appetites for thought Appetites for Thought Philosophers and Food Michel Onfray reaktion books Published by Reaktion Books Ltd 33Great Sutton Street Londonec1v 0dx, uk www.reaktionbooks.co.uk First published as Le Ventre des philosophes: Critique de la raison diététiqueby Michel Onfray, © Editions Grasset et Fasquelles, 1989 English-language translation copyright © Reaktion Books 2015 Translated by Donald Barry and Stephen Muecke All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publishers Printed and bound in Great Britain by Bell & Bain, Glasgow A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library isbn978 1 78023 445 8 Contents Introduction: The Banquet of the Omnivores 7 one: Diogenes; or, The Taste of Octopus 15 two: Rousseau; or, The Milky Way 24 three: Kant; or, Ethical Alcoholism 37 four: Fourier; or,The Pivotal Little Pie 49 five: Nietzsche; or, The Sausages of the Anti-Christ 64 six: Marinetti; or, The Excited Pig 75 seven: Sartre; or, The Revenge of the Crustaceans 90 Conclusion: The Gay Science of Eating 103 References 115 Bibliography 130 Introduction: The Banquet of the Omnivores I am much more interested in a question on which the ‘salvation of humanity’ depends far more than on any theologian’s curio: the question of nutrition. Nietzsche, Ecce Homo Diogenes – farter, masturbator and cannibal – has invited to his banquet the most emblematic of dining companions: Rousseau, paranoid herbivore and champion of plebeian tastes; Kant, the austere hypochondriac, trying to bring together drunkenness and ethics; Nietzsche, the Germanophobe who champions Piedmontese cuisine in order to purify Prussian nutrition; the nebulous Fourier, who wants to be the Clausewitz of nutritive warfare; Sartre, the viscous thinker, comfortable with lobster à la mescaline; and Marinetti, the experimental gastrosopher, who combines the most unexpected flavours.1 From Cynical alimentary nihilism to futurist culinary revo - lution, many paths, winding and diverse, can be taken. They link men who are preoccupied – if we may venture the neo lo - gism – with Dietet(h)ics,understood as knowledge of tastes. On the banquet table of these guests we find raw octopus and human flesh, milk products and sugared prunes strangely transformed into sauerkraut, a rosary of sausages and a plate of ‘Excited Pig’, a sausage cooked in coffee flavoured with eau de cologne, small pastries, vol-au-vents and gutted crustaceans. Water for abstainers and wine for hedonists. Kant’s Médoc and 7 his choice of cod, spring water and clear fountains, Rousseau’s curd and fresh fruit. Those absent are otherwise occupied with their orders or their favourite foods. Descartes is too quiet. He, who in his Parisian period was a brawler and libertine, a hedonist and bandit, was not averse to taverns where a Poissy vintage, the table wine of the court, was served from the barrel. Or he would opt for a rough drop from the hills of Montmartre.2All we know about him is what the overly austere Baillet wanted us to know. It seems that more accurate biographies of the author of The Discourse on Method would be full of women, wine and duels. Spinoza, also, is silent. His life – as is so often the case – resembles his work: regular architecture, a machine without surprises, Apollonian in form. Colerus tells us that: ‘He lived a whole day on a milk soup tempered with butter . . . and a pot of beer . . . another day he ate nothing but gruel served with raisins and butter.’3A few hours before dying, the Dutch sage ate some broth from an old rooster prepared by the people of the lodging house. Baruch’s taste certainly seems plain. Based on the abstemiousness of the Ethicsand the rigour of his proofs, one can hardly infer he ate like a new Gargantua. Between courses Hegel appears with his wine from Bordeaux. In his hand he is holding a letter to the Ramann brothers that reads: I once more have the honour of requesting from your graces the delivery of a quarter Eimer[about 11 litres] of wine, this time Médoc. You should have received the money for the barrel: but I pray send me one that is in good condition; the last one was cracked on the top and some of the wine had leaked out.4 It is a pity that we have to deplore the absence of the essential – tears, laughter, wine, women, food and pleasure – in the beautiful 8