Paolo Mantegazza as Didatic Gastronome: Food, Art, Science and the New Italian Nation

Abstract

It is in Risorgimento Italy that there is an incessant quest for a definition of what it means to be Italian amongst a reality of economic paucity and clear social divisiveness. During this tenuous yet crucial epoch, there is a cohesive attempt to define Italian taste with an ideological terminology previously absent from sensorial and aesthetic discourse. A fundamental purveyor of this novel approach is the self-defined “poligamo delle scienze,” Paolo Mantegazza. To the plurality of roles attributed to the medic (anthropologist, pathologist, senator, writer, etc.), there is one yet to be explored—Mantegazza as didactic gastronome. In the attempt to combat what he considers the anti-hygienic conditions plaguing the nation, the medic inaugurates a pedagogic process that would ideally lead to the formation of the Italian citizen. With the goal of creating a stronger and more capable Italian populace, the author goes to great lengths to provide guidelines for maximizing nourishment through the humblest of foods. Ultimately, Mantegazza’s pedagogic gourmandism is integral in the propagation of a social model of comportment that defines the Positivist framework of biological and nationalistic renewal and to a new vision of taste.

Nell’amore il prima è spesso un prurito che fa male o un uragano che schianta gli alberi e rovina le messi. Il mentre è dolcissimo, ma ahimé, dura troppo poco. Non dirò coll’epicurea francese, che cela ne dure que le temps d’avaler un œuf, ma dobbiamo pur confessare, che il mentre si misura non a giorni, né a ore; ma coll’orologio a minuti secondi.

Il poi, poi, è ora acido, è ora amaro: nei casi più fortunati è un languore, cioé una forma di stanchezza. Nei casi più disgraziati, che pur son frequenti, è un dolore o un pentimento o l’uno e l’altro insieme.

Nella gola invece delizioso è il prima, più delizioso il mentre, deliziossimo il poi. ([1], pp. 78–79).1

─Paolo Mantegazza

In recent years, particularly after the 150th anniversary of the Italian unification (2011), there has been a new focus on the role of cucina (cuisine) in the creation of italianità (Italianess), with keen attention given to the figure of Pellegrino Artusi (1820–1911).2 Aside from Piero Camporesi’s declarations in the famed 1970 edition of La scienza in cucina e l’arte di mangiar bene (Science in the Kitchen and the Art of Eating Well),3 which first generated intellectual discourse around the text, the 100th anniversary of Artusi’s death4 coincides with, and is therefore juxtaposed with, the sesquicentennial national anniversary, thereby further solidifying the correlation between the cookbook author and a sense of national unity. The book that Alberto Capatti deems “un opera di impegno civile,” [4]5 has at this point taken on iconic status, cementing Artusi’s place in a gastro-nationalistic discourse. It is Artusi who becomes the Italian cookbook author par excellence, credited with unifying a nation that was struggling to come together because of centuries of political, linguistic and cultural fragmentation. However, it is important to note that Artusi is not alone in his venture to use food as nationalizing stimulus. A figure who I contend has been overlooked is a collaborator of Artusi: Paolo Mantegazza. The two are intertwined in the Italian 19th century gastronomical landscape, and this article will ascribe a new role to Mantegazza that has yet to be explored: to the many labels attributed to this man of science (medic, anthropologist, ethnographer, pathologist, neurologist, physiologist, senator, novelist, etc.), it is fundamental to add one more, that is gastronome or, rather, didactic gastronome.

