| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Lunar Refractions: Breaking the Record, Breaking the Bank | Main | In Hive or Castle, Duty Without Power »

May 14, 2007

Dispatches: On The Bowery Whole Foods

First, a few words on the neighborhood.  Inside the door, above a landscape of crushed-ice, a long wooden board has been affixed to the wall, the purpose of which quickly becomes clear.  Fish, having been selected from the tank in front, sail wriggling through the air, hit the board, bounce, skitter along it, hit the far inside wall, and fall to the ice below to be grabbed, alive, and filleted by the staff in back.  Below the plank that ensures the fishmongers' accuracy, the heads of large salmon, recently detached, continue to yawn and gawp reflexively.   In front sit wooden baskets of soft-shell crabs, porgies, shrimp of all sizes, razor clams with their phallic, protruding siphons, and numerous flatfish, all whole and waiting for inspection by customers who wouldn't think of buying a fish without checking its gills for redness and pressing its scaly sides for taut resilience.  Squeezed between the wall and the crab and lobster tanks sits a large black bucket, nearly the size of a garbage can, from which the topmost of many layers of frogs stare up.

Such is a typical fish stall on Mott Street, in downtown Manhattan.  But many other food shops south of Houston Street and east of Lafayette Street, of all cuisines and nationalities, share the stall's intensity, if not always the sheer directness of the relationship between people and the animals they eat that obtains there.  In the window of Despana, a newish food boutique on Broome that specializes in Spanish delicacies such as paprikas, olives, cheeses, and oils, hangs a salt-cured pig's hind leg, hoof and all, unmistakably a severed mammalian limb, waiting to be sliced into transparencies of Serrano ham.  Inside Dom's, a nearby Italian grocer, chickens complete with head and feet (the better to be added to to your stockpot) lie in cases beneath gamy homemade sausages that age hanging from the ceiling.  The Essex Market's Dominican butchers sell goat meat and oxtails, while pig stomachs and tripe are available nearby.  Not only the Sullivan Street bakery but the Balthazar bakery, Ceci-Cela, the Falai bakery and several others turn out impeccable breads.

Bangkok Grocery, the city's best purveyor of galangal, shrimp pastes, lime leaves, fish sauces, and other Thai ingredients, is a few blocks below Canal on the San Francisco-esque, tilted Mosco Street.  Back up on Mott sits DiPalo's, the legendary supplier of the best Parmigiano-Reggiano and other Italian artisanal products in this country.  Catty corner from it one can buy the city's best Banh Mi, or Vietnamese sandwich, at Banh Mi Saigon Bakery.  (This opinion professionally corroborated by the always scintillating J. Slab at The Porkchop Express.)  Vegetable sellers and more fishmongers from China's Fujian Province line Grand Street all the way to Hester, where a right turn brings you to Il Labatorio del Gelato, New York's most lauded ice cream makers, and a little beyond that a wide-ranging chocolate shop where you can find most of the finest single-bean productions of Michel Cluizel, Valrhona, and other chocolate titans.  Next door is Alejandro Alcocer's excellent food shop, Orange, and restaurant, Brown.  Over another block on Grand is Doughnut Plant, where Mark Singer makes his grandfather's recipes using organic ingredients.  And back up to Houston sits Katz's, the pastrami champion of New York City.

Back west a few blocks on Houston is the new Bowery Whole Foods.  Is it just me who finds still finds appending the word "Bowery" to such amenities as pricey supermarkets oxymoronic?  Or has the word Bowery already shed its downmarket connotations, or rather, already accrued the upmarket status into which downmarket connotations are now magically transformed?  Whichever confusing permutation it is, the branch itself comically interrupts perhaps the densest, most diverse, and best collection of individual food shops in the United States.  Whole Foods, the American food economy's answer to Crate and Barrel, is no doubt a useful intervention in most suburban contexts in which there are thirty enormous chain pharmacies for every good butcher or fish shop.  If you live on the exurban outskirts of Columbus, Ohio, presumably Whole Foods appreciably increases the diversity of available food. 

