Cinemorphosis

Tag: food

  • How Fake Food Mirrors AI Writing

    How Fake Food Mirrors AI Writing

    Like most people, I have an unbreakable bond with food—a bond so primal that when the food industry dares to present me with a counterfeit, I might taste it out of politeness or morbid curiosity, but love it? Never. Inferior substitutes, especially those concoctions posing as “creative alternatives,” are my culinary kryptonite. My first encounter with such deceit came in 1970, courtesy of my stint in the YMCA’s Indian Guides (now rebranded as Adventure Guides). We were part of “tribes,” each made up of eight father-son pairs, with one dad dubbed “Chief” and the rest relegated to “Assistant Chiefs.” The real highlight, of course, was the weekly rotation to a different family’s home, where the moms—our unsung heroes—served dessert.

    But one evening, dessert took a turn for the worst. Our host mother, a vision of 70s flair with her blonde spun-sugar hair and white go-go boots, had stumbled upon what she must have thought was the recipe of the century. There it was, in plain sight on her kitchen counter: an open Ladies’ Home Journal or some equally menacing tome of domestic innovation. She cheerfully announced her culinary coup—a dessert she was calling “ice cream” but with no actual ice cream in it. Instead, the concoction was an unholy alliance of canned frosting and Cool Whip.

    She served it in cones with an enthusiasm that could have powered the disco lights at Studio 54. But when I took a bite, the illusion shattered. It wasn’t ice cream; it was a crime scene. The texture was gritty, like someone had blended sand with modeling clay. It was lukewarm—room temperature, for God’s sake—and tasted like the sugary sludge dentists use to polish your teeth before hitting you with the guilt trip about flossing. I glanced around and saw my fellow boys and their dads wearing identical expressions of barely-contained horror—the same grimace detectives on TV crime procedurals make when they have to pull out a hanky to block the stench of a decomposing corpse. One by one, we all quietly set our cones down as though handling evidence at a murder trial.

    The poor woman, sensing the full weight of her failure, blushed beet-red and stammered out a series of apologies, swearing on everything holy that she would never again darken a dessert table with this abomination. We forgave her, of course—some crimes are too absurd to punish. But to this day, whenever I see Cool Whip, I feel a pang of existential dread and hear the faint echo of tribal laughter masked by suppressed gagging.

    My second traumatic encounter with fake food came years later, sometime in the early 90s. I was living alone in the barren expanse of the California desert, surrounded by nothing but dust, lizards, and my questionable life choices. Thanksgiving rolled around, and rather than go full Norman Rockwell with a solo turkey feast, I decided to spare myself the hassle and opted for something “easy.” Enter the boxed abomination known as tofurkey—a vegetarian horror show complete with a pouch of dubious “gravy.”

    The first bite was a betrayal of taste and texture. My jaw slowed in protest, grinding against the dense, rubbery mass like I was chewing on a tire patch. The spongy gluten monstrosity refused to yield, as if daring my teeth to break first. The flavor? Imagine licking a salted yoga mat that’s been marinated in vague artificial regret. I eyed another slice, its pallid, lifeless complexion daring me to continue. With the enthusiasm of a condemned man, I stabbed the fork into it, hoping for some hidden culinary salvation. Nope. The taste was as bland and soul-crushing as the first bite—less “holiday cheer,” more “processed despair.”

    Finally, I’d had enough. With a sigh that could’ve put out a candle, I carried my plate to the trash and scraped the entire crime scene into the garbage, where it belonged. Dignity had to be reclaimed. I poured myself a bowl of Cheerios, sliced a banana over the top, and drizzled on some honey. As I savored each crunchy, sweet spoonful, I felt a small but vital spark of culinary joy return. It wasn’t just a meal—it was a rescue mission for my self-respect. And let me tell you, a bowl of cereal has never tasted so victorious.

    The self-abasement and insult to others from eating and serving fake food was captured brilliantly in the early 1980s when comedian Bob Sarlatte took aim at the pièce de résistance of culinary chicanery: the Ritz Crackers recipe for Mock Apple Pie. Sarlatte was on a mission to uncover the absurdity behind Ritz’s audacious claim of making apple pie with, wait for it, crackers instead of apples. He was incredulous, practically frothing at the mouth as he dissected this travesty. “Why on earth,” he demanded, “would Ritz, in all their cracker-clad glory, boast about a recipe that doesn’t even remotely involve apples?” According to Sarlatte, this so-called “apple pie” was like calling a desert a beach because it had sand—except the sand was made of crushed Ritz crackers, and the beach was a figment of your imagination. The comedian was in no mood for Ritz’s grandstanding. To him, this wasn’t a culinary innovation; it was a culinary catastrophe. He took Ritz to task for attempting to pass off a cracker conglomeration as apple pie, as if the lack of fruit was a feature, not a flaw. “Who,” Sarlatte railed, “are you going to serve this Mock Apple Pie to? Your mock friends? People who enjoy mockery served with a side of disappointment?” Sarlatte’s razor-sharp wit wasn’t just about lampooning a recipe—it was about exposing a greater travesty: the shameless elevation of a subpar substitute as a triumph of creativity. This wasn’t a clever culinary trick; it was an insult wrapped in a cracker crust. Bob Sarlatte laid bare the staggering lack of self-awareness and the brazen audacity required to serve such an ersatz “apple” pie with a smug smile. It was a masterclass in how to serve up an insult with a cherry on top, minus the apple, of course.

    Sarlatte’s takedown resonates because food is sacred territory. Our connection to it is primal. Unlike AI-generated text, fake food assaults the senses in ways you can’t ignore. And while AI hasn’t (yet) encroached on the culinary world with soulless meal simulations, the market’s rejection of fake meat shows just how little tolerance we have for edible counterfeits. Sales of plant-based protein substitutes have tanked, a clear signal that consumers aren’t ready to trade their ribeye for a rubbery simulacrum. Simply put, there’s only so much culinary mockery we’re willing to stomach—literally.

    Fake foods fail 90% of the time with 90% of the people, but in the realm of writing, AI-generated prose seems to enjoy the opposite fate: it’s “good enough” 90% of the time for 90% of situations. So perhaps fake food isn’t the right comparison. When it comes to our slow surrender to mediocrity in writing, convenience food may be a more apt metaphor. Sure, a Hot Pocket isn’t a Russian piroshki, but its ham and cheese filling is technically real. The danger isn’t the outright fakery of fake food—it’s the insidious appeal of convenience that gradually numbs our taste for anything better. The same flattening effect occurs in writing, where AI churns out serviceable but soulless content, lowering our appetite for higher-level craftsmanship.

