Bourdain Versus Deen Pt II

Originally, Anthony Bourdain gave his thoughts on some of the Food Network's "talent".  As you recall, I suggested that he didn't go far enough.  Then the New York Times' Frank Bruni came to Deen's defence by suggesting that Bourdain was a culinary elitest (sorry, link may require registration).  Then Rebecca Marx came to the aid of Anthony Bourdain.    So the battle rages on.  

But, the point isn't, from my standpoint anyway, that there is anything wrong with fried chicken or macaroni and cheese or even butter or lard.  My problem with Paula Deen and certain others on the food network is that they elevate fat, sugar, butter and lard to iconic status and their shows are more about how great it is to cook big, fatty meals like they remember from their childhood.  But, they never talk about cooking technique, food quality, importance of ingredients or, most importantly, moderation.  

And look, I don't see eye to eye on everything that Bourdain says.  He has some of his own simple minded thoughts especially on the subject of vegetarianism.  Bourdain has travelled extensively and eaten food all over the globe.  His preference is always the food of the peasants, but that doesn't suggest that it is unhealthy or unpalatable.  Far from it.  And I agree.  His show talks about the culture that lead those peasants to seek out the ingredients they use and how the techniques evolved because of the ingredients and the availability of materials and fuels.  All the influences of community, locale and mores are examined in each dish that he eats and an attempt is made to understand that culture's food.  As he said in a recent tweet when someone suggested he be banned from the south:

Which South? The one with a glorious tradition of food? Or the TV version?