The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals

it went like this:

part 1: corn - i'm stoked! lots of science and history uncovering things i didn't know, yay!

part 2: meat - okay. not a lot here i don't already know, but i read a lot on this issue. nice description of totally sustainable farm even though the guy running it is obviously a crack pot.

part 3: i do it myself! - um, whoa. what are you talking about? and who the hell are these people who live in berkley and have large walk in freezers and spend their leisure time hunting on their personal swathes of california that must be worth tens of millions of dollars? and why do i care about you wringing your very waspish hands over shooting a pig?

ooohhh...i get it now, this is where we turn food into a “delightfully” entertaining moral and philosophical experiment that 70% of the population has absolutely no chance of identifying with; instead of something that everyone has to have to live and is therefore the single commodity whose supply is most easily reformed by individual demands to address ecological, health, and safety concerns.

i see what you did there, michael pollan.

i suppose this confuses your own point well enough to mask the fact that you obviously come out this deciding to continue to eat as you always do except for special occasions? because it made you several millions of dollars, i can see why you did it. i cannot however see any reason for anyone to read it.