logo
Wrong email address or username
Wrong email address or username
Incorrect verification code
back to top
Search tags: Morgan-Spurlock
Load new posts () and activity
Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
review 2016-09-02 00:04
[KSIĄŻKA] "Życie w fast foodzie. Co czeka McCzłowieka" Morgan Spurlock
Życie w fast foodzie. Co czeka McCzłowieka - Morgan Spurlock

Po obejrzeniu dokumentu "Super Size Me" - który w jakiś sposób był lekko stronniczy, ale mimo wszystko zrobił na mnie spore wrażenie - zmieniłam swoje postrzeganie jedzenia, nie chodzi mi tylko o fast-food'y, ale ogólnie chodzi o tą całą "korporacyjną, masową żywność", która już pomału nie ma wiele wspólnego z żywnością.

Na książkę sporo polowałam, aż w końcu dorwałam ją w swoje łapska. Bardzo ciekawa lektura, która nie atakuje wyłącznie sieci McDonalds, ale również inne "restauracje" tego typu, jak i ogólnie świadomość żywieniową Amerykanów, co przekłada się na przeróżne choroby wynikające z otyłości (tu już nie chodzi o samą nadwagę). W książce znajdziemy sporo ciekawych analiz, faktów, jak i czasem interesujących przypuszczeń,. Dobrze ukazanie sytuacji stołówek w szkołach w USA i władzy "tych większych", które to wszystko kontrolują, aż się w głowie nie mieści!

Ogółem sam film jest z 2004 roku, a książka z 2005, więc powinno się zdawać, że już nie jest aktualna, ale niestety nie jest to prawdą. Mimo, że ostatnim czasem bardzo modne jest fit żywienie i wysiłek fizyczny na siłowniach, to z roku na rok, zamiast maleć, to otyłość wśród ludzi cały czas się zwiększa, jest to niestety przykre. A sieć McDonalds cały czas poprawia swój wizerunek, prawda? Każda sportowa impreza jest sponsorowana przez te nasączone tłuszczem (nasyconym! czyli tym beee) ogromne kanapki popijane napojem cukrowym (bo przecież cola nie ma żadnych składników odżywczych)... Ale na szczęście w menu mają też sałatki... które są niezłą bombą kaloryczną

Książkę zdecydowanie polecam, aby "przejrzeć" na oczy, i tu nie chodzi tylko o to, że ciągłe jedzenie w fast food'ach jest niezdrowe (bo to chyba już wszyscy wiedzą), ale zobaczyć, jak te duże marki nas wychowują, atakują marketingiem poniżej pasa i uzależniają... Bo przecież całkiem niezła dawka cukru na raz działa na nas jak amfetamina ;)

Żałuję, że w Polsce nie zostały wydane inne książki Morgana.

Like Reblog Comment
review 2013-07-21 20:58
Don't Eat This Book
Don't Eat This Book - Morgan Spurlock An interesting book that should be read in conjunction with the film. He goes into some depth about some of the issues brought up by the film and some of the after effectes it had. Food for thought.
Like Reblog Comment
review 2012-08-27 00:00
Don't Eat This Book: Fast Food and the Supersizing of America
Don't Eat This Book: Fast Food and the Supersizing of America - Morgan Spurlock This book was a good reminder of the variety of known health hazards associated with eating fast food regularly and also a brain tickler on what we don’t know about long-term health risks associated with regular intake of junk food.Spurlock guides the reader through a sea of facts, making them easily accessible through his narration. The book is sprinkled with funny incidents (such as how Spurlock came up with this idea) and the various reactions of friends, family, and doctors. In avoiding fear tactics, he keeps the reader from shying away from finishing his book.
Like Reblog Comment
review 2012-05-10 23:35
Spurlock's quest to understand the Muslim world
Where in the World is Osama bin Laden? - Morgan Spurlock

The first this that I noticed when looking a some of the reviews of this book was that Morgan Spurlock is considere a 'poor man's Michael Moore'. I am going to have to disagree with that statement. Michael Moore has become little more than an entertainer, and while Spurlock is much the same, I afind Spurlock to be somewhat more intelligent and enlightened than Michael Moore ever was. Okay, that is an opinion and it appears that there is more of a focus on Moore than there is on Spurlock, but it is clear that Spurlock tends to approach his subjects in a different, and less confrontational way. I will deal with his documentary on fast food in his other book 'Don't Eat this Book', but I believe the difference between Moore and Spurlock also comes out in this book as well.

