1. MENUS
HUMAN beings must eat. Under ordinary circumstances this is neither a disagreeable nor a despicable duty. Just now, however, it is a duty which is being made unduly conspicuous. Even those of us with good digestions and excellent appetites can hardly sit down to a meal without taking some thought concerning nutritive values and the use of beverages, things which should not be thought of except by housewives, doctors and nurses, whose business they are. People watching their own symptoms and doctoring themselves, people constantly observing their own thoughts and feelings, and people studying their own diet and digestions are all in the same class—they are all made ill by too much personal attention.
Mr. G. K. Chesterton has said a wise word on the subject of keeping good health. It is: "The one supreme way of making all those processes go right, the processes of health and strength and grace and beauty, the one and only way of making certain of their accuracy, is to think about something else." He supports this idea with the command: "Take no thought what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink."
The only person in a household who should busy herself with matters of diet is the housekeeper. The other people ought to be too busy and too interested to think of diet and digestion between meals, and too courteously occupied in being agreeable at table to think of them then.
Knowledge concerning diet and digestion, both valuable and useless, can be had without asking.
The grocer sends you with your purchases a pamphlet on nourishment; a restaurant menu furnishes a few thoughts on mastication; warnings against coffee drinking glare at you in the street cars; library shelves are crowded with books on health, food, and so on. When we go out to luncheon or have guests to dinner, matters of diet and digestion are talked of so freely that we seem to eat with a chart of the digestive tract before our mind's eye, and we suspiciously watch while innocent food, which unobserved might have given vitality and cheer, becomes a cause of weariness and depression.
To know enough to feed a family wisely, agreeably and economically without becoming over-careful, or perhaps a faddist in regard to food is indeed very difficult. For one thing, avoid fixed rules and arbitrary ideas in catering. Digestions are as different as noses and thumb signatures; one can, therefore, neither invariably forbid one thing nor insist upon another. On the contrary, digestions are as alike in general as noses and thumb signatures, and it is, therefore, unnecessary and harmful that any member of a family should be especially provided for and cooked for unless that person is an invalid living upon a prescribed diet.
I believe a simple and successful rule for those who have nothing to do with the meals except to eat them is: Eat what is set before you and find something amusing to say or to think about. It is a little difficult at first, both to eat things one does not especially care for, and to think up something amusing, but it soon becomes a habit. Meals are not times for stoking an engine, even with the most thoughtfully selected fuel, but times for the renewal of life. There is a meditative by-path which leads off from this thought concerning the reasons that meals are in some cases the most sacred and spiritual rites of religion. We must not wander there, however, but may note in passing the reason for saying Grace at meals which is suggested by this thought. A Grace blesses a gift of new life and is a thanksgiving for it.
But that meals shall fulfil their office of renewing life and gladness, it is necessary that the woman who selects and arranges them shall have some knowledge and shall expend some care. It need not be elaborate knowledge, nor burdensome care, just a usual quantity of each.
It has been discovered that human bodies are composed of chemical elements just as are cabbages and doctors' prescriptions. Some of the elements of which we are composed are oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur, iron, potassium, calcium, and there are others yet. It would seem a simple matter to find out just how much of each of these things we contained and then to keep up the supply by eating or inhaling them in the required quantities, but you can be sure there is nothing as dull and matter-of-fact as that in this interesting creation. We are not doctors' prescriptions, we are even a bit more remarkable than cabbages, and it is not just correctly measured proportions of oxygen, nitrogen and potassium that we need, but energy, and heat, and flesh, and blood. Therefore, it is that when we consult some wise table of statistics in which the nourishing value of food is given, we do not find it given in terms of oxygen and hydrogen and the rest, but in terms which indicate heat, energy and building material.
Tables of the composition of foods are usually made in the following terms: Refuse, Water, Protein, Fat, Carbohydrates, Ash. Added to these there will often be a division headed "Calories." The calorie nevertheless is not a food substance, it is the unit by which energy-giving heat is measured. Just as a ribbon is measured in yards and molasses in cupfuls, so heat is measured in calories.
"Refuse" means that part of food which cannot be eaten or which could not be used by the body if it were eaten, as bones, fibres, seeds, parings, pods and shells.
"Protein" is an inclusive word for the chief substances in food which the body can use in rebuilding itself as use wears it out.
"Carbohydrates" are the fuel of the body. They are converted at once into heat and energy, or if there is a surplus they are often stored in the body in the form of fat to be used when nourishment is less abundant.
"Fat" is also fuel, a more concentrated form of fuel than the carbohydrates. A certain quantity is stored in the body as a reserve heat supply.
The word "Ash" in food tables stands for the mineral matters which are used in our bodies for building bones and teeth, and for a few other purposes; these minerals are for the most part building materials, but are not so important as protein and are needed in smaller quantities.
Human bodies are constituted to withstand adversities and to bear the experiments and mistakes which we make; therefore it is that though these food substances usually serve the purposes attributed to them above, yet when need arises the body is able, for a time at least, to use one for the other. This is a provision, however, for special and adverse occasions. Ordinarily food should be supplied in the variety and proportion which will enable the body to use each class of nourishment for its own purpose.