But on Bowery and Houston, Whole Foods represents a much poorer form of food diversity than what is already there.  And, food shops are not just food shops: they are a solidified form of the social relationships that obtain between people in an particular place.  The unofficial little vegetable market that pops up on weekends on Forsyth Street under the Manhattan Bridge represents a food culture of inspecting produce and comparing adjacent vendors for the best price: the entire cacophony of traditional market culture.  It is the product and instantiation of the middle and working-class residents of Chinatown.  But don't think I am making an argument about authenticity here.  Whole Foods is in no way a less natural emanation of a different class stratum: the professional and managerial upper-middle people who flow into downtown in increasing numbers.  These people, and their needs for organic baby food, large amounts of wildly expensive prepared lunchtime panini and salads, exist in symbiosis with Whole Foods.  As downtown New York tilts towards this population, and its fauxhemian pretensions, there is a natural influx of corporate franchises with bland, do-gooder brand identities that serve the casual American elite from Seattle to Cambridge.

But the Bowery Whole Foods tells us something remarkable about its shoppers: how ignorant they are of where they are and how alienated they are from food.  Perusing it, the thing that impresses you most is the pervasive labeling, the enormous amounts of information appended to everything.  Everywhere are little identificatory notes, signs overhead, brochures on what to do with their sausages (eat them?), glossy photos of the smiling man who supposedly dredged up your mussels or baited the hook upon which your (always already headless and filleted) wild salmon met its end.  This is food shopping for people who have come to trust only that which is mediated by text, addenda, explanations, certifications.  It is a website come to life, or a piece of life for those who prefer websites: each piece of signage functions as the hyperlink that clicks through to a capsule review. 

I once served some sliced raw albacore tuna doused in soy to a friend.  I had bought the fish not far from Whole Foods from Alex, the fisherman who had caught it and brought it the next day to the Greenmarket.  I'm lucky to live in a city where this is a humdrum and everyday transaction.  My friend, a film producer, remarked, "This is great!  But how did it get sterile?" 

"Sterile?" I asked.

"Yeah.  How does it get safe to eat?"

Food?  Sterile?  This is the alienation on which Whole Foods depends.  In the age of hysterical warning about the dangers of food, it comes as a surprise to find that fish can be pulled out of the water and eaten, raw.  No anti-bacterial soap or release form required. 

There is something else alienating about Whole Foods: it posits a universe in which we are all only consumers.  The holism its name gestures towards is not the holism of a community in which buyers and sellers know each other.  Instead, it's purely about the foods themselves: one's interest in food is projected as only another form of self-interest.  Industrial organic food production has many of the same faults as the conventional food industry; it doesn't matter.  That organic food is roughly a third the price at socialist institutions like the Fourth Street Food Coop, or the superb Park Slope Food Coop, is also unimportant.  These neoliberal shoppers prefer the impersonal embrace of a corporate parent, disguised as some vague moral goodness.  Yet a principle like seasonality is sacrificed to the lure of exotic, irradiated produce available year-round.  Such are the characteristics of the so-called "foodies."  Even the term suggests a cute and infantile hobby.  And it does seem infantile to shop at Whole Foods while all around you sits the very food cultures about which Whole Foods' publicity materials fantasize.

Near Orchard Street, four blocks from Bowery and Houston Street, sits Russ and Daughters, a small shop crammed with smoked salmon, cured salmon, salmon roe, herring, chubs, sturgeon eggs, bagels, fruits and candies, mustards, cream cheeses, etc.  It is a legacy of a time when the Lower East Side was the world's single densest agglomeration of people, and Jewish and Eastern European foodstuffs were for sale from pushcarts up and down Orchard Street.  The store started on such a pushcart, but this is no neighborhood of Jewish immigrants anymore.  Instead, Russ and Daughters has survived by becoming the best source for smoked fish and caviar in New York City, no mean achievement.  In a way, it and shops like it have produced the very market they now serve: the teeming Lower East Side's taste for bagels and lox ended up colonizing the nation. 