    Let’s be real: when you bite into a Big Mac, you’re not searching for the subtle interplay of flavors or the delicate dance of textures. You’re there for the holy trinity of fat, protein, and salt—instant gratification, hold the sophistication. Likewise, when you fire up ChatGPT, you’re not chasing literary immortality. You’re after a fast, serviceable product so you can free up time to hit the drive-thru. Convenience becomes king, and both your palate and prose pay the price. Before you know it, you’ve traded filet mignon for fast food and Shakespeare for shallow clickbait. Standards? Those eroded long ago, somewhere between the special sauce and the soulless syntax.

    We’ve already seen this erosion over the last fifteen years. Smartphones have replaced thoughtful correspondence with texts full of abbreviations and emojis. My students now submit essays littered with “LOL” and lowercase “i” like punctuation’s gone on permanent strike. But maybe it doesn’t matter. Maybe this linguistic infantilization is the new standard, and business communication will one day be indistinguishable from TikTok captions. Still, I don’t entirely despair. Higher-level writing—like Joan Didion’s piercing cultural reportage—exists in a category of its own and doesn’t compete with the memos and press releases AI is destined to take over.

    What worries me more is that fewer people will seek out writers like Didion, Zadie Smith, or Hunter S. Thompson. Without readers, the appetite for great writing—and with it, deep thinking—shrinks. The flattening of taste becomes a flattening of consciousness, a slow bleed of our shared humanity. Look at our growing dependence on technology: GLP-1 drugs manage our weight, AI shapes our communication, streaming algorithms filter our music, and nutrition powders substitute for food. The result is a bland middle ground, a life devoid of both high peaks and deep valleys. We stop noticing the dehumanization because we’ve acclimated to it.

    But not all hope is lost. I remember hearing an interview on Fresh Air with Tiffany Haddish. Early in her career, Haddish struggled to find her comedic voice—until Eddie Murphy gave her a piece of advice that changed everything. He told her to have fun on stage, to genuinely enjoy herself. If she was having fun, the audience would feel it and respond. That human moment of mentorship transformed her career.

    This story reassured me for two reasons. First, Tiffany Haddish wasn’t mentored by ChatGPT—she was guided by Eddie Murphy, a living legend. Second, comedy itself is proof that people will always crave voices that cut through the emotional numbness of modern life. Great comedians, like great writers, are the axes that Kafka said could break the frozen sea within us. They shatter our tech-induced monotony and return us to the raw, messy experience of being human. As long as there are voices like Haddish and Murphy to remind us of that, there’s still hope that humanity won’t flatline into a dull, digital abyss.

    We may live in a world where powdered meal replacements pose as dinner and AI-generated text poses as thought, but the human appetite—whether for flavor or for meaning—can’t be faked for long. Just as we spit out Cool Whip cones and tofurkey slabs with a shudder, our souls eventually revolt against the flattening effects of machine-made language. We remember what real texture feels like, in food and in prose. We remember what it means to laugh at a story that stings because it’s true. And even if convenience wins most days, there will always be those who crave the messy, glorious excess of a banana split or the searing honesty of a well-told tale. As long as people continue to gag on mediocrity—be it edible or literary—there’s hope that the hunger for something real, soulful, and defiantly human will keep coming back.

  • The Haunted Mind vs. the Predictive Engine: Why AI Writing Rings Hollow

    The Haunted Mind vs. the Predictive Engine: Why AI Writing Rings Hollow

    In More Than Words: How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI, John Warner points out just how emotionally tone-deaf ChatGPT is when tasked with describing something as tantalizing as a cinnamon roll. At best, the AI produces a sterile list of adjectives like “delicious,” “fattening,” and “comforting.” For a human who has gluttonous memories, however, the scent of cinnamon rolls sets off a chain reaction of sensory and emotional triggers—suddenly, you’re transported into a heavenly world of warm, gooey indulgence. For Warner, the smell launches him straight into vivid memories of losing his willpower at a Cinnabon in O’Hare Airport. ChatGPT, by contrast, is utterly incapable of such sensory delirium. It has no desire, no memory, no inner turmoil. As Warner explains, “ChatGPT has no capacity for sense memory; it has no memory in the way human memory works, period.”

    Without memory, ChatGPT can’t make meaningful connections and associations. The cinnamon roll for John Warner is a marker for a very particular time and place in his life. He was in a state of mind then that made him a different person than he was twelve years later reminiscing about the days of caving in to the temptation to buy a Cinnabon. For him, the cinnamon roll has layers and layers of associations that inform his writing about the cinnamon roll that gives depth to his description of that dessert that ChatGPT cannot match.

    Imagine ChatGPT writing a vivid description of Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlour. It would perform a serviceable job describing the physical layout–the sweet aroma of fresh waffle cones, sizzling burgers, and syrupy fudge;  the red-and-white striped wallpaper stretched from corner to corner, the dark, polished wooden booths lining the walls; the waitstaff, dressed in candy-cane-striped vests and straw boater hats, and so on. However, there are vital components missing in the description–a kid’s imagination full of memories and references to their favorite movies, TV shows, and books. The ChatGPT version is also lacking in a kid’s perspective, which is full of grandiose aspirations to being like their heroes and mythical legends. 

    For someone who grow up believing that Farrell’s was the Holy Grail for birthday parties, my memory of the place adds multiple dimensions to the ice cream parlour that ChatGPT is incapable of rendering:

    When I was a kid growing up in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1970s, there was an ice creamery called Farrell’s. In a child’s imagination, Farrell’s was the equivalent of Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory. You didn’t go to Farrell’s often, maybe once every two years or so. Entering Farrell’s, you were greeted by the cacophony of laughter and the clinking of spoons against glass. Servers in candy-striped uniforms dashed around with the energy of marathon runners, bearing trays laden with gargantuan sundaes. You sat down, your eyes wide with awe, and the menu was presented to you like a sacred scroll. You don’t need to read it, though. Your quest was clear: the legendary banana split. When the dessert finally arrived, it was nothing short of a spectacle. The banana split was monumental, an ice cream behemoth. It was as if the dessert gods themselves had conspired to create this masterpiece. Three scoops of ice cream, draped in velvety hot fudge and caramel, crowned with mountains of whipped cream and adorned with maraschino cherries, all nestled between perfectly ripe bananas. Sprinkles and nuts cascaded down the sides like the treasures of a sugar-coated El Dorado. As you took your first bite, you embarked on a journey as grand and transformative as any hero’s quest. The flavors exploded in your mouth, each spoonful a step deeper into the enchanted forest of dessert ecstasy. You were not just eating ice cream; you were battling dragons of indulgence and conquering kingdoms of sweetness. The sheer magnitude of the banana split demanded your full attention and stamina. Your small arms wielded the spoon like a warrior’s sword, and with each bite, you felt a mixture of triumph and fatigue. By the time you reached the bottom of the bowl, you were exhausted. Your muscles ached as if you’d climbed a mountain, and you were certain that you’d expanded your stomach capacity to Herculean proportions. You briefly considered the possibility of needing an appendectomy. But oh, the glory of it all! Your Farrell’s sojourn was worth every ache and groan. You entered the ice creamery as an ordinary child and emerged as a hero. In this fairy-tale-like journey, you had undergone a metamorphosis. You were no longer just a scrawny kid from the Bay Area; you were now a muscle-bound strutting Viking of the dessert world, having mastered the art of indulgence and delight. As you returned home, the experience of Farrell’s left a lasting imprint on your soul. You regaled your friends with tales of your conquest, the banana split becoming a legendary feast in the annals of your childhood adventures. In your heart, you knew that this epic journey to Farrell’s, this magical pilgrimage, had elevated you to the ranks of dessert royalty, a memory that would forever glitter like a golden crown in the kingdom of your mind. As a child, even an innocent trip to an ice creamery was a transformational experience. You entered Farrell’s a helpless runt; you exited it a glorious Viking. 

