FIND A RESTAURANT

Great Deal of the Day!

Crystal Clean Cleaning

Enjoy a sparkling clean home at a 30% discount.
Today's Deal
 

Dining Features Article

Julia Child: Just a Pinch of Prejudice

By Laura Shapiro

Page 3 of 3

One of Julia’s longtime ambitions was to attract more men to the food world. In France, where cooking had the status of a high art, men were the chief players whether or not they actually cooked: It was their talking, writing, and gourmandizing that put cuisine at the center of domestic and national life. In America, by contrast, cooking was traditionally defined as a female preoccupation, hence unworthy of serious attention. Julia had spent years in France trying to win the respect of male culinary authorities, self-appointed and otherwise, and had met with little success on account of her two handicaps: She was American and she was female.

Yet the experience didn’t turn her into a culinary feminist—quite the opposite. She was inclined to see men the way the French did: natural masters in the kitchen, born with an easy confidence at the stove, graced with an understanding of science and logic that guided them smoothly through the preparation of a meal. No matter that most American men couldn’t cook. An aura of maleness in the world of American cookery would be enough to ennoble the whole enterprise, or so she hoped. When William Rice was appointed food editor of the Washington Post in 1972, she cheered. “I’m all for having MEN in these positions; it immediately lifts it out of the housewifery Dullsville category and into the important things of life!” If improvements were under way in American cooking and eating habits, it had to be men who deserved the credit. “Thank heaven for the men in our TV audience,” she remarked in 1966. “They are responsible for stimulating interest in cooking. The women would just pass it over.”

Women were too easily intimidated in the kitchen, Julia believed; they panicked if the recipe called for three tablespoons of lemon juice and they had only two. Men were fearless—in fact, men were accustomed to bullying, she once noted, which could be a very useful trait in the kitchen.

But while she was confident that men would have a good influence on the American home kitchen, their growing visibility in the culinary profession was a touchier subject. Yes, an infusion of talented male chefs was exactly what the profession needed in order to gain stature and respectability. But the ambitious young men taking up cooking included a number of gays, and Julia feared they would soon define the profession, keeping straight men away. “It is like the ballet filled with homosexuals, so no one else wants to go into it.” She urged a few close friends in the food world to encourage the “de-fagification” of cooking, but admitted that she had no idea how to go about it—and besides, “fags” bought plenty of cookbooks, including hers. “What to do!”

What she did, in the end, was generously support the career aspirations of every gifted cook who came her way—male or female, “normal” or not. Her devotion to “real male men” ran deep, but her appreciation for good cooking ran deeper still, and at this level she was entirely free of prejudice. Richard Olney, the moody American writer living on a Provençal hillside whose expertise in French cooking impressed even the French, was a homosexual and not particularly friendly to Julia or most other people; she, in turn, never took to him personally. Yet she gave a press party when he published Simple French Food in 1974, and used all her contacts to help him promote it, simply because his work was so outstanding.

And although she distanced herself from the women’s movement in general, in her own profession she was a feminist in spite of herself. She simply would not put up with any injustice that threatened to deprive the world of a good chef. Julia funded scholarships for female culinary students, encouraged them to write to her about their progress, did a great deal of networking on behalf of young women chefs, and dispensed quantities of advice and encouragement. For her Master Chefs programs, she made a point of inviting male and female chefs in equal numbers; she worked her media connections tirelessly to help cookbook writers she admired.

Julia’s tangled sensibility about sex, gender, and food relaxed a good deal in the warmth of her friendship with James Beard, whom she loved and admired above anyone else in the American culinary world. Beard, a gay man who neither hid nor flaunted his orientation, was widely recognized as the nation’s leading authority on good cooking when Julia set out on her career. She never forgot how generous he was when she arrived on the scene in 1961, a potential rival whom he greeted enthusiastically and introduced to everybody. “I think he has done much to set the tone of friendliness among cooking types, which is so different from that sniping and backbiting that goes on in France,” Julia told her friend, food writer M. F. K. Fisher. “Jim is such a hard worker, has such a vast store of knowledge in that enormous frame. There is outwardly some bluff in him, but I think that is because he is very tender inside.” She used to say he was “cozy”—one of her favorite qualities in a man. Julia rarely commented on Beard’s homosexuality; she was far more concerned about the various health problems associated with his weight. Yet her homophobia came and went during their long friendship, apparently at random. “Good that people are out of the closet at last!” she noted in her journal in 1974, upon learning that an acquaintance was openly gay. “Makes things easier all around.” A year later, she was agitating to keep “them” out of the culinary business.

But by the 1980s, when the AIDS crisis began to unfold, the horror of what was happening to people she knew, and people she loved, dealt a significant blow to her longtime prejudice. “Last year my husband and I stood by helplessly while a dear and beloved friend went through months of slow and frightening agony,” she told a crowd at the Boston Garden in 1988 during an AIDS benefit sponsored by the American Institute of Wine and Food. “But what of those lonely ones? The ones with no friends or family to ease the slow pain of dying? Those are the people we’re concerned about this evening. And food is of very special importance here. Good food is also love.”

