Austin Miller is the creator of The Daily Hash You can also follow him on Instagram @dailyhashco (Austin asks that you please don’t hold the nerdiness of this article against him.)

Every new “organic” product we purchase, “scrap” of food that we toss, or “locally grown” food source we consume — says something about our culture (and ourselves) on the most profound level. And while there are many trends in food (unicorn Starbucks frappes, glitter pizza, salted chocolate)there are three large and encompassing traits occurring in food culture:

*Organic Food

*Eating local

*Resurgence of Offal Cuts

Making a Statement With Your Food

The political nature of food is nothing new by any standard as evidenced by the USFDA ad above. In his article Distinction, Pierre Bourdieu discusses the notion of cultural taste and writes:

It functions as a sort of social orientation, a ‘sense’ of one’s place’, guiding the occupants of a given place in a social space towards the social positions adjusted to their properties, and towards the practices or goods which befit the occupants of that position. It implies a practical anticipation of what the social meaning and value of the chosen practice or thing will probably be, given their distribution in social space and the practical knowledge the other agents have of the correspondence between goods and groups.

During the depression era food was scarce and the US government wished to emanate feelings of patriotism by encouraging Americans to “do their bit” by leaving no waste and refraining from wheat. To buy corn cereals instead of wheat was an investment in the fight against fascism and a token of appreciation to the soldiers. Although a Western sense of “consciousness” in food purchase is not new, what is new is the categorization of food and its assigned meanings.

As time passes and attitudes, philosophies, technologies and other socioeconomic factors evolve, so does meaning. PR Newswire quotes the United States Organic Food Market Forecast and states:

According to “United States Organic Food Market Forecast & Opportunities, 2018”, it is forecasted that the organic food market in United States will grow at the CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) of about 14% during 2014–18. The organic fruits & vegetables will continue to dominate till 2018 and with the growth in organic food market revenues, the demand for organic meat, fish, poultry, etc. is also expected to gain demand in the forecasted period.

It is no secret that today that organic foods are markedly more expensive than non-organic foods. There arises then, a semiotic rupture between classes. To buy “organic” is to implicitly declare one’s socio-economic status or “sense of one’s place” as Bourdieu puts it.

Anyone familiar with North American grocery chains “Walmart” and “Whole Foods” can readily testify to a stark contrast in the type of social classes that frequent these establishments (the latter being an organic foods store). Attesting to the mythification of these stores and what they culturally represent — are the plethora of websites, blog posts, and articles that exist to poke fun at these stores and their perceived classes of clientele such as the ever so popular website peopleofwalmart.com.

Celebrities and the privileged (I don’t exclude myself from this latter category) constantly tout their favorite “organic food” products on social networks as if they were a newly acquired boyfriend or girlfriend.

But eating organic food not only symbolizes wealth but also self-care. Organic foods are generally seen to be healthier, and one who goes the extra mile to take care of their body is undoubtedly to be seen as more “socially responsible” whereas those who eat processed foods are viewed as unhealthy and careless. On one hand, science has proven in many instances that the organic food industry does provide healthier alternatives to over-processed foods, but inversely they are only affordable to specific social classes. It seems a little unfair that the less privileged get judged for this.

Food Inc.

Corporate investment is often the most reliable reflection of cultural impetus due to its financial prowess and now that restaurant chains are losing their bourgeois customers to the lower class — they are trying hard to play “catch-up”. With the possibility of a more economically endowed class frequenting their restaurants and spending more money, it is no surprise that they have begun to market themselves as healthy and organic. In the article McDonald’s May Sell More Organic Foods to Boost Sales, Bloomberg’s Leslie Patton states:

McDonald’s Corp. (MCD), which yesterday posted its fourth straight quarter of falling U.S. same-store sales, may look to sell more organic food to stem the loss of customers to chains known for better-quality fare. “You’ll see us in some categories looking to different products, possibly organics,” Chief Executive Officer Don Thompson said on a conference call. “We actually are doing it in certain markets.” The world’s largest restaurant chain already uses organic semi-skimmed milk in McCafe coffees, porridge and Happy Meals in some restaurants in the U.K., said Becca Hary, a company spokeswoman. Organic milk also is sold in Germany, while organic fruit juice is available in Germany and France, she said.