    The other failure of ChatGPT is that it cannot generate meaningful narratives. Without memory or point of view, ChatGPT has no stories to tell and no lessons to impart. Since the days of our Paleolithic ancestors, humans have shared emotionally charged stories around the campfire to ward off both external dangers—like saber-toothed tigers—and internal demons—obsessions, pride, and unbridled desires that can lead to madness. These tales resonate because they acknowledge a truth that thoughtful people, religious or not, can agree on: we are flawed and prone to self-destruction. It’s this precarious condition that makes storytelling essential. Stories filled with struggle, regret, and redemption offer us more than entertainment; they arm us with the tools to stay grounded and resist our darker impulses. ChatGPT, devoid of human frailty, cannot offer us such wisdom.

    Because ChatGPT has no memory, it cannot give us the stories and life lessons we crave and have craved for thousands of years in the form of folk tales, religious screeds, philosophical treatises, and personal manifestos. 

    That ChatGPT can only muster a Wikipedia-like description of a cinnamon roll hardly makes it competitive with humans when it comes to the kind of writing we crave with all of our heart, mind, and soul. 

    One of ChatGPT’s greatest disadvantages is that, unlike us, it is not a fallen creature slogging through the freak show that is this world, to use the language of George Carlin. Nor does ChatGPT understand how our fallen condition can put us at the mercy of our own internal demons and obsessions that cause us to warp reality that leads to dysfunction. In other words, ChatGPT does not have a haunted mind and without any oppressive memories, it cannot impart stories of value to us.

    When I think of being haunted, I think of one emotion above all others–regret. Regret doesn’t just trap people in the past—it embalms them in it, like a fly in amber, forever twitching with regret. Case in point: there are  three men I know who, decades later, are still gnashing their teeth over a squandered romantic encounter so catastrophic in their minds, it may as well be their personal Waterloo.

    It was the summer of their senior year, a time when testosterone and bad decisions flowed freely. Driving from Bakersfield to Los Angeles for a Dodgers game, they were winding through the Grapevine when fate, wearing a tie-dye bikini, waved them down. On the side of the road, an overheated vintage Volkswagen van—a sunbaked shade of decayed orange—coughed its last breath. Standing next to it? Four radiant, sun-kissed Grateful Dead followers, fresh from a concert and still floating on a psychedelic afterglow.

    These weren’t just women. These were ethereal, free-spirited nymphs, perfumed in the intoxicating mix of patchouli, wild musk, and possibility. Their laughter tinkled like wind chimes in an ocean breeze, their sun-bronzed shoulders glistening as they waved their bikinis and spaghetti-strap tops in the air like celestial signals guiding sailors to shore.

    My friends, handy with an engine but fatally clueless in the ways of the universe, leaped to action. With grease-stained heroism, they nursed the van back to health, coaxing it into a purring submission. Their reward? An invitation to abandon their pedestrian baseball game and join the Deadhead goddesses at the Santa Barbara Summer Solstice Festival—an offer so dripping with hedonistic promise that even a monk would’ve paused to consider.

    But my friends? Naïve. Stupid. Shackled to their Dodgers tickets as if they were golden keys to Valhalla. With profuse thanks (and, one imagines, the self-awareness of a plank of wood), they declined. They drove off, leaving behind the road-worn sirens who, even now, are probably still dancing barefoot somewhere, oblivious to the tragedy they unwittingly inflicted.

    Decades later, my friends can’t recall a single play from that Dodgers game, but they can describe—down to the last bead of sweat—the precise moment they drove away from paradise. Bring it up, and they revert into snarling, feral beasts, snapping at each other over whose fault it was that they abandoned the best opportunity of their pathetic young lives. Their girlfriends, beautiful and present, might as well be holograms. After all, these men are still spiritually chained to that sun-scorched highway, watching the tie-dye bikini tops flutter in the wind like banners of a lost kingdom.

    Insomnia haunts them. Their nights are riddled with fever dreams of sun-drenched bacchanals that never happened. They wake in cold sweats, whispering the names of women they never actually kissed. Their relationships suffer, their souls remain malnourished, and all because, on that fateful day, they chose baseball over Dionysian bliss.

    Regret couldn’t have orchestrated a better long-term psychological prison if it tried. It’s been forty years, but they still can’t forgive themselves. They never will. And in their minds, somewhere on that dusty stretch of highway, a rusted-out orange van still sits, idling in the sun, filled with the ghosts of what could have been.

    Humans have always craved stories of folly, and for good reason. First, there’s the guilty pleasure of witnessing someone else’s spectacular downfall—our inner schadenfreude finds comfort in knowing it wasn’t us who tumbled into the abyss of human madness. Second, these stories hold up a mirror to our own vulnerability, reminding us that we’re all just one bad decision away from disaster.

    As a teacher, I can tell you that if you don’t anchor your ideas to a compelling story, you might as well be lecturing to statues. Without a narrative hook, students’ eyes glaze over, their minds drift, and you’re left questioning every career choice that led you to this moment. But if you offer stories brimming with flawed characters—haunted by regrets so deep they’re like Lot’s wife, frozen and unmovable in their failure—students perk up. These narratives speak to something profoundly human: the agony of being broken and the relentless desire to become whole again. That’s precisely where AI like ChatGPT falls short. It may craft mechanically perfect prose, but it has never known the sting of regret or the crushing weight of shame. Without that depth, it can’t deliver the kind of storytelling that truly resonates.