In a world in which we've been socialized to distrust the claims of brands, we paradoxically require ever greater documentations of authenticity, ever wordier mediations between ourselves and things.  We don't trust ourselves to be able to divine with our own eyes what an edible object is, whether it's genetically modified, whether it contains omega-3, whether it's safe for our children.  But the Lower East Side of New York has lasted against this tendency, thanks to the richness of its cultural inheritance.  It's also due, frankly, to intrepidness of the people who have lived here, their lack of a need for handholding, and their willingness to seek out the new and the strange.  There is something beautiful about the fact that the greatest smoked salmon purveyor in the country operates on the very corner from which the taste for the foodstuff emanated.  It is a rare and appropriate historical congruence, and to me it represents what is fascinating and powerful about the food culture of this quadrant of New York City.  Whole Foods is not.

The rest of Dispatches.

Posted by Asad Raza at 02:27 PM | Permalink

Comments

Anytime one bedrooms go for $4,100/month, Whole Foods is likely not far away. Or, as Mr. Big recently opined in New York magazine:

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/29457/

"Chris Noth, who’s still best known for playing Mr. Big on Sex and the City, is ready to repent for all the harm that series did to New York. At the opening-night party for Talk Radio, he lamented, “What makes me really sick is how New York now looks like a bad imitation of Sex and the City. Meatpacking is a good example of just how fucked up it is. You can’t have a city that’s interesting where the only people living in it are rich. When I came here as a kid, as a young adult, you could get lost—many different worlds collided. You cannot say that today.”"

Posted by: Asad N | May 14, 2007 2:42:05 PM

genius article. i sincerely agree with your final assessment yet, perhaps sadly, am probably one of the best examples you know of someone who prefers a nice weekly trip to whole foods over navigating the arguable grotesquerie of chinatown. what to do about this paradox?

Posted by: alia | May 14, 2007 6:10:12 PM

I agree that Whole Foods is the "corporate parent" in hippie disguise, but I, like Alia, can't live without a trip to Whole Foods every once a month or so. Where else can I get my vegan cookies and soy cream cheese?! But their produce is wayy overpriced, their staff underpaid (and WF is notorious for union-busting), and the stench of meat permeating the entire store makes this vegetarian wary every time I even enter the store.

In short, I prefer farmer's markets for my produce and regular old supermarkets ("corporate parents," but blatantly obvious ones) for everything else, but when it comes to vegan birthday cake, no one beats Whole Foods. At least, not in this part of the country.

Posted by: Jayasree | May 14, 2007 6:26:07 PM

Very nice indeed, Asad, though I would disagree with the assertion that Bangkok Grocery is the city's best purveyor of Thai ingredients. But that's just quibbling. An anecdote you might enjoy: I was once buying unprepared fugu from a fishmonger on Canal, who refused to sell it to me until I promised it wasn't actually for eating. As I left with it wrapped in paper under my arm, he pointed and called out, "You don't eat that! You eat that, you come back here, you lose your soul!" The fellows at Whole Foods, as fresh and as kind as they are, could never give such good, and so deeply rich, advice...

Posted by: timothy Don | May 14, 2007 6:28:08 PM

many people, when shopping for food, want something familiar, easy and that they don't have to think about. that's what whole foods is. not that i'm some great lover of the place, but many people don't have the sheer time that you do to deeply ponder the food that lets them go about their days. eat to live, not live to eat, is the mantra of many, not least on the crazy, non-stop schedule of new york. if whole foods provides something easy and familiar _and_ that's more ethical than most supermarket chains (poo poo it all you want, it is), it's not such a bad place. finally, to americans, food culture _is_ giant supermarket chains, and specialty markets like the ones you celebrate are foreign. i'm making the point again, but people just want something that they don't have to think about, and looking down on them for that is silly, condescending and a misunderstanding of consumer culture.