Roughly estimated, an average person's diet should be about one-fifth protein, one-fifth fat and three-fifths carbohydrates. That the carbohydrates exceed the others in quantity is easily accounted for. They are not such concentrated fuel as fat, therefore a greater quantity is needed; they are consumed to make heat instead of being built into the body as protein is; therefore, we need more carbohydrates, just as we need to renew the coal supply in a house more frequently than to renew the carpets.
The foods from which we derive protein are chiefly meat, fish, milk, beans, peas, bread and other articles made of wheat, corn, oats, and like grains.
Vegetables, with the exception of beans and peas, furnish chiefly carbohydrates.
Fats are derived for the most part from the animal food which we eat. Butter, for instance, is chiefly fat, and the proportion of fat in bacon is more than half.
But because nearly every kind of food contains other constituents besides the one which is chief, the housekeeper who wishes to make wise menus will need more and more detailed statements of food values as she is able to get and understand them. If she has hitherto thought little about such matters, she will probably not know that the United States Government has very kindly employed people to make years of experiments and to write books and pamphlets for her help, nor will she know that she may have these last merely by asking the Department of Agriculture for them. They are not made into attractive booklets, but they are by no means dull reading. Farmers' Bulletin No. 142, for instance, called "Principles of Nutrition and Nutritive Value of Food," and written by Dr. W. O. Atwater, is brief, helpful and most interesting. The figures in the table given below were taken from this Bulletin. But there are things which may be derived from this and the many other food pamphlets issued by the Government which are quite as important as definite statistics. They are things which give the housewife a feeling of comradeship with many people who are working earnestly with and for her; things which increase her interest in her own small part of the work and which give her a helpful sense of its dignity.
For many reasons it is impossible for a housewife to make an exact calculation of the amount of nourishment which she gives her family. The figures in even the most carefully made tables are, of necessity, averages or approximates, for food varies in quality in different localities and at different seasons. Moreover, the figures in the various government reports upon food values and in books giving such statistics differ somewhat, nevertheless, there is sufficient general agreement upon which to base an intelligent effort to make wise as well as agreeable menus.
On this account, a housewife who is neither very learned nor very experienced can yet wisely regulate her menus by keeping in mind the general character of a day's nourishment and helping out her lack of chemical knowledge with a table of food values such as the one below. The general aim in providing food, as has already been said, is to furnish all the varieties of nourishment which the body requires and the chief ones in about the proportion of a fifth protein to a fifth fat to three-fifths carbohydrates. That is, either the per cent. of protein or the per cent. of fat multiplied by three should about equal the carbohydrates. This is, of course, a very rough and general way of estimating, but I believe it to be a practical way to begin the study and application of a branch of difficult and as yet slightly established knowledge.
Transcriber's Note: The column title "Carbohydrates" was shortened to "Carb." to make table less wide.
A table given as this one, in percentages instead of quantities, may seem at first sight too indefinite to be of much service to a housekeeper who naturally wishes to know the quantity of food to give her household as well as the proportions of its composition. I have purposely avoided giving a food table which deals with quantities because I believe this one to be more useful to a beginner. One's first calculations in food values can hardly be other than approximate and inexact. Not many girls, when they begin their housekeeping, have either the time or the ability to make the calculations which even the simplest schemes for computing a dietary require. Besides, an effort to provide scientifically correct meals on the part of a housewife to whom the effort is unfamiliar and difficult is apt to produce monotony in the meals, worry in her, and disregard and forgetfulness of the family's particular tastes.
A first and simple step for her to take is to make herself familiar with the chief value of different articles of food and of the more usual combinations. When she takes this last matter into consideration she will find that many combinations which are traditional, which were probably made merely by instinct, are, when tested, palatable wisdom. For instance, bread is a very complete food in itself except that it is a little lacking in fat, but people have been spreading butter on it for centuries, and thereby completing it.
Consider the traditional combination of baked beans and brown bread. Referring to the table we find beans a fairly well-balanced food, but a little lacking in fat. In brown bread neither the protein nor the fat come anywhere near being a third of the carbohydrates. Therefore, when we combine these two articles we shall be a little lacking in protein and a good deal lacking in fat. Butter on the bread will help this last difficulty and the wisdom of our ancestors will help out the rest. What did they combine with these two? Codfish cakes, to be sure. And in these there is codfish which has a good deal of protein in it; egg which has protein and fat; butter which is chiefly fat and potato which is chiefly carbohydrates. We might make a diagram of it, like this:
| Cod fish | Protein | ||
| Egg | Protein | Fat | |
| Butter | Fat | ||
| Potato | Carbohydrates |
As a dish to combine with two articles somewhat lacking in protein and fat, we may feel ourselves content with this.