  • Kettlebells, Groats, and the Ghost of Cardiac Doom

    Kettlebells, Groats, and the Ghost of Cardiac Doom

    I’m 63, and my body is a museum of movement trends. I’ve done Olympic weightlifting, bodybuilding, power yoga, and for the last 12 years, kettlebells—because nothing says “midlife stability” like swinging a cannonball on a handle five days a week while trying not to herniate a disk. I eat well—if by “well” you mean “like a disciplined wolf at a cheat-day buffet.” Animal products still feature in my diet, usually in portions that would make a cardiologist raise one eyebrow and reach for their prescription pad. I’m a good 30 pounds overweight and have cut back recently but perhaps not enough. 

    Lately, I’ve started worrying about the future: namely, a heart stent. The idea of threading a balloon through my groin to unclog a bacon-clogged artery isn’t my preferred retirement plan. So I’m contemplating a semi-vegan diet—not for virtue-signaling, but for vascular survival. Greek yogurt and whey powder will stay, though. I refuse to shrivel into a human twig for the sake of purity. Sarcopenia can go pound tempeh.

    My dream breakfast resembles a Pinterest board curated by a monk with delusions of grandeur: steel-cut oats, yogurt, whey, berries, walnuts, and dark roast coffee. Lunch is the same symphony with the oatmeal swapped for buckwheat groats, in honor of my Polish great-great grandmother who, I’m certain, could crush a man’s spirit with one glance and a bowl of groats. Dinner? A nutritional yeast-drenched, spice-blasted tempeh tableau, with beans, roasted vegetables, and maybe a solemn scoop of cottage cheese followed by an apple—the dessert equivalent of a tax deduction.

    Snacks? Don’t speak to me of snacks. They are the sneaky saboteurs of caloric creep, the grinning goblins that ruin otherwise virtuous intentions. Between meals, I’ll drink water, and maybe a diet soda or two to convince myself I’m still living on the edge.

    Of course, this plan risks collapsing under the crushing weight of its own monotony. Worse, I dread becoming that guy at family events—the joyless dietary specter haunting the buffet table with his lentil sermon. I don’t want pity, nor do I want to be admired for abstaining from Costco sheet cake while others live in reckless, frosted bliss.

    To preserve my sanity and prevent my relatives from staging a flavor intervention, I may allow one restaurant meal a week—a carefully sanctioned culinary parole. A sanity-saving bite of indulgence before I return to the tofu mines.

  • Luxury Is Relative: Tales from the Desert of Almost

    Luxury Is Relative: Tales from the Desert of Almost

    Fresh off the bus from the bustling Bay Area, I found myself marooned in Bakersfield, a sun-bleached corner of California that could only generously be described as a town. With zero friends and even fewer social obligations, I embraced my solitude like a monk embracing a vow of silence. My one-bedroom apartment became my sanctuary—no roommates, no forced small talk, just me and the sweet luxury of never having to negotiate over chores or TV channels.

    My companions? A stack of CDs featuring Morrissey, The Smiths, and other bands that sounded like a group therapy session set to a minor key. I was working on a novel Herculodge, my dystopian magnum opus in which society punishes the overweight with Orwellian fervor for failing to meet state-mandated body standards.

    When I wasn’t writing, I’d plink away on my Yamaha ebony upright, conjuring up self-indulgent sonatas that only the most pretentious of muses could appreciate. I didn’t read music so much as let it ooze out of me—luscious chords here, shameless glissandos there—while imagining some ethereal goddess materializing in my living room to stroke my ego as I struck a soulful pose.

    Compared to the misery of my college days in the Bay Area, my Bakersfield digs were practically a five-star resort. Back then, I wasn’t so much living as squatting in a hovel that had the audacity to pretend it was a room. The place featured a gaping hole in the wall strategically located at bed level, inviting in gusts of cold air so fierce they felt like the Bay’s fog had developed a personal vendetta against me. Sleeping wasn’t just uncomfortable; it was a survival sport. I’d huddle under layers like I was gearing up for an Everest expedition—jacket, hat, and sometimes gloves if the wind got particularly sassy.

    My diet was a tragicomedy in three acts: breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Cheerios were the headliner, while bean-and-cheese burritos played the understudy whenever I was feeling particularly adventurous. These “burritos” were nothing more than refried sludge wrapped in a tortilla that had all the elasticity of cardboard. The cheese? It was the kind that refused to melt out of sheer spite, clinging to the tortilla like it was serving a life sentence. Each bite was a bleak reminder that I wasn’t starving, but I wasn’t thriving either.

    Transportation was another chapter in my tale of woe. My chariot was a ten-year-old Toyota Tercel that was less a car and more a mobile disaster waiting to happen. It rattled like a haunted maraca, and driving it felt like piloting a coffin with wheels. The brakes let out a tortured groan every time I approached a stop sign, as if they were begging me to put the poor thing out of its misery. On the infamous Bay Area hills, I clung to the steering wheel with a white-knuckled grip, praying the Tercel wouldn’t decide to pack it in and roll backward into oblivion, taking out a few unsuspecting cyclists along the way. Fixing it was a twisted game of financial Russian roulette: repair the brakes or eat for a week—one of us had to suffer.

    Money was as scarce as warmth in that drafty hole I called a room. Every broken item (and there were many) required a DIY fix involving duct tape, a prayer, and whatever scraps I could scavenge. Even gathering enough change for a trip to the laundromat felt like winning the lottery. “Luxury” back then meant adding an extra spoonful of salsa to my sad burritos—living on the edge by upping the spice in a meal that was otherwise flavorless and depressing.

    Looking back, it’s a miracle I escaped that purgatory with my sanity—or whatever passed for sanity. That cold, drafty hole taught me resilience, but more than anything, it taught me how to laugh at the sheer absurdity of trying to survive in a city that demands gold while you’re barely scraping together tin.

    So here I was, newly settled in this desert hideaway, craving a hint of the luxury I’d been denied. On weekends, I tanned my lean, 195-pound frame by The Springs’ apartment pool—a so-called “luxury” pool that only deserved the title because the sign said so. No real friendships blossomed at that pool—friendships are messy and overrated—but I did collect some “acquaintances,” a bizarre cast of characters who could only exist in this sun-scorched limbo.

    I wasn’t thriving, but at least I wasn’t freezing or eating cardboard masquerading as food. And in a place like Bakersfield, that was about as close to paradise as you could hope for.

