While reading "A Cook's Tour" by Anthony Bourdain an interesting thread kept appearing. I couldn't understand what purpose it served. This thread revolves around women and their seeming ability to make a contribution to Bourdain's writing. What that contribution is I cannot see but for him it must mean something.
In the second chapter he compares returning to France and tasting fish soup again to seeing an old girlfriend and wondering what he had seen in her. I can relate to this comparison however his next choice contrast seems a little extreme as far as relate-ability goes. He writes that he remembers sitting on a dock near his old haunts as a teenager and feeling bitter--"I was a lonely bitter kid. I never got so much as a hand-job in this fucking town" (36). While I appreciate Bourdain's honest writing I didn't think this morsel of his tour was as satisfying. In this particular passage Bourdain sounds awfully spoiled. He is in France for the summer for gods-sake!
Later he writes that he had hoped that re-visiting oysters would bring back his first seminal experience. He compares his hope to "buying your girlfriend flowers, jewelry, perfume, and candy as well as the bathing suit Ursula Andress wore in Dr. No and stating that you expect the best sex of your life" (41). I get that he wants the reader to know he felt he was trying too hard but I'm wondering why that is where his mind goes to when thinking of an example to explain his feelings. It's really interesting to me.
In a subsequent chapter he talks about guys night versus girls night. Bourdain contradicts himself stating that guys night lacks "the civilizing perspectives of women" but later writes, "I'd learned painfully at times, that women have nothing to learn from men in the bad behavior department" (66 and 71). I think he gets it more right in the second passage but why are these details important to him and why does he create a paradox on the page?
The chapter on how to drink vodka is equally perplexing. Bourdain says on page 89 that he is in love, that is, if he could ever fall for someone who reminded him of Broderick Crawford. It's a different kind of compliment if I've ever heard one. I'm not saying that I am offended by his comments but rather that I am intrigued by them. There is a small commentary to be had about Bourdain's choice of female muses. What it all means I have yet to decide.
I hear you, Elaine. A question that kept popping into my head as I read the first half of the book was, "what is Bourdain's wife's take on his descriptions/comparisons involving women? Does she approve?"
ReplyDeleteI really think a lot of it has to do with the machismo persona he's putting on. I don't really like it, but I guess he is consistent and an entertaining writer who commands authority. I'm glad Marin underscored some of the places where Bourdain shows more reverence for women. (Again, because of his persona, these compliments are more subtle.) Otherwise I don't know if I'd be able to enjoy the book as much.
I sometimes found his jokes regarding women to be humorous, but after a while they got a little obnoxious. As Julia said, Bourdain has a machismo persona that is prominent throughout the entirety of the book. We see this when he throws down one hundred dollars for a lamb in Morocco, in his desire to shoot big guns in Cambodia, and of course, his sexual remarks which you have already pointed out.
ReplyDeleteI don't find a paradox so much in his comparison with the boys night vs. the girls night, I think in the end he's actually trying to give women a compliment. Women are civilized compared to men because they do not babble on and on about "sports stats, cars, pussy, and whose dick is bigger -- subject I've already heard way too much about in twenty-eight years in kitchens." (p. 66-7) His comment on women there, I think, is based on the idea that they know how to hold down a decent conversation. His later statement however, says that girls still know how to have a good time.
The ironic part about that quote of course is that he hints at some of these males subjects that he complains about in his own writing.