I just remembered... The command that I heard, I think, every of my peers (and even now it is given to children):
- First, eat normal food, and then chew all the filth!
I remembered and wondered what "normal food" is. This is what was normal food in the understanding of past generations, and what is it now?
By the way, the question does not arise with past generations.
Only two things were considered normal food: soup and porridge. Even pasta, for example, with a cutlet in many families, my friends were supposed to eat after soup, otherwise lunch is not dinner. And a sandwich for breakfast was allowed only after porridge.
Scrambled eggs or scrambled eggs were also not considered "normal" food. Especially the elderly - those who were born before the revolution or several years after it, eggs generally went under the category of "pampering".
It was believed that soups and cereals are very useful for the body and, in fact, the degree of "usefulness" has never been discussed or questioned.
Although now I had a suspicion that the benefits for the body were secondary and the advertisement of this benefit stemmed from the fact that the soup and porridge - quite hearty and rather cheap dishes that help to feed a large amount of food at minimal cost eaters.
Eggs belonged to pampering for very mundane reasons: when people lack grain, chickens are a luxury, and eggs are even more so.
The leader of "normal" food is soup, especially if it is eaten with bread. It was obligatory to eat with bread.
After the soup, and even with bread, there was hardly any other food - what was "normal", what was "abnormal" After the soup with bread, "abnormal food" could not be spent.
I remember a friend's grandmother was always very angry when he bought a pack of cornflakes for ten or eleven kopecks.
She (grandmother) always said:
- It would be better if I took a normal roll!
You understand that it was not about usefulness or protection from excess weight. They did not bother with the glycemic index of foods in those days. And the usefulness of buns and cereals... It is on the same level.
That is, the normality of food in past generations was determined by the ratio of price and greediness. And also - habit.
Recently I had a chance to hear the following phrase:
- First, eat a normal meal, and then chew your sushi!
And I thought - why, in fact, the same sushi rolls are not "normal food"? No, the fact that she is unhealthy is understandable. Nutritionists strongly oppose this combination of foods. But let's be honest: in rare families, they bother with high-quality food. The combination of proteins, fats and carbohydrates in many familiar, so-called "normal" dishes is such that the body rushes from them as if by leaps and bounds.
But the same soup, in which there are potatoes and noodles for fatness, seasoned with mayonnaise for taste, is considered normal in many families, this is soup! And rice with fish and fatty cheese - no. In my opinion, both are somewhere on the same step. By the degree of harm.
It’s even strange. Although... maybe again the ratio of price and greediness, and at the same time - familiarity?
Tell me, what do you personally think is normal food, and what is not?