  • The Protein Bar Delusion: My Love Affair with Lies and Graham Crackers

    The Protein Bar Delusion: My Love Affair with Lies and Graham Crackers

    I don’t eat protein bars anymore. Not because I’m virtuous—far from it—but because I finally admitted the obvious: they’re not meal replacements. They’re meal add-ons, sneaky little calorie grenades dressed up in the halo of anabolic health, whispering sweet promises of lean muscle and zero guilt.

    I’ve been chasing that lie since the 1970s.
    Back then, the gold standard of protein bars was the Bob Hoffman Club Sandwich—a peanut butter and graham cracker Frankenstein’s monster that must have clocked in at 500 calories, easy. It wasn’t a snack. It wasn’t a supplement. It was a religious experience.
    If I wanted to recreate it today, I’d just mash a couple of Reese’s between two graham crackers and pray for forgiveness.

    Over the decades, I kept eating protein bars—dense peanut butter bricks, chewy “engineered food” monstrosities—but never to any good effect. These bars didn’t sculpt my physique. They bulked me up like a slow, steady inflation of regret. Eventually, I abandoned them, like a gambler walking away from the slot machine after realizing the house always wins.

    Still, they haunt me.
    Protein bars remind me of Willy Wonka’s cursed 7-course meal gum that turned Violet Beauregarde into a giant blueberry: a miracle product promising the world but delivering only bloat and existential crisis.

    To be fair, the bars have gotten better over the years. There’s even one called David (because apparently even protein bars have minimalist branding now) made with real food, boasting 28 grams of protein at a miraculous 150 calories. It tempts me.
    Wouldn’t it be smarter, simpler, even a bit sexier to chomp down a David bar at breakfast instead of mixing up my daily slurry of yogurt, protein powder, soy milk, and berries? (A concoction that hits 500 calories with depressing reliability.)

    Maybe. But I know myself: I’d be starving by 9:30 a.m., staring into the abyss of a second breakfast. Protein bars have never given me satiety. They’re a snack in drag—a dessert cosplaying as health food.

    And yet… with all the shredded influencers on YouTube slicing open protein bars like they’re sommelier-testing vintage wine, I feel the pull. A little FOMO. A little “Maybe this time it’ll be different.”

    I have to remind myself, again and again:
    I’m not in love with the protein bar.
     I’m in love with the idea of the protein bar—the fantasy that some sweet, tidy, macro-balanced rectangle will solve my problems, sculpt my body, and carry me into some higher, cleaner version of myself.

    Reality tastes different.
    It tastes like mealy, sweet resignation. It tastes like being duped—with a thin layer of whey isolate on top.

  • Gluttonshame

    Gluttonshame

    During the Great Life Purge, flashbacks of gluttony didn’t just sneak up on me—they stormed in like uninvited relatives, loud and unrelenting. Just today, I winced remembering a scene from six months prior, when my wife and I, wrapped in the post-dinner glow of calories and denial, settled in for a couple Arrested Development reruns. The show—a chaotic valentine to familial dysfunction—still felt razor-sharp, sharp enough to leave paper cuts on your frontal lobe.

    As the theme song played, I rose from the couch with the sanctimony of a monk on pilgrimage. I was off to retrieve my so-called “satiety apple,” that smug little orb of virtue allegedly designed to curb cravings without detonating my calorie budget.

    But then I heard it—a low, seductive hum from the direction of the microwave. There it was: a lone pie box, faintly glowing like radioactive treasure, humming a siren song of buttery crust and spiced filling. I opened the box. Inside, the final slice of Thanksgiving pie waited like a femme fatale in a noir film—dangerous, irresistible, and destined to ruin me.

    I didn’t stand a chance. One second I was a man of discipline; the next, I was hunched over the sink, inhaling that pie like a raccoon who’d broken into a bakery. Crumbs flew. Filling oozed. I was mid-bite, feral and euphoric, when my daughter Alison entered the kitchen.

    She paused, surveyed the carnage, and with surgical precision asked, “When’s the last time you were on a diet?”

    I froze, mid-chew, cheeks ballooned like a chipmunk caught mid-heist. “It’s one slice of pie,” I sputtered, wiping whipped cream off my face. “Hardly a relapse worthy of a family intervention.”

    “Don’t be so defensive,” she replied, with the kind of tonal flatline only teenage girls can weaponize. “I’m just asking—when was the last time you had a strategy?”

    “I didn’t realize you were moonlighting as the historian of my weight management failures,” I muttered, scrambling for dignity.

    “What strategy?” she deadpanned, her eyes sliding toward the now-empty pie tin in the sink like a prosecutor resting her case.

    I opened my mouth in exaggerated mock offense, miming emotional devastation. We laughed, sort of. But her words hit like a sucker punch wrapped in fondant. Despite my kettlebell crusades and protein piety, my daughter saw me for what I was—a man-child undone by pastry.

    The truth hurt because it wasn’t just about pie. It was about a lifetime of performing duets with food, not as nourishment, but as codependence. My relationship with eating wasn’t a partnership; it was a soap opera—a never-ending saga of longing, betrayal, and deeply inappropriate snacking.

    I suffered from food noise—a chronic condition in which the brain becomes a 24-hour food court blaring meal ideas through a megaphone. It wasn’t a craving. It was a full-time broadcast. Even as I wiped pie filling off my shirt, some inner gremlin was planning breakfast, brunch, and an emotionally necessary mid-morning protein bar.

    I had, of course, tried everything. High-protein meals? Check. Fiber-packed produce? Ate it until I squeaked. “Permission to eat favorite foods”? Please. That just gave me moral cover for more cheesecake. As for “hunger cues”—those had long since been drowned in a Wagnerian opera of appetite, where every aria ended in a trip to the fridge.

    I didn’t eat because I was hungry. I ate because I was enchanted. Food was my symphony, and I was its slobbering conductor. While others savored notes of flavor, I devoured entire movements. Pie wasn’t dessert—it was the crescendo. A bag of chips? That was a tragic aria. My kitchen was a concert hall, and I, a helpless Snack Serenader, crooning sonnets to chicken shawarma and tearfully composing odes to sourdough.

    Romantic? Maybe. But make no mistake: this was less about joy than it was about entrapment. I didn’t eat food—I worshipped it. I wasn’t hungry for sustenance—I was desperate for an encore.

    And that’s when the memory landed with full force: the gluttonshame. A post-binge echo of mortification so potent it deserved its own DSM entry. Gluttonshame—the echoing pang of regret triggered by the memory of a food orgy, often witnessed, preferably by someone genetically programmed to judge you—is no passing embarrassment. It sticks, greasy and persistent, like pie filling on a dress shirt. It whispers, “This is why your jeans stage a mutiny every morning.”

