Recently, I subscribed to a free online service called History Facts, which feeds me a dose of historical trivia that I likely would not have known––or cared about––had it not shown up in my “in box.”
If you’re a casual history buff, or you just like interesting facts or trivia, it might be worth a try. “George Washington didn’t know dinosaurs existed” was a good one I read recently. “John Wilkes Booth’s brother saved the life of Abraham Lincoln’s son” was another.
Anyway, you get the picture. It’s a catchy headline with two to three easy reading paragraphs about something that accomplishes nothing more than occupying three to four minutes of my time and brainpower every morning. And it’s fun if you’re someone who likes to know things and share them with others (and I am that someone … so is my best friend/cousin Mike).
Last week, one of the headlines read, “In colonial America, lobster was an undesirable food fed to prisoners,” and rather than paraphrase, I’ll share the first couple sentences of the post:
Lobster has long been considered a culinary delicacy, but in colonial America it was seen as the cockroach of the sea. When European settlers arrived in North America in the 17th century, New England’s shoreline was littered with the clawed crustaceans. In fact, lobsters were so prevalent, they were used by Indigenous inhabitants as fishing bait or fertilizer.
To the colonists, they served as a simple and abundant source of protein. Though eating lobster was useful in times of food scarcity — such as in 1623, when Plymouth Colony Governor William Bradford lamented that the settlers’ best meal was a lobster or a piece of fish — it wasn’t exactly desirable. The seafood was mostly fed to those with little say in their diets, such as prisoners housed near the coast and indentured servants working off their contracts.
A phrase in the first sentence, “cockroach of the sea,” caught my attention. In modern society, who doesn’t consider lobster as a “higher end” gastronomic opportunity, whether it matches one’s culinary preferences or not. (By the way, lobster has never been an option for me. Along with other foods from the sea, I simply never developed a taste for it.)
Growing up, I remember the rare occasions in which the Haznaw clan would visit a local supper club, only to find “surf and turf” as an impressive, attractive and expensive menu item, and likely one that landed outside our budget. While the “turf” was a variable (a steak of some ilk), the “surf” was almost always lobster.
Apparently, no one in late 20-Century Midwestern society received the memo or telegram or Pony Express message all those decades ago that lobster was taboo, and that we were eating a food that was once considered a last resort as a source of protein and routinely fed to prisoners until someone with a conscience stepped in and said, “C’mon folks, that’s torture.”
And so, throughout history (and to the chagrin of lobsters and their ancestry), this arthropod (which is how lobster is classified, along with its creepy, much smaller cousin, the cockroach among others) has gone from, “You just ate WHAT?” status to “I’ll have the special … it’s lobster tonight, right?” (And if you have to ask, “What is market price?” you can’t afford it, chum.)
After reading this tidbit of lobster trivia, it made me think of a larger (yet no less trivial) question: What is acceptable to eat, and how does something transform from “cockroach of the sea” status to “Ooh, that large, gangly arthropod with the armored thorax and gratuitously large pincers looks like just the ticket for this hungry lad!”
I mean, if Twain would have written the fence-painting scene in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer to instead show how Tom could fleece his friends into believing lobster (a group of which he would have collected and brought to the street corner in lemonade stand fashion) was a delicacy, and then charged them to eat it, any reader would have been just as entertained, the message being (as I believe Twain intended):
“We can, with the right amount of influence, confidence, artistry and manipulation, make someone do or believe just about anything.”
Is lobster a mainstay on restaurant menus today? Yes. Why? Is it because someone fleeced the public and now we’re all just suckers? Well, maybe, at least initially. But at some point, lobster’s image was elevated (again, to its own demise) to “surf and turf” and “market price” on menus around the globe.
I find this interesting because when it comes to what we eat, so much is perception, preparation and the influence with which something is sold to us, in countries like the U.S. anyway.
In other parts of the world (and in some parts of our own country), people eat for fuel and to get enough nutrition to function or sadly, survive. And that doesn’t always permit a discriminating palate. And it’s easy for us (we know who we are) to wrinkle our noses at foods that we deem outside the range of acceptable. We might even look down on the people and cultures who eat such foods.
I don’t eat much meat or dairy anymore. Not judging, not pontificating. Not saying I’m right or better than anyone, or that you should do the same. I just know that, as I get older, my body “does better” with more plant-based foods fueling it. (And while I won’t judge you for your choices of nutrition, feel free to judge me; I simply ask that you do it quietly and out of my earshot.)
I’m not militant about it, and don’t spend my waking hours looking for bakery that dairy or animal fat in the process. And yes, insofar as there is a “wagon” from which to fall, I do occasionally compromise my approach to enjoy some pizza or bacon, or a nice Caesar chicken wrap or whatever.
I just think it’s interesting, that line we will draw as to what is acceptable to eat and what isn’t, especially when it comes to animals. Beef and pork and chicken and lamb and fish, etc., are all OK, but insects and “creepy-crawlies” and other mammals (especially the cute ones) tend to be off-limits for many.
I don’t want to get into an argument about food, the economics or politics of it or what it does or doesn’t do to or for the environment. I’m simply saying I think it’s interesting how perceptions change over time, and how those perceptions drive our actions, especially when it comes to what we eat, and how we view those who eat differently than we do.
I’m a believer in “You do you,” and as long as you’re not hurting anyone else, I have no right to direct you in your culinary choices. That said, for many reasons, I will not consider lobster as an option today, not because it was once considered the cockroach of the sea; simply because I don’t like it, and because my body doesn’t need it.
On the other hand, if you’re a cockroach lover, who am I to judge?
Bon appetit!
© 2025 David R. Haznaw