Anthony Di Renzo wrote a scholarly article about a personal experience with Italian – American food. Jane Dixon composed a research database reflecting on the distribution and consumption of chicken in Australia. Comparing these two articles has similarities and differences. Both authors discuss the importance of food and why it is consumed more than other types of food. Dixon sets her article up as a formal paper where as Di Renzo made it more informal and personal to the readers. Bitter Greens written by Di Renzo is a historical story about the culture of Italian food and his personal experience with it. This story is comparable to a novel because of how detailed, colorful, and lively the story is. For example Di Renzo starts off the story
…show more content…
As you can see Di Renzo is very detailed when he writes and you are able to picture what is happening in your head. He continues this story by showing emotion for Italian food and goes on about Americans taking advantage of the immigrants from Italy. America has taken Italian food and made there own twist on it, which did not make Di Renzo happy. He wanted to keep the traditional Italian way going but instead ended up not getting any homemade Italian meals in America. You can tell Di Renzo takes this very personal and you can feel the emotion through the story by him stating, “Time gobbles customs and nations more greedily than Neapolitan urchins gobble sausages” (30). You can see the passion Di …show more content…
This article is a lot more formal than Bitter Greens. This is a secondary source, unlike Di Renzo’s primary article. This secondary article is compiled of research data put together. This chapter is mainly about the production, distribution, and consumption of chicken and how it affects the economy. Super markets want to change the way consumers buy and pick their food. Jane, the author, states, “Their promotional activities –for example, categorizing and advertising certain foods as ‘fresh produce’ and ‘home-meal replacement’- influence the way that consumers think about food commodities..” (102). This means that how super markets market there produce can make their sales more popular and get people to buy their food. Her main argument in this research is that retailers and consumers have changed the market for how food is perceived, produced, and bought. For example they made meat easier to make by chilling it and not putting it in the freezer. This is easier for producers to make, and consumers to buy and make, which is all around cheaper and easier. The argument in this article is laid out chronologically and you can get the sense that there is not as much passion as Di Renzo had. By taking processing into their own hands this makes things easier and cheaper for super markets, they now have the higher end. This is
As you can see Di Renzo is very detailed when he writes and you are able to picture what is happening in your head. He continues this story by showing emotion for Italian food and goes on about Americans taking advantage of the immigrants from Italy. America has taken Italian food and made there own twist on it, which did not make Di Renzo happy. He wanted to keep the traditional Italian way going but instead ended up not getting any homemade Italian meals in America. You can tell Di Renzo takes this very personal and you can feel the emotion through the story by him stating, “Time gobbles customs and nations more greedily than Neapolitan urchins gobble sausages” (30). You can see the passion Di …show more content…
This article is a lot more formal than Bitter Greens. This is a secondary source, unlike Di Renzo’s primary article. This secondary article is compiled of research data put together. This chapter is mainly about the production, distribution, and consumption of chicken and how it affects the economy. Super markets want to change the way consumers buy and pick their food. Jane, the author, states, “Their promotional activities –for example, categorizing and advertising certain foods as ‘fresh produce’ and ‘home-meal replacement’- influence the way that consumers think about food commodities..” (102). This means that how super markets market there produce can make their sales more popular and get people to buy their food. Her main argument in this research is that retailers and consumers have changed the market for how food is perceived, produced, and bought. For example they made meat easier to make by chilling it and not putting it in the freezer. This is easier for producers to make, and consumers to buy and make, which is all around cheaper and easier. The argument in this article is laid out chronologically and you can get the sense that there is not as much passion as Di Renzo had. By taking processing into their own hands this makes things easier and cheaper for super markets, they now have the higher end. This is