I was enchanted by this book. I mean, what an awesome premise. A year of local food life. How did they do it? How much of what, exactly, did they plant, and how did they raise meat for the winter? Canning? Did they make butter like in Little House in the Big Woods (one of my favorite childhood books)?
I wasn’t disappointed, in that vein. There was a lot of info about how this family made its own food, and in a very helpful format that went through the calendar year with each chapter. So, canning tomatoes in August, while the crisp salads were eaten in June, and the food stores didn’t even start to get low until March. That kind of practical knowledge is the hardest to come by except from experience, and it’s that kind of practical knowledge that I personally don’t WANT to try to come by from experience. So I was really happy to read this book and read how the Kingsolver family got through the winter on foods they worked hard to make.
Also, the recipes that go with the seasons are a great addition. I’ve read complaints before about how the latest recipe books assume you can get all ingredients, even if they are from plants that have different seasons. I’m more content right now to try these tried-and-true recipes than something random I found flipping through a Joy of Cooking, which has no such organization.
Another really strong point for this book was the excellent argument against vegetarianism and veganism. As a mostly-vegetarian for the past two years, this came with a bit of a shock. The best argument goes that it would be irresponsible to just leave the chickens and cows and domestic farm animals to their own devices, as we are the ones that domesticated them for thousands of years so that they’re genetically programmed to rely on us. Just leaving them and switching to a completely vegan diet? That would be irresponsible. There’s another argument that some areas simply can’t support the vegetation for a vegetarian diet, which does seem plausible.
However, some of the things I disliked about this book was how preachy it was. I’m glad at least I was able to identify and ignore it—that proves that I’ve learned some things from my high-class education, at least. I’m starting to question people’s motives and knowledge before taking their opinion for correct. In any case, many of the arguments in the book I’ve taken with a grain of salt, unless I have knowledge confirming the fact (see: domestication of farm animals). Or if it’s relayed from one of the family’s experiences. Many of Steven Hopp’s additions to the book include links to websites that look biased just from the Internet address. I’m dismissing them for that simple fact alone. Certainly, there are many things he (and Kingsolver) say that I will take for granted because they align with my own belief set, but I won’t be preaching them to others because I dislike the fact that I’m supposed to take Kingsolver’s word for this. Yes, she seems to have done her research. But she’s not backing it up with the footnotes so that we can see what she read and read the same things and draw our own conclusions. I dislike that.
It’s really interesting, drawing parallels between this book and High Tide in Tucson, which I think is Kingsolver’s other work that I read most recently (don’t worry, I’ve read Pigs in Heaven and Animal Dreams and The Bean Trees too; all great books, I just remember HTIT most recently). When we read HTIT for my 11th grade English class, my teacher pointed out the reflective, argumentative essay format very strongly. From there it’s easy to see how Kingsolver uses the same format in AVM. She starts with a personal story, goes on to her argument, then ends by connecting her personal story with the argument. It’s a good way to write a story, and does make it more interesting than dry argument. It also makes me think that I need to take more English classes to fully explore the connection between format and content, so I could draw some conclusions from these parallels. (Sigh—minor in English? Or just more English classes? My last English professor seemed to think I was definitely going to keep up with literature, even if German literature…)
Anyway, I wanted to share all of this because I have been so enthusiastic about this book. Has anyone else read it? Any thoughts that I haven’t covered? I’d love to discuss this book with people (as evidenced by the fact that I’ve already talked about it with TWO DIFFERENT people, even before I finished reading it). Or… anything else in general?
I’ve been a Barbara Kingsolver fan for years. I enjoyed most of this book, but I really did NOT enjoy her vehement arguments against veganism. For one, Camille’s nutritional information is simply incorrect. I get mine from a board-certified internist who’s spent 35 years getting people healthy and reading hundreds of thousands of medical papers about diet, disease, and nutrition.
Second, I really think the argument re domestic animals is specious. They are not native species and therefore do not have to be retained for genetic diversity. I do agree, however, that if people are going to eat animals, it’s better to raise them in small farm situations and raise the heritage breeds. But, to argue that we should continue to eat them (i.e. KILL them) to preserve them is, like I said, specious. Just my opinion, and one that is not commonly shared. :)
It sounds like an interesting book. I’ve heard of it before and I might consider reading it, but I must admit I was really turned off by their don’t-be-a-vegetarian argument.
I don’t want to be harsh toward the author, but honestly, that’s a load of crock. They’re assuming that all animals are treated with care, living in cutesy little farm environments. Today, animals aren’t treated like that – so, being a vegetarian or only eating meat that comes from animals who are treated properly are responsible actions. Eating meat that comes from anywhere because we have a “responsibility to continue domesticating animals” is stupid. That’s ignoring facts.
