Jonathan Safran Foer, why hast thou forsaken us?

Facebook and the blogosphere are all aflutter with commentary about Jonathan Safran Foer, author of the bestseller Eating Animals, becoming a spokesperson for Buyingpoultry.com, a website that promotes the consumption of "humane and sustainable poultry."

For those who haven't read Eating Animals (a book I've mentioned several times on this blog), it's Safran Foer's nonfiction account of the harsh treatment of animals in factory farms and a damning indictment of the food industry. It has been extremely influential in winning people over to veganism, including actress Natalie Portman, who, in 2009, said the book converted her to a vegan lifestyle. At the time, she wrote:

I say that Foer's ethical charge against animal eating is brave because not only is it unpopular, it has also been characterized as unmanly, inconsiderate, and juvenile. But he reminds us that being a man, and a human, takes more thought than just "This is tasty, and that's why I do it." He posits that consideration, as promoted by Michael Pollan in The Omnivore's Dilemma, which has more to do with being polite to your tablemates than sticking to your own ideals, would be absurd if applied to any other belief (e.g., I don't believe in rape, but if it's what it takes to please my dinner hosts, then so be it). 

Jonathan Safran Foer, at the time he wrote Eating Animals (2009).

Eating Animals is a powerful book. It's not the Uncle Tom's Cabin of the Animal Rights Movement (that book hasn't been written yet). But it's persuasive and beautifully written, nonetheless, and it skilfully advances all kinds of sound reasons for adopting a vegan lifestyle, including arguments having to do with ethics, sustainability, the environment and freeing up resources to help feed the hungry around the world. Safran Foer, a young novelist who gained fame as one of the leading Young Turks in the literary world (no small feat in an industry characterized by declining sales and so hard to break into), is a hell of a writer, and he choses each word with passion and conviction.

When Safran Foer endorsed Buyingpoultry.com, which promotes "humane meat" and accountability in the poultry industry (an industry sorely in need of accountability), some vegans and animal rights activists felt deeply betrayed. Safran Foer's promo endorsing Buyingpoultry.com just went up on YouTube the other day (see it above or here). One particularly perceptive critique of Safran Foer's came from one of my very favorite blogs, the Veganomaly. The author described an unforgettable moment when she crossed a line after reading Safran Foer's account:

Several years ago, at about 4AM I got to the part in ‘Eating Animals’ where he shares the stories of the pregnant cows whose calves are discovered inside of them at slaughterhouses. I’m not going to go into more detail here, because it’s the single most upsetting animal-related thing I’ve ever read. Maybe it was being alone in my dimly lit room with an angry rain pounding on the roof. Maybe it’s the way that the dark and the quiet disrobe all the defenses you cloak yourself in during the day. I found myself so sickened, the kind that makes it impossible to think of anything but the suffering you just has described to you. The room spins, your heart unable to take such pain. I remember thinking “We’re told as children that monsters don’t exist, but I’ll bet no one ever asked a farmed animal”. That night, Safran Foer’s work gutted me. A part of me truly died and in doing so, provided a thick, impenetrable layer of emotional cement over my decision to live as a vegan for the rest of my life. (Source) 

The blogger went on to express her disappointment in Safran Foer, asking whether he'd become "nothing more than a particularly clever puppet for the foodies." Foodies, of course, are people like Michael Pollan and other defenders of "happy meat" and "humane omnivorism." They think that it is possible for human beings to engage in "sustainable" production and consumption of animal products in a way that is ultimately compassionate and shows deep respect for animals.

The blogger's discouragement is understandable. At the same time, as the blogger points out, Safran Foer never embraced veganism and did not consider himself a spokesperson for the lifestyle, despite his book winning over numerous converts. Be that as it may, it is hard to comprehend why someone so deeply aware of the suffering, pain and death that millions of animals endure on a daily basis could defend the so-called "ethical" use of animal products.

We can drive ourself crazy asking questions. Did Safran Foer really believe - deep down inside - what he wrote in Eating Animals? Was this just a cynical ploy by a wunderkind who clearly relishes attention to get even more attention? Does his rejection of veganism somehow negate what he writes?