Evidence of folkloric humor, parody, and satire that mock non-organic foods can be seen throughout culture and perhaps most abundantly — on the Internet. Although many of their critiques of non-organic foods are undoubtedly exaggerated (such is parody), the result is an epic mythification of processed food giants such as McDonalds Corporation. Through humor these institutions are viewed as symbolic representations of “all that is evil” in food practice (most notably by the bourgeois). What was once a staple of middle-class life and the victors of capitalism — has now been brought down to the level of the grotesque through comedic devices such as the following memes:

(Fig. 2, 3, 4) Individually created McDonald’s attack meme’s.

In recognition of their now tarnished reputation, McDonald’s has responded with their own media ad campaign, “Our Food: Your Questions”. This campaign is an obvious attempt to combat their now tarnished reputation. However, once smaller entities and companies invert the norm and challenge authority — authority has the option of staying the same or conforming.

It has been reported that a vast number of processed food chains are now converting to organic practices. One might hastily assume that this signifies a “victory” on behest of the populace, but a pessimist would be quick to point out that McDonald’s could now more readily close the gap between competing niches and squash its much smaller competitors.

And although general food preference has changed from “convenient” to organic, the desired symbol is exactly the same — a desire to be seen as upper class — in essence, the “Whole Foods”[ii] effect. In the same aforementioned Washington Times article[iii], Helfer states:

The western states in United States hold the major market share in the total organic food market revenues. However, increasing per capita income coupled with the growing domestic production and commercial sector are anticipated to surge the demand of organic food in other regions of the country.

Therefore, what remains to be seen (at least in the West) is how the symbolic capital of purchasing and serving organic foods will evolve as the lower classes gain more purchasing power and are able to join in on the organic food market craze. How will small business react? Will big business’s attempts to play part in what is seen as a “people’s movement” taint its image? Will there arise a cataclysmic divide between “authentic” participants in the movement and “money-chasers”? And moreover, if big business is deemed as “unauthentic” due to economical motivations, “Do we care?” or “Do we only care about the ends?” — An influx in convenient organic food choices.

Locals only, Bro

Maybe even hotter than the organic food craze, is the “local food” movement. In the article Taking Local to the Next Level, Julie Knudson explains the psyche of today’s consumer:

Today’s consumers want to know where their food is coming from and are hungry for local foods. In the National Restaurant Association’s (NRA) “What’s Hot in 2014 Culinary Forecast,” which surveys U.S. chefs, locally grown meats and seafood and locally grown produce were the №1 and №2 trends for this year, respectively. (QRS magazine)

In her Forbes.com article What You’ll Eat Next: Tasty Food Trends For 2014, Carol Tice reports “This trend goes hand-in-hand with concerns about the environment and sustainability in our food supply. Sustainable seafood and ‘environmental sustainability’ were two more of the NRA’s 2014 top ten trends.” What is clear about the food industry’s most prominent trend is its ability to signify social awareness and honest food practice. Each of its participants whether producer or consumer gives symbolic meaning to the food and its practice depending on their actions.

Countries and territories have been trading food and goods for centuries, but the lower classes have for the most part been confined to “eating local” for the better part of history. Therefore, the importation of food in many cases was historically touted by the bourgeois as an “exotic luxury.” However, in a post-globalization boom economy, where imported goods are the norm and locally sourced goods are a luxury — the cultural capital of food has once again taken a Bakhtinian inversion.

As Carol Tice points out — eating local is commonly associated with a sense of social awareness pertaining to “sustainability” and “environmental concerns.” Restaurants now hang signs advertising their locally sourced food as a proud badge of honor. Said honor surges from a sense of social and health consciousness as if to say, “we know what the food is and where it comes from” — a seemingly simple idea that would appear rather absurd to the peoples of prior centuries.

Although any social movement is susceptible to monetization, the local food movement appears be seen as a veritable response to corporatism and a call for redistribution of wealth. That is not to say that it is a conscious protest against capitalism but rather a communal attempt at capturing a piece of the economic action. In the CBC article 5 Canadian Consumer Trends to Shape the Future of Retail, economist Pierre Cléroux states: “Marketing a made-in-Canada, or better still, a local connection can be a big advantage for small and medium-sized businesses.”

To market “local” is to provide small business a platform with which they can compete and in some niches, outpace big business. This due to the fact that many larger corporate chains are often based on national and in some cases international product sourcing structures.