    Symptoms? Defensive sarcasm. Performative chuckles. Sudden existential dread. And an uncontrollable urge to delete your food log and relocate to another time zone.

    I felt it all. But if the Great Life Purge taught me anything, it’s that these flashbacks are necessary. They remind me that change doesn’t happen without confession—and a little mockery. Because behind every gluttonshame echo is a man trying, however clumsily, to crawl his way back to self-control—one apple, one salad, one deeply judged slice of pie at a time.

  • Losing Weight in Suburbgainia Isn’t Just About Willpower

    Losing Weight in Suburbgainia Isn’t Just About Willpower

    I live in the padded belly of the beast—a Southern California suburb so manicured and overpriced it feels like a gated community built on a diet of Zillow listings and delusion. Here, tiny homes crouch next to high-performing schools like obedient little dogs, and you can practically hear the sound of families hemorrhaging two-thirds of their salary just for the right to say they live in “one of the most desirable zip codes on Earth.” Never mind the suffocating health insurance premiums, the rent-sized car payments, or the phones that become obsolete faster than the milk expires. Somehow, despite all this, we still manage to gorge ourselves into oblivion.

    And gorge we do—with the kind of unapologetic culinary nihilism that says: Why not chase your statins with a triple-decker guacamole onion ring bacon cheeseburger the size of a toddler’s head? These meals don’t nourish. They sedate. They carpet-bomb the body with a week’s worth of calories and lull us into a coma only broken by the siren song of the ice cream truck chirping its Pavlovian jingle.

    Sedated and bloated, we require appropriate transport. Enter the all-terrain behemoths—SUVs that could ferry a minor league baseball team but are usually occupied by one distracted suburbanite and their half-finished iced mocha. These vehicles aren’t just cars—they’re padded rooms on wheels, egg-shaped mirrors of their drivers’ own expanding silhouettes, stuffed with sensors to correct for our chronic inattention and entertainment centers to distract us from the creeping dread that this might be it.

    Their true purpose? A fantasy of freedom. A lifestyle accessory for people who dream of hitting the open road, yet refuse to drive more than two miles for a pedicure, a Panda Express run, or the latest Marvel sequel. Why venture beyond the safety of the suburb when out there lies gridlock, road rage, parking scarcity, and the occasional wildfire licking the edge of the 405 like it’s auditioning for a role in Dante’s Inferno: The LA Edition?

    So we stay. We scroll. We snack. And when the walls of this sun-bleached hamster cage start closing in, we do what any respectable suburbanite does—we shop.

    The heart of our civic religion is the membership superstore, a concrete cathedral where the faithful line up before opening like doomsday preppers. We flash our membership cards like VIP badges to the apocalypse, and once inside, the frenzy begins: cartloads of triplet-pack peanut butter, bulk tubs of sourdough pretzels, yogurt for an army, and the holy grail—those chocolate cream-filled sandwich cookies that whisper, You’ve earned this.

    Ravenous and under-cabineted, many of us start devouring our haul in the parking lot just to make room for more. We don’t so much eat as conduct calorie triage, clearing shelf space in our bellies before the next Costco pilgrimage. And thus, a problem festers—one so normalized it’s barely acknowledged: obesity.

    But we don’t call it that. Here, being overfed is reframed as being “well-lived.” Belly overhang becomes a badge of leisure. A neck absent from sight is recast as comfort. A visible jawline is regarded with suspicion, even disdain.

    Yet behind this rebranding lies a biochemical horror show: insulin resistance, fat-marbled pancreases, and a Pavlovian addiction to sugary, creamy, sprinkle-laden beverages masquerading as coffee. Our organs are staging quiet rebellions while we sip iced mochas adorned like carnival floats.

    I don’t sketch this grotesque portrait of Suburbia to mock my neighbors. I sketch it because I am them. I, Jeff McMahon, reside in this land of ambient adiposity and quiet desperation—a land I’ve come to call Suburgainia.

    Suburgainia is a soft dystopia stitched together with frozen yogurt kiosks, massage chairs, and drive-thru frappuccinos. It is a place where convenience calcifies into inertia, and waistlines widen in lockstep with our sense of entitlement. It is where obesity isn’t a warning sign—it’s a lifestyle brand.

    Losing weight in Suburgainia isn’t just about willpower—it’s an act of rebellion against a system meticulously designed to keep you soft, slow, and sedated. You can’t change what you refuse to confront, and the truth is this: our environment is a padded cell masquerading as paradise. The enemy isn’t just calories—it’s culture. It’s the drive-thru dopamine, the Costco-induced euphoria, the suburban sprawl that turns a three-block stroll into a vehicular event.

    Real progress begins when we stop romanticizing these indulgences and start recognizing them for what they are: fat traps dressed in convenience, landmines stitched into the elastic waistband of modern life. Reclaiming our health requires more than kale and kettlebells—it demands clear eyes and an honest reckoning with the architecture of excess that surrounds us.

    Somewhere beneath this quilt of belly fat and bulk-pack chicken bakes lives a man with arteries worth saving. But before I can meet him, I have to scale the fat mountain I’ve built—one step, one salad, one unsweetened iced tea at a time.

    Will I make it to the summit without collapsing from myocardial betrayal? I don’t know. But I’ve started the climb. And for now, that’s enough.

  • The Reluctant Dieter’s Survival Guide

    The Reluctant Dieter’s Survival Guide

    Cravattenuation Nation: Dispatches from the Snack Trenches

    In 1978, my high school biology teacher Mr. Hennessy—an underqualified martyr with a Napoleon complex and a permanent scent of chalk dust and moral compromise—falsely accused me of cutting class and vindictively tanked my grade from a B to a C. Yet, in a rare moment of non-pettiness, he lobbed a line at the class that clung to my psyche like burnt cheese on a cafeteria tray: “You need two things in life—a job and a philosophy.”

    It took me decades and a thousand acts of minor self-sabotage to grasp what he meant. A true philosophy, I finally decided, wasn’t about quoting Camus in coffee shops or scrawling Latin mottos on vision boards—it was about cultivating a healthy anger at your own slow-motion collapse into chaos. If you weren’t revolted by your own slide into sloth, indulgence, and instant gratification, then congratulations: your dignity had officially left the building.

    Flash-forward to a recent humid night in a Miami hotel kitchenette, where I stood barefoot on sticky linoleum, bathed in microwave light and the snoring of my family through a wall that may as well have been made of Kleenex. I was bloated on Cuban oxtail stew, fried sweet plantains, tres leches cake, and key lime pie, anxious, spiritually sagging like a wet hammock. I missed the illusory reinvention vibes of Southern California—where even failure could be filtered through an ocean breeze and a protein smoothie.