Michael Moore tends to be very confrontational, and in a way, comes to a conclusion with little to no research, and then gets into people's faces and demands an answer. No wonder people generally can't stand the guy. However, Spurlock seems to actually go out and research his topics, and in a way, his books and his films seem to be more about his research into a subject then simply pushing a specific viewpoint. This book is a case in point. Here, Spurlock goes out into the world to try to find out why people hate American so much, and it is more an attempt to get beside them to talk to them rather than getting in their face, as Michael Moore does. If Moore were to approach the same people that Spurlock approaches in this book I am sure that Moore would have landed up in an awful lot of trouble.

The question has been raised as to whether this book is now obsolete now that Osama bin Laden is dead, but I would probably say that it is not. The question that this book tries to answer is not so much where is Osama bin Laden, but rather who he is and what he represents. As for his death, I must suggest that I am still a little dubious about it, namely because I still suspect that he has been dead for a lot longer than we actually believe he has been, and further, all we really know is that a mansion in Pakistan was raided, somebody was killed, no photos or videos were taken, and a corpse was dumped in the Indian Ocean. In a way, it is not so much the death of a man, but rather the death of a icon, and even then while the icon may be dead, the idea is not.

Spurlock travels to some of the most dangerous places in the world in his quest, and one of the things he must do is to go to a training school where journalists learn how to survive in a war zone. When I read this I was quite intrigued because at the time I knew a number of people joining the missionary movement and I discovered that none of these missionary schools taught them survival skills. I must say I am quite critical on that, but this is not the time or the place to discuss this, namely because I would rather try to explore the ideas that are coming out of this book.

Now, I read the book before I even knew of the existence of the documentary, however like most books that are written along with a documentary, this book does tend to go into a lot more detail. Granted, documentaries tend to be more visual and you can watch them in about 2 hours where as books tend to take longer to read, but in a way I do find myself gravitating towards books much more than I do towards documentaries, however documentaries are still good because you are able to watch them with friends and then discuss the implications afterwards: of course as long as ypur friends are willing to think and to discuss as opposed to simply forcing their views down your throat.

Now this book has turned out to be more of an exploration of the Muslim world from the eyes of an American who wants to understand what is going on in this world. However, he does not simply stick with Muslin countries, but he also travels to western countries where Muslims have settled into communities. This is no more obvious than in Paris where there are parts of the city that are pretty much Muslim neighbourhoods. It is interesting though that these neighbourhoods tend to be on the city fringes and very poor. It is not actually something we generally see here in Australia, because my understanding of the Muslim culture in Australia is that they are not necessarily poor. I would hardly say that they are integrated, they are not, but they have established themselves. For instance, here in Adelaide there was a Palistinian named Shahin, who came out here without a cent to his name, and ended up building a convenience store empire.

Now, I must admit that integration is something that is not easy within our countries, and one of the reasons is that our thought processes and our cultures are vastly different, and I will not speak of the Christian/Muslim divide, even though that divide is ripe for conflict. However, that divide really only exists within the fundamentalist elements, and I must say that amongst a lot of evangelical and fundamentalist Christian communities, there does seem to be little tolerance towards Muslims, but it is not so much directly only at Muslims, but rather at anybody who does not hold the same beliefs as them.

I can't say I know many Muslims myself, but I do know some, and one in particular I do have a good relationship. In fact we have spent a lot of time talking about Islam and Christianity. However, we must remember that our culture is a very liberal culture, and this is something that is not the case in many conservative Muslim countries. This is something that Spurlock had to learn and to respond to appropriately, and from what I understood, he did this quite well. He is not a Muslim, and he did not become a Muslim after his adventure, but he did come out with a much better understanding of the Muslim culture. However, our culture is different, for instance we have a tolerance for pornography, and we do not dress conservatively. We also indulge in alcohol, and this is something that is forbidden to Muslims. However, we need to remember that this is our culture, and people coming into our culture must learn to accept this part of our culture, just as we need to respect another person's culture when we travel there.