The local food movement however, does not project symbolic meaning solely on an economic level but also a political level. In the same aforementioned article[iv], CBC quotes the economist Pierre Cléroux and states: “In general, consumers are looking to buy Canadian products because when they buy local, it has a positive impact on Canada and Canadian jobs and the environment.” In this sense, to buy local is to symbolically and materialistically invest in regional pride.

It is to proudly state one’s support for their country or local community and what they stand for. Texas’s capital Austin is famous for its “Keep Austin Weird” campaign, which has since been copied by other cities throughout the US. Stores put signs in their windows, and tourist and locals alike purchase t-shirts carrying its slogan and wear them with pride. This move by middle sized cities that tend to have a “hippie” mentality — are clear attempts against the homogenization of business and a desire to keep what is unique to the region from being taken over by outside interests.

This type of political capital is generally seen as positive and patriotic. But politicians and other interest groups have been known to use the purchase of foreign products as leverage to deem others as “unpatriotic” and as political weapons of slander. Therefore it must stated that the local food movement can be used both to lift one’s social status and to tarnish reputations. Perhaps what is most uncanny about symbolic capital is that it is an ever changing and evolving force — the product in many instances remaining the same, but the people around it changing ever cyclically.

In modern cuisine it is not uncommon for restaurants that profess to be local, to accompany their service with historical and contextual knowledge. In season 2 episode 4 of the CNN series Parts Unknown, chef Anthony Bourdain visits the Copenhagen restaurant credited for starting the local food movement — Noma[vi]. As the servers bring out the food they often state what, where, and how their food has been prepared and sourced.

This tactic is becoming more and more common and is nothing less than a verbal politicizing of cuisine. The very unassuming front page of Noma’s website formerly contained the very simple phrase: “In an effort to shape our way of cooking, we look to our landscape and delve into our ingredients and culture, hoping to rediscover our history and shape our future.” By providing historical and regional context the server is hoping to communicate that what they are serving is “much more than just food.”

The local food movement is two fold:

On hand the chefs and producers act as archeologist, excavating the remains of their civilization — rediscovering and uncovering their identity. On the other hand, the consumer acts as a jury, judging and tasting the evidence — deciding between what is authentic and what is forgery. It is through this process that the local food movement hopes to “shape” the future — a future that is quickly heading to homogenization due to globalization. The local food movement is more than a marketing scheme to convince consumers to reinvest currency back into the system (although it is undoubtedly hoped for), but it is also an attempt to rediscover identity and protect against the loss of a culture.

Therefore to consume local food is to consume a story, a people, a culture, and ultimately give symbolic meaning to the act.

In the same aforementioned episode of Parts Unknown, head chef and originator of Noma René Redzepi discusses with Bourdain the Danish law of Jante — a cultural practice of looking down on individual success. In its initial creation Noma was rejected by Danish society. Redzepi states that op-eds have been written in Danish papers linking their deconstructive mentality to some of the most heinous acts in Danish culture as well as fascism — Danish critics refer to him vulgarly as “Seal Fucker”. Ironically Noma has gained incredible fame outside of Denmark, attracting celebrities and chefs from all over the world who wait for months to be given a seat. Just as Bakhtin’s idea of carnival has the ability to tear down borders of class and identity — the local food movement as evidenced by Noma does the same.

The movement is now worldwide and affects nearly all modern nations and tongues. Its food practices trespass borders and bring together people from various ideologies, backgrounds, classes, into a single movement and sometimes location. This act of “bringing together” creates carnivalesque “contact” between disparate bodies in an orgy of the senses — for eating is perhaps the only human practice that involves all 5 senses of the body.

It is important to note then, that to be “local” can have different political connotations depending on context. For socialist Denmark, to be local is seen to be radical and capitalistic. In the west (particularly in capitalist societies) to be local represents a re-appropriation of wealth and anti-corporate sensibility. It is precisely this Bakhtinian idea of “otherness” that Esmail Yazdanpour’s discusses in his thesis, City of Ideas: A Bakhtinian Reading of Saul Bellow’s Herzog. Yazdanpour comments:

It is an event in which the people in their own way experience the things, without the need for a socially higher rank to teach them how to see. Actually they dismantle the logic of the ruling system, the dominant discourse. This has a close relationship with the rise of the novel, which rejects all the institutional ways of knowledge and begins to experience the things in its own ‘novel’ way.

It can be said then, that in regards to political connotations in cuisine, that implications can differ depending on context. However no matter where this “otherness” exists, it tends to disrupt the hegemonic order.