Mantegazza is at the avant-garde of the nascent self-helpism6 in the 19th century and attempts to resolve the prominent uncertainties of the post-unification period, demonstrating that food consciousness equals identity on various levels—from domestic to societal. Hygiene and hygienism, of which Mantegazza is the major 19th-century Italian proponent, become significant inasmuch as they serve as basis for good propriety and good citizenship, and, along with galatei (etiquette manuals) that tackle hygiene of various kinds, manuals and periodicals are published in the Italian 19th century with goals to establish a criteria for good health and beauty. This is particularly the case in a post-unificatory Italy, where questions of what it means to be Italian among a reality of economic paucity and clear social divisiveness arise. During this tenuous, yet crucial, period, there is also a cohesive attempt to define Italian taste with an ideological terminology previously absent from sensorial and aesthetic discourse. A fundamental purveyor of this novel approach is precisely the self-defined polygamist of the sciences,7 Paolo Mantegazza. In the attempt to combat what he considers the anti-hygienic conditions plaguing the nation, the author inaugurates a pedagogic process that would ideally lead to the formation of the Italian citizen. Through his numerous manuals on hygiene and physiological studies, Mantegazza the Positivist is determined to actively participate in the edification of his nation.8 This entails the regeneration of its citizens from the bottom up, denoting the educative intent of imparting a gastronomic, as well as gastrophonic (i.e., a language of food), lesson to those who may seem incapable of partaking in such endeavors due to economic constraints. With the goal of creating a stronger and more capable Italian populace, the author goes to great lengths to provide guidelines for maximizing nourishment through the humblest of foods, in addition to ennobling cuisine as fine art. Ultimately, I contend that Mantegazza’s analysis of food as subsistence, as well as an aesthetic subject, can be defined as a unique brand of pedagogic gourmandism,9 integral to the propagation of a social model of comportment that defines the Positivist framework of biological and nationalistic renewal.

In order to demonstrate the important role that Mantegazza occupies within 19th-century Italian taste theory, I will draw from volumes of his immensely popular Almanacco igienico popolare:10 Igiene della cucina (1866), Igiene di epicuro (1872), Igiene dei sensi (1874), Piccolo dizionario della cucina (1882), L’arte di conservare gli alimenti e le bevande (1887); as well as the manual Elementi di Igiene (1871),11 and texts of a more physiological and philosophical nature: La fisologia del piacere (1880), L’arte di essere felici (1886), and Epicuro: un saggio di una fisiologia del bello (1891). With these works I will be able to trace a taste narrative that oscillates with great command from gastronomy (or, rather, the art of cuisine) to gastrology (the 19th-century term for “the science of eating”),12 forming an amalgam that defines Mantegazza’s scientific production. I will analyze his food theory from the following interwoven perspectives: (a) the anthropology of cuisine; (b) food as health and hygiene; (c) gastronomy as an art form for all; I will then focus on (d) the artful nature of these eclectic scientific publications. I contend that these themes work in unison within the author’s production, with the ultimate goal of creating a stronger and more economically viable Italian nation, while promulgating a rationalized gluttony for a new, stronger and more capable Italian citizen. I will lastly examine (e) the social context in which the author writes to better understand how far reaching his message is.

1. The Anthropology of Cuisine

To commence the Mantagazzian narrative of taste, it is important to consider cuisine as a subject of anthropology; after all, it is Mantegazza who is famed for founding the first cattedra di Antropologia (i.e., the first professorship of Anthropology in Italy), in addition to the Museo Nazionale di Antropologia ed Etnologia (the National Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography) and its subsequent periodical and society. These are accomplishments that are possible precisely because of his voyages and subsequent studies that take him through Latin America in 1854 (Paraguay, Chile, Bolivia, and Brazil), Lapland in 1879, and India in 1882.13 Within these works there is, of course, keen attention paid to the gastronomy of the peoples the author encounters. Whether focusing on the use of stimulants such as the coca leaf and liqueurs for manual workers in Peru, the excellent coffees or the manners of cookery and consumption of meats such as reindeer in Lapland, or the preparation of millet, fish and the best mangos of the world in India, it is evident that the products to which Mantegazza is exposed go far in shaping the way he envisions his nutritional ideals.