Okay, Christians tend not to be tolerant of our culture, and I must suggest that I am a bit critical of that. While I do not suggest that Christians throw away their biblically based morality, I do recommend that they do show a little more tolerance towards those who do not hold the same views as them. This can be difficult however, because in many cases it means that we cannot associate with others in certain contexts (such as going to a strip club). However, I would also not suggest that they lock themselves away in their own little communities, only going out occasionally to fish for prospective participants. I have noticed a lot of hesitation to do such things, and even then, the only time they do so is on 'official business'. I hear all of this talk about evangelism, however I hear no talk about actually making friends beyond that. To be honest, to be a friend with somebody simply to tell them about Christianity, and to discard that friendship when it becomes clear that this person does not want to become a Christian, is first of all not friendly and, I would also suggest, not Christian either.

Now, the conclusion of this book is that Bin Laden is not so much a person but an idea. It is an idea that Muslims should be proud of their heritage and of who they are, and not let another culture move in and destroy that. In the same way he is like Martin Luther King, who became not so much a person, but an idea that all people are equal and should be treated as such. In the same way Christ, while a person, is also an idea (I will be slammed for that statement), and is not so much an idea that people should be nice to each other, but an idea that through his death and resurrection, we have been forgiven of our sins and transgressions, and can come back to God to be in relationship with him.

Source: www.goodreads.com/review/show/328421750
Like Reblog Comment
review 2012-03-12 02:34
A critical examination of our fast food culture
Don't Eat This Book: Fast Food and the Supersizing of America - Morgan Spurlock

There has been a lot written about the obesity epidemic that the United States (and to a lesser extent Australia) is facing and in many cases the finger is pointed directly at fast food franchises. Many people have probably heard of and even watched Spurlock's documentary where he sets himself a task (to the horror of his vegetarian girlfriend) of eating only McDonalds for a period of 30 days. Personally, there are a couple of flaws in his methodology, however I do believe it is something that we need to be aware of, especially if we ourselves want to live healthy lives.

I must admit that the better book was Fast Food Nation, however this book should be read alongside Spurlock's film not only because it is a companion guide to the film, but also because it is somewhat more light hearted than Eric Schlosser's more academic and journalistic look at the fast food culture. Anyway, the one comment that I have of the methodology is that it appears that Spurlock is generally a healthy eater, and as such switching from a relatively healthy diet to one consisting entirely of fast food can have significant health problems. I guess the closest analogy would be letting a car sit in a garage for six months, and then immediately using it to pull a trailer containing all of your worldly belongings halfway across town (I did that once). The reason that I use that analogy is because after sitting idle for six months, the car's engine needs to be warmed up and worked for a while before turning it into a workhorse, otherwise it will clog up and break down (which is what happened to me).

Like Australia, in America fast food is cheap and quick to make, and as such it tends to be the staple diet of the poor. I actually lived with a guy whose main meal of the day was McDonalds (and it didn't help that we lived across the road from one). This friend of mine was used to eating lots of fast food, so his body was used to it (though he wasn't the healthiest person that I knew). As for Spurlock, it seems that being on a healthy diet meant that switching to a high fat, high sugar diet, was going to have a worse effect on him than somebody who is already on such a diet.

In a way there is nothing strictly wrong with fast food, and since the beginning of the century we have seen a gradual change in the fast food culture. Okay, I don't like Subway on the grounds of certain franchising practices, however that is an example of a more healthier form of fast food franchise (though some do criticise the fact that they sell crisps and soft drink alongside their healthy sandwiches). The other thing about fast food is that it is quick to make and it is cheap, so where as going to a restaurant means that you might wait ten to twenty minutes (and sometimes more than forty) for your meal to arrive, with fast food it arrives within a minute or two. Our society has become so fast paced, and time such a commodity, that we simply cannot wait for our food any longer. However, one again, it is not necessarily something new. I still remember the food courts from the late eighties (and they still exist) where you would wonder past the Indian and Asian shops, and their offerings are laid out under a glass case, and all you do is point at what you want, the shopkeeper then fills a container with rice or noodles, and adds one or more toppings to it. That is just as fast.