Posted by: alex | May 14, 2007 6:31:53 PM

This was a provocative and interesting read, but I guess my question is; why should I not require in-depth text labels on my products, almost like contracts? As a consumer of everything, it is so routine to be mislead and given bad products and service, that I want to see thorough "proof" in writing that what I'm looking at is what it looks like. I want to know if something has corn syrup in it, for example. I can't look at something and know the answer to that.

Posted by: edlundart | May 14, 2007 6:44:58 PM

I live in Chicago, where we have a decent number of ethnic markets as well as a burgeoning number of Whole Foods. I have a friend who lives half a block away from a really good latino grocer and butcher, yet she travels 3 miles for a carton of milk from Whole Foods, not to mention everything else she may decide to get from there. I once asked her why she didn't go to the place near her, as she is a "foodie" and likes to cook some ethnic dishes.
She gave me a blank look, and I realized it had never occured to go there, as it was too "other", and she was frankly scared to wander across the street. Whole Foods makes her feel safe, socially as well as foodwise, since the people there are usually white, and went to the same types of schools she did, although she may get a frisson by seeing someone with piercings and tatoos.
The patrons of Whole foods want ethnic, and or fresh perhaps, but sanitized and vetted, and they're obviously willing to pay for it.

Posted by: shibadev | May 14, 2007 7:56:48 PM

I love this Dispatch, Asad. Thank you! I'm sure that anyone who thinks you're microfocused on food is only -- alas for that person -- unaware of the joys of shopping for and preparing it as if it were the worthy subject it is. What little leisure we have we all devote to something, and it's just so Lutheran to suppose it shouldn't be cooking and all the discerning that makes for good cooking. I say this as someone who routinely cooks dinner for 50, and, on many days, would like to hurl it all against a brick wall, so I must mean it. Anyway, as Tennyson might have said, "To know, to find, to cook, and not to yield."

Posted by: Elatia Harris | May 14, 2007 8:42:50 PM

Excellent read. I have been to the Whole Foods in Columbus that you mentioned, twice and found things that you wont otherwise find in this part of the dountry any way. I enjoyed the way you described all the stores in the area to set the perspective of Whole Foods in NYC. It seems so out of place. The rest of the country has lost the authentic food stores long ago and so WF is doing well. Thanks again for the thoughtful piece.

Posted by: Tasnim | May 14, 2007 9:10:49 PM

Very nice, Asad.

Could you pick up one of those brochures on what to do with sausages for me?

Posted by: Abbas Raza | May 14, 2007 10:11:23 PM

I only go to my DC Whole Foods for the jazz bands and cheese samples. It's a cheap party.

Posted by: Helmut | May 14, 2007 11:25:03 PM

today i was looking for 2 lbs of tomatillos to cook with some chicken i had in the fridge. i wandered through various places on the LES with no luck (i even tried pathmark first!) and finally resigned myself to going to the new WF. sure enough, they had plenty of tomatillos. wandering to the exit i passed some salsa, which i also needed. $5.19 for 10 oz? no thank you. thank god i have a bicycle and can ride somewhere else with little trouble.

my favorite detail of your post was the organic babyfood. made just right for all the organic free-range children. watch out, park slope food co-op! your days are numbered!

Posted by: bw | May 15, 2007 12:12:47 AM

Karachi carnage - 3 comments
Chimp's genes - 1 comment
Loyalty - 6 comments
Art review - 1 comment
Whole Foods gripe - 12 and counting

Whole Foods the corporation has identified a new consumer market and has sought to exploit that niche bringing the power of 21st century capitalism to bear to speed up the growth process. Their organization is efficient and effective and even when the checkout line snakes through the entire store, they still get me out of there more quickly than the three registers serving eight people at Commodities, and I don't have to go anywhere else, I don't have to make a lifestyle commitment to shopping for food and scouring Chinatown and the LES for "the Best" fish or cheese or pig’s feet and then still go somewhere else for milk. Everything is there, it's pretty good, so I trade a 10% mark up for a 300% reduction in time spent.

It's true their workers are exploited (as are all workers), but that is more an effect of the great effort in the US to break all the organized Unions than it is of Whole Foods particular rapacious policies.

