On the Shortness of Life

Life, as it turns out, isn’t actually short—it’s just that most of us waste it. That’s the central argument of On the Shortness of Life by Seneca, a work that has remained startlingly relevant despite being written nearly 2,000 years ago. While the ancient Roman philosopher was addressing the concerns of his time—politicians chasing power, merchants obsessed with wealth, scholars lost in trivial studies—his words feel just as applicable in an age of social media, endless notifications, and the modern obsession with productivity. Seneca’s message is simple: we have more than enough time to live a meaningful life, but we squander it on distractions, meaningless pursuits, and worrying about things that don’t matter.

Unlike many modern self-help books that focus on “time management,” Seneca isn’t concerned with squeezing more hours into the day. His argument isn’t that we need to be more efficient—it’s that we need to be more intentional. He criticizes people who spend their lives chasing wealth, fame, or leisure without ever stopping to consider what truly matters. His famous warning that “it is not that we have a short time to live, but that we waste much of it” cuts through the excuses we use to justify our lack of fulfillment. We complain about not having enough time, yet we spend hours on trivial distractions, indulging in gossip, worrying about status, or numbing ourselves with entertainment. Sound familiar? Swap out the Roman baths and political scheming for Instagram feeds and Netflix binges, and suddenly, Seneca could be writing about modern life.

What makes On the Shortness of Life so powerful is that it’s not just a critique of wasted time—it’s a call to action. Seneca urges us to take ownership of our lives, to stop living as if we have unlimited time ahead of us. He warns against the trap of “living for the future,” something that resonates strongly with modern readers. How many people tell themselves they’ll be happy after they get the promotion, after they buy the house, after they retire? Seneca sees this as one of the greatest delusions—people plan for a future they might never even reach while neglecting the present, the only time they actually own. His solution is simple but profound: live fully now. Engage deeply in what truly matters, cut out meaningless pursuits, and treat every day as valuable rather than assuming you’ll always have more time.

When comparing Seneca’s advice to modern Stoic practices, there’s a striking overlap. Today’s Stoic thinkers—whether it’s Ryan Holiday’s The Daily Stoic or William B. Irvine’s A Guide to the Good Life—echo many of the same themes. Both ancient and modern Stoicism emphasize the importance of focusing on what we can control, avoiding distractions, and valuing time as our most precious resource. However, while modern Stoic methods often include structured routines, journaling, and practical exercises to cultivate mindfulness, Seneca’s approach is more direct: stop wasting time, recognize your mortality, and live with purpose.

One of the biggest differences between ancient and modern Stoicism is the way we approach productivity. In today’s world, self-improvement is often tied to efficiency—how can I get more done in less time? How can I maximize my schedule? Seneca would likely argue that this mindset still misses the point. It doesn’t matter how much you accomplish if what you’re accomplishing isn’t meaningful. Modern Stoicism often incorporates methods like digital detoxing, setting daily priorities, and practicing gratitude—things that align with Seneca’s philosophy but are packaged in a more structured way. The key takeaway from both approaches is the same: be intentional about how you live, because time is the one thing you can never get back.

Perhaps the most chilling reminder in On the Shortness of Life is Seneca’s observation that most people don’t even realize they’re wasting their lives until it’s too late. He warns that many people only understand the value of time when they’re near death, looking back with regret at how much of their existence was spent on things that didn’t matter. This is where his writing transcends philosophy and becomes something of a wake-up call. His words force the reader to ask uncomfortable but necessary questions: If I were to die tomorrow, would I be satisfied with how I’ve spent my time? Am I prioritizing things that truly bring meaning, or am I letting life slip by in trivial pursuits?

In a world that constantly demands our attention, where distractions are engineered to be irresistible and busyness is worn like a badge of honor, Seneca’s wisdom is more important than ever. Modern Stoic practices may provide tools to help us implement his advice, but the fundamental lesson remains unchanged: life is only “short” if you fail to use it well. The challenge isn’t to find more time—it’s to stop giving it away to things that don’t matter.

Worldwide Food Tour – Gambia

Domoda is a rich and hearty West African stew, particularly popular in The Gambia where it’s often considered the national dish. The star ingredient is ground peanuts (groundnuts) or peanut butter, which creates a thick, creamy sauce base.

The stew typically combines meat (commonly beef, lamb, or chicken) with a blend of tomatoes, onions, and garlic. The peanut-based sauce is enhanced with tomato paste and a mix of spices. Root vegetables like carrots, potatoes, or sweet potatoes are often added, making it a complete one-pot meal. Some versions include hot peppers for added heat.

