This essay is more of a
breakdown of the lecture Musonius gave about food. As a fat Stoic,
food is of keen interest to me, more than any other subject. This
essay focuses on part A. In it, I try to just both sum up and expand on what Musonius is talking about.
I.
The
first thing that strikes me about Musonius and food is his seeming
anger about it. I mean, here's just a few quick quotes:
“He
often talked in a very forceful manner about food...”
“We
thought that this lecture about food was rather unlike the lectures
Musonius customarily gave.”
Now, I
can't say for certain, but something tells me Musonius wasn't one to
just go off on a tangent. Yet shortly after the first quote, it's
suggested that he didn't bother with his normal topics and instead
spoke about food.
But it's
the second quote that hits me most. Why was this lecture so unlike
the others? This is a man who felt the need to tell men that they
shouldn't shave their beards or cut their hair. Him telling people
what to do doesn't seem to be the problem. No, I'm willing to bet
what make it so unlike his other lectures is that he was actually
angry about it.
So, my
question is, why?
II.
Of
course, there's no way of knowing why. Maybe he was a porker before
becoming a Stoic and carried a hatred for food when he did because it
controlled his life. Maybe he was sickened by the way the Romans ate.
Or maybe I'm over-thinking this part. All I know is that this lecture
stiffened my spine. And provides one of the few “practical”
applications of Stoicism.
III.
He
starts his lecture in a logical way. Choose cheaper foods over more
expensive ones (I kid you not, there is a $5k hamburger out there).
Choose foods that are easy to get over hard to get. And, lastly,
choose foods that are good for humans over foods that aren't.
Simple,
isn't it?
IV.
Well,
not quite. See, Musonius felt there were only so many foods that were
suitable for human consumption. Foods that didn't need to be cooked
were the best. Fruits, cheese, honeycombs, things like that. Some
cooked foods were a-okay, too. Bread, certain veggies, things of that
nature.
V.
Perhaps
you noticed that there wasn't any meat listed up there. That's
because Musonius didn't think meat was human food. Sure, you can use
animal byproducts like milk and eggs. But don't you dare eat that
animal.
However,
the argument Musonius puts out is, well, weak in today's world. He
argues that meat makes people stupid and that the smoke from cooking
it darkens one's soul. He also goes on to say that, because humans
are closely related to the gods, we should eat like they do. The gods
eat vapors from the earth and water, because yeah, sure. Whatever.
But we should eat foods that are “light and pure” and meat just
isn't that.
As you
can see, talk of soul and gods falls flat in a secular age. As for if
meat makes you stupid, there's been suggestions that the eating of
meat does the brain a whole host of good.
It does
get me wondering, though, how Musonius would argue this in a more
modern age. Odds are, he would choose the religious route, which may
convince some. I couldn't think of any good secular reasons, at least
none that would make me give up meat all the way.
VI.
Now,
when it comes to the pull food has in our lives, Musonius says we're
worse than “brute animals.” This, perhaps, is both the most
convincing and funniest. Convincing, because he says that while
animals may wildly go after food, they aren't too picky about it.
Humans, on the other hand, can be just as wild, yet act very fussy
about it. The need to pretty up our food and come up with “tricks
to...better amuse our palate” points to our absurd behavior towards
food.
I can
give you an example of this. Ever hear of the orange roughy? It's it
type of fish that many people seem to like and can get a little
pricey. Yet for the longest time, you couldn't find it anywhere as
food, nor would anyone want to eat it. Why? Because before its name
change, it was known as the slimehead. It was a marketing trick to
make our brains think we're eating something tasty.
The
reason I find this section so funny as well is because he talks about
the dangers of – get ready for it – cookbooks. But it makes sense
when you think about. This is a man who's idea about cooking is
little more than boiling some veggies and baking some bread. Recipes,
and the cookbooks they come in, are unnecessary.
VII.
Actually,
wait, maybe this section is funnier. Picky eaters who eat rich foods
are, he says, like pregnant women. Why? Because they eat weird
combinations of food. According to him, both pregnant women and picky
eaters can't tolerate regular food. Of course, I think Musonius is
being a little harsh on pregnant women.
Now,
this part is a little confusing for me. He speaks of people's appetites needing
to be sharpen by unmixed wines, vinegar, and tart sauces. Appetite, in this case, isn't just being hungry. It's one's willingness to eat even if hungry. And I'm also assuming he's saying people need various sauces and shit to make the food more appealing
and, thus, increase their willingness to eat.
So, in short, he's saying picky eaters that need to spice up their food in order to eat it, even if they are hungry, are strange for just not eating the food for the way it is. At least, that's what I'm getting out of it.
In
any case, he tells of a story of a Spartan and a picky eater. Mr.
Picky refuses to eat a expensive, fat, and tender bird because he
didn't have an appetite. Now, it's obvious this guy was there to eat,
so he was hungry. But it wasn't good enough for him. The Spartan,
though, sneered at the man and said, “I could eat both a vulture
and a buzzard.” To Mr. Picky, food needed to be just right. To the
Spartan, food was just
right.
VIII.
To
finish off Part A, Musonius talks about Stoicism's founder, Zeno. In
another story, he tells us that when Zeno fell ill, his doctor
ordered him to eat young doves. Zeno refused, noting how slaves
weren't treated in such a manner, yet somehow managed to get better.
To quote, “A good man won't expect to be coddled, any more than a
slave does.”
He also
says that Zeno avoided gourmet foods because, like a drug, all you
need is a taste to get hooked. (I can almost see a Stoic anti-drug
message, but for food. “This is your brain. This is your brain on
gourmet food.”)
That's it for Part A.
Part B will either be sometime later this week or next week. There
will be a part 3, in which I talk about some things I infer from all
this, as well as a more modern Stoic approach towards food.