And all the Foodies who descend on the latest find in Chinatown and LES are every bit as annoying as the "ignorant" patrons of Whole Foods and there seems to be a real snobbishness from those who refuse to shop at Whole Foods.

This modern world is sure getting annoying and plastickier and I too miss the old Bowery and the broken down winos lounging about at the Sunshine Hotel, but lambasting Whole Foods as a malignant cultural tumor is misplaced aggression.

Also, their "365" line of products remind me of the kind of low price and relatively high quality I remember as a child when you could grab a can of Red & White or A&P soup or whatever and trust that the food contained therein would work to the end you had in mind. Ahh the good old days.

Oh what the Hell....

Posted by: Rob | May 15, 2007 6:04:28 AM

The kind of post that gives blogging a bad name. Yes, you are soooo much better than the rest of us. And this proves it.

Posted by: Michael | May 15, 2007 11:34:18 AM

You just stole my thunder, Michael. Dammit.

Posted by: Sean Bannion | May 15, 2007 11:41:32 AM

Get real everybody. This piece is wicked satire. Waaaaay too long but great, nonetheless.


Isn't it?


I hope.

Posted by: Jon S. | May 15, 2007 12:24:49 PM

Who's the snooty one? The poster or the Whole Foods shopper?

Is it a moral failure to be alienated from food production?

Posted by: DaveyChuck | May 15, 2007 12:33:59 PM

I've only been to NY as a tourist. Is it really as full of effete snobbish assholes as it seems?

Posted by: Gus | May 15, 2007 12:59:04 PM

Food that is not in a plastic package MUST be pretentious.

Posted by: beajerry | May 15, 2007 1:46:14 PM

Asad,

This was very enjoyable to read. Maybe it was too enoyable.

I agree with you entirely about whole foods. I very much like what you say about the trade in information: whole foods being a superhighway of information about food more than food itself. I've always thought about it as selling image and lifestyle before food (though they had some amazingly delicious scotch salmon last spring that *nearly* rivalled the wonderful and cheaper offerings of our greenmarket fisherman).

But, the rhetorical brilliance of the first part of your piece--before we get to whole foods--also made me aware of a blindspot of my own. I too prefer to shop paripatetically: when I don't go to the greenmarket, I buy vegetables and fruit at the local fruit stand, I buy fish from chinatown or from my local fishmonger, I prefer the baker for bread, etc. I acknowledge that it requires the extra time and sometimes even extra money to shop this way.

But, in contemporary new york, shopping this way (and talking about it with rhetorical grace, as you do) does not necessarily signify a demystified attitude about food as a commodity. When I shop in the way we do, and talk about its rich emotional and social rewards, I am trading in cultural capital in precisely the same way as a whole foods' shopper.

What this suggests to me is that these two attitudes about food are less opposed than we think. Or, rather, that they are generated by a homologous set of assumptions about what it *means* to buy food. If we actually wanted to return to an older way of shopping for food, we'd have to make it much more instrumentally mundane. I'm not even sure that's possible.

Posted by: Maeve Adams | May 15, 2007 2:03:55 PM

To Gus, who has only been to NY as a tourist: Yes, the city is full of effette snobbish assholes. It's a terrible place, uninteresting, ugly, loud, overcrowded, self-important, hard-nosed, ferociously hot in summer, blasted by artic winds in winter. Culturally, you want to thinik of Athens c. 450 BC, Augustinian Rome, the Florence of the Medicis, Belle Epoque Paris... not your kind of place at all. I recommend you stay the fuck out. Love, New York.

Posted by: timothy Don | May 15, 2007 3:03:19 PM

To the people who think it's snobbish to dislike "Whole Foods", or who think that the author is a snob: try to put aside YOUR prejudices and insecurities and just consider Asad's argument. There is nothing to disagree with. Why is disliking the homogenization and monopolization of one of the few vibrant and diverse places left in the US "snobbish"? Are these ad hominem critics saying it is good to have one or two enormous corporations control entire markets and areas? If so, why not put forth a point that supports this odd thinking instead of attacking the author of this thoughtful and very true post?

