My response (also on the blog post):
This is a great, counter-intuitive idea with a lot of complex resonances. A possible Marxist complaint about modernity is that it's nowhere near pleasurable enough�he's no Puritan.It's a shame that the Pollans of this world seem to be the only ones who can enjoy slow food (etc.): reminds me of Marie Antoinette and her shepherd's cottage scene at Versailles. I went to one of Pollan's talks en plein air near Davis a few years ago, where slow food was served to the choir to whom Pollan was preaching. The whole scene was kind of yuck...
The trouble with the �elitist� accusation, though, is that it lands us in Palin-world, where elites force poor kids not to eat damaging non-food. I'm happier with Pollan's Marie Antoinette than Palin.
The whole notion of rights�which involves questions of reason and property, the proper�has a long and vexed history vis a vis the notion of enjoyment and pleasure ...The right-wing response has to do with the Lockean right to destroy rather than some kind of nonviolent, or positive pleasure: �It's my body and I can destroy it as I see fit.�
Here's another conundrum: Kantian taste (the subroutine of the aesthetics app that underwrites the democracy software) is predicated on being appropriately disgusted. Yet a lot of �disgusting� food, like a Happy Meal, is delicious...
Can we find some non-Pollan, non-Western examples of deliciousness and food pleasure? Off the top of my head I would start with the Indian notion of rasa, which is also a broad aesthetic�rhetorical category.