It is through this optic that the author establishes a very modern premise, one that is the subject of such recent texts as Massimo Montanari’s Food is Culture [20] and Richard Wrangham’s Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human [21]: that is, cuisine as civilizer. Referencing his La fisiologia del piacere (The Physiology of Pleasure), it becomes clear that for Mantegazza food preparation and consumption serve as an anthropological marker for the distinction between man and brute. The key differentiator lies in the refinement of the pleasures of taste and the development of gastronomy, which defers to reason for regulation and distribution ([22], p. 73). In the early centuries of human evolution, hunger rules consumption (l’appetito supplì all’arte); however, with rational development, comes intelligence and art, as Mantegazza indicates, which drives man to search to multiply flavors, and to refine his gustatory capabilities. The brute, conversely, consumes with irregularity and with consideration for neither time nor measure, allowing his primordial impulse to govern, with no propensity for rationing or conservation. Mantegazza, in fact, dedicates an entire volume of his popular Almanacco igienico popolare in 1887 to L’arte di conservare gli alimenti e le bevande (“The Art of Preserving Foods and Beverages”), accentuating evolved man’s conscious effort to preserve food, as well as divulging all of the techniques that the modern sciences have afforded him.

2. The Medic in the Kitchen

It is within L’arte di conservare gli alimenti e le bevande, that Mantegazza (a medic himself) proclaims: “Se i medici conoscessero un po’ più gli alimenti, le loro diverse virtù e i diversi vizii…potrebbe far guarire chi è malato e….impedire che i sani si ammalino!”([23], p. 62).14 This theme of cuisine as panacea is prevalent throughout the author’s food writings, and, in Igiene della cucina (Hygiene in the Kitchen), the author insists that a medic is more effective in the kitchen than he could ever be in the pharmacy. Cuisine can “prevenire molte malattie e curarne molte altre…[può] trasformare uno scrofoloso in un uomo robusto…la cucina può guarire un’indigestione, una febbre, una tisi” ([24], p. 63).15 This ideal of the “medic in the kitchen” serves as an archetype to which anyone can aspire, for the manuals are not destined for colleagues, but for the mater familias, who, in adopting the author’s advice, become, in essence, medicus familias.16 Mantegazza's work represents the first conscious endeavor in Italy to promulgate the means by which this ideal can be realized.17

Domestic health and hygiene are, for the author, issues that transcend the family unit. As Comoy Fusaro demonstrates, Mantegazza is determined to partake in the construction of Italy ([27], p. 194); hence, the scope of his alimentary message can also be interpreted as chiefly nationalistic. The construction of an Italian nation leads Mantegazza to disseminate the message of cuisine as nutrition for all sectors of Italian society, from the proletarian to the aristocrat to the peasant, and, for the lower classes, he sees in the humblest of foods the possibility for regeneration. Throughout his manuals of nutritional hygiene, as well as his texts of a more gastronomic inclination, the author goes to great lengths to provide guidelines for maximizing nourishment to create a stronger Italian citizen. For the lower classes,18 there is an insistence on techniques that may ensure suitable nutrition. Such is the case when he writes of the benefits of salt; the medic states, “Un pizzico di sale di più nella pentola del povero, vuol dire tanti globuli rossi di più nel suo sangue, e quindi tanto di forza nelle vene di tutto il popolo italiano” ([28], p. 100).19 In the instance of polenta, Mantegazza identifies a foodstuff that transcends class; however, he is quick to note that the pale, poorly cooked, and salted polenta consumed by rural citizens, which had led to pellagra, is a far cry from the one enjoyed by the elite. With this realization, the medic calls for action: “Tocca a noi, tocca all’economia sociale, all’igiene fare che la polenta sia per tutti una benedizione e non un veleno” ([28], p. 89).20 It is this social conscience that is exemplified in Mantegazza’s gastronomic writings, prompting him to divulge methods through which the nutritional gap between the social classes can be bridged.21

