* * *
which i guess means…mushy peas with mint and lentil-sprouts on toast? flipping through the new issue of Saveur (that includes chili-cardomom-infused tequila as hot sauce, fine cooking with cheetos, and homemade kielbasa) which is just charming enough to make me reconsider deciding not to renew my subscription this year, listening to Burial Year, and anticipating how insufferable will be my company when i’m all hepped up on coffee and breakdowns.
Food for Thinkers is a week-long, distributed, online conversation looking at food-writing from as wide and unusual a variety of perspectives as possible. Between January 18 and January 23, 2011, more than thirty food and non-food writers will respond to a question posed by GOOD’s newly-launched Food hub: What does—or could, or even should—it mean to write about food today? You can check out the conversation in full at GOOD.is/food, join in the comments, and follow the Twitter hashtag #foodforthinkers to keep up-to-date as archaeologists, human rights activists, design critics, and even food writers share their perspective on what makes food so interesting.
as someone who believes there are a good many fascinating and significant reasons to write about food, but whose own writing is basically an vanity project, i’m curious to see what i come up with. wondering if it would do too much violence to Hans Jorg Rheinberger’s idea of ‘epistemic things‘ to use it to think about foods, traditions, and their conceptual and material traces. i guess we’ll see. tune in next week!