Posted by: Akbi | May 15, 2007 4:58:45 PM

Andrew Sullivan links to this article at The Atlantic's website (from his Daily Dish column):

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/05/poseur_alert.html

He calls this article classic in its "downtown snootiness." I suppose a "gay conservative" (i.e., the Uncle Toms of queer culture) would be quick to label any critic of bourgeois consumerism "snooty." Jeez!

Posted by: Akbi | May 15, 2007 5:53:10 PM

Sully's a big Macdonald's fan so what does that tell you about his libertarian 'market rule' view on markets. If you don't know how to shop, don't know how to eat and trust success in the marketplace as an indicator of excellence, of course you are going to like Whole Foods and distrust anyone who writes an overlong but heartfelt paean to shopping in Chinatown. Behind the little smirk is a boy who grew up with overcooked vegetables.

Posted by: permo | May 15, 2007 7:19:29 PM

You know, Permo, it's fine with me if people like Sully want to eat McDonald's and slowly poison themselves--that's their right, and it makes no difference to me (and I admit: I indulge in McD's fries every now and again, b/c they're just too good!). But why must they oppose any critique of mainstream culture, labeling it snobbery? Sorry some of us don't love the commodification and Wal Mart-ization of every last bit of the cutlture, you know? And you're right--Sully's love of McD's does say a lot about his view of "free markets".

Posted by: Akbi | May 15, 2007 7:36:11 PM

Cool. Thanks for the advice New York.

Posted by: Gus | May 16, 2007 10:41:13 AM

You guys are snobs, though it's through no fault of your own; I blame the writers of this website. I believe they have tainted you with their pretentious writing style. But there is a chance to save yourselves and your pets (your children already hate you): get a gun and end your lives. Do them (pets) and all of us a favour. Vive la whole foods.

Posted by: David from Anchorage | May 16, 2007 10:55:49 AM

Really nice writing, I don't find it pretentious at all.

Posted by: Todd and in Charge | May 16, 2007 2:34:52 PM

I think there is a lot of criticism which can make very valid points about Whole Foods' stance on a lot of issues. I'd recommend listening to the discussion John Mackey (Whole Foods' CEO) had with Michael Pollan (one of Whole Foods' harshest critics) a few months back:

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2007/02/28_pollanmackey.shtml

Mackey acknowledges that Whole Foods is not precisely where he wants it to be but he also highlights what they are doing and what his vision is for the future.

If you are passionate about food and agriculture, that conversation is extremely enlightening on the process and where Whole Foods intends to make its mark.

Posted by: hindigo | May 16, 2007 3:27:00 PM

Well, this raises some interesting questions, such as the influence of environment (New York) vs. the influence of genes (snob). I'm siding with environment, but I concede that genes may play an important role.

Posted by: David from Anchorage | May 16, 2007 7:42:50 PM

Firstly:

"their staff underpaid (and WF is notorious for union-busting),"

Not true. At least at Bowery, the salary starts at $10 an hour.. hardly underpaid for a supermarket worker. There has only been one instance, as far as I know, where WF's workers decided to unionize, and within the year, they dropped the union. WF's benefits are voted on by the workers, and and the package is pretty amazing, compared to other supermarkets. What other supermarket gives free health insurance?

As a regular Bowery shopper, I have many reasons for doing most of my shopping within the store. First off, I'm not buying thai ingredients, unprepared fugu, or lox on a daily basis. I need to know my normal, everyday food, is all natural or organic, and I can trust that I get it there. The basics are certainly cheaper than organics in regular markets, who up-price just because they know they can take advantage. No one says you have to buy the fanciest olive oil, but if you want to, it's there.