As stated by Gabriella Armenise, Mantegazza’s concept of hygiene is identified with the art of physiology ([31], p. 90) and, therefore, the majority of Mantegazza’s food studies are physiological in structure and content. Food types, appetites, aromas, ingredients, scales of digestibility, and nutritive capability, as well as a superfluity of other alimentary subject matter, are categorized in an attempt to diffuse knowledge that would allow the reader to become a more informed consumer.22 Within his physiological tendency, Mantegazza utilizes a largely plurilateral and international model to convey his pedagogic gourmandism. The medic becomes an advocate for a rationally governed gluttony that includes the enjoyment of a myriad of ingredients from all the corners of the globe. Science has a fundamental role in this mode of consumption, as it is the ancient art of alimentary preservation that permits foods to travel, and the advancements of Mantegazza’s epoch lead him to claim its perfected status ([23],p. 39).23 The author is a proud advocate of the splendor that modern progress has afforded gastronomy: “È in questa maniera, che seduti in una comoda poltrona e circondati da tutte le leccornie del lusso europeo, possiamo in un solo pranzo mangiare del bove ucciso nei matadores di Buenos Ayres o in Australia, del salmone pescato in Lapponia e delle aragoste cresciute nei mari dell’America del nord” ([23], p. 39).24

This transnational, physiological modus operandi is indicative of Mantegazza’s pertinence to the greater Positivist culture that comes into fashion in the second half of the century. His framework has precedents in Italy in other authors, many doctors and pathologists in their own right, who attempt to convey a similar ideal of food nutrition. Salvatore Tommasi, for example, dedicates numerous pages to the topic of consumption, because “[si] frutterebbe senza fine alla pubblica ed alla privata igiene” ([32], p. 105).25 Angelo Camillo De Meis goes as far as envisioning a world in which Positivist ideals come fully to fruition and chemistry capable of fabricating materiale alimentare, i.e., food matter, that would satisfy all the nourishment requirements of the masses—specifically speaking of a “cibo saporoso, odoroso, squisitissimo” and a “vino chimico eccellente…da digradarne il Chianti” ([33], p. 43).26 In short, Mantegazza represents the trend of food science that is mirrored in Italian contemporaries. They show how the progressive ideals of disseminating education and a heightened faith in the possibilities of science and technology can be espoused in matters of food and taste. However, it is Mantegazza who, more than any other, prolifically reshapes this discourse for the masses, while ennobling the art of cookery to the sphere of aesthetics.27

3. Gastronomy as an Art form for All

In addition to a nutritional gap between the classes, the artistic qualities of gastronomy seem to be exclusively for the upper strata, while the lower classes are relegated to subsist on inadequate provisions. Yet, Mantegazza seeks, in many instances, to create fare out of the most meager of ingredients. A germane example is the medic’s ennobling of the humble egg, which he claims to be the most democratic and aristocratic of foodstuffs, offering “i suoi tesori di forza e di salubrità al povero proletario, come al più Creso dei Re…e rimane sempre al disopra di ogni più complicato intingolo gastronomico” ([28], pp. 113–15).28 This attempt to bridge the gap of artistic intent between aristocratic fare and the scant rations of the majority of the peninsula is significant, because it denotes the pedagogic intent of imparting a gastronomic lesson to those who may seem incapable of participating in such endeavors because of social status. It is an effort, as demonstrated by the gourmands and gastronomes who preceded Mantegazza (such as Anthemme Brillat-Savarin), to introduce the middle classes to a world that previously excluded them: that of food as art. Mantegazza, however, goes even farther; it is evident that part of his audience is incapable of relishing such undertakings, since their condition is far from opulent. Yet, the medic is keen on conveying the strategies necessary to optimize available foodstuffs and render them arte culinaria. In addition, he also provides a foodway towards intellectual/artistic production.