In many people's minds the word "sausage" is just naturally followed by the words "buckwheat cakes." Is there sanction for this? From the food table we learn that sausage has a fair percentage of protein, almost no carbohydrates, and is almost half fat. Buckwheat cakes have in them, beside buckwheat flour, a little milk and often some wheat flour or corn meal. This table will, perhaps, represent the matter better than an explanation.
| Protein. | Fat. | Carbohydrates. | |
| Sausage | 13.0 | 44.2 | 1.1 |
| Buckwheat flour | 6.4 | 1.2 | 77.9 |
| Milk | 3.3 | 4.0 | 5.0 |
The table says to the eye, too much fat. One cannot remedy the defect by increasing the protein and carbohydrates to match the fat, for we should then have as much food at one meal as we should need for three. The real remedy is to balance this meal with others during the day in which the percentage of fat is very low. Another remedy is to serve meals with a large percentage of fat on very cold days; in that case the weather will help to balance the excess of heat production.
Pursuing this matter of tradition, why are peas served with lamb, and why is pork so often accompanied with "greens" of some sort? The percentage of protein in lamb is low enough to allow, perhaps require, some supplement from the vegetables. The excess of fat in pork is offset by the excess of water in greens, and also by certain medicinal qualities they possess which are represented in the percentage of "Ash." One might almost say that the combination known as "hog's jowl and turnip greens" is providential. I am sure it has saved bodily suffering and even lives in certain pig-raising localities.
One can see from looking thoughtfully at this food table that the dinner at which we have lamb, veal, poultry, or fish is the occasion upon which to have a substantial vegetable, such as macaroni, lima beans, parsnips or sweet potatoes, or an especially substantial dessert such as a boiled pudding or a pie. It is also evident that when we have beef, mutton or pork it is healthful to combine them with vegetables like spinach, cabbage, lettuce, tomatoes and turnips, which contain a large percentage of water. The dessert for such occasions may well be a jelly or fruit in some form—something light and cool.
The day on which we have roast pork is not the occasion to have apple dumpling or any dessert with a percentage of fat; the meal at which we serve beef steak and mushrooms is not the one to complete with mince pie, for we should then have more protein than we should know what to do with. On the contrary, the day on which the main dish at dinner is made from yesterday's meat, or is fish, is not the time for a watery or a fluffy dessert, unless we are purposely planning a day of abstinence. If it happens that the family diet includes little meat, care must be taken that protein is supplied from other sources, otherwise we shall be running an engine at full speed in a building which is never decently repaired and which will one day fall round our ears.
There are several questions which frequently arise in the mind of a person who begins to study food values. One is, why are articles included in the menu of almost every meal which have almost no value as nourishment? In many cases such articles are appetizing and refreshing; such are lettuce, celery, muskmelons, cucumbers and many soups and desserts. They also contain much water, of which the body has great and constant need. They also give bulk to our food, which is a necessity because some of the processes of digestion do not begin until the organs to which they belong are expanded.
A housewife who is bewildered or disheartened will sometimes ask why we cannot take our food in capsules, or why an ideal dietary cannot be made and used over and over again. She will not be the first person who has thought of these expedients, but it has been fairly well proved that highly condensed food, as also "predigested" foods, not only lack this element of bulk of which we have been speaking, but have an even worse defect. They give us something for nothing, which is always bad for us. That is, they furnish us with nourishment without requiring any effort to speak of from the digestive organs. As a result the digestive organs grow flabby and useless from having nothing to do. A child in school who is never given anything difficult to do grows flabby in mind and character and soon can't do anything difficult; so it is with a digestion.
The objection to the use of an ideal dietary is, in the first place, that such a dietary has not been discovered. People claim to have discovered it, but that is different from really doing so. But the chief objection to the use of such a thing is that the body requires a variety of food, that a variety of food has been provided for it on the earth and that the part of us which is not body will not stand eating the same thing every day or even every week. Have you ever lived in a boarding house or in an institution where there was an invariable week's menu. It is a mechanical contrivance which soon stirs up rebellion, and rightly.
Probably a word more needs to be said on this subject of variety, for it is a saving grace in menu making. If one can give one's household real variety of food, not merely that which is made by different methods of serving and cooking, but that which is actually a difference in constituents, mistakes in selection will then never get very long or thoroughly established. If one cannot be right all the time, by means of variety one can be fairly sure of being right some of the time. Variety is also made necessary by changes in season, in occupation, in state of health, and I think I may add without making a loop-hole for pampering people unduly, that it is made necessary at times by change of mood.
A trivial thing comes to my mind which none the less illustrates what I am trying to say about variety. So often I have seen a woman, whom I like to be with, a woman who has many, many things to do, take a few moments to make the last bit of her cookie-dough into an elephant or a rabbit of extraordinary figure. The cheering effect of this animal upon the boy who comes in from school very tired and perhaps cross or discouraged, is delightful to see. I repent that I called it a trivial thing, for this puffy, blunt-legged animal is to the child pleasant food, an amusing sight and the assurance that some one has thought gladly of him during the long school hours.
Variety in menus gives to the grown-up mind the same pleasurable feelings which the cookie elephant gives to the mind of the child, with this practical addition, that such feelings of pleasure also quicken the appetite and the energy and digestive powers of the body, thus enabling it to profit more by the nourishment varied foods convey.