A recent change to my commuting strategy has taken me on a brief walk every morning into the Mission District of San Francisco, where I'm now taking BART instead of the slow slow Muni (an acronym for Mostly Useless Not Improving, but that's a rant for another blog). My twice-daily trips into the Mission have opened my eyes up to some food options that I wouldn't otherwise have considered, and it's got me thinking about what kinds of compromises they present.
Along Mission Street, there is a meat shop that serves as a fishmonger and a butcher, with large open tanks of crabs and crawfish squeezed into a narrow shop along with glass cases full of the usual cuts of beef, pork, lamb, and poultry, along with an astonishing supply of offal and feet and tongues. It's amazing. Just a few shops down is a little independent bakery, with Mexican specialties on the menu but Chinese being spoken behind the counter. And between the two shops is a minature produce market, with cases of freshness displayed on the street a la Amelie.
The distinguishing feature of all of these markets is that, despite their inherent charm and appeal they represent to the food-obsessed, they are not being targeted at that crowd. And thusly, by serving the local community of the Mission, and not the fleece-wearing biodiesel crew at the Ferry Building, the prices are just plain stupid low.
I've begun doing some selected food shopping here now. I bought a whole chicken the other day for $6. Six. Dollars. And a morning apple turnover from the bakery, still warm from the actual oven that baked it, for a dollar. I saw little baguettes for 50 cents.
So clearly, I'm beside myself with joy at my new culinary discovery, but I'm forced to wonder what compromise I'm making. Those apples aren't organic, I'll bet you that. And the six dollar chicken probably goes against all of the animal welfare principles that I've developed and adhered to as much as I can elsewhere. But, I insist to myself, it's locally-owned! It's a neighborhood market serving its neighborhood! And for that alone, it's winning points against Whole Foods, whose profits go back to the corporate coffers in Austin instead of staying here in San Francisco.
Do we only get two of three food options? Or can't our food be ethically sourced, sold by local businesses, and inexpensive? I'm still looking, but I'm also very happy to have found a new compromise in the Mission.
1 comments:
Thank you so much for this eloquent post, I think it speaks to a real tension and growing pains in the evolution of progressive food thought. The local, organic, humanely raised food movement has rejiggered some "progressive"food meanings and understandings (originating in the 60's and 70's, I tend to assume, like my parents' formative years.)
I was raised to believe that expensive food--or food that was more expensive than food that was available somewhere else off the beaten track--whether in a stodgy chain restaurant or grocery store usually meant I was being taken for a ride by corporate conglomerates or fooled by mainstream, overly squeamish American food culture, the same health inspectors that require any prepared foods that are commercially sold to be made in some kitchen other than someone's home kitchen, or that categorically rule out street food when Americans travel. Expensive = wool over your eyes.
That extra mile to a hole-in-the-wall restaurant, the discounted "overripe" stone fruit bin at the farmer's market, the ripe, smelly cheese on discount at the supermarket, or a small, locally owned store catering to foreign kitchens/ palates as you describe, or catering to the particularly health conscious with bulk food bins (cheaper, eco-packaging) was all part of what in-the-know food life was about.
Obviously there was much to relearn. Some of these activities can still remain in the "progressive" category, but I sorely agree, it can be sad and strange to see the others go!
Post a Comment