The object of this whole book is to furnish a "knockdown" argument as
to the overwhelming importance of securing the best flavors in food and
to demonstrate at the same time that commercially the richest Flavor
pays best.
A few years ago Professor J. L. Henderson of the Harvard Medical School
astonished newspaper readers by saying that the needed food for one
person costs only ten cents a day and that the rest we spend goes
largely for flavor.
Had he made this remark some years hence he might have said "goes
_chiefly_ for flavor." At the present time, unfortunately, not a few
purchasers of foods are guided to a considerable extent by appearance.
Dr. Wiley has written trenchantly on the widely prevalent habit of
"eating with the eyes"--of selecting articles of food for their size
and color instead of their flavor. Inferior or imitation butter, for
example, is artificially colored and the ignorant consumer meekly
buys it. The epicure buys butter for its Flavor and the dealer cannot
deceive _his_ eyes. To him, in the words of Dr. Wiley, "the natural
tint of butter is as much more attractive than the artificial as
any natural color is superior to the artificial. There is the same
difference between the natural tint of butter and the artificial
as there is between the natural rose of the cheek and its painted
substitute. The dairymen of our country are honest and honorable and
evidently do not clearly see the false position in which the practice
of coloring butter puts them. When the dairymen of the country
understand that _the naturally colored products will bring the highest
price on the market_ and appeal more strongly to the confidence of
the consumer it is believed the artificial coloring in butter will be
relegated to the scrap pile of useless processes." Natural butter is
yellow in May and June; but whoever buys yellow butter at other times
in the belief that it is fresh is a greenhorn. Even harmless coloring
matter, like carrot juice, is objectionable, because it makes the
butter spoil sooner.
George K. Holmes, Chief of the Division of Foreign Markets, contributed
to the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for 1904 an article
entitled "Consumers' Fancies" which gives some curious illustrations
of the stupid underrating of the all-important Flavor. To cite one of
them: "Although it may seem that it is positively not worth while, to
say nothing of money, to buy a _nut_ except to enjoy its flavor, yet to
taste is assigned only 25 per cent., while 50 per cent. is given to the
eye, the remaining 25 per cent. going to the convenience of cracking
the shells."
Judges at county fairs have been known to allow 20 points on looks and
only 15 on the flavor of foods. They knew that city folk are easily
fooled by appearances. On this point Mr. Holmes remarks: "In the city,
a large city especially, the appearance of an apple is everything and
taste nothing, unless the purchaser was once a country boy and enjoyed
the freedom of an orchard." And again: "City-bred people, who have
little knowledge of the origin and real character of food and food
products, such as the country man has, and who have no childhood's
acquaintance with the good things of the farm, are especially liable to
suggestion; they are governed largely by appearances in their selection
of farm products and are _easily deceived by the trick of a false name
or a false ingredient in a prepared food_."
One of the standing jokes in our comic papers concerns the "hayseed"
who comes to town and buys a "gold brick." If the farmers edited comic
papers, they would have a standing joke about the city folk who buy
their showy products, leaving them the best flavored, which may not
appeal to the eye.
It is not true, however, that all the showy fruits are insipid and all
the small plain fruits full-flavored. The delicious Winter Nellis pear
is not nearly as pretty to look at as the Bartlett, yet it is quite as
popular, while the Bartlett is as luscious as it is beautiful and often
imposing in size, especially on the Pacific Coast. Among the apples in
our markets, also, some of the biggest and most beautiful are the best
to eat.
It cannot be denied that there is _something_ to be said in favor of
"eating with the eyes." Women naturally want the apples and oranges,
the berries and vegetables, and the viands on their tables, to look
pretty and inviting. Nor is there any reason why they should not have
their way. The eye and the palate can be reconciled by breeding fruits
and vegetables that combine good looks with agreeable flavor.
Luther Burbank has done the world a tremendous service by originating
the luscious fruits and vegetables briefly referred to in the preceding
chapter, but perhaps his greatest achievement is the demonstration
that there is virtually no limit to obtaining fruits of any size,
form, or flavor desired, and that the good looks and flavor can be
amalgamated at pleasure with shipping and keeping qualities. He himself
is preparing many pleasant surprises of this kind beside those I have
referred to, and hundreds of others are profiting by his example and
following his methods.