What once carried connotations of exotic luxury (importation of food) — is now seen as corporatist, socially irresponsible, and unpatriotic. Just as Don Quixote’s eloquent speeches are cries against the theatrical and unnecessary excesses of knight errantry, the local food movement is also a demand for rustic simplicity and honesty in food practice. The people have spoken and their demands are simple: “What are we eating?” and “Where does it come from?” A little less clear however is what will occur once big business takes the inevitable lead. As Michael Zacka from Huffington Post reports in his article Local Foods: From Fad to Force and What it Means for the Food Industry, he reports:

So retailers are giving consumers what they want. Now placards that once listed produce by price-per-pound boast detailed descriptions of when, where and how the item was grown. Even Wal-Mart, which had food sales of $150 billion last fiscal year and is the nation’s largest fresh produce retailer, according to CNBC, is also going local. In spring 2013, the retailer committed to double its local produce stock by December 2015.

Like organic food we must once again ask, “How will the local food movement change as big business gets involved?” and “Will the sense of regionalist pride, of social awareness, and subversion, survive this inevitable evolution?”

We may not yet, be able to fully answer these questions, but one thing that does seem to ring true with both the organic food movement and the local food movement is the law of “supply and demand.” As an item or movement such as organic and local foods become more available, their cultural capital will most like decrease. In other words there appears to be a historical trend among the bourgeois — that what is most scarce is most desirable. But once the item becomes commonplace and readily available to the lower class — its ability to “elevate” status seems to dissipate.

Make Trash Food Cool Again

In the culinary world, nothing seems to encapsulate the spirit of Bakhtin’s carnival more than the recent re-appropriation of discarded cuts of food (most prominently meat). What has traditionally been viewed as low, vile, and grotesque — is now being served in some of the world’s most “haute” restaurants. Bakhtin comments: “The grotesque brings the sublime to Earth, making it material and on our level forcing attention back to the body” (Ronay, Jr. 182). For years animals have been dissected and their parts sold according to which cuts are seen as most desirable. In the US cuts like pig snouts, the trotter, gizzards, and feet have been seen as corporal, base and less desirable. In many cases they have served as the only affordable source of protein for the lower class and therefore they have traditionally symbolized the “poor man’s cuisine”.

Could it be that these “grotesque” cuts reminded the consumer (who by this point in time is so far removed from the farming process) of the corporal? Or “That the modern consumer wishes to be disconnected from the animal?” Perhaps these cuts that tend to be seen as dirty parts of the body (intestines, feet, snouts, trotters etc.) taint the luxurious sensation of eating finer cuts such as filet mignon and prime rib. The common dinner table phrase “Please don’t talk about that, I’m eating” aptly demonstrates the modern day consumers psyche. It’s precisely “that” (the grotesque) which has the ability to taint the sublime and bring it down to a base and carnal level.

But many chefs feel that the idea of the consumer being so far removed from the corporal (the animal) has dulled the senses. The masses sit down to a table and consume a chicken, or a rabbit with which they have no relationship to. In many cases they have no idea of its origin or the butchering process. In Ina Lipkowitz’s Words to Eat By, she aptly comments:

‘Meat has ceased to have any connection with animals,’ Dorothy Hartley wryly observed in her ‘Food in England’…We can’t live without our meat — our roast beef, our hamburgers, our lamb chops and pork tenderloins — but we don’t want to be reminded where it came from either. And so we have an elaborate vocabulary in which we are carnivores, rather than flesh eaters, and meat is anything but what it once was: animal flesh.

The general populous does not want their “sublime” culinary experience to be tainted by thoughts of butchering, killing, deboning, and cooking. There is a trend amongst chefs however that is taking place, one that feels the human race must pay respect to the animal that has given its life to humankind. Much like many of the Native American tribes who thank god after every animal kill, chefs want the consumer to be conscious that something has died for its benefit — a fact not to be taken lightly.

Leading the charge is the renowned chef Fergus Henderson who not only believes it’s important to connect the eater to the animal but also to consume the entire animal, hence the title of his popular book — Nose to Tail Eating. Fergus Henderson famously comments: “It’s only polite really if you knock an animal on the head to eat it all: tripe, heart, feet, ears, head, tail. It’s all good stuff.” In this sense, Henderson is challenging a preconceived binary in popular cuisine — that of “good cuts” and “bad cuts.” What he is now implying is that entire animal is the only acceptable solution for they are all “good cuts” and to do otherwise would be socially irresponsible.