For answers to these questions, maybe we should look at another author, Upton Sinclair, who lived before the emergence of the modern animal rights and vegan movements. His book, The Jungle, was a horrifying indictment of the meatpacking industry, with some famous passages about the inhumane slaughter of pigs. Many online sources claim Sinclair was a vegetarian. I tried to verify this in a biography about Sinclair by my friend and colleague Kevin Mattson. Mattson mentions Sinclair embracing vegetarianism in 1909 after a visit to Harvey Kellogg's sanitarium (Kellogg was the famous cereal maker), but there is no evidence that Sinclair was a vegetarian his whole life. And there is zero evidence that he was a vegan.

Yet The Jungle stands as a great monument that no only critiques the excesses of Gilded Age capitalism, but severely denounces the harsh treatment of animals more passionately than any other classic work of literature that I know of. It has been said (and maybe this is apocryphal) that Teddy Roosevelt promptly became a vegetarian after reading it (although T.R. didn't seem to abandon hunting). Certainly, it moved a lot of people in the early 20th Century to reject eating meat, which happened regardless of Sinclair's own personal diet.

Today, animal rights activists often quote the pig slaughtering scene from The Jungle (I've included it here on my blog) to capture the brutal essence of the slaughterhouse experience. Certainly, Sinclair was no vegan. Nor were a lot of the historical figures that we vegans quote for inspiration. I even found out the other day the other day that a famous Alice Walker quote I often use about animal rights - "The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for white, or women created for men" - was actually not her opinion, but her summary of a book she was reviewing, and that animal rights people have been quoting her out of context all these years (she's not a vegan; she's not even a vegetarian). Yet Walker's words, even quoted out of context, leave an indelible impression on people who are quietly contemplating the possibility of going vegan.

I bring up these things to make a point. Safran Foer isn't a vegan, that's clear. But his book - while not a masterpiece - is still a damn good one, and with his high profile, he's able to spread his message to a very large audience, one most of us could never hope to reach. It is too bad he doesn't necessarily practice what he preaches. Alas, a lot of writers do not. What is more important is that he has built a monument, in the form of a book, that will touch countless readers for generations to come, and continue to convert a lot of people to veganism. Of how many people can that be said?

The Big Vegan Chill

Back in 1983, a dreadful film called The Big Chill hit the theaters across North America. It depicted a group of narcissists - men and women in their late 30s (possibly early 40s) - who reunite after one of their friends commits suicide.

Most of the characters in the film had been activists back in the Sixties, but now they now - approaching middle age - they no longer cared about politics. They'd all grown cynical. Not a single one still held on to the idealism of her/his youth. They'd all wised up, joined the "system," and about the only thing they still liked about the 1960s was the music.

The Big Chill was a depressing movie because it reinforced Reagan-era myths that activists from the 1960s had all abandoned their political commitments. Reality was much more complicated than myth. Many people who'd been active in struggles for social justice still held on to their youthful ideals, which they took with them into their adult lives and sometimes even found ways of integrating them into their professions.

I bring up The Big Chill because nearly 30 years ago, it proved to be a useful myth in helping to make dissenters - people protesting nukes, U.S. involvement in Central America, homelessness, American investments in South Africa, etc. - feel even more isolated. If everybody ditches their beliefs with the approach of middle age, what hope is there for real and meaningful change?

I raise this issue because The Big Chill myth is still very much a part of our contemporary political landscape. And it has found its way into the vegan community.

Celebrities play a vital role in our culture. Like it or not, celebrities wield enormous influence. People from all walks of life pay attention to celebrities. Ordinary folks take their cues from celebrities, follow celebrity gossip in magazines and on the Internet and in newspapers, and the actions of celebrities matter.

Take veganism, for example. Celebrity vegans are able to spread the vegan message to millions of people, thanks to their high profiles. Which is why when they "jump ship," which some do, the effects can also be negative.

Recently, the media has made much out of high-profile celebrities who have abandoned veganism. These famous "ex-vegans" have gotten quite a free ride in the media.

"My vegan diet almost killed me," said actress, philanthropist and action star Angelina Jolie in 2010. "I joke that a big, juicy steak is my beauty secret. But seriously, I love red meat." (Source)

Meantime, actor Hugh Jackman wrote in the introduction to the latest edition Brendan Brazier's Thrive: The Vegan Nutrition Guide to Optimal Performance in Sport and Life that "there's every chance I will be vegan by the time you read" the book. The book was published last year. Jackman is not a vegan. (Source)

Actress Zooey Deschanel ditched veganism due to "food sensitivities." "I gave it a good try," she said. "But sometimes you need a little something, a little meat." (Source)

The press made much of Academy Award-winning Black Swan star Natalie Portman leaving behind veganism during her recent pregnancy. "If you're not eating eggs, then you can't have cookies or cake from regular bakeries, which can become a problem when that's all you want to eat," Portman told a local L.A. radio station in April of this year. (Source)

And the most recent celebrity to abandon veganism was actress Ginnifer Goodwin (pictured on the copy of VegNews above), star of several recent films and the TV series Big Love. I've blogged about Ginnifer here. Her support of Farm Sanctuary's Adopt-A-Turkey Program was a constant source of inspiration.

