For me, there were many notable reads this semester both in our shared texts and my personal outside readings.  My favorite reading from the syllabus was David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster.”  This reading synthesized many interesting aspects of eating one normally does not think of: science, social class, and ethics.  I expected to read a light hearted review of the Maine lobster festival, but instead was greeted with a debate about the humanity of killing lobsters for consumption.  This reading was one of the best in my opinion because it was extremely insightful and intriguing.

My favorite self-selected reading was Minerva Orduno Rincon’s “The Authenticity Trap of Mexican Food in America.”  Her humorous view into the world of authentic Mexican cooking challenged stereotypes about what makes a dish truly “Mexican”  and shed light on how these stereotypes can negatively affect people.  An excerpt from my writer’s notebook displays how I felt after reading:

[Rincon] thought it was absolutely ridiculous that critics often judge a Mexican restaurant by such a petty thing as whether or not the tortillas are handmade.  She ponders the absurdity of this critique: Why should this be what determines authenticity? Why can’t the more substantive critique of the food’s actual flavor be what critics care about? Why are we, as Americans, so hell-bent on such petty aspects of Mexican food, and what is really important about the way a tortilla was made?

I thoroughly enjoyed her article and it helped significantly in forming the topic I chose for my annotated bibliography.  In my opinion, this reading was one of the best because it kept a humorous backdrop while discussing a more serious topic in food culture: authenticity.  It effectively kept the reader engaged and entertained while informing them about a problem in food critique, something I feel is difficult to do and should be commended for achieving so well.