Earlier this week, we discussed a possible reason for Alice Waters' questionable involvement in a Montana housing project—which interestingly enough, has not yet been addressed by the her camp. Since then, the comments field at Tigers & Strawberries has pretty much exploded, and a surprising majority of the sentiment has been anti-Waters. To wit:
The problem that I have with Alice Waters is not that I think she's elitist, it's that it seems as though everything she says is infused with a mild air of eau de sanctimony. (She also reminds me of those people who drive you up a wall because they're so beatific.) It' not something I could easily explain, but reading the NYT piece and the Salon article, I wanted to scream. It's not a question of her message, it's just something about her that just rubs me the wrong way.Even here in the Bay Area, where residents have been known to embrace and defend local heroes no matter what (cough cough Barry Bonds), an Alice Waters discussion is just as likely to warrant eye-rolls as raves. So we ask you, what's wrong with Alice Waters? It can't just be the beatific pontification, right? Because if there's a place that loves pontification, it's got to be San Francisco. Discuss.
· Is Alice Waters an Elitist Food Snob? [Tigers & Strawberries]
· Alice Waters Knows How to Return a Favor [~ESF~]
· Alice Waters' Involvement in Montana Housing Development: Slightly Confusing [~ESF~]