Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

mentalfloss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#31

Post by sai_c »

prower wrote: post #12
camillomiller wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Italian, my experience is that I can’t have any satisfaction with less than 180g of pasta. Therefore I only eat it like once a week and make it a little event. Growing up I had similar portions almost on a daily basis and I was never overweight. Trick: do sports. A lot.

Wow, we usually eat around 250g of pasta divided by 3 people. 180g only for you? Congratulations! Full disclosure: we're also all very sedentary

I eat 250g (uncooked) alone. Add to that sauce and vegetables, sometimes meat.

I'm nearly forty, and 1,74m and weigh between 76 and 78 kg (depending on the time of the year). I'm a software developer and only do loaded carries three times a week.

My wife always asks where all the calories go ;-).

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#32

Post by ummonk »

arnejenssen wrote: post #24

I recently used the Libre Sense continuous glucose sensor as an experiment (I don't have diabetes). I noticed that after eating pasta, my blood sugar stayed elevated for 4-5 hours. It looks like calling pasta and bread "slow carbs" is appropriate. One of my conclusions from the experiment is that I will probably never buy wheat again (but I'll eat it if I get it served).

Do you mean that in a negative way? A food with carbs that release over 4-5 hours seems ideal for lunch.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#33

Post by telesilla »

scottlocklin wrote: post #21

Futurists were the most punk rock artistic movement before punk rock happened in the 70s. They even invented Industrial noise before Throbbing Gristle with Russolo's "Art of Noises" and orchestra of noise makers. The interesting thing about them is while they enjoyed shocking people and beating up their artistic rivals, they weren't nihilists like punks were: they were punk rock for technological progress rather than…

They were also the first to notice, in writing in any case, that the world around them now sounded of machines so why not use that in music? Much like, our lives are increasing electronic, and so is so much now of the music we listen to. We truly reflect the world around us in our creative expressions.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#34

Post by thinkingemote »

arnejenssen wrote: post #24

I recently used the Libre Sense continuous glucose sensor as an experiment (I don't have diabetes). I noticed that after eating pasta, my blood sugar stayed elevated for 4-5 hours. It looks like calling pasta and bread "slow carbs" is appropriate. One of my conclusions from the experiment is that I will probably never buy wheat again (but I'll eat it if I get it served).

Do you eat any carbs? Potatoes, rice?. How did they affect the sensor

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#35

Post by arrrg »

camillomiller wrote: post #26
arrrg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

180g cooked or uncooked? Portions with 125g of uncooked pasta feel fine to me. That‘s 450 calories. Plus sauce (200 on the low end, 350 calories on the high end, depending on what exactly you want to eat – 200 calories would be something like a 400g can of tomatoes, garlic, onions, some olive oil) and cheese (100 calories for 25g Parmesan) you end up with a meal that‘s between 750 and 900 calories. That between a nor…

Uncooked. depends on the pasta type though. Spaghetti can be easily 180g. Penne, Fusilli or Rigatoni, let's say 150g. My sauces are generally quite light. I'm vegetarian, so they never involve calorie-dense ingredients such as guanciale or pancetta. (I know, I know, what am I missing and so on... :D) For me pasta means less ingredients as possible, at the highest possible quality. Examples: Fresh Tomato-Basil Spaghet…

Now I’m hungry.

Don’t get me wrong, 180g is no problem for me, I can even over-indulge and go for more, but that insures feeling disgusting afterwards (in that sense 180g seems like a pretty good delineator between large but possible and too much).

Currently I’m losing weight (very necessary) so I’m hyper-aware of portion size and while the first couple of weeks 125g portions felt unimaginably small I think I got used to them and they don’t leave me back empty anymore. But, yeah, not as filling as something with much more vegetables and, say, tofu and some rice.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#36

Post by hombre_fatal »

corty wrote: post #16

> And pasta is anti-virile because a heavy, bloated stomach does not encourage physical enthusiasm for a woman, nor favour the possibility of possessing her at any time. This might be time-appropriate for 1930, but leaving that drivel uncommented perpetuates the oppression and violence immanent in it.

The whole article is the comment.

You're suggesting there exists someone who might read this interesting morsel of history and walk away, convinced by the excerpts, with anti-pasta views accompanied by a superstition that has them avoiding Italian cuisine on their first date unless warned otherwise.

Seems quite far-fetched. Though who are we to stop such a gentleman from sparing a woman some indigestion after reading a 1930s dating tip?

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#37

Post by thinkingemote »

pjc50 wrote: post #18
corty wrote: post #16

> And pasta is anti-virile because a heavy, bloated stomach does not encourage physical enthusiasm for a woman, nor favour the possibility of possessing her at any time. This might be time-appropriate for 1930, but leaving that drivel uncommented perpetuates the oppression and violence immanent in it.

Well, this is diet advice from Italian Fascists.

The German fascists had very strong health and diet advice too. Turns out that because exercise was recommended by the Nazis, a good anti fascist shouldn't do anything strenuous.

/S

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#38

Post by ummonk »

pjc50 wrote: post #18
corty wrote: post #16

> And pasta is anti-virile because a heavy, bloated stomach does not encourage physical enthusiasm for a woman, nor favour the possibility of possessing her at any time. This might be time-appropriate for 1930, but leaving that drivel uncommented perpetuates the oppression and violence immanent in it.

Well, this is diet advice from Italian Fascists.

Well, without seeing the original Italian, it's hard to know whether "possessing her" is a faithful translation of how it termed having sex.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#39

Post by arnejenssen »

thinkingemote wrote: post #34
arnejenssen wrote: post #24

I recently used the Libre Sense continuous glucose sensor as an experiment (I don't have diabetes). I noticed that after eating pasta, my blood sugar stayed elevated for 4-5 hours. It looks like calling pasta and bread "slow carbs" is appropriate. One of my conclusions from the experiment is that I will probably never buy wheat again (but I'll eat it if I get it served).

Do you eat any carbs? Potatoes, rice?. How did they affect the sensor

Yes. I get my carbs from vegetables like broccoli, cabbage, carrot, tomato, and kale.

Fruits like banana, apples and clementine appears to be fine.

The highest glucose I measured was after a parsimon.

I tested potatoes as a part of a meal, and it gave a small and short elevation.

I tried rice twice and it gave a high but short elevation.

Sequencing also appears to be important. Start the meal with fat and protein and finish with carbs. The French desert is a good idea. Bread as an appetiser at restaurants is a bad idea.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#40

Post by LeonB »

gattilorenz wrote: post #17
LeonB wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. “Ruffling feathers” is an alarming depiction of Fascists.

I think the claim is that futurists lived to ruffle feathers, not fascists. Which doesn't seem an euphemism to me.

I think the claim is that futurists lived to ruffle feathers and that their fascism is an example of this. Thus fascism is placed in the class of things that “ruffle feathers”.

Where is that an inaccurate interpretation?

Post reply on HN