The Bowery store is working closely with local businesses, too. By bringing in Ricks Picks, il Labratorio (huge concession inside the store, plus packages), and others, they're introducing these smaller companies to people who will go out of their way to get to a WFs anyways. The patrons of that store are mainly locals who are tired of not having a decent big market.. sometimes you just want to wander a big store and do your shopping at once, with one swipe of the debit card. If it puts other businesses out of business, it's because they were inferior to begin with, and only doing business because they were convenient, not because they were special. Those that are worthy will last.

WFs as a company is doing some amazing things, making a big difference in the way people think about their food, and the way farmers and producers work. I'm careful with my spending, but I am proud to support a company that made some very real changes to this world.

Posted by: lbh | May 16, 2007 8:50:25 PM

Thanks for a fine piece - Sullivan did you a favor by linking it, and making a fool of himself with his asinine dismissal.

David from Anch. - there are people who can help you. You don't have to suffer like you do.

Posted by: gallonprunk | May 17, 2007 2:06:56 AM

oh please.....get off your high horse. the amount of thought that even the most passive New Yorker inside that Whole Foods Market puts into what they buy is multitudes higher than what even the most conscious people do in other parts of the country. I shop at greenmarkets too, but I need some convenience in my life, and getting that convenience through some one-stop shopping at Whole Foods hardly makes me a morally bankrupt person.

Typical hipster, holier-than-thou, attention-starved crap. So sorry to see websites like Eater link to this garbage.

Posted by: DK | May 17, 2007 11:22:28 AM

Totally agree with you, Asad. In a way, Whole Foods is like Walmart - a big corporate entity crushing local businesses. In this case the "advantage" is convenience, not lower prices.

Posted by: sw | May 17, 2007 1:44:47 PM

If it wasn't for brands like Whole Foods, the conversation about organics in this country would still be a small, niche ordeal.

At the WF store I shopped in Carolina, they carried local organic produce, and helped improve the lot of smaller growers in the Triangle region. Where I lived in PA, which had a Wegmans but not a WF, farmers at the local weekend market cited WF as allowing them to have an audience that had not existed before...people sought out their produce, meat and cheese because they became aware of the benefits of naturally raised foods BECAUSE of places like Whole Foods.

And lastly, as an avid fisherman, I would (and do) spend more to know that I am not supporting pirate fishing fleets who rape the ocean daily to put fish in the boat.

Small, local and ethnic markets are great. But just because you are there and have a footprint does not justify your existence. It's called service, selection and competitiveness. I guarantee that the best specialty shops don't feel threatened by Whole Foods, because they know how to attract, treat and retain customers. That's what makes them better than other options in the first place.

Comparing Whole Foods to Wal-Mart is a joke. Having had friends who have worked at one or the other, there is absolutely no comparison. And when was the last time Whole Foods refused to work with a vendor because their environmental standards made a product too costly. Hasn't happened. If they pass on that cost in their price, it's their business.

Ultimately, the consumer decides the fate of any business. And right now, the consumer is begging for more Whole Foods not only in NYC, but across the country.

Posted by: Royberg | May 17, 2007 5:02:00 PM

David from Anchorage--that was funny too. I like you now, so I had my stupid, angry comment deleted by the head editor. Royberg-When I comapred Whole Foods and Wal Mart, I was comparing not their corporate policies, but the way they spread quickly all over (even downtown NYC!) and make every place look and feel the same and are big corporations pushing smaller businesses out of the market (whether one supports this or not, it does seem true). No doubt I would MUCH rather see a Whole Foods go up anywhere than a Wal Mart!

Posted by: Akbi | May 17, 2007 6:39:23 PM

asad, what a hullabaloo you've caused.
gentle readers, no one is accusing the upscale supermarket or the shopper who frequents it of being 'morally bankrupt.' even we affected elitists know that whole foods can be charming. one certainly appreciates the organic strawberries, the canned tuna that is conscientiously pole caught, the prohibitive prices that keep the great unwashed away, et cetera. i would love it if a branch were to open in, say, parkersburg, west virginia - in a context where consumers could truly benefit. what this article skillfully points out is simply the irony of this particular whole foods franchise in this particular section of new york city. these provinical and defensive comments are over the top. and besides, since when are snobbery and pretentiousness not things to aspire to?

