These two books have become phenomenally successful among women lately, thanks to the power of Oprah. I thought I'd check them out to see what all the hype is about. I've heard glowing recommendations about Eat, Pray, Love, and how it has changed people's lives. I also have friends who are Deceptively Delicious disciples, with freezers stocked full of purees to sneak into meals for their kids.I borrowed a copy of EPL and was immediately swept away by the first section of the book about the author's months in Italy. Her writing was engaging and beautiful and I enjoyed living vicariously through her travelogue of unplanned adventures. Her descriptions of the Neapolitan pizza and becoming the quintissential crazy aunt were hilarious. Some friends were even kind enough to indulge me as I read the paragraphs out loud, they were that good. But as I moved on to the sections about India and Indonesia, her writing got more bland and I found it narcissitic and a bit self-aggrandizing. I felt bad that she'd had such a rough go, but lots of people have hard lives and manage to make it through and find meaning in their lives without being so fortunate as to be able to take a year off and travel the globe on a mission of self-actualization. As a travelogue it was interesting, but definitely not life changing for me. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you had a different (or similar) reaction to EPL.
When I first saw Deceptively Delicious, I thought that it was something I'd definitely be interested in. I'm all about healthy eating and finding ways to encourage Ben to try new foods. When he was little I made lots of my own baby food by cooking veggies and freezing them in ice cube trays. After borrowing the book from a friend the whole process seemed a bit time intensive and some of the foods didn't look all that appetizing. Maybe I'm just lazy and would rather just cut up some fruit or veggies and served them raw or steamed. Then last weekend I read an article that I found interesting. Granted, it's by the food critic for The Wall Street Journal, who has a much more cultured palate than most, but he brought up some valid points.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120130461452618137.html?mod=weekend_journal_primary_hs
They tested some of the recipes and he offered the opinion that we should not be hiding fruits and vegetables from our kids. If we do, how will they ever learn to appreciate their flavor and learn to eat them independently, which is our goal. He also made the point that over 1/3 of the recipes in the book were for desserts, and are desserts really that much healthier with a little fruit or vegetable puree? I wonder if we're feeling guilty about our children not eating a perfectly balanced diet, when it's just part of being a kid. I hated almost all fruits growing up (I still don't particularly like canteloupe or honeydew and can only eat peaches canned), but now like most of fruits and veggies I try. It's just a part of maturing. I am by no means discouraging parents from using purees or continuing to try to feed their kids different foods, even if they've refused them in the past. It's just with our modern society, foods are pumped full of additives and kids already don't know where many foods come from. They deserve to see things in as close to a natural state as possible. What do you think about this topic?
P.S. The Ominvore's Dilemma and Animal, Vegetable, Miracle are good books about the whole idea of eating naturally. A little yuppy and elitist, yes, but thought-provoking nonetheless.