Photo//Fine Food Dude

Henderson’s ideology was not always popular, in the beginning his restaurant seats were often empty. The website The World’s 50 Best Restaurants reports:

…When Henderson opened St John in Smithfield in 1994 with long-term business partner Trevor Gulliver, it was an alien concept that flew in the face of the prime-cuts cooking of haute cuisine. Only through his unashamed celebration of offal and indigenous food, his pushing of the boundaries of acceptable restaurant cooking and an infectious passion for ingredients has the nose-to-tail approach become an intrinsic part of contemporary gastronomy. Now, quite rightly, it can be experienced everywhere from the informal café up to the top table.

The fact that Henderson’s “Nose to Tail” philosophy is not a one-off phenomenon is evidenced by the previously mentioned article’s[vii] statement, that it has indeed “Become an intrinsic part of contemporary gastronomy.” Offal cuts can now be experienced in a wide variety of institutions that serve food. Henderson’s restaurant St. John’s has received a Michelin Star[viii] — evidence of the “establishments” acceptance of his practices. Henderson claims he has not changed anything in the past 20 years of the restaurant’s service, and we must therefore assume that the change had to take place in others who now accept “his poor man’s food” as respectable.

Although this trend seems to be picking up steam in the West, the same cannot be said for other regions of the world. The Zimbabwe-central news outlet Southern Eye shares several case studies highlighting this phenomenon:

Thus to a certain extent the neglecting or abandoning of certain or all traditional foods has to do with attitude or perceived reasons. There are those who regard the eating of rice as a more civilized habit than eating maize. Watch them select their food at a wedding party or at a funeral dinner. Isitshwala, amatshakada, traditional vegetables will remain untouched (Southern Eye).

The article later goes on to explain that the upper and lower classes seem to have no problem eating neglected and traditional foods. Southern Eye reports that it is the middle-class who tends to turn their nose up at traditional Zimbabwean food due to “attitude” or “perceived reasons.” Could it be, that the middle-classes of Zimbabwe are desperate to not be associated with the lower class?

Just as eating organic or local caries certain capital — to eat traditionally discarded food is a statement of primal embracement as if to say, “This is who we are, this is who we’ve always been.” An indigenous spirit is being rediscovered and being awoken by such rituals as: “flesh eating”, “eating with the hands”, “whole animal eating”, and the butchering process. Ina Lipkowitz states:

‘It’s finally cool to be a carnivore.’ TV chef Emeril Lagasse’s mantra ‘Pork fat rules!’ never fails to draw thunderous applause, and even former vegetarian Mollie Katzen of Moosewood fame has begun to eat meat. New York magazine’s Grub Street blog has dubbed the new style of cooking ‘The Refined Meathead School.’

This new class of carnivores is not merely eating “hotdogs” and “hamburgers” but “flesh” and “meat”. Some of the haughtier restaurants such as David Chang’s Momofuku are now taking more aggressive stances against vegetarianism through their menus. It seemed as if for a while that the act of eating meat was being questioned, but new ideologies are challenging that through Bakhtinian practices.

These movements or trends share a deconstructionist ability to subvert and question authority. But unlike deconstruction which solely questions meaning — these undoubtedly produce it.

On page 24 of his article Distinction, Bourdieu states:

It follows that, when considered in each of their uses, the pairs of qualifiers, the system of which constitutes the conceptual equipment of the judgment of taste, are extremely poor, almost indefinite, but, precisely for this reason, capable of eliciting or expressing the sense of the indefinable. Each particular use of one of these pairs only takes on its full meaning in relation to a universe of discourse that is different each time and usually implicit — since it is a question of the system of self-evidences and presuppositions that are taken for granted in the field in relation to which the speakers’ strategies are defined.

There are certain undeniable habits and cycles that seem to occur in the phenomenon of cultural capital throughout time. Indeed the symbolic value of objects does change depending on the various socioeconomic factors of the era, but what remains constant throughout history is the human desire to achieve social status (intangible) through their environment (tangible). In this sense humanity is much like Icarus of Greek Mythology, who in an attempt to reach the sun with a pair of wax wings, inevitably falls to his death. Humanity is grasping at the sublime (symbolic godhood) through that which is most terrestrial and corruptible. But what humanity so oft forgets is that the sublime is beyond the realm of human reach and that the proximity of the sun like social status— is only an intangible perception.