Posted by: alia | May 18, 2007 2:43:06 AM

great article... but we're a time-pressed world. being too busy to shop at lots of small markets for all the natural, organic, and ethnic products i use, buy natural and organic staples online (www.shopnatural.com for instance) and have them delivered to my door - that way i can spend the my free shopping time on farmers markets and butcher shops and fish markets. packaged foods are a no brainer when you can read the package online (organic? check. no refined sugar? check. not tested on animals? check.) - its the fresh stuff that i want to see, smell and feel before i buy.

Posted by: rachel | May 22, 2007 6:27:55 PM

Some things in this composition are right on, others are dead wrong.

It makes me laugh sometimes, the spread of whole foods and people's automatic assumptions of it. Where I come from (incidentally where WF comes from), Whole Foods is the place where alternative people go to work because no one else will hire them (although that's changing these days). Here I don't see that, but I see that my coworkers come from far across the city to work there and most had much lower paying jobs before WF.

My old whole foods still has a lot of its original customers. These days more yuppies show up, but most of them are the old hippies that have now become financially successful. Co-ops were always cheaper, but then again they employed volunteers and often had fewer overhead costs. (oh yeah, grocery stores have to pay for things other than food).

Also, produce at whole foods is never irradiated- its part of the quality standards.

The line about underpaid employees... you've obviously never worked for a grocery store. Most grocery stores start at minimum wage. There is not a whole foods in existence that starts at minimum wage. They all start at $10/hr and Team Members get to vote on benefits every three years. You also get a raise every year. You also get free insurance,its high deductible, but the company gives you the money to cover the deductible. You are also guaranteed full time hours if you work full time, your schedule never gets cut unless you ask for it. Many people I've worked with came from grocery stores who had unions. They often were only hired part time or lost their jobs despite the union. Wow, people must be crazy to leave those unions behind, whole foods is obviously much worse (yes, sarcasm).
That's also part of the reason food seems so expensive (though milk, pasta sauce, pasta is the same as trader joe's, beer is cheaper than associated, and soda is cheaper than well, anywhere)is because employees ARE paid fairly. Its expensive to pay people. In fact, the cost of employees is the second largest cost after the price of the goods. Profit is the smallest. Or didn't you know that being smaller than major grocery stores means you get charged more for products? Sourcing smaller companies means you pay more for product? (meaning the store gets charged more, that's why you get charged more)

The reason there is information all over the store is because when the store started many people didn't know anything about all natural food. Part of customer service is educating customers. You may think that everyone is savvy when it comes to food, but, as we've established you must never have worked in a grocery store. When you've got enough people asking you the difference between (I kid you not) Chicken and Spinach, you might want to do something to make it less embarassing for someone buying quinoa for the first time to figure out how to use it.

Or we could just be snobs and not give them direction at all. I suppose that would make you happy, a store not for the community, but for know-it-alls who don't need any help whatsoever deciding how to cook dinner. hey, then we could lay off some of those employees (another things wf doesn't do, but unionized stores DO)and make your food even cheaper!

Posted by: Homesick Houstonian | Jul 4, 2007 1:51:58 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

dthoko on The History of Typography - Animated Short

Richard on John Gray’s Godless Mysticism

Abbas Raza on Why Steven Pinker Is Wrong

nogodrod on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Lusine on Quest for 'Genius Babies'?

Bill on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

j_93 on Gezi Park

j_93 on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Norman Costa on The Insanity Virus

Dave Ranning on Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations

Sundar on Quest for 'Genius Babies'?

Sundar on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

musafir on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Lusine on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Brad Wilson on Gezi Park

Raza Husain on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Brad Wilson on The Insanity Virus

billy on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

rafiq on The Insanity Virus

Ben Schwartz on Here He Goes Again: Sam Harris’s Falsehoods

JonJ on Moving books

musafir on My Father: A Veteran's Story – Part 2

omar on Quest for 'Genius Babies'?

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed