The piece in The New Yorker betrays a kind of urban parochialism that I sometimes forget exists. It faults the restaurant chain for being a restaurant chain, for humorously using cows to advertise their poultry-based products, for being popular, for being successful, and most of all for being owned by Christians. It is the otherness of Atlanta-based Chick-fil-A that appears to be most offensive to the writer.
Conservative Protestant Christians, of which I am one, have long engaged in a weird habit of looking for evil in mundane things. During my formative years I learned that a variety of objects and items were to be kept at arm’s length, or even better, across the street at the worldly neighbors’ house. These corrupt items included playing cards, sweepstakes entry forms, rock and roll music, and more. Casual conversations were liable to be interrupted by assertions that “That song is about sex/drugs/rebellion, don’t you know?” and “Did you know what awful person invented such-and-such, and why?”
A favorite story heard in my childhood involved missionaries, African tribesmen, and the Beatles. It seemed that some missionaries had succeeded, with great persistent effort, in convincing the natives that their beloved syncopated rhythms were of the Devil, and must be abandoned. When the new converts heard the missionaries’ kids listening to the Beatles on the phonograph, in a panic, pleaded with the missionaries to make the kids stop indulging in syncopated music of the Devil. To my preteen ears it seemed obvious that the natives’ objection was plaintive on the basis of fairness rather than alarmed on the basis of damnation, but what does a kid know?
Dan Piepenbring, author of the New Yorker’s attempted hit on Chick Fil A, has embraced the same repressive attitude while at the same time standing it on its head by advancing it in the secular sphere. He asserts in paragraph two that “[T]he brand’s arrival here feels like an infiltration, in no small part because of its pervasive Christian traditionalism.” Viewed through that prism, everything about the restaurant, its food, its advertisements, and its presentation is suspect. Even a representation of the city skyline incorporated in a store’s facade is disconcerting, the twin towers of the World Trade Center look to him like “imperious rectangles.” Chick-fil-A offends Piepenbring by “proselytizing” and by resembling (to his distaste) some kind of fast-food megachurch. It seems even to offend Piepenbring that the S. Truett Cathy, the founder of Chick-fil-A, hadn’t the good grace to die before becoming a billionaire.
Piepenbring reminds us that when Chick Fil A first entered the New York market in 2015, there were protests, and “when a location opened in a Queens mall in 2016, Mayor Bill de Blasio proposed a boycott.” Piepenbring’s regret at the evident dissipation of hostility is palpable, and he devotes considerable effort to reminding New Yorkers how different and offensive and other the restaurant and its management really are.
A substantial portion of the composition is dedicated to the Cows. If you have lived in the United States in the last twenty years, you’re familiar with the cartoony Chick-fil-A cows and their “Eat Mor Chikin” picket signs. The whimsical advertisements work because the concept is so outlandish, like a Far Side cartoon. After all, cows aren’t people; they aren’t politically active or socially aware. They don’t even know that they’re food. That is, unless you’re morbid Dan Piepenbring, who laments that Americans have fallen “in love with an ad in which one farm animal begs us to kill another in its place.” He continues, “Most restaurants take pains to distance themselves from the brutalities of the slaughterhouse; Chick-fil-A invites us to go along with the Cows’ Schadenfreude.”
In the end, our reception of the article will reveal something of our own world view. Who reads The New Yorker? Is it New Yorkers? To one who imagines a cow munching grass contentedly standing on a green hill, under a blue sky, this piece will seem so much nonsense. To on who imagines the same cow secretly agonizing about the futility of her life and fearing her gruesome destiny, Piepenbring’s weird vision will resonate.