim for any goal (so long as it doesn't do harm to others)! But I took your story (Karen) of your mother that she did do harm along the way of seeking her goals (harm to you by not parenting you). I see your current situation (being a soon to be single parent) as facing a similar delemia: wanting to be free to seek out your goals, yet being responsible as a parent and trying to find a balance between those goals. Where will you land?

I ask not really of you personally, but there are SO many women in the same situation.

←

I'll tell you where I WON'T land. Which is doing ANYTHING at all with computers, having tried to copy and paste and quote and write things for the past umpteenth amount of time in response and then erasing or losing it all.

In the workplace, I was startled upon entering it to discover that one of the usual ways that people got promoted was by others getting fired.

Even if you are just there are doing a good job, you might inadvertantly do harm to another. Would this then be considered 'your fault'...or would it be 'their own fault' or would it be 'the way things are's fault'....? Or nobody's fault...

I am not sure 'where I'll land'.

Or really, I must say that I AM landed.

I have been raising my children alone 'unmarried' for three years now. But I must say that I was raising my children alone when I was married, too.

Bottom line, though, having had a 'good career history' will not only move me in directions I would like to go but also profits my children in ways both economic and 'psychological'.

[Pan]

I think years ago no one questioned the childless women. Birth control wasn't what it is today and people knew the reasons why a women didn't have children.

←

Condoms existed in the early 50s [though I don't see the relevance] when my mother, at the age of 19, was told by her mother that she was becoming an old maid and asked when she would get married (she got married at 20 and felt she was too young). In other words, you would have been nagged about why you weren't married, not why you didn't have children out of wedlock.

In terms of your points about how boys and girls play, I think most of the difference is ascribable to enculturation, not biology.

Edited October 22, 2004 by Pan (log)

[Carrot Top]

I've been watching this debate unfold without throwing in, lately, cause it's moving forward well without my help.  I would suggest, however, that everyone agree that "great" means astounding and influential cooking, not economic success (though the two can certainly overlap.  And by influential, I don't mean selling a lot of cookbooks, (Rachel Ray, Emirel, Bourdain ) but influencing the direction and style of other top chefs.

←

I had to sit with this idea overnight...just to be sure you weren't trying to trick me into something, Busboy... but...I'm almost 'there' in agreeing with you on this.

Please don't take my lack of further commentary on this as lack of interest, for I would like to see how this plays out in terms of discussion and thought on this thread...but my major interest was the 'woman' part, not the 'great' chef part.

Ideas, anyone? What defines a 'great chef'?

[Carrot Top]

Karen, Hi...

A few quick thoughts - one person's reactions to your above questions:

With regard to the "spark of talent": I am in full concurrence that the spark of talent and/or "the fire in the belly" is necessary to the creation, development and later continuation of the "great chef".  However, keeping in mind though that the vast majority of diners never physically get to know or even see the chefs preparing their meals, it is not the spark that counts but the results that appear on the plate and how they appeal to the eye, the nose, the palate and an overall aesthetic.  Does the spark "show" on those dishes – damned right it does.

As to the difference between European and American support systems – I cannot help but think that to a large extent, Europeans will be straightforward in their biases while Americans will show them in what are considered more "subtle" or politically correct manners. In the end, however, much the same social, sexual and cultural biases.

As to the lionization of chefs – not a new phenomenon but one that has taken on a new luster in the last three decades. In the case of Americans, much of that is accounted for by the fact that starting in the 1970's Americans began traveling abroad in ever increasing numbers and were exposed to both food and wine as important parts of the cultured and civilized life-style.  In the case of Europeans who have a far better record in treating chefs well, the newer movement may well be due to the ever-spreading influences of public relations and exposure on television.

As to business skills – if the chef does not have business skills he/she had damned well better have a not only committed but honest partner that does. No business skills, no success; no success, no stardom; etc, etc…

←

Thanks, Rogov. You have earned my undying devotion.

[Gifted Gourmet]

Ideas, anyone? What defines a 'great chef'?

←

How about we try these combined in one new thread, Carrot Top??

here

[Carrot Top]

Okay with me...! Can't wait to see what people think and feel....