    That’s when my invisible guru showed up, conjured by shame, cortisol, and the psychic residue of every unwritten to-do list. Half Stoic monk, half caffeinated boot camp instructor, he looked me dead in the eyes—the eyes of a man who’d seen too many midnight Pop-Tarts—and said, “Repeat after me: Less coffee, less food, more dignity. More focus, more humility, more gratitude, more work—less regret. Got it?”

    It was the kind of slogan you’d find stenciled on a CrossFit wall next to a kettlebell and a shattered dream. But fine, I nodded. I felt that brief, delusional jolt of resolve—the one that comes right before you delete all your food delivery apps and tell your wife you’re going keto again.

    Then I caved and confessed. “Look,” I told him, “I love your gospel. Really. But the moment a cookie enters the room, I turn into a lab rat in a dopamine lab. There’s this gremlin in me—wired for despair and internet snacks—who takes over the moment my blood sugar dips or a notification pings. What do I do with that guy?”

    The guru didn’t blink. He barely moved a muscle, as if quoting from the sacred scroll of Instagram fitness influencers:

     “As you live in accordance with the plan, you’ll grow stronger. The old ways will become revolting. The deeper you root yourself in the good, the weaker the bad becomes.”

    I nodded, sure—but not with conviction. It was more of a sweat-slicked head bob, the kind one gives when pretending to agree while actually fantasizing about cinnamon rolls. Augustine came to mind, that eloquent saint of foot-dragging repentance: “Grant me chastity and continence—but not yet.”

    In my case, it was more like: “Grant me food discipline, but let me demolish a Costco cheesecake first and start clean next fiscal year.”
    And just like that, I saw myself clearly: not a fitness monk, not a nutritional Spartan—just your everyday Reluctant Dieter, dragging my fork through life’s buffet while whispering, “Soon, Lord. But not now.”

    In spite of initial reluctance, on April 10th at the age of sixty-three, fresh off a family vacation in Miami and still spiritually sticky with airport pastrami sandwich guilt, I stepped on the scale and was greeted with a soul-curdling 247 pounds. Yes, some of it is lifelong muscle from half a century of hoisting kettlebells and playing Hercules in the garage. But make no mistake—this number was a slap in the face, a statistical insult to my dignity. Fueled by a righteous anger I can only describe as metabolic revenge, I went to war.

    First, I cut my meals down to three per day and gamified the system like a psychological Jedi. My lunchtime yogurt-and-berries bowl got reassigned as a post-nap “treat,” and a humble apple—normally the most boring fruit in the bowl—was elevated to nightly “dessert,” strategically scheduled for 8 p.m. to give my inner child something to cling to as the kitchen closed. I also slashed my coffee intake from 36 to 18 ounces (don’t worry, I’m still barely human), and dropped my creatine from 6 grams to a mere 3—enough to retain my swole, but not enough to float like a sodium balloon.

    Meanwhile, I came to grips with the ugly truth that I was overstuffing both my freezer and my face. The freezer had become a metaphor for my appetite: jammed with frozen berries, low-carb snacks, and delusions of future discipline. Constantly raiding it created two problems: overconsumption and literal water puddles from a clogged defrost drain. My wife and I emptied the thing out like detoxing hoarders, and miraculously, the fridge stopped weeping. I then purchased a chest freezer for the garage to create a buffer zone—a cold storage moat to protect the kitchen from my impulsive nibbling.

    By April 19, I had dropped to 240 pounds—a loss of seven pounds in nine days, even with an Easter cheat day that involved chocolate cake and blueberry pie, which I regret nothing about. Losing seven pounds seemed like a move in the right direction, a sign of a man with a healthy anger fueling my desire to achieve some self-control. 

      But here’s the real revelation from those ten days: the hunger I thought I was feeling wasn’t hunger—it was performance anxiety from my stomach, a neurotic need to react to every twitch of emptiness like it was a national emergency. That, my friends, is where Cravattenuation comes in.

    Cravattenuation is the noble and necessary art of muting your inner snack gremlin—the one who panics at the first polite growl of your stomach and demands cheese. It’s the mental and metabolic recalibration that teaches you this: real hunger is not a 3 p.m. yawn with a craving for almonds. It’s a deeper emptiness, one you can actually enjoy. Because when you let your appetite stretch out and breathe, you arrive at meals not with guilt or compulsion, but with appetite and joy. Hunger becomes less of a trigger and more of a drumroll.

    Cravattenuation the deliberate process of retraining your body to interpret minor hunger signals not as existential emergencies but as low-priority system notifications: “You might want to eat in a bit” instead of “RAID THE PANTRY OR DIE.” Just as meditation teaches you to sit with discomfort rather than react impulsively, Cravattenuation teaches you that a little hunger isn’t a crisis—it’s foreplay for a better meal.

    We’ve been conditioned by snack culture and anxiety-driven consumption to treat hunger as something to be feared and fixed immediately, like a smoke alarm or a toddler tantrum. But when you practice Cravattenuation, something remarkable happens: your threshold for hunger strengthens, and the urgency softens. You learn to sit with a mild stomach pang without spiraling into carb-lust. Over time, you develop what can only be described as Hunger Discernment: the ability to separate emotional nibble-itching from true physiological need.

    By making your body earn the meal—not through punishment, but patience—you begin to eat with a clarity and joy that’s been missing since the dawn of office vending machines. Food tastes better when you’re actually hungry for it. Not “kinda bored” hungry, not “scrolling through cheese reels” hungry, but real hungry. Cravattenuation helps you not only manage your weight with more ease and grace, it re-enchants the eating experience itself. You’ll start treating meals like mini homecomings rather than pit stops at a dopamine gas station.

    As I snacked less, I enjoyed my meals more. They had more savor than before, and here I had arrived at the desirable condition of Savorosity–what happens when you’ve tamed the snack-demon with Cravattenuation—the fine art of not panicking at the first rumble of your stomach. It’s hunger with manners. You arrive at meals like a guest at a candlelit dinner, not a contestant in a pie-eating contest. You chew like someone who reads books—slowly, curiously, with presence. You’re not chasing a craving. You’re honoring an earned appetite. And you know you’ve crossed into Savorosity when you feel less like a gremlin in a pantry and more like a monk with a spoon.

    But if Savorosity is dinner at a five-star bistro, we must acknowledge its opposite–Munchdrift, which is loitering in the food court of your own life. It’s the slow-motion landslide of indiscriminate nibbling—a cashew here, a dry crust of cheese there, a spoonful of peanut butter just to “hold you over.” It’s hunger as white noise, muffled beneath boredom, impulse, and the kind of existential drift that ends with you staring at an empty bag of pretzels like you just blacked out at a carb rave. In the Munchdrift state, flavor is irrelevant. Appetite never sharpens. Meals become a blur, and you, a passenger on the Grazing Express with no clear destination and no seatbelt.