The taste is complex and satisfying – simultaneously nutty, savory, and slightly sweet from the natural sweetness of the peanuts. The meat becomes tender through slow cooking, while the sauce develops a velvety texture that’s perfect for serving over rice.

As for its history, Domoda reflects the importance of groundnuts in West African cuisine and culture. Peanuts were introduced to Africa by Portuguese traders in the 16th century and quickly became a staple crop. The dish exemplifies how African cooks masterfully incorporated this “new” ingredient into their traditional cooking methods, creating something entirely unique and deeply flavorful.

I’m not sure what I did wrong here – but the peanut flavor didn’t really come through – all I tasted were the spices. I sourced the recipe from a cook in the country so I tried to be as authentic as possible. It’s not something I think I’ll make again but it was interesting to get a feel for West African cuisines.

Seven Samurai

Ah, let me dive into Akira Kurosawa’s epic masterpiece about medieval gig work!

The story kicks off in 16th-century Japan, where a village of farmers discovers that bandits are planning to raid them once their harvest is ready. (Apparently, bandits in feudal Japan were considerate enough to give advance notice of their robberies.) The villagers, tired of being the medieval equivalent of a free grocery store, decide to hire samurai for protection. Their budget? Room, board, and all the rice they can eat – which, in feudal Japan’s version of a job posting, translates to “unpaid internship with meals included.”

Enter Kambei, a wise, experienced samurai who’s first seen shaving his head to rescue a kidnapped child. (If that’s not the definition of a perfect job interview, I don’t know what is.) Despite the less-than-attractive compensation package, Kambei takes pity on the villagers and agrees to help. He then starts assembling his team like it’s Ocean’s Eleven: Medieval Edition.

The recruitment process brings together a colorful crew: Katsushirō, an eager young samurai wannabe; Gorobei, who can catch arrows mid-flight (a skill that, surprisingly, does come in handy); Kyūzō, a serious master swordsman; Heihachi, the funny one who’s good with an axe; Shichirōji, Kambei’s old war buddy; and the scene-stealing Kikuchiyo (Toshiro Mifune), a wild card who’s clearly not a real samurai but makes up for it with enough energy to power a small village.

Once they reach the village, our samurai find that their job includes not just fighting bandits, but also being part-time therapists for a community with major trust issues. The farmers have hidden their women and valuables, because historically, samurai haven’t exactly been the most courteous house guests. Kikuchiyo, revealed to be a farmer’s son himself, calls out both sides for their prejudices in what must be feudal Japan’s first diversity and inclusion seminar.

While waiting for the bandits, the samurai turn the village into a fortress and train the farmers in the art of war, which goes about as well as you’d expect when teaching rice farmers to use spears. Meanwhile, young Katsushirō falls for a local farmer’s daughter, because apparently no one told him that workplace romances are complicated.

When the bandits finally attack, what follows is a series of increasingly intense battles in the rain (because Kurosawa never met a fight scene he couldn’t make more dramatic with weather). The samurai’s clever tactics and the farmers’ newfound courage turn the tide, but victory comes at a cost – four of the samurai die in the fighting, proving that even in medieval Japan, the mortality rate for temporary contract work was unreasonably high.

The film ends with the surviving samurai watching the farmers happily planting rice, leading Kambei to muse that the real winners are the villagers, while samurai just keep losing. (Though you could argue that the real losers were the bandits, who probably should have just applied for farming jobs instead.)

The whole thing serves as a poignant reminder that sometimes the best-paying jobs aren’t the most rewarding, and that if you’re going to hire security consultants, maybe offer better benefits than just rice.

In the end, “Seven Samurai” became so influential that it spawned numerous remakes, including “The Magnificent Seven,” proving that the concept of protecting villagers from bandits transcends both cultures and centuries – though the payment plans remain consistently poor.

5/5 Samurai Swords – Really just a classic movie. I love the idea of Samurai and have watched a LOT of these kind of movies (in addition to kung fu movies) such as Zatoichi and the Hidden Fortress. It’s really well acted and after a short while the subtitles became less obtrusive and and got pulled into the story. It was really well paced – the silences and ambient sounds were well placed and the on screen deaths were meaningful – hard to do character development with so many characters but Kurosawa pulled it off.

