6. In terms of pleasure is it more efficient to prefer cooking on sex or the contrary ?

Whilst it is certain that sex is a form of pleasure that belongs to the most exciting part of one’s life, cooking accompanies you for your lifetime. Nonetheless some could object that food in infancy and in old age is reduced to strange mixtures because of the lack of teeth, hence the impossibility to give a good bite on whatever eatable comes across your mouth. That pityful state corresponds also to a extremely happy period where one does do not know what will happen next and on the other hand a most sad one where people do live on bitter memories of past times. Some could also object that even children and elderly people do have a sexuality. Of course like any other animal or plant on earth !
Now to simplify things, let’s consider “the most exciting part of one’s life”, the one where we can both eat and taste food as well as enjoy the pleasure of having sex. In our developed western countries we note a dual approach which results in a number of obese (who do not necessarily eat properly) and a quantity of pornographic material made available to anyone with a TV set or a computer screen (again people who are not necessarily satisfied with their sex life). Let’s have a look on the average Western adult : fit because always on a diet, sexually active because it is healthy, most of the time overworked or underemployed, continuosly on the verge of splitting up with the partner or settled in an everlasting relation with some tender half. That’s how many of us find their balance in excess. Then food and sex become like the rest : on a diet you spend your time watching the others “eating” what you fancy most, and in other circumstances you “put on weight” and regret it whilst you watch those who can show off on the beach.
Should we live on air and meditation to be in tune with today’s life, just like unsatisfied static stones, or roll over life like unbalanced animals and implose when we become too old to experience pleasure or even meditation ? I end up with a question because I am too lazy to answer.

5. Why my second question is not on cooking ?

I define cooking as the delicate process by which we choose, manipulate with the appropriate array of tools and expose food to the adequate temperature in order to improve the taste and quality of what we eat. Salads, sandwiches or sushis are not cooked though we eat them with pleasure. Why on earth should we cook our food if many civilisations have brilliantly demonstrated how row material can be aphrodisiac enough to let you discover heaven without the fuss of spending time in a kitchen. So many books have been published on the ground that they claim to be THE collection of aphrodisiac recipes one must have. Without the help of Aphrodite’s gastronomy your sex life is bound to be only a pale reflexion of what it could be. Let’s be stubborn and decide not to cook anything prior to a sexual encounter. To be even more radical we could even experience starvation a few days before meeting our partner just to see if our sexual appetite is not enhanced by the lack of food. Anything eatable would become aphrodisiac thereafter, including poison. These were more or less the conditions that enabled our ancestors to decide that some kind of cooked food is aphrodisiac.

4. Why my first question should be on sex ?

If not the most obvious, sex is the most natural and the most universal form of expression animals and plants have invented to connect and interact with the other half of their species. And the marvellous infinity of stratagems to attract the opposite sex is somewhat a rest of paradise on earth. Think of birds : how many colourful feathers they desplay, what array of dances they perform, how delicate they are in seducing their partner... and us, so blatantly dull, so boring, complicated and vicious... If humans still have sex, it is a miracle. It is the result of an effort of willingness boosted by the desire to reproduce one’s beloved person. The fact that we need to be two in order to have a posterity is a mere accident, and indeed many of us were born by accident. Pleasure is an accident too, as now consumerism has replaced the fuss of expressing one’s feeling by limitating sex to a sequence of mechanical acts you could very well perform in a gym or a stage in the presence of a public that has already seen it all and that expects to be surprised at every move you make, every breath you take – remember the song – I’ll be watching you. People who watch sex on TV get damn bored to the extent that - contrary to what most trend-setters think – they are not excited any longer by the post midnight pornographic blurb and think it twice before having sex after such a movie. This is nothing else than sex pollution. Personally I am ecosexy since I never watch TV. I am quite naive and full of fantasy. That is why I will forever be spinsterly yours.

3. How would you cook a man ?

Cooking a man seems quite a natural activity to me though I deeply dislike spending my time in a kitchen, in front of an oven, among frying pans... Actually it could be a fritto misto, a mix of fried bits flavoured with lemon juice with slices of golden polenta resting around your fishing. This will obviously mean that you will have to fish the man first and then think about finding a pan large enough to contain your catch. But that’s a detail.
You may also want to consider not cooking him at all. I mean, there are so many pâtés and terrines recipes on the net that you could very well get rid of him without cooking him. But I am mistaken since you still need some cooking to confectionate the farce since pâtés and terrines are not made of row material.
Speaking of row material it would be nice to shape up an aspic, that Italian antipasto made of anything you fancy plus jelly. Lay him out in a jolly kamasutra position then cover him with spicy colourful jelly. Your fantasy is free to create the pièce montée of the century and I am sure you will happily serve it to your girl pals during a memorable banquet.
What about a dessert ? A gelato of course: gelato al gusto di maschio – male flavoured ice cream. Sounds better in Italian, don’t you think ?
As for the wine I would recommend a white Bourgogne of Burgundy, France of course.

2. Would I eat sushis with a one-night guy ?

The prerequisite for eating sushis with a man is fantastic sex which in my opinion needs to be developed over more than one night. Therefore I am definetely against the idea of wasting my time in tasting those delicious Japanese bouchées with the occasional male. It is a question of estethics. Even Tanizaki would agree with me that you need a certain quality of night to eat sushis and that the feelings you get by swallowing this food needs to be preserved from polluting attitudes such as impatience or self-indulgence. Nonetheless you can always have sex and eat sushis by daytime which is a totally different affair. There you do not have any longer the obscurity to protect you from seeing how dull is the lover you have chosen – for an afternoon, say. And you will eat your sushis just because there is nothing else to taste, I am afraid. A pity that you react so mildly to the sensations the food delivers so generously to your indifferent palate. The rice becomes a sort of gross flower you mix in your mouth with the leave of algae and the zest of salmon gets lost in your throat without living the faintest impression on your lazy senses. Anything you ingest is intended to make you believe you have spent a divine afternoon with the incarnation of Apollo. Nothing could persuade you of the contrary. And you keep chewing your sushis firmly pinched between two sticks whilst your lover is asleep.

1. Did Lucrezia Borgia ever eat her lovers ?

Poor Lucrezia was the remote daughter of Pope Alessandro VI and the sister of the famous Cesare Borgia as you may know. She was a lady of the Italian Renaissance, born in 1480, married several times with husbands her dear Papa chose for her or killed for god’s sake. She poisoned quite a few of her lovers, since it was said that a simple caress of her was able to kill the unfortunate bloke. Her ring was her weapon, how she used it no one knows. Yet she was a patron of the arts once she was married to the duca d’Este and a much admired duchess.
She was considered by many as a sort of marvel, a black widow (the spider) made woman. As black widows tend to devour their lovers, I am wondering if she was ever tempted to eat a lover or two since orgies were a natural pass time during her lifetime. Unfortunately we do not have evidence of that. We do not even know how Lucrezia looked like since the portrait of Bartolomeo Veneziano pictured here might be a pure fantasy.
Was she able to resist the temptation of biting in the crunchy buttock of one of those elegant young men who orbitated around her ? I believe not. If I were her I would not have hesitated a second and I am sad to say that nowadays the beef-like lovers one has to cope with are nothing but buttockless men most of the time, halas!