(no subject)

[botias]

I heard an interview last night in which a man who coaches world-class tenors said that he encourages his performers to think of their favorite food during really sexy, romantic operatic pieces in order to get the correct passion and enthusiasm. One of them sings to the ultimate pastrami sandwich, etc. Now why it is better to think about food instead of love and passion in order to create the best semblance thereof? And then I realized that sex is really kind of a cheap high, big ol' nerve bundles in strategic locations jacked straight to the pleasure centers of the brain. "Come on little mammal, press the shiny pink button, you know you want to... *Bzzzt!*" Whereas a pastrami sandwich (I assume, having never partaken) is a much more intellectual and, dare I say it, complex pleasure. Well, perhaps I'm just a sexual philistine then. What about scented candles, lickable love jelly, whips, chains, long tickly feathers? Pshaw! Window dressing. If you ate the pastrami sandwich during foreplay would that make it a sexual act? (Well, I suppose it might actually.) Additionally, this is an activity whose operatic climax is distinguished by an inability to produce one's own name and perhaps some unfortunate drooling. As fine as this may seem at the time, this is probably not Technicolor recording mode. Pastrami sandwich reveries are probably much more complete and accessible.

Uh, anyway, maybe it's time to talk about the imminent arrival of my in-laws now. There's a buzz kill. No, I don't want to talk about that. Back to packing.

Comments

[elynne.livejournal.com]

Weee! I had to read that out loud to myclaudia, who was reading something else at the time and was thus annoyed, but she's done it to me often enough that she can damn well cope.

I could sing to sushi. Mmmmm... suuuuushiiiiii... on a somewhat serious tangent, I'd guess that part of the reason that the singers are directed to sing about food rather than about love/sex/passion is that there's all kinds of emotional baggage connected with romance that might distract them from the actual content of what they're singing, while most folks don't have much emotional baggage around good food. Picture the face of a loved one while singing, and you might find your mind wandering to how zie left socks in the living room again, and how much that irritates you... but picture an inanimate plate of really good food, and hey. I suppose if you're a famous, well-paid opera singer, you can afford to have a plate of that really good food waiting for you offstage. :) Though that might tempt you to rush through the performance... heh.

Tell Alan's mom I said hi. That should confuse her. :) For Ghod's sake, don't give her my email address or web locaion... a second-hand "hi" is fine!

[botias.livejournal.com]

Or how there's computer bits everywhere AGAIN. Yes, we certainly can't forget the baggage. :) I didn't actually, but I was thinking of it more from a puritanical guilt complex standpoint. Pretty much every letter is scarlet for us American types at some subterranean level. Even food isn't guilt free for most people.

[elynne.livejournal.com]

Yeah, true - though I think that the guilt that folks have around food is less intense, and less complicated, than sex-emotional-baggage-stuff-guilt. But yeah, the American obsession with "If you like doing it, it must be BAD FOR YOU, and you should STOP DOING IT" seems to really puzzle and to some degree irritate most of the rest of the world. Especially since, as a nation, we're such utter hypocrites about it. "It's BAD FOR YOU, you should feel GUILTY and DIRTY and ASHAMED, but you should also BUY OUR PRODUCTS that will ENHANCE YOUR PLEASURE, you HORRIBLE PERSON who DESERVES THE VERY BEST!!" No wonder Americans are neurotic. :P