Mantegazza sustains the importance of gastronomic literacy for mental stimulation; he refers to a category of foodstuffs, which are of particular benefit as alimenti nervosi. The idea that consumption directly affects our thought is not new; Ludwig Feuerbach and Jacob Moleschott, for example, advanced similar theories.29 However, Mantegazza’s application is wholly different. For the author, nervine foods “hanno una storia molto simile a quella delle nuove scuole di pittura, della nuova musica, dei nuovi stili architettonici!” ([40], p. 162).30 They are among the most noble of foodstuffs, allowing man to have a heightened control over his intellect and sensibility. If foods are the vapor that moves the locomotive, as Mantegazza indicates, then the nervine foodstuff is the vehicle through which we can govern its movement ([41], pp. 13–14). The author categorizes more than a hundred of these stimulants throughout his works; when balanced and used in moderation, “L’uomo incivilito…nel brillante sviluppo della sua intelligenza [consume] in un sol giorno i succhi fermentati delle vigne del Vesuvio, la birra nebbiosa dell’Inghilterra, il cacao dell’America, e il té dell’estrema China” ([29], p. 60).31 The introduction of such substances into the body and, as a result, into the bloodstream, awakens the intellect, causing new sensorial and cerebral activity that is most advantageous for the mind.32

The aesthetic nature of gastronomy becomes paramount to Mantegazza’s theory of taste ennoblement. Once again, in the Fisiologia del piacere, the author delves into a theoretical discourse that analyzes how the pleasures of taste are brought about, elevating the traditionally mundane act of consumption while rendering food an analog of music. The pleasures of taste are divided into two key elements: harmony and melody, which together forge a paragon that allows the medic to assert the sublimity of gastronomy. It is a sublimity that finds expression in the concatenation of dishes and pairings that encompass a pranzo, which the author describes as “un concerto d’armonia e di melodia del gusto… che viene poi portato alla massima perfezione dal genio dell’artista” ([3], p. 65).33 A meal, for Mantegazza, is to become a plurisensorial event: “Una festa ai piaceri del gusto, ai quali si associano quelli dell’odorato, dell’udito, della vista…elevati a un certo grado dalla perfezione dell’arte e dal sentimento del bello” ([22], p. 76).34 A pranzo, therefore, is not just the mere satisfaction of hunger, but, rather, as indicated in Elementi di Igiene, a feast in which the superior joys of sentiment and intellect participate, transforming a simple primordial urge into one of the most fruitful, sociable, and educational sources of merriment ([29], p. 214).

The highly intellectualized, sensorial communion proposed corroborates Mantegazza’s modernity and anticipates the Futurist paradigm by more than fifty years.35 Furthermore, the physio-aesthetic narrative constructed by the medic is wholly unique and certainly worthy of praise. It is an ideal that is continued in the Piccolo dizionario della cucina, a work based on Alexandre Dumas’s Grand Dictionnaire de cuisine.36 Here, Mantegazza invokes conviviality as prerequisite for the realization of this gustatory symphony. Therefore, the communal setting, with its psychological value becomes premise to a meal that can be classified as fine art, distinguishing it from an act of mere satiation. The author indicates that the perfect man makes it his goal to attain perfect joy in the convivial setting, by invoking the angel of poetry and the archangel of affection ([28], p. 9). Using a language tinted with clear spiritual connotations, Mantegazza makes of the dinner table a sort of laic altar that can be created from the “desco dell’operario e del contadino, come alla mensa dorata del milionario e del re” ([28], p. 8).37

4. The Art of Mantegazza’s Science

Mantegazza’s goal is to ameliorate the stagnant Italian dietetic circumstances. This leads the author to conceive of texts that have success within the Italian context, not only because they fill a void and help answer questions both of a pragmatic38 and sumptuous nature, but also because they exude an innate literariness. Due to the various digressions into which the author delves, it is this literary quality that Nicoletta Pireddu points to as protagonist of Fisiologia del piacere ([43], p. 140).39 This notion can easily be extended to a vast majority of Mantegazza’s texts, particularly those utilized within our narrative of taste. In Mantegazza, even the most scientific of material is presented with anecdotes and literary references that make his works palatable for a large portion of his audience: the numerous anecdotes, such as the account of the comical events of a masquerade ball where a host concocts a boisterous ruse ([28], p.107); or the innumerous aphorisms that lace the pages of his texts, such as “conviene che ogni effetto abbia il suo pane, e che ogni ambizione leggitima abbia il suo vino” ([44], p. 36);40 or the multitude of literary and philosophical references, such as those to Dante and Parini ([30], p. 33; [24], p. 31).