Ginnifer appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Live! in May and revealed that not only had she given up on veganism, she had also enjoyed meatloaf (with bacon on it) and a juicy hamburger.

I've posted the video here:

Ginnifer insists she eats "humane" meat in her home. "Wow, you've really gone over the edge now," said Jimmy Kimmel, when Ginnifer told him about her bacon meatloaf. "I'm glad you're back to the normal part of society."

I don't know Ginnifer. Based on all of the things I've read and heard about her, she certainly seems like a wonderful person with a lot of integrity and a strong conscience. She alludes to health issues in this video when explaining her reasons for ditching veganism. I like to think she engaged in a great deal of soul searching before moving forward with her decision. Clearly, it is important to her that she eats "humane" meat.

But it is sad to see Ginnifer leave veganism behind. It's like losing a powerful ally. Some vegans would scoff at such a statement. I can hear the naysayers: We make too big a deal of celebrities. What matters is what you, as an individual, decide to do in your daily life. Who cares about Ginnifer Goodwin? Or Natalie Portman? Or Angelina Jolie or Hugh Jackman? Or Zooey Deschanel?

But celebrities matter. They are newsmakers. They're hugely influential. Their actions matter. Their views influence others. The examples they set can both inspire and discourage.

Look at the promotional material distributed by PETA. Half of PETA's propaganda contains photos of celebrities who are either vegans or vegetarians. (Some of them, I swear to God, aren't either, but I give PETA some points for good intentions.) I just visited PETA's website. Sure enough, at the top of the Homepage, there is a picture of Hollywood stars Russell Brand and Kristen Wiig, voted "PETA's SEXIEST VEGETARIAN CELEBRITIES OF 2011."

When celebrities ditch veganism, like it or not, their actions are used by foes of the lifestyle to try to marginalize us, much like The Big Chill Myth was used back in the 1980s against activists. Jimmy Kimmel's words echo: "I'm glad you're back to the normal part of society."

Back to normal.

One can sympathize with someone like Zooey Deschanel, whose diet was so limited due to allergies that she didn't have many choices for her survival. And Natalie Portman had very real physical needs for certain types of foods she wasn't getting. And Ginnifer Goodwin's health issues are probably perfectly legitimate.

Yet, without being sanctimonious or self-congratulatory, we are still left to wonder about people who embrace and then abandon the vegan lifestyle.

Reading about these famous "ex-vegans" (actually, the term ex-vegan is absurd - either you're vegan or you're not vegan), one wonders what thoughts go through their minds. With those who embraced veganism for non-moral reasons - that is, purely for health - it is slightly easier to understand how they could walk away from it.

But, by their own admission, some of these celebrities were people who gazed deeply down into the abyss. They saw and felt the suffering that animals endured. They spoke out on behalf of the animals. They had epiphanies, awakenings. They were liberated from omnivorism, only to go back to the lifestyle. They woke up, then went back to sleep.

Ginnifer Goodwin, who used to see right through the myth of "humane meat," now touts her consumption of it. How can that be?

My purpose is not trying to pass judgment on these erstwhile, famous allies. Just trying to understand their actions.

"Ideas won by our intelligence, embodied in our outlook, and forged in our conscience, are chains from which we cannot tear ourselves away from without breaking our hearts," said the philosopher Karl Marx. "They are demons we can only overcome by submitting to them."

At the end of the day, in a world filled with so much tragedy and slaughter, it is hardly worthwhile to sit in self-righteous judgment of those who have looked into the abyss and then decided to walk away. At least they put two and two together at one point in their lives. At least they are capable of feeling compassion and being sensitive. The same cannot be said of a lot of other people.

Yet I reserve the right to feel sad about that video of Ginnifer Goodwin on Jimmy Kimmel Live!. Hearing that laughter about meat, then imagining the suffering that occurs in order to put that meat on a plate, leaves even the perpetual optimist feeling forlorn.