I UNDERSTAND that we should not expect too much from
our bakers : the quality of the pour they have to use prevents them from making the kind of bread that we enjoy so much in France. Still, bread should be vastly better now than it has been since 1939, provided we are not so foolish as to go on buying masi-produced machine-made rubbish. Admittedly it has certain advantages. It is of uniform (if low) quality; it can be bought at the grocer's; it makes good toast; and it is cheap. There is a real risk, I gather, that these advantages will out- weigh, in the housewife's mind, what should be the overriding advantage of getting a loaf which tastes as bread ought to taste. One of the ill-effects of the austerity years is that people are suspicious of paying more for quality; they fear that they are being 'had.' And these fears are encouraged by newspaper stunts. The Daily Express claims to be speaking for the house- wife; but is the housewife's interest confined to cheapness, without regard to quality? Personally, the higher the price of the standard loaf, the better I would be pleased, if it meant more and more housewives transferring their custom to the craft baker. 'Standard,' in fact, is a misnomer: I would like to see it labelled 'sub-standard : for toasting only.'
Previous page