It is important to frame Mantegazza’s success within his contemporary society. According to the author, man “abbraccia quanto può e quanto sa dell’universo che lo circonda, e dice: tutto questo è mio” ([16], p. 13).41 It is this moral that the author intends to diffuse; advocate of Darwin in Italy,42 Mantegazza promotes and practices the nascent sciences that biological Darwinism generates, particularly those of anthropology and sociology, in addition to being a medic and a literary writer. This philosophy of embracing all as man’s capital is what defines Mantegazza’s interests and production; from literary novel to scientific treatise, from manual of hygiene to philosophical text, from almanac to dictionary, the medic’s works are as varied as can be found from a single author. And it is because of this eclecticism that the author’s production has been defined as schizophrenic—marked by a continuous flux between artistic and scientific production. This eclecticism, that justly denotes the medic’s work, is, I believe, the reason for his success. He becomes one of the few figures of the period to engage his audience in an open dialog, making this priest of science an apostle through the street and the piazzas.43 With his ability to shift from societal to domestic issues, and from first person to dialogic narratives with ease, the author creates accessible pedagogical texts that are meant for immediate application. However Mantegazza’s work may be defined, it is evident that its hybrid artistic/scientific nature, and its intent to educate, articulates a trend that is already present in the century—a trend that will bring to the development of the most widely famed gastronomic Italian text of the 1800s: Pellegrino Artusi’s La scienza in cucina e l’arte di mangiar bene.

Notwithstanding the variety of approaches from which Mantegazza postulates his theories, food and taste are analyzed by Mantegazza from a Positivist standpoint—they are seen as a fundamental instrument to man’s progress and advancement, because ultimately “si deve mangiar bene per viver bene” ([24], p. 8).44 This idea of eating well is particularly salient in a Darwinist epoch given that, “La metà dei viventi vive, divorando l’altra metà. I grandi mangiano i mezzani e i mezzani mangiano i piccoli; e i piccolissimi poi, più forti di tutti, mangiano grandi, mezzani, e piccoli… A noi non resta che a mangiar bene, con scienza e conscienza, tutto il mangiabile” ([23], p. 37).45 Therefore, the author preaches throughout much of his hygienic production that the manner and mode of alimentation directly affects mental processes, or rather our way of thinking, acting, and being—appropriating cuisine as an intellectual affair despite the biases confronted, because “L’arte di preparare i cibi non solo li rende più saporiti, ma anche più digeribili e più nutrivi, e la cucina in tutta la perfezione della civilità moderna è altamente igienica” ([29], p. 211).46 From the poetry of cuisine that can be achieved ([24], p. 29), to the pleasures of sentiment and the intellect satisfied ([22], p. 66), Mantegazza propagates an ideal of culinary art that needs to attain three essential goals: first, it needs to supply a maximum variety of foods and flavors; second, it must facilitate the digestibility of foods without diminishing their nutritive value; finally, it must educate both the sense of taste as well as the sentiment of beauty ([29], p. 211). With these prerequisites, it is clear that the medic’s conceptualization of taste consists of both lofty aesthetic ideals and a more pragmatic, Positivist framework of biological necessity and nationalistic renewal. As Armenise indicates, the author partakes in a process of cultural and hygienic literacy ([47], p. 99). If this is the case, then it is evident that the divulgation of a gastronomic ideal of regeneration, moderation, and beauty is fundamental. It is with this in mind that Mantegazza reminds his reader, “Studiate a fondo la vostra cucina, occupandovi assai di ciò che mangiate e del come mangiate,” adding, with the zeal that characterizes much of his prose, “Non vergognatevi mai di essere saviamente golosi!” ([29], p. 214).47