On the Waterfront

Ah, let me dive into Elia Kazan’s gritty masterpiece about corruption, conscience, and questionable career choices in the longshoremen industry!

The story follows Terry Malloy (Marlon Brando), an ex-boxer turned dockworker who spends his days doing the bidding of union boss Johnny Friendly – when he’s not tending to his rooftop pigeon coop, that is. (Nothing says “sensitive tough guy” quite like racing pigeons.) Terry’s brother Charley works as Friendly’s lawyer, making corruption a real family business.

The trouble starts when Terry unknowingly helps set up the murder of Joey Doyle, a dockworker who was planning to testify against Friendly’s corrupt union. Terry thought they were just going to “talk” to Joey, but instead, Joey takes an unscheduled flying lesson off a roof. Oops.

Enter Edie Doyle (Eva Marie Saint), Joey’s sister, who’s determined to find out who killed her brother. She’s also apparently the only person in this waterfront neighborhood who owns clothes that aren’t covered in grime. Terry starts falling for her, which really complicates his whole “pretend-nothing-happened” strategy. Meanwhile, the persistent Father Barry (Karl Malden) keeps popping up like a clerical whack-a-mole, giving waterfront sermons about standing up to corruption and making Terry feel guilty.

As Terry gets closer to Edie and more conflicted about his role in Joey’s death, Friendly starts getting nervous. More dock workers end up dead, including Kayo Dugan, who’s crushed by a “mysteriously” dropped load of whiskey cases. (OSHA would have had a field day with these working conditions.)

The turning point comes when Friendly orders Charley to make sure Terry doesn’t testify to the Crime Commission. In the famous taxi scene, Charley pulls a gun on his own brother, leading to Terry’s heartbreaking “I coulda been a contender” speech about how Charley ruined his boxing career by making him throw fights. Instead of killing Terry, Charley lets him go – and ends up dead himself, hung from a hook in an alley. (Friendly isn’t big on subtlety.)

This finally pushes Terry over the edge. He testifies against Friendly, which makes him about as popular on the docks as a punctured life vest. In the final showdown, Terry gets beaten to a pulp by Friendly and his goons, but refuses to stay down. He staggers to his feet and leads the other workers into the warehouse, breaking Friendly’s control over the dock.

The movie ends with Terry bloody but unbowed, having finally stood up for what’s right – though you have to wonder if maybe he should have considered a career change to something less dangerous, like professional alligator wrestling.

The whole thing serves as a powerful reminder that sometimes doing the right thing means getting punched in the face repeatedly, and that keeping pigeons is apparently the universal signal for “complicated character with a hidden soft side.”

5 punch drunk stars. I loved this movie – it’s got everything – romance! mobsters! Brando chewing the scenery! Brando quietly brooding! The famous ‘I could have been a contender!’ speech – just oozing 50’s cool guy vibes. The plot was a bit thin as a morality tale but it was overall well acted and engaging and worth the watch.

Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Love the Bomb

Ah, let me break down Stanley Kubrick’s darkly hilarious Cold War satire where everyone’s trying their best to avoid nuclear annihilation… and somehow making everything worse!

The film kicks off when General Jack D. Ripper, a man whose grip on reality is about as firm as his grip on proper bodily fluid management, decides to launch a nuclear attack on the USSR. His reasoning? He’s convinced the Soviets are corrupting America’s “precious bodily fluids” through fluoridation. (This is what happens when you get your medical information from questionable sources.)

Group Captain Lionel Mandrake, a British RAF officer, finds himself trapped at the base with the paranoid Ripper, trying desperately to get the recall code. Meanwhile, President Merkin Muffley (Peter Sellers in one of his three roles) assembles his advisors in the War Room, including the enthusiastically hawkish General Buck Turgidson, who treats potential nuclear war like an exciting football game.

Enter Dr. Strangelove himself (Sellers again), a wheelchair-bound ex-Nazi scientist whose right arm occasionally decides to recreate the Nazi salute (talk about muscle memory issues). He’s supposedly the expert, though his expertise seems mainly focused on underground bunkers and their potential for repopulating the Earth – with a special emphasis on the male-to-female ratio that would be “necessary.”

The situation gets even more complicated when we learn about the Soviet “Doomsday Machine” – a device designed to automatically trigger world-ending nuclear destruction if the USSR is attacked. The Soviets built it as a deterrent but hadn’t announced it yet because, as the Soviet Ambassador explains, they were saving it for a special occasion. (Because nothing says “surprise party” like mutually assured destruction.)