I remember reading a book once where they talked about obesity being a sign of wealth (Creation by Gore Vidal). In many ancient cultures only the incredibly wealthy would have the access to food to gorge themselves and as such only the wealthy would suffer from obesity (though we still see this among some of the wealthy today, particularly one lawyer I remember waddling into a conference room). Today we are seeing something that we have never seen in the history of the world, and that is obesity arising amongst the common people. Either food is getting cheaper or we are becoming wealthier. I suggests that both answers are correct.

However, when I travelled to Hong Kong I noticed something significant, and that was while food was somewhat cheaper, particularly in the many restaurants that dot the back streets of Kowloon, the price of a meal at Burger King was the same as I would expect to pay here in Australia (though having gone their a second time I realise that that is not strictly the case). In fact, I questioned why I would want to eat at Burger King since I could get a meal half price or less in a small family run restaurant around the corner. This has led me to a bit of a dispute with a couple of guys at work. They are performing a task of attempting to live on only $2.00 a day to try to help them understand what it is like being poor. However, I pointed out that $2.00 will actually go further in places of Hong Kong and China (among other places) rather than here in Australia. They argued that the value has been adjusted to reflect prices here in Australia, however I have a feeling that that is not the case. There are laws and regulations that exist in Australia that do not exist in Hong Kong and China, as well as other aspects, that make food in Australia much more expensive.

As for the book, one of the things that stood out was a comment made very early on that the size of a portion of food that can been bought at a restaurant has increased over time. This is something that I can relate to especially since some restaurants that I have been to I struggle to finish the meal. My mum generally served us smallish portions when she cooked dinner, normally about half the size of what they serve at restaurants. However, the increased portion also comes along with an increased price, and there generally is no options (in many cases) of having a half-portion. This I don't like because it is effectively wasting food, and I do not like wasting food. Granted, while our scraps and left overs will not make it to Africa, at least they could be composted and used to return nutrients to the soil.

I won't go too deep into the production aspects of our food because that is covered more in Schlosser's book 'Fast Food Nation' (and it is quite scary at that, especially when you realise that our entire production system is reliant on the cheap and easy access to oil). Spurlock does look at this, however he is more concerned about what we eat and what we are giving our children. Then there is the addictive nature of fast food, particularly with things like transfats. We need to remember that our ability to freeze and preserve food is actually a double edged sword. When we freeze and preserve food we destroy its taste, meaning that we have to create artificial taste so as to make the food palpable. Then there is the Happy Meal, which includes a toy. In a way it is a work of marketing genius, however it is of concern because it is like giving an addictive substance to our children at a young age. It is not so much the food itself, but the fat and sugar that goes into the food.

Look, I'm not the healthiest eater myself, eating crisps and curries, as well as drinking bucket loads of beer. The catch is that buying and eating healthy food is not the easiest thing to do, especially if you live by yourself and feed yourself. Meat is expensive, and fresh vegetables and fruit, unless used quickly, end up spoiling. When I buy potatoes, carrots, or even lettuce, unless I am using it quickly, it ends up going off and needs to be thrown out. However, that is no excuse to regularly eat McDonalds. In fact, as I consider it, and I am sure if I were to do some research and do my sums correctly, I suspect going to the supermarket and buying groceries for the week will end up being substantially cheaper than buying takeaway on a daily basis. I guess that I why I always try to take a packed lunch to work. In fact, I look at all my collegues who complain about not having any money, and then at lunch time running down to Subway or another nearby takeaway, and buying their lunch.

 

Source: www.goodreads.com/review/show/328794816
More posts
Your Dashboard view:
Need help?