    This war between Savorosity and Munchdrift isn’t just about food—it’s a philosophical struggle. I arm myself with these lexicon terms the way a weary soldier straps on armor, battling the inner sloth that says, “You’re going to die anyway, so why not faceplant into a tray of brownies?” But that’s a lie dressed in pastry. Because death may be inevitable, but turning into a winded, sweat-drenched metaphor for chaos along the way is not. Dignity matters. So does self-possession. And so does a philosophy of restraint—not one rooted in punishment, but in purpose.

    My old high school biology teacher, Mr. Hennessy—grumpy, flawed, and accidentally wise—once said everyone needs two things: a job and a philosophy. This is mine. Not some monkish denial cult, but a gritty, practical roadmap to push back against entropy. It’s the reluctant dieter’s creed. A form of mature rebellion. And maybe, just maybe, a recipe for actual happiness.

  • The Shame of Being Crock Blocked

    The Shame of Being Crock Blocked

    I learned the invaluable lesson of staying in my lane in 1989, a year that will forever be etched in my memory as the year I brought industrial sludge to an English Department potluck picnic. I was a freshly minted lecturer at a university in the California desert, and it was my inaugural potluck. Naturally, I was determined to impress my colleagues with a culinary masterpiece. I had a slow cooker, a gift from my mother, which I imagined to be my ticket to gastronomic glory. So, I decided to tackle curried lentils—a dish so ambitious it could have been named “Lentil Apocalypse.” I poured lentils into the slow cooker until it was practically bursting at the seams. Next, I added what could only be described as an entire bottle of curry, along with a mountain of chopped onions and celery. Unsure of how long these lentils needed to avoid the dreaded “raw green beetle” look, I left them cooking all day. By the time I made my way to the picnic, the contents had morphed into what resembled a toxic waste spill, a sludge so thick it could be used to pave roads. With all the bravado of a culinary adventurer, I placed my slow cooker among the other dishes. As hours ticked by, my creation remained untouched. The English Chair, Solomon, seemed to take pity on me. He ladled a small portion onto his plate in a gesture of charity, but his reaction was nothing short of tragic. His face contorted in a way that suggested he’d just tasted a toxic waste dump, and he looked as if he might need a hazmat suit and a team of medics. From that day on, I was never again entrusted with bringing food. Instead, my muscles were put to better use hauling giant bags of ice, crates of wine glasses, and cartons of boxed wine to future events. Eventually, I learned my lesson and found my true calling—one that involved heavy lifting and zero culinary experiments. And so, I stayed in my lane, with a clear understanding that my talents were best suited for anything other than poisoning my colleagues with curried lentils.

    My ordeal points is an example of being Crock Blocked–the uniquely mortifying shame experienced when your potluck contribution—usually involving a Crock-Pot, misplaced ambition, and a suspiciously gelatinous texture—is avoided by everyone, like it’s radioactive. Crock Blocked is when your dish becomes a pariah on the buffet table, gathering flies instead of praise, while nearby casseroles are ravaged like it’s the last supper. You watch helplessly as guests whisper about “that lentil thing,” your dreams of impressing the crowd slowly congealing into a turmeric-scented failure. You leave with your dignity dented, your Crock-Pot still full, and your social standing demoted to Ice Guy.

  • The PreSnackalithic Era

    The PreSnackalithic Era

    In the Before Snack Times of the early 70s, we didn’t have helicopter parents hovering over us, micromanaging our every move with a suffocating schedule of dance classes, gymnastics, karate, swim lessons, math tutors, writing coaches, soccer practices, chess clubs, computer coding, mindfulness meditation, and Ashtanga Yoga. We didn’t have smartphones tracking us like we were secret agents with microchips implanted in our necks. For the entire day, our parents had absolutely no clue where we were or what we were up to. We’d saunter off after breakfast, either on foot or aboard our trusty bicycles, and were expected to return only by dinner. During that endless stretch of freedom, we’d navigate through construction sites strewn with lumber, nails, electrical wires, and bottomless ditches, all of which screamed, “Adventure awaits!” We gravitated toward mud, streams, and rivers like moths to a flame, setting up wooden ramps to perform Evel Knievel-level stunts over bodies of water. The messier and more perilous the terrain, the more irresistible it became. These hazardous playgrounds were usually bordered by rusty barbed-wire fences and “Do Not Enter” signs, which not only failed to deter us but ignited our rebellious spirits to trespass with even more gusto. Inside these danger zones, we’d be chased by furious steers, territorial cows, and muscle-bound guard dogs. Occasionally, a disgruntled landowner would fire warning shots at us with a pellet gun, a token gesture that barely fazed us. In the ravines behind our homes, we crafted forts, swung from vines, ignited firecrackers, and leaped into piles of poison oak. We encountered black widows, rattlesnakes, bobcats, coyotes, and even the occasional mountain lion. After a day of flouting every conceivable health and safety code, we’d trudge home at night, our bodies caked in filth, bruises, and scratches. But our parents, bless their oblivious hearts, never inquired about our whereabouts or escapades. As long as we took a bath and cleaned up, they were content to feed us hearty helpings of turkey pot pies, meatloaf, chili, and tacos. They knew we needed the energy to wake up the next morning and dive headfirst into another day of mayhem. Back then, we had little time for snacking. Our days were filled with wilderness adventures, where our imaginations ran wild. This level of playfulness, chaos, and enchantment is as extinct as the dinosaurs in today’s Snack Age, where parents meticulously micromanage their children’s activities and pacify their appetites with chips, juice boxes, chocolate chip granola bars, fruit rolls, and Happy Meals.

    Before Snack Times is sometimes referred to as the PreSnackalithic Era–the rough-and-tumble epoch of the early 1970s when childhood ran on chaos, sunburns, and a single daily meal of meatloaf or tacos—long before the rise of the Snack Age. In the PreSnackalithic Era, children roamed unsupervised like feral philosophers, fueled not by organic apple slices or protein-packed squeeze pouches, but by sheer mischief and an occasional stolen sip from a warm garden hose. Helmets were for astronauts, schedules were a myth, and sustenance came only when the streetlights flickered on and the meatloaf hit the table. Snack culture had not yet risen from the primordial ooze, and the only “mindfulness” was making sure you didn’t get bitten by a rattlesnake while building a fort in a construction site. Parents parented with the laissez-faire wisdom of, “If he’s not home by dinner, we’ll worry.” And worry they rarely did.