Several months ago, I wrote in support of Chancellor Biddy Martin’s Go Big Read common book program. More than ever, it is important for students to have a shared set of literary reference points. I encouraged students to avoid cheap cynicism about this very innovative idea – after all, as a scholar of German Literature, Biddy has clear humanist street cred. I might have desired more comprehensive outreach to students during the book selection process, but I always trusted Biddy would pick a genuinely earth-shattering tome to assign our campus. I knew – just knew – that Biddy’s choice would make humanist sense.
And then she picked Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food. This is, as the kids are saying, an ‘epic fail’ – an almost compulsively-uncreative choice from the universe of the written word. The choice is almost certainly related to Pollan’s impending visit to campus, courtesy of the Center for the Humanities. (Pollan will speak at the Kohl Center on September 24.) I imagine the Chancellor’s Office was momentarily mesmerized by the coincidental timing of Pollan’s visit with the Go Big Read kickoff. But sometimes it’s better to ignore serendipity and stick to your original premises. In Defense of Food is not a brave choice.
Have you read it yet? It’s indeed worth-reading, and can be breezed through in a few hours. Pollan argues that nutrition science should focus on the health benefits of “whole foods,” instead of celebrating a “reductionist” approach exclusively concerned with individual nutrients. He gives a quick overview of the abysmal history of nutritional science, and concludes with common-sense dietary suggestions. Critiques of the “Western diet” are a dime-a-dozen; I count at least six prominent bestsellers on the topic in the past several years. In Defense of Food may be the most eloquent of them. My beef with the book has nothing to do with the quality of Pollan’s writing or the urgency of his message.
But I would venture a guess that the vast majority of UW students are already on board for Pollan’s thesis; witness our thriving farmers’ markets for evidence of this claim. And even if we didn’t already agree with the book, it’s very hard to dispute anything in it. I imagine campus-wide conversations about the book will involve a lot of head-nodding and groupthink. That might be an appropriate response to the indisputable claims of Pollan, but it is not healthy for dynamic and creative humanist discourse. Urgent public health messages like In Defense of Food are vital, but there’s not much to say about them – besides, of course, “Yes, right, of course.”
Brave choices for Go Big Read would have been Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses or Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America. Or if nonfiction is the thing these days, Christopher Hitchens’ God is not Great or Tim Weiner’s Legacy of Ashes: The Story of the CIA would have sure gotten campus talking. I wonder as well whether the works of noted UW faculty were hastily overlooked by the Chancellor’s Office; Prof. Donald Downs’ Restoring Free Speech and Liberty on Campus should be compulsory reading on campus at any rate, and would have been an excellent primer for students on their constitutional rights at the university.
Might a more controversial choice have upset some people? Almost certainly. But the burden of diplomacy does not – should not – rest on books; it is readers who bear this responsibility. And in the shared experience of dialogue and discourse about subjects where consensus is impossible, good readers grow closer to their fellow human beings than they do reading 10,000 books by Michael Pollan.
By all means, go see Michael Pollan on September 24. I’ll be in line. Read In Defense of Food. The Center for the Humanities, which is bringing Pollan, does great work. But Pollan could have packed the Kohl Center without this selection by Biddy. And UW students could have instead been reminded by their Chancellor that reading a book means more than nodding your head in agreement.
Eric Schmidt ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science.
