Thursday, May 21, 2009

Sing to your supper

The other day, Phyllis and I found ourselves once again engaged in one of our all-over-the-map discussions about food. One issue that we talked about was what it means to be an omnivore, a conscientious meat eater. As I describe myself as something of a foodie, an omnivore with vegetarian leanings, I recognize that were I to actually have to butcher my own meat, I would return to my erstwhile vegetarian days in short order (sorry, dad). I have been making a real effort to buy and prepare humanely raised and slaughtered meat from local sellers. It's expensive, so I don't eat much, but I do eat it. I tend to subscribe to the belief that animals, if given a life of animal joy -- a chicken with lots of lush grass to strut around and bugs to peck at, sheep with hills to roam and clear streams to drink from, deer with forest to traverse and time to raise fawns -- and a dignified death, are okay to eat.

One point that Phyllis brought up that keeps turning in my mind is the idea that all life has value, be it plant or animal, and that animals raised in a happier environment are not only healthier for us, nutritionally speaking (less fatty, less likely to get sick and need medicine or hormones to survive), but they have a different energy that is passed along to us when we consume them. Matter cannot be created nor destroyed, right? I think of life energy along similar lines, but more... karmic.

Now, I'm not getting all New Agey here. In fact, most of the "life force" stuff I have stumbled across is too out there or flaky sounding for me to incorporate into my worldview. (Perhaps it's my literary critical nature: "The Celestine Prophecy" was the first work I had come across which dealt with these issues, but even reading it in high school I felt it was too poorly written for me to buy into some of the ideas; "What the Bleep?!" on the other hand, I saw more recently, and it got me thinking a bit, but again some of the attempts at a dramatic presentation were a bit ham-handed.) Nonetheless, the idea that the energy of formerly living things that we consume is transferred to us makes sense. Life is comprised of more than molecules and electrical currents. Is it so strange to think that food is, too? Years from now, I would not be surprised if science bears this out. (In the meantime, it can't hurt to continue singing to your plants. You never know.) ;)


  1. As someone fascinated by both science and religion, I can't get behind you on this energy issue. You secretly like The Celestine Prophecy, I bet. :)

  2. I must agree with Justin, this sounds a bit like homeopathy to me and I don't think science is ever going to go for either.


Thanks for your comment! Just making sure this isn't spam.... Thanks for your patience. :)Ibti