Food Tv Vs Home Cook Meal Analysis
Food TV vs. Home Cook Meals
Americans today tend to believe that the cooking channel will enhance their possibility to become great cooks. According to both food writers, Michael Pollan and Frank Bruni, Americans’ lack indolence when it comes to food associated references. In one hand, food writer, Michael Pollan, believes that Americans’ are basically “cheap and lazy,” and want everything in their hands prepared and ready to be eaten. On the other hand, food writer, Frank Bruni, believes that food television has been inspiring and motivating for young men’s mind and is a “passive” and “mind-resting” experience to be apprehend. While both food writers agree that food TV does not motivate viewers to do hands-on cooking, Pollan focuses more the harmful effects that bring along with sluggishness to Americans while Bruni emphasis more on the beneficial effects that food TV brings to Americans. …show more content…
In the article, “The Cooking Animal,” Pollan explains the lack of preparation coming from Americans. He states, “the fact that we longer have to plan or even wait to enjoy these items, as we would if we were making them ourselves, makes us that much more likely to indulge impulsively.” In other words, Pollan believes that we, human beings, are becoming idling and useless to our environment. Along the same lines, in a short article, “An Expert’s Theory of Food Television’s Appeal,” Bruni writes about how young men like to watch food television, but not actually do the hands-on action in the kitchen. Bruni himself writes, “None of these young men were home cooks. Nor did they seem to aspire to be.” Basically, Bruni is saying that although we like to watch food TV, we do not have enough self-motivation to make food our own self. Both articles underline the key reduction of productivity in home-style meals constructed in the
Americans today tend to believe that the cooking channel will enhance their possibility to become great cooks. According to both food writers, Michael Pollan and Frank Bruni, Americans’ lack indolence when it comes to food associated references. In one hand, food writer, Michael Pollan, believes that Americans’ are basically “cheap and lazy,” and want everything in their hands prepared and ready to be eaten. On the other hand, food writer, Frank Bruni, believes that food television has been inspiring and motivating for young men’s mind and is a “passive” and “mind-resting” experience to be apprehend. While both food writers agree that food TV does not motivate viewers to do hands-on cooking, Pollan focuses more the harmful effects that bring along with sluggishness to Americans while Bruni emphasis more on the beneficial effects that food TV brings to Americans. …show more content…
In the article, “The Cooking Animal,” Pollan explains the lack of preparation coming from Americans. He states, “the fact that we longer have to plan or even wait to enjoy these items, as we would if we were making them ourselves, makes us that much more likely to indulge impulsively.” In other words, Pollan believes that we, human beings, are becoming idling and useless to our environment. Along the same lines, in a short article, “An Expert’s Theory of Food Television’s Appeal,” Bruni writes about how young men like to watch food television, but not actually do the hands-on action in the kitchen. Bruni himself writes, “None of these young men were home cooks. Nor did they seem to aspire to be.” Basically, Bruni is saying that although we like to watch food TV, we do not have enough self-motivation to make food our own self. Both articles underline the key reduction of productivity in home-style meals constructed in the