Austin Miller is the creator of The Daily Hash You can also follow him on Instagram @dailyhashco

Boring Ass (but important) Bibliography

[i] Peopleofwalmart.com is a popular website that pokes fun at the franchise’s clientele.

[ii] Whole Foods is a popular organic food grocery store chain that is famously expensive and attracts a upper-middle class clientele for its “healthy” alternatives.

[iii] U.S. Organic Food Trend Forecasted for Growth Through 2018, Adam Helfer

[iv] 5 Canadian Consumer Trends to Shape the Future of Retail

[v] Francium is the most unstable periodic element

[vi] Noma has been hailed as the “best restaurant in the world” three years in a row. It is the recipient of two Michelin stars and located in Copenhagen, Denmark.

[vii] The World’s 50 Best Restaurants, article: Fergus Henderson, St John, London, UK

[viii] The Michelin star award is a long running French tradition in which they judge the best restaurants in the based on a 3 star system. It is commonly recognized as the most prestigious restaurant award in the world.

Works Cited

“5 Canadian Consumer Trends to Shape the Future of Retail.” CBC News. CBC, 21 Oct. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.

Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1984. Print.

CNN, prod. “Episode 2: Coppenhagen.” Parts Unkown. CNN. 6 Oct. 2013. Television.

Henderson, Fergus. “Offa, P*rn, Death Threats & Bourdain with Fergus Henderson.” Not Quite Nigella. Not Quite Nigella. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

“Icarus.” Encyclopedia of Greek Mythology. Myth Web. Web. 15 Dec. 2014.

Figure 2. Digital image. Funniest Memes. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

Figure 3. Digital image. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

Figure 4. Digital image. Raw for Beauty. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

“French and American Poster Art-First World War.” Argonaut Bookshop. 27 May 2011. Web. 12 Dec. 2014. <http://www.argonautbookshop.com/images/Little Americans.jpg>.

Knudson, Julie. “Taking Local to the Next Level.” QSR Limited-Service, Unlimited Possiblities. QSR, 1 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.qsrmagazine.com/sustainability/taking-local-next-level>.

Lane, Richard J., and Sue Vice. “Carnival and the Grotesque Body.” Global Literary Theory: An Anthology. New York: Routledge, 2013. 342–350. Print.

Lane, Richard J. Global Literary Theory: An Anthology. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.

Lipkowitz, Ina. “Meat: ‘Forty Pounds of Meat — or No Less than Sixty’” Words to Eat By: Five Foods and The Culinary History of The English Language. First ed. 2011. 185–201. Web.

Noma. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <noma.dk>.

Patton, Leslie. “McDonald’s May Sell More Organic Foods to Boost Sales.” Bloomberg. Bloomberg, 22 Oct. 2014. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

Ronay, Istvan. “Sixth Beauty: The Science-Fictional Grotesque.” The Seven Beauties of Science Fiction. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan UP, 2008. Web.

Saavedra, Miguel De, and Francisco Rico. Don Quijote De La Mancha. Ed. Del IV Centenario. ed. Madrid: Real Academia Española :, 2004. Print.

“Supply and Demand.” Merriam-Webster. Encyclopedia Britannica. Web. 12 Dec.

2014.

“The Diners Club Lifetime Achievement Award 2014.” The World’s 50 Best Restaurants. William Reed Business Media, 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

Tice, Carol. “What You’ll Eat Next: Tasty Food Trends For 2014.” Forbes. Forbes, 22 Dec. 2013. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

“Traditional Food: Neglected Abandoned Habits.” Southern Eye. AMH. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.

“United States Organic Food Market Forecast & Opportunities, 2018.” PR Newswire. United Business Media P.L.C., 28 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Dec. 2014. <http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-states-organic-food market-forecast — opportunities-2018–233741931.html>.

Yazdanpour, Esmail. “City of Ideas: A Bakhtinian Reading of Saul Bellow’s Herzog.” SHIRAZ UNIVERSITY, 1 Sept. 1998. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <http://www.oocities.org/yazdanpour/y-thesis.htm>.

Zacka, Michael. “Local Foods: From Fad to Force and What It Means for the Food Industry.” Huff-Post Food. Huffington Post, 17 June 2014. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.