What's All the Fuss?

I took my youngest child to see the Lorax over the weekend. I wanted to see what all the hype was about. I keep running in to angry bloggers, columnists, and their commenters who have their panties in a wad about this film. Having read the book (something I’m not sure some of this outraged people have done), I was familiar with the message headed my way – if we don’t start doing something different in terms of caring for the environment nothing is ever going to get better. In other words, if we keep up our horrible behavior – no more truffala trees.

I’m not a fan of animated movies. And I’m certainly not a fan of animated movies that attempt to drag out an 1800 word beloved book in to two hours. Plus, the popcorn always makes me sick. Add to that the fact that it was 60 degrees and sunny (in March!), and I was definitely in a bad mood as I settled in to my theater seat next to my son who was ruining his teeth with Swedish fish and soda. (Yes, I’m that kind of mother!)

I do like Danny Devito, the voice of the Lorax, though, and my daughter had told me to listen for Taylor Swift, the voice of Audrey. Who’s Audrey? She wasn’t in the book. The movie quickly establishes a Suessland reminiscent of the one created at Universal Studios amusement park in Orlando. Bright colors, overly rounded and gravitationally-challenged buildings, and assorted people with big eyes and tiny noses. Sneedville is a plastic town – everything is plastic, even the trees. The villain of the movie, the obscenely wealthy Mr. O’Hare, sells fresh air to the people living in this perfect, plastic, polluted town. When the hero begs the town to grow a “real” tree, Mr. O’Hare asks, “Why would you want a tree? They’re dirty, poisonous; they’ll hurt your children!”

He’s convinced the town they are better off with a manufactured world, even as the children glow after swimming in the stream. It’s been so long since the Truffala trees were chopped down by the Onceler, that the people don’t know any different.

I was disappointed that the Lorax wasn’t recited in full, only a few lines are butchered by Danny Devito, who is much better suited to be Cousin Vinny. Still, the movie does a good job of portraying the Onceler as a well-meaning guy just setting out to make his fortune. He’s kind-hearted and he doesn’t mean to destroy the earth, it’s just that his product is a success and the only way to satisfy demand is to work faster and use up more trees. He doesn’t learn until it’s too late.

So the blatant message of the movie is that UNLESS we do something about it, our apathy and big business' greed will destroy our earth. That’s what’s upsetting all these bloggers and columnists – this movie is brainwashing kids in to thinking that big business is responsible for destroying the earth. And maybe they're feeling a bit guilty themselves. I’m thinking that the kids watching this movie, are really just seeing a short, evil guy with really bad hair battle it out with the kid on the segway who is only trying to win the girl.

My question is this: What did you expect the Lorax to be about? The message from Dr. Suess was unequivocally clear when the book was first published. Not all that much has changed. Big business is still destroying the earth in the name of increased profit margins. The public is still being confused and manipulated in to allowing it to happen. We all think we need a sneed (water in plastic bottles, new cell phones each year, appliances to make s’mores and deep-fried twinkies).

So UNLESS we start thinking for ourselves and asking what is the true cost of this lifestyle, nothing will change. Just saying. I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees.

Me, Me, Me

This week I’m going to shamelessly plug my own interests. Feel free to roll your eyes and skip this post, but if you manage to slog through my posts on a regular basis, let me tell you about some opportunities for even more of my musings, rantings, and ideas.


First, if you are new to this blog or don’t really remember anything I said way back at the start, you’re in luck. Instead of looking up the old posts from three years ago, you can read the condensed and much better edited versions of those posts in the e-column I now write for Central Penn Parent online. My column comes out every Thursday and you can have the e-newsletter sent directly to your inbox. I’ve started back at the beginning and am reducing each post down to 300 words or less. The online editor then takes his mouse to it and slashes it even more, rearranging it, and making me sound much more professional.

The second opportunity is for locals. I’ll be giving a workshop entitled, “How to Eat Organic on a Budget” at The Mason Dixon Library in Stewartstown at 6:30pm on Wednesday March 14. In addition to spouting off on all kinds of ideas for eating better without breaking the bank, I’ll also bring books, resources, and samples of my own peanut butter, bread, and cookies. I’d love to see you there.

I have one other opportunity I will sheepishly offer. I have been working on a non-fiction publishing project that has nothing to do with organic life, although I can’t really say that because everything I do is colored by my organic life. In a few weeks, I’ll be looking for some objective readers who are willing to take a look at the manuscript and give me honest feedback. This project is called “True’s Tale” and is the story of an unbroken horse that was given to me two years ago. It’s basically a journal of our time together, my attempt to “break” him, and the things I learned about horses, kids, and life in the process. It’s not a lengthy read and I’m really hoping that you don’t need to know (or even like) horses to get something out of it. If you’d be interested in being one of my early readers for this project, shoot me an e-mail. I’m probably still several weeks away from the big read, but I’d like to get my ducks lined up (not that you’re a duck or in any danger of being shot).

And lastly, dear reader, I can’t thank you enough for the gift of your time each week. This blog has always been a labor of love for me and I write it in the hopes that I’m helping you, not just to eat and live more organically, but to lift you up and celebrate the connection we all have with each to other as we do the best we can with what we know each day on this fragile, spinning sphere.

Eating the 1%

I have two bird carcasses in my freezer. Well, actually, they don’t have feathers or heads anymore. They are the result of my husband and I attempting to put our knife where our mouths are and be responsible for the food we eat. I’ve said time and again that if we eat meat, we ought to not only know where it comes from but be prepared to kill it ourselves. Most people shudder at the thought. I do too. But it is the very fact that we are shielded from the actual killing of the animals we eat that makes it so easy to turn our heads at the atrocities that are going on this very second in the meat industry.