Furthermore, the author is assuming that everyone’s going to become a vegetarian, causing mass chaos with the domesticated animals, which also isn’t the case. I know too many people too eager to keep their meat, and that’s totally fine. The point is that some people can be vegetarians without upsetting the balance of the universe.
Also – it’s true that some areas can’t support vegetation for a vegetarian diet. But again, that really has nothing to do with an individual choosing to be a vegetarian. To me, the author is simply stating why all people everywhere shouldn’t be vegetarians, which is pretty much irrelevant – it really doesn’t even need to be said.
Aside from that, though, it sounds really intriguing. I’m curious to check it out. :D
Chile: See? I was definitely dubious about this argument, though less so than all the others, and now I’m even more so. Like I said, I don’t trust most of the arguments in this book. They all lack evidence for the argument. I’ve told my family a little bit about this argument, but haven’t given up my personal hold on vegetarianism, much to their chagrin. I don’t feel that it’s something to give up just because someone made a half-worthy argument.
Plus, you’re right, I trust the internist more than a 19-year-old.
Rebee, I think this may be a case where I didn’t explicate the argument well enough, sorry! Part of Kingsolver’s argument was in response to a vapid celebrity wishing everyone was vegan, and Kingsolver talking about why that wasn’t possible, and another part was advocating ONLY eating meat from places where the animals were raised in good environments for them. Not assuming that all are, but advocating it.
Anyway, it is an intriguing book. I love the Little House in the Big Woods feel, but I would feel better about it if there were less odd arguments without evidence. Apparently I’m getting used to backing up claims with evidence… my schooling, it iz working.
Makes sense. I still agree with Chile though, that the argument of needing to kill animals to save them is kind of silly. Also, if the author thinks that a vegan or vegetarian diet is unhealthy, yeah, she really does have another thing coming.
Also, one thing I wonder is if she ever mentions the huge amount of crops AND water needed to feed animals for our consumption. I read that cows eat enough food to feed billions of people. So in light of that, her arguments are still pretty weak.
Anyway, didn’t mean to bash her again, but I was reading about her elsewhere after this and found out that she was pretty defensive about the whole thing. Very interesting.
Rebee: Yeah, that’s true too, that animals eat a lot. But if they were just eating grass, is that such a crime? I think that is more for the big meat industry that just raises animals to be slaughtered and feeds them grain 100% of the time. Though if not, huh. e.e;
Also, being pretty defensive? Sigh. I hoped for more dignity. Time to go back to writing fiction, Kingsolver! (I love Turtle. The cutest kid in the world.)
I am supposed to bake a blueberry cobbler. Off to find recipes. Sigh. (yay)
I must admit – I don’t read books such as Kingsolvers’ because I know from my own experience there’s no single answer or approach to suit everyone and fix everything we’ve messed up around us.
I shop and cook for a whole family – 7 days a week, all year round. Every year I strive to become more responsible, sensitive, informed , economical and efficient. My family’s health is paramount. I’m concurrently feeding kids going through growth spurts and food fussy stages with adults fighting middle age bulge. This after already going through pregnancies and nursing babies and introducing foods after weaning to combat congenital food and environmental allergies.
Its a huge balancing act . New information is constantly available and the health and development of the people I feed changes year over year.
I shop for local organics but buy fair trade certified wherever possible. I buy very few prepared foods. I cook every day and bake weekly. My favourite source is actually vintage Martha Stewart (from the first 10 years of the magazine) She is all about eating in season, from your own garden and her recipes always taste great!
Thanks for putting up with my comment despite my not having even cracked the book about which you’re talking! Its great to visit this blog and see your enthusiasm on this!
Thanks for the comment, Marie! It’s really useful to hear the perspectives of people who haven’t even read the book. =) It’s hard for parents not to get stuck in habits (I think), so it’s awesome that you strive to be better at everything year by year. It is hard to do, I can imagine. And cooking every day. That part is pretty amazing.
Thanks for the tip about Martha Stewart! I never would have thought to look there for in-season recipes.
About the writing as if I want to know about foods and animal stuff like that, I can still ask mom and dad…
It makes it much easier to get folks interested in what is being communicated if it can be related to real life use, especially by experience. I taught my army job for a while and made the students realise that they would be using the knowledge to do their job by sharing my own experiences in it. Better than boring formulas that you aren’t even sure will really ever be seen in your lifetime again.