Encapsulating the author’s role as didactic gastronome is a quote that helps define Mantegazza’s witty and direct approach; as he has done on various occasions, he ennobles simple foods, in this case squash, by playing with the bisemic meaning of zucca:48 “Anche le zucche più vuote di questo mondo poi possono elevarsi a pretesa di aristocrazia culinaria, quando si faccia loro un ripieno.”49 Leaving the author to question, “Non è forse tutta quanta la pedagogia un’arte di mettere un buon ripieno nelle zucche umane?” ([28], p. 119).50

5. Truly an Art for All?

It is evident that there was an attempt to construct an Italian cultural unity by preaching an ennobled national taste, but to what extent was this endeavor successful? We must first define the parameters within which we will be judging success. If we look at book sales, then we can almost certainly say that the message is well received, at least among the Italian middle classes of the late 19th century. Mantegazza was immensely popular, and, therefore, his writings certainly did reach a literate audience. However, it remains to be said that his success can be considered relative.

In Igiene dei sensi (Hygiene of the Senses), Mantegazza lauds a philosophy immersed in a sensorial acquisition of knowledge: “Tutto quello che sappiamo, tutto quel che possiamo, tutto quel che facciamo ci viene dall’umile scaturigine dei sensi” ([30], p. 15).51 Furthermore, the author encourages the banishment of the traditional sensory hierarchy, suggesting: “Tutti i sensi riuniti si aiutano, si correggono l’un l’altro e a guisa dei molti tentacoli d’un polipo, ci permettono di mettere in intimo contatto della natura delle cose i nostri organi nervosi centrali, così avidi di sentire e di imparare” ([30], p. 15).52 It is precisely in this work that Mantegazza promotes a sensory communion no longer defined exclusively by intellectual faculties. Knowledge is acquired through all the senses and therefore the Platonic/Kantian aesthetic tradition is eradicated. No longer are the intelligent senses (i.e., vision and hearing) held in position of prominence, since they function in harmony with the lower senses (i.e., smell, touch and taste). However, it is noteworthy that it is within this very text, where the author continues to promulgate these lofty aesthetic ideals, that he is forced to defend himself:

I miei almanacchi, perché popolari, son creduti da alcuni critici destinati soltanto al contadino o all’operario e son quindi accusato di occuparmi dei ricchi e son quindi maltrattato, perché insegno al popolo precetti igienici, che possono sembrare una crudele ironia per chi non abbia molti quattrini in tasca.

Ma c’è dunque bisogno ancora di ripetere per la millesima volta a questi aristarchi, che il popolo non è fatto di soli operai e di soli contadini, ma è composto di tutti noi; e che quando si scrive un libro popolare, convien farsi un’idea empirica e media di un popolo medio, a cui non appartengono né i dottissimi, né gli analfabeti? Ma vi è dunque bisogno di ripetere fino alla noia, che un libro popolare ha per natura propria il difetto congenito di riuscire troppo elevato per gli uni, troppo volgare per gli altri? Perché sia utile, basta che si attagli alla statura media dei cervelli umani e che tutti, l’altissimo come il piccolissimo, vi possan beccare qualche granello di cibo…

([30], pp. 26–27).53

This juxtaposition between the extremely modern premise of an aesthetic reordering of the senses and Mantegazza’s defense, sheds light on the author’s difficulties in an epoch where hunger is much more prevalent than opulence.

Paolo Sorcinelli, the Italian social historian, refers to a malessere alimentare (nutritional malaise) that becomes a defining factor of the post-Risorgimento period ([49], p. 52). Statistics support his argument. A summary of historical data compiled in 1968 by ISTAT (The National Institute for Statistics) [50] reveals details of a diet in which the art of food is seemingly all but unattainable. In the first years of unification (1861–1870), the Italian diet is made predominantly of grains (nearly 55%) and produce (42%). Meat consumption constitutes a small fraction of the diet, comparatively (a little over 3%).54 Government-sponsored surveys also paint a clear picture. Perhaps the most famed example was the large-scale inquest initiated by Senator Stefano Jacini, which produces 15 volumes of studies and recommendations (1878−1883). From Jacini’s inquiry (which is considered the most complete analysis of agricultural Italy) we learn much about the rural population’s diet and hygiene,55 as he concluded: “Lo stato generale non è soddisfacente; l’aria è cattiva, cattiva l’alimentazione e il vestito, le abitazioni poco salubri” ([52], p. 56).56