The beef you eat comes from cows that are spending their abnormally short lifetimes standing in their own manure, eating food that their bodies were never meant to eat, and being pumped full of antibiotics to keep them from getting sick from that very food and those conditions. Makes NO sense. Cows are meant to eat grass, wander in herds, and yes, be eaten eventually.

Chicken in a pot (on the porch)

The chicken and eggs you eat come from chickens that are living in near darkness, crowded in to spaces so close they can’t turn around, let alone spread their wings, take dirt baths, or peck the ground for grubs. I love watching the antics of my own chickens. Watching them streaking (in their own waddly way) from tree to bush to barn as if they are under fire amuses me to no end. The grand chase and battles that ensue when one pulls up an earthworm from the garden are an animal reenactment of my kids with the last cookie in the jar. They curiously peck anything new, like the football abandoned in the yard or the freshly carved jack-o-lantern on the porch. These are chickens in a “natural” habitat. While they may be exceedingly dumb animals, I do believe they are smart enough to know they are miserable in a typical industry chicken house.

The bacon you eat comes from pigs that must have their trademark curly tails “docked” so they won’t be bitten off by the other pigs crowded together with them in their holding pens for their brief time on earth (the industry has “progressed” to be able to get a piglet from birth to slaughter in just 4 months). They never have the opportunity to root or wander or play.

I suppose it comes down to how you perceive animals. Do you think they are people in furry suits, or are they unintelligent creatures whose only purpose on earth is to provide food for us? I’m somewhere in the middle of that equation. Why is it we eat pigs, but not dogs? Pigs are supposed to be more intelligent and, at least when they are little, they are equally cute. Pot Belly pigs aren’t eaten, but I assume they make excellent bacon.

I’m a horse owner and have provided foster care for horses that have been saved from slaughter by a local horse rescue. I’m kind of ambivalent about my feelings on this. Certainly, once these horses come to live with me I’m horrified that they almost ended up on someone’s dinner table. But in context, I suppose I don’t have a huge issue with the slaughter of horses for meat and whatever else it is they do with them AS LONG AS they are treated kindly during the process. Heartless, I know. I have horsey friends who will probably challenge me on this.

I do believe animals are intelligent (some more than others, my dog Gracie is just about the dumbest dog I’ve encountered and I’ve yet to meet an animal dumber than a chicken). So the idea that animals don’t really mind the harsh conditions prior to slaughter seems misguided. Raising animals in cruel conditions in order improve profit margins is a crime and I don’t buy meat that has been produced in those conditions.

But…… what about meat that has been produced in happy, healthy conditions? My chickens, for instance. The three roosters we butchered last fall spent the summer digging up grubs, chasing the hens, and lounging in the shade. For a chicken headed for slaughter they were in the 1%. But when it came time to kill them, it was so emotionally stressful that we let the fourth rooster go (ironically he was eaten that night by a fox) rather than put ourselves through it.

I don’t know how many emotions an animal “feels”, but I’m certain they feel pain and they experience fear (as the knowledge that they are about to feel pain). We tried to make it as quick and painless as possible, and in our fumbling efforts we were not as quick as we might have been if we had more experience. So these three roosters lived a good, short life and were killed quickly and humanely. And still two carcasses sit in my freezer. This is because I cooked the first one while he was still fresh and made him in to chicken and cheese enchiladas. And then choked on every bite.

I have to wonder if the people who live in slaughter houses ever eat meat. Maybe they can disassociate themselves from their work. Maybe they put on the blinders, much as the rest of us do, and buy the valu-pack at Wal-Mart without a second thought.

I still think that if you eat meat, you ought to be able to hunt and/or butcher the animal. We owe the animal that much. We need to respect the life that was given for us. And we should respect it enough to demand that it is treated humanely before it becomes our dinner.

The meat producers would have us believe that the only way to provide enough meat for the growing appetite of this country is to raise it nose-to-tail in a stockyard and feed it corn. But that is a lie. Raising animals in mass production only ensures that the prices stay low, the meat companies make lots of money, immense amounts of oil are wasted (growing and transporting corn), and the pharmaceutical companies get rich selling their antibiotics. If we took all the land that we use to raise feed corn and plow it under for grass, there would be plenty of space to raise enough meat. It might require a little more effort and sure, it might cost a little more (although I’d like to do the cost-analysis when you compare the real cost of growing corn and making the chemicals and antibiotics versus just turning a cow loose on grass). Heck, a change like that might bring back the cowboys (I’m all for cowboys).

Chickens don’t need nearly the amount of space as a cow, so changing that industry is even simpler. But again, it might raise the cost of your mcnuggets and reduce the profit margins of then poultry manufacturers.

Because I’m rambling, I won’t even go in to the difference in the nutrient value of meat raised on the diet it was designed to eat. But there’s that too.

I’m working up the nerve to cook another one of our chickens. I’m hoping enough time has passed that the images of the actual killing will have receded far enough in my mind to keep my throat from closing up.

Before you ask, yes, I’m well aware of the hypocrisy surrounding my choice to eat meat. Believe me, it weighs on my heart. I just wish it weighed on the hearts of the rest of the people with the power to bring change.

There is hope. McDonald’s, which purchases over 21 billion dollars worth of pork each year, recently informed suppliers that they will have to remove the “crates” they use tocontain pregnant sows. These crates keep the sows from ever even turning around in their lifetime of producing mass quantities of piglets. I would think confinement like this of such an intelligent animal would lead to mad pig disease. At any rate, this move will affect the entire industry. Finally McDonald’s does something we can be proud of. Let’s hope they take a look at the beef and poultry industries next – now that could change the world.