Her politics, her passions, and her fundamental decency were coming together at last. Some time after that, when a woman friend told her she was in love and about to marry another woman, Julia blanched for a second and then congratulated her warmly. What was important was the team.


Reprinted by arrangement with Viking, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., from the forthcoming book Julia Child by Laura Shapiro. Copyright © 2007 by Laura Shapiro.

Originally published in Boston magazine, April 2007
 

Page Return to the beginning


Change text size
Print

Email

Write a comment
 
 

User comments

gives julia another dimension
Posted by krissy | Aug. 5, 2009 at 11:04 PM
COMMENT:
The homophobia of the time was so palpable. When you see peoples prejudices it gives you a fuller understanding of who they were. They should have put Carrie Prejean in the new movie.
consider the times
Posted by Timothy | Aug. 6, 2009 at 1:22 PM
COMMENT:
Back then, homosexuality was not as out in the open so people could not help but fear it. I don't think you can judge homophobia in people of past generations the same as you can judge it in people of today. It is just different now.
timing isn't everything
Posted by Zack | Aug. 6, 2009 at 1:39 PM
COMMENT:
I understand that "the times" were different in the 60s, but Julia wasn't cloistered off from gays in a church somewhere. She worked hand-in-hand with gay people. For the same reason we don't just excuse racists for trying to keep schools from integrating as bad historical timing, Child's employment discrimination and overt cruelty shouldn't just be swept under the rug and ignored, even by her admirers.
Julia Child
Posted by Jay | Aug. 6, 2009 at 6:57 PM
COMMENT:
So disappointed to learn of Julia's homophobia. We tend to idealize people that we think we know through television and books. Obviously, she really was a provincial housewife even if she made it to Paris.
More Expansive Than "My Life In France"
Posted by David | Aug. 7, 2009 at 1:06 PM
COMMENT:
I read her book, "My Life in France." I suspected at the time that the book was a scrubbed version of the real person. We always hope that a person can be all things to all people, and are always disappointed when our hopes are dashed. Julia spoke of death as "slipping off the raft into the great blue beyond." Best of luck to you, Julia, wherever the great blue beyond has taken you. Sincerely, Dave, who still has some bloom left on his petals.
She was a better woman than most.
Posted by James | Aug. 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM
COMMENT:
Notice that her attitude towards gays changed with the times, It followed what was common and understood, which is more than I can say for most older people. They get stuck in one frame of mind and then never change, but Julia evolved with the evolution of understanding. and the gay community WAS disgusting back then. It was all about meeting and screwing and not talking about it later. I AM gay, and I find it gross.

Posted by Larry | Aug. 10, 2009 at 2:51 AM
COMMENT:
Paul child was investigated when at USIA in Germany before the couple moved to DC. They accused him of being gay. He sanded and received written exhoneration.
Julia's True Nature
Posted by Sonja | Sep. 17, 2009 at 2:34 AM
COMMENT:
Julia's true nature was somewhat under-developed in the recent film Julie and Julia because personal views as regards homosexuals and other controversial topics were glossed over or omitted entirely. The joyful spirit portrayed by Meryl was exceptionally well portrayed, but the film's music bordered on a Lawrence-Welk bubble machine mood and the color was dingy, - all very disappointing to one curious to know more and "see" more!
Tiresome
Posted by Anonymous | Nov. 2, 2009 at 3:08 PM
COMMENT:
I hope a hundred years into the future enlightened people look back on the political correctness of our time with the disdain it deserves.
PC double standards
Posted by Anonymous | Nov. 2, 2009 at 3:14 PM
COMMENT:
"So disappointed to learn of Julia's homophobia. We tend to idealize people that we think we know through television and books. Obviously, she really was a provincial housewife even if she made it to Paris. " Your prejudice against the country, the non urban French, and housewives is pc, so that's okay, right? Too bad you never got out of being a snooty ghettoized cosmopolitan queer huh? But that's not okay, right, that's prejudiced?
OK Julia
Posted by Anonymous | Jan. 5, 2010 at 7:20 AM
COMMENT:
So dissapointed to learn of James Beards and Richard Olneys homosexuality. I believe Julia was right in this regard and that her honesty and lack of pretense made her special.
Palto
Posted by Palto | Feb. 9, 2010 at 4:58 AM
COMMENT:
OK Julia, would you feel the same way if Beards and Alneys were black and Child racist? Would that lack of pretense make her special? You're a bigot.

Post a comment

(* = required field.)
  • Please check to make sure that your referer is not blocked.


Subject line of your comment*
Your comments (200 words max)*
Email*
First name*
Last Name*
Enter the code shown below.
Visual CAPTCHA
This helps prevent automated form submissions.
 
Boston Buzzworthy

Boston Magazine Daily

Follow Boston Magazine tweets on twitter.com/bostonmagazine
 
 

Travel Club Newsletter

Sign-up for our Travel Club email to receive special New England getaway packages.
 
 

Boston magazine Readers' Choice Awards

It's our first annual Readers' Choice Awards, presented by JetBlue, and we want to hear from you! We've selected ten categories - now it's up to you to cast a...
 
 

Great Seasonal Drinks.

hit the town and Check out some of THESE AMAZING COCKTAILS.