Navarro 1

Victoria Navarro

Professor Ludwig

English 101H

27 November 2017

The Missing Links

In Dan Barber's book, The Third Plate, he offers insight into the future of cooking by

proposing several farming methods that support nutrient-condensed produce. During his search

for flavor, he acknowledges the conditions of nature and how fascinating the end result is if

produce is grown without extensive human control. Although Dan Barber proposes several

plausible arguments throughout the book, his use of rhetorical devices was extremely ineffective

in convincing readers to take part in the farm-to-table movement.

Considering the book is divided into four sections based on the various ecological

systems, the book is slightly easy to comprehend. Based on each section, Barber analyzes his

experiences and transforms them into handfuls of tips on how to change the reader's perspective

on the environment. However, while he studies different ecosystems, having four parts is

unnecessary, considering his points are the same, regardless of what story he tells. For instance,

in the soil section, his main claim is to grow crops in nutrient-dense soil in order to produce the

best crop (61). Meanwhile, in the seed section, Barber emphasizes the need for crop rotation

without extensive amounts of chemicals (365). He could have easily stated his argument without

extending the same message on to four different sections. Essentially, people should grow their

produce naturally in order to enhance its flavor.

 Navarro 2

Not only that, but his research methods were extremely confusing to keep track of. The

majority of Barber's evidence is through numerous anecdotes. Similar to the organization style,

each story basically has the same message: food produced naturally tastes better. With his

different experiences, the four divided sections seem to be split as well. In other words, Barber

bombards the readers with constant introductions to multiple farmers and chefs, making it

confusing to keep track of who each person is. Reading the book without referring back to

previous pages is extremely difficult considering how often Barber switches to a different

anecdote to support his claims.

In addition to the confusing stories, many of Barber's arguments are not directly stated

because of his casual tone. His writing is mainly composed of conversational language that

ultimately puts himself on the same level as the readers. Rather than writing in an elevated

language that is often used for formal writing, he connects with readers by making them feel as

though they are not being attacked for their ignorance towards the subject.

Yet, this casual tone makes his statements confusing because he is vague, rather than

being straightforward. For instance, as Barber was watching the birds eat the fish he stated that

"you must embrace life, which is to say all life, not just what you're trying to grow, or, as Klaas

would argue about healthy soil, what you can actually see" (246). Barber never applies his

experiences into the life of an average consumer. Instead, he extensively describes every detail

about his experiences and proceeds to generalize what he learned into an extremely vague lesson

that is difficult to relate to.

However, in order to counteract the lack of understanding between his experiences and

the reader's, Barber turns to extremely dramatic descriptions in order to emphasize his main

points. As a matter of fact, his writing consists of numerous metaphors that he uses to attempt to
 Navarro 3

connect to readers on an emotional level. Yet, Barber's attempts are unnecessarily dramatic to the

point where he tries to find deep, philosophical meaning in a simple process. For instance, when

he describes the importance of the ocean, he refers to a previous anecdote about Safina who

"calls us 'soft vessels of seawater' 'We are,' he writes, 'wrapped around an ocean within,'"

(212). In order to convince the audience to have a specific stance towards a subject, the author

must connect to them and make the issue relevant. On the other hand, as Barber attempts to

achieve that through completely absurd statements, he ends up with the opposite effect. Instead,

his arguments that should seem extremely relevant for everyone transforms into ridiculous

lessons that have minor importance unless one deeply cares about the topic.

While Barber attempts to connect with readers, he fails at providing various options for

the average consumer. In other words, the farms Barber visited all had produce with high price

ranges that were hundreds of dollars. The foie gras from Eduardo Sousa's farm sells for 124

euros for just 130 grams of product. If Barber wanted to alter consumer mindsets by transitioning

them into the farm-to-table movement, he should have provided readers with an alternative that

is accessible to the general public without the high costs. The fact that his sources are places of

luxury, such as high-class restaurants, ultimately degrade the effectiveness of his arguments

because he fails to connect with the reader.

Despite the fact that Barber's methods are ineffective for readers who do not care about

the subject, I agree with most of his arguments. His proposals for pursuing food filled with flavor

and improving the environment spark curiosity within the audience, ultimately getting more

people to take a step into the farm-to-table movement. However, if I did not have the same

beliefs prior to reading the book, The Third Plate would not have been effective in altering my

opinions because of how absurd and dramatic many concepts were in the book. His points are
 Navarro 4

often dramatized, making it difficult for the reader to understand which arguments are important.

Essentially, Barber's methods for conveying his purpose were ineffective because of his one-

sided perspective.
 Navarro 5

Works Cited

Barber, Dan. The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food. Penguin Group, 2014.