It is evident that with large portions of the nation poorly nourished, parts of Mantegazza’s message of a pedagogic gourmandism is unattainable for many new Italians. The author’s ideal of regenerating the nation by educating its citizens about food and cuisine is problematic, and the medic himself addresses this notion in Elementi di igiene (Elements of Hygiene) by stating:

So pur troppo che per molti e molti il pranzo si reduce a polenta, a sola minestra condita col lardo o a patate; ma che potrebbe contro queste miserie un libro d’igiene? Tutt’al più consigliare che nella minestra si mettano più fagiuoli, più ceci, più piselli che riso; che si preferisca il pane di segale a quello di frumentone. L’igiene del povero è questione di economia politica.

([29], p. 228).57

Mantegazza insists that his texts are to be of aid even to the poor, despite the reality in which they find themselves. However, they cannot solve the issues of poverty that plague the new nation. His goal is simply to diffuse the knowledge that would allow even the poorest towards better nourishment, but he realizes that his message is limited. It cannot put more pennies in the pockets or food in the mouths’ of its citizens.

The intended audience of his gastro-hygienic ideals, however, remains largely the middle classes (as stated by the author), which also can be considered problematic. There is no question that Mantegazza’s works sell well; nevertheless, we must say that even this is relative. The reality is that the bourgeoisie only encompasses 6.7% of the population during this period.58 Additionally, 78% of the nation is illiterate at the time of unification (with certain regions seeing rates as high as 91%).59

6. Conclusions

With a blend of science and art, Mantegazza promotes an Italianness that is ahead of its time. However, Italy in many ways is not ready for his modernity. While his rational gluttony and his guidelines for better nourishment are novel and sound, the message could not feasibly reach enough of the population to have an immediate widespread effect. The task of nourishing the malnourished is far too great to be solved by food literature. Moreover, I believe that Mantegazza’s ideal of an aestheticized cuisine, of a dinner that reaches perfection when it demonstrates a symphonic harmony, is beyond the reach of too many during his period. Yet, the formation of an Italian taste, for the author, is also the formation of the sense of what it means to eat in conviviality and as well as possible. Whether the gastrosophic theories forwarded directly enter in the vocabulary of the masses is almost insignificant, because these theories draw attention to the art of food in a wholly unique way. As a result, we see the trickle down of certain paragons from the middle classes: as poor as a dish may be, even from the table of the peasant or the worker, it is shared with the utmost dignity and respect for what it represents and from where it comes. What the medic ultimately transmits is an art that everyone can afford at any epoch: the sentimento del bello (sentiment of beauty), as Mantegazza reminds us, is what makes a meal truly artful ([22], p. 76).

I contend that taste does ultimately find prominence in Italian culture, and although it cannot be said that intellectuals in the 20th century espouse an eradicated sensorial hierarchy (with exceptions being the Futurists and authors such as Mario Soldati); it can however be said that the layman do. If we were to construct a philosophy of our everyday experiences, as Nicola Perullo suggests [55], I believe we can trace taste as a driving factor of the Italian quotidian. This is precisely what Mantegazza preaches: an everyday world where taste reigns, and where a trip to the market “[far] crescere la salute e il buon umore” ([29], p. 229).60 The attention and care put into daily food rituals has been a defining characteristic of so many generations of Italians, who see in their foods a way of sustenance, yet so much more. Here gastrosphers such as Mantegazza are fundamental. He is at least in part reflective of this mentality that makes food central to daily life, transforming the quotidian into a philosophy through his Positivist ideals, while solidifying the dinner table as a laic altar for all sects of society ([28], p. 8). His initial limited influence notwithstanding, Mantegazza as philosopher of food exemplifies what Carlo Petrini says: he who sows utopia ultimately may reap reality [56].