Extra Credit Examination of Omnivore's Dilemma

Since we read a few chapters in class already, for my Pollan responses I jumped to chapter two: The Farm.

In my pre-read I skimmed over the first couple sentences of each paragraph as well as the headings for each subsection in the chapter. From this I gleaned that this chapter was about the physical maintenance of the farm, from the planting to the harvesting, and everything in between.

Reading through with a more in-depth approach I found that this was an examination at the industrial farm. Specifically focused on the farmer George Naylor, we see that this is your stereotypical American farm, having been handed down through generations of Naylor men. However, we see the impacts of the industrialization of food on this farm, for though the farm yields acres of corn, and will feed approximately 129 Americans alone, Naylor himself will not be initially part of that figure. The corn is "basically inedible" describes Pollan, citing that the corn that is grown on the farm must first be processed and tried to be able to feed humans. That might have been the most interesting part of the chapter- the fact that a farmer's crops simply cannot feed him without the stains of industry first. Another piece of this chapter I found interesting was the sheer amount of corn gathered fro ma single acre of corn per harvest. Pollan tells us that a single acre of this farm will yield to slightly more than ten thousand pounds of corn. 1.8 million pounds for the whole field. To me that sounds like enough to feed a few towns, not the 129 Pollan had approximated earlier. This leaves me with the question of how many pounds of kernels equates to a single person, so that they get a figure like that.

This has affected my understanding of food in that I realize the taint of industry destroying our crops. I believe that there was a quote that sums up my feelings exactly. Something along the lines of "We haven't aquired the technology that allows us to synthesize food from oil.....yet.

Posted to Kate
Kate-
I like that you acknowledge the soil issue. I overlooked that in my own post, and I will add it to a second draft. Now, when you wonder if technology is a problem, I would say that Kiana's point is essential. Technology, for all of its flaws, greatly reduces the amount of manpower needed, and also allows for more crop to be grown. However, the counter-argument to that is that less technology would encourage more independent farming, so i guess there's that. As for the corn issue, the fact that consumers demand a higher amount of it is a result of a capitalistic idea, the concept of supply and demand. When the demand is greater than the supply, the economy can boost, so perhaps asking for more than there is is good up to a certain point.