Why can’t an apple just be an apple?
I still wonder why I wasn’t sent to the vice-principal’s office when I asked that question in 9th grade literature class. I think we were reading William Shakespeare’s Julius Ceasar or maybe Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. I can’t remember exactly. I do remember making a list of archetypes and symbol imagery found within the story and discussing as a class each the meaning of each word or phrase. The process was maddening. I still don’t understand why a character’s desire to eat a piece of fruit has to trace back to the Biblical story of Adam and Eve and mankind’s expulsion from Paradise. Is it always man’s battle between ignorant bliss and true knowledge? Is it so wrong for a person to simply hunger for a tasty treat? It’s this type of subliminal training that has led us as parents to go the next step when interrogating our children as to why they did something so stupid to which they can only reply, “I don’t know” or “it seemed like a good idea at the time.” Those answers to the “Why?”are never good enough. There has to be a reason. The apple is always more than just an apple.
Everything we consume needs to be justified. Every indulgence requires defense.
Really?
Chocolate is good.
I read somewhere that one serving of dark chocolate has more antioxidants than a serving of blueberries or cranberries. Apparently, antioxidants are good for promoting blood flow and good cardiovascular health. The article also proclaimed cocoa butter is a “good” fat, meaning it doesn’t negatively impact your cholesterol. Certain chocolate and cocoa products are high in minerals like magnesium, which helps with type 2 diabetes and hyper tension, or zinc, which is valued for its ability to prohibit viruses and bacteria from spreading in the body. Scientists continue to learn from the ancient Aztecs who used chocolate as medicine and test chocolate’s effectiveness on blood flow and blood pressure.
Stop.
When I said chocolate is good, I meant it tastes good. That’s all, nothing else.
Apples are good with chocolate. Let’s analyze that for a while.
Personally, I’d rather just eat it. Chocolate has but one purpose. There is no point in analyzing its nutritional content or researching its history, or evaluating its value as a commodity. Chocolate is to be consumed for the simple pleasure it provides. The only analysis need is in what form it should be consumed, i.e. cake, cookies, candy, pie, etc. The only thesis to argue: is white chocolate really chocolate? The only conclusion: if it tastes good, who cares?
I like the questions that you are posing. You write like I do where you pose questions during your output of information to not only challenge your reader but yourself as well. This process helps me to answer my own questions and spark more writing.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said I am a bit confused by your post. I see the transition between the two but perhaps a better introduction of your thesis as you're coming into it. Because I'm not quite sure what the overall message or link between the apple and the chocolate are.