Article on Rachael Ray

[bleudauvergne]

I have never seen her show or any of her books, but I can say I have some respect for her, this is why.

A month ago, another one of my nieces aged 22 arrived in France for a year here. We found her an apartment and I was getting her settled in with just the very basic rudiments of a student kitchen. As we're looking here and there for equipment and such, she decides that she doesn't need a stove because she doesn't know how to cook anyway, and she decides that a single hot plate burner will suffice for the year she will spend here. I respect her decision, it's her place after all, and I'm guiding her through some one pot meals, one of them a stove top rendition of a boeuf bourgignon which is really easy, and as we're browning the beef I say - see that on the bottom of the pan? Don't worry about that because when you add the liquid it will all mix in and add flavor to the sauce. She says, "I know, I learned that from Rachel Ray". So if this woman has got my niece interested in cooking enough to watch and learn a few things, I say - I respect her. Seeds planted now can bloom later, there's time for that.

[menton1]

The Times reported on her because of her celebrity; they didn't decide if she was deserving of it, they left that to the reader. I actually found the article quite interesting.

As far as her talent, we often criticize those who have attained success with dubious credentials. Many best-selling authors, for example, churn out books one after another like a factory and they always are on the top of the best-seller list. Whenever they are criticized, they just laugh all the way to the bank, like Ms. Ray is probably now doing.

[Rinsewind]

For whatever criticism you can make of her cooking (and certianly there are things to critique), can we at least all agree that she's basically making fresh food that requires some basic cooking skills? All right, she does use a few shortcuts, but in comparison to, say, Sandra Lee, her food is basically edible and a step away from take-out or Hamburger Helper type meals. Seems fine especially for younger people acquiring a few basic skills-- as bleudauvergne mentions above. Another newer show that seems to aim at the same demographic is Good Deal with Dave Lieberman. While I personally would prefer to watch Mario Batalli, Rick Bayless, Jaques Pepin, David Rosengarten, or other higher-end chefs, and did prefer the Food Network of earlier days, I can at least see the value of basic cooking shows.

How about we lobby to leave Food Network to its more generalized audience, and lobby for a new cable networkd: FoodieTV to go with FoodTV?

[R Washburn]

Well said Rich.

Media is all about communication.

Back in the seventies Carl Sagan was not anywhere near the pre eminent astronomer of his day, Many "serious" astronomers joked about him and mocked him-- but he was the one who was on the Tonight Show and other media and he is the one who sold millions of astronomy books. Why?

He was a much better scientist than Ray is a cook, but you are right that his peers were not sufficiently impressed with him to vote him into the National Academy. I am not sure Ray is the culinary equivalent of an Ivy-league professor.

[ingridsf]

Rachael Ray's a treasure trove of snark-worthy material ("Yummo!", "Delish!", "EVOO,") but she doesn't pimp brand names like Sandra Lee does. Actually, I think the only product Rachael Ray promotes is...herself. Unless I miss my guess, that's called branding. Not too shabby for a "girl," as she is still frequently called. And I haven't seen too much difference between much of the food she cooks up than, say, Dave Lieberman.

(OhmygodIjuststuckupforRachaelRayIdon'tknowwhoIamanymoreI'minadarkdarkplaceandallIcanseearesammiesandstoupmommy.....)

[JohnL]

There is tension in just about every field between the views and interests of the cognoscenti and the views and interest of the general public.  Someday maybe a new food channel will be created especially for foodies.  For now, we have Food Network and they are interested in making money.  Whether I or anyone else likes it, Rachael Ray makes them money.  Lots of money.

←

"Cognoscente" = "Connoisseur."

(Webster)

I believe that all cognoscente are part of the "general public." A lot of this is about elitism, the smaller "in the know" group often sees itself as "better" than those not in the know. (regardless of what it is they are in the know about).

While a certain level of self satisfaction is certainly allowed the "connoisseur" --it is a small step from self satisfaction to snobbism, to elitism.

Also, what is "wrong" with making money? I have a hard time accepting that the Food Network is somehow corrupt or less "pure" because they appeal to a large audience (the great unwashed)

and are a for profit operation.

As I see it, the reason that there is no food channel for "foodies" is there are not enough foodies to support one (there are plenty of media outlets for foodies--PBS cooking shows, magazines, web sites). By the way, mentioning PBS, I wonder how many "foodies" who watch the cooking shows actually support the network with a contribution. (see even the pure and altruistic need to eat).

I would also think that foodies would rejoice at the success of the Food Network on the premise that some of those currently not "blessed" with the foodie calling will, in fact, become--foodies!

That means more foodies (remember even foodies were once members of the "general public" at one time).

Then, maybe, there will be enough foodies to support a Foodie Network--one just for them!

Hopefully, though, there will not be too many foodies because then, foodies may not be all that "elite" and a number of current foodies who are really foodies because they feel "special" won't be so "special" and they will leave the foodie world and then there will be fewer true foodies and then the Foodie Network will fail and......well we will be right back where we started --where we are now!

I am being a bit sarcastic here. (not that anyone would notice)javascript:emoticon(':wink:')

But all this "bashing" of the Food Network and Emeril and Ms Ray and others often goes a bit overboard.

To me, being a foodie simply means one who loves food and eating and dining out etc and certain connoisseurship as a result of that love. A passion, if you will.

But connoisseurship also means sharing that passion and being happy when the passion "infects" someone else. It also means understanding that not everyone shares that passion or shares it to the same degree.

I admit it is fun to "pick on" Ms Ray and others and a lot of this is in good humor, that is fine. But really, enough is enough!

It is not as though foodies have nowhere to go--I can't keep up with all the "serious" food media out there--TV, Radio, Magazines, books, web sites as it is.

I certainly welcome more people who want to be seriouis about eating--that way there will be more good restaurants and more places to find the food I love.

Better for me!

(though not too many more people serious about food--it is hard enough finding a good truffle as it is).