As bombers approach their targets, Major T.J. “King” Kong (Slim Pickens) leads his crew with cowboy enthusiasm, determined to complete their mission despite increasingly obvious signs that maybe they shouldn’t. This culminates in the iconic scene of Kong riding a nuclear bomb like a rodeo bull, which probably wasn’t in the Air Force training manual.

The film ends with a montage of nuclear explosions set to the cheery “We’ll Meet Again,” because sometimes gallows humor is the only appropriate response to the potential end of civilization.

Through it all, the film serves as a brilliant satire of Cold War politics, military bureaucracy, and the absurdity of nuclear deterrence – reminding us that sometimes the biggest threat to humanity isn’t our weapons, but the people in charge of them who insist they know exactly what they’re doing. It also suggests that maybe, just maybe, putting world-ending weapons in the hands of people worried about their precious bodily fluids isn’t the best idea.

The whole thing makes you wonder if somewhere, in some war room, there’s still a General Turgidson explaining how we can “win” a nuclear war with only 10-20 million casualties, “tops.”

4/5 ICMBs. I love Peter Seller’s comedy and him playing three roles in this movie probably set the standard for Eddie Murphy to follow in the 80’s. The comedy is absurdist and really reflects the time the movie was made and released. I’m not sure it would be very successful outside of that time however as the brand of humor is pretty specific. Overall though, superbly acted throughout even if it went a bit long in spots.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Let me lay out this twisted treasure hunt of a Western, where everyone’s moral compass spins like a broken slot machine!

The story kicks off during the Civil War, introducing us to our three protagonists – though “protagonists” might be stretching it for at least two of them. There’s “Blondie” (Clint Eastwood) who’s “the Good,” though his goodness seems mainly to consist of being slightly less awful than everyone else. Then there’s Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef), “the Bad,” who will cheerfully kill anyone as long as he’s been paid for it (he’s very professional about his awfulness). And finally, there’s Tuco (Eli Wallach), “the Ugly,” a fast-talking bandit who’s about as trustworthy as a rattlesnake in a sock drawer.

The film opens with Blondie and Tuco running a scam where Blondie turns in Tuco for the bounty, then shoots the rope at his hanging (usually waiting until the last possible second, because apparently Blondie has a flair for the dramatic). They split the money and move on to the next town. That is until Blondie decides to end their partnership by abandoning Tuco in the desert – which, as far as workplace resignations go, is pretty extreme.

Tuco survives (because cockroaches and Tuco are nature’s great survivors) and spends the next portion of the movie trying to get revenge on Blondie. This leads to him forcing Blondie to walk through the desert without water, which seems fair – though you’ve got to wonder if these guys have heard of mediation.

The plot kicks into high gear when they stumble across a dying Confederate soldier who reveals the location of $200,000 in Confederate gold. The catch? He tells Tuco the name of the cemetery where it’s buried and tells Blondie the name on the grave. Now they’re forced to work together, which goes about as well as you’d expect for two guys who just finished trying to kill each other.

Enter Angel Eyes, who’s been tracking this gold too. What follows is a three-way dance of alliances, betrayals, and Mexican standoffs, all while the Civil War rages around them like an inconvenient background event. Our three anti-heroes keep crossing paths with the war, getting wrapped up in prison camps and battles, though they remain impressively focused on their gold hunt despite the minor distraction of America tearing itself apart.

It all culminates in the famous three-way showdown in a massive circular graveyard, because if you’re going to have a Mexican standoff, you might as well do it somewhere photogenic. After enough tension to snap a piano wire, Blondie emerges victorious, sharing the gold with Tuco – except he’s left Tuco’s share out of reach while he’s tied up, because old habits die hard.

The whole thing is set to Ennio Morricone’s iconic score, which manages to turn “wah-WAH-wah” into high art. The film basically created the template for every subsequent movie where people squint at each other while pointing guns, which turns out to be quite a few movies.

And there you have it – a story that proves that maybe the real treasure was the enemies we made along the way, and that having a cool theme song makes everything you do about 300% more awesome.

5 Pistoleros out of 5. I’ll admit I love a good western – the genre has thinned out in recent years and not all of them a great but this is Clint Eastwood in his prime and he’s facing off against a great supporting cast (much better than that chair on the stage). The score is iconic – ecstasy of gold is right up there with what I consider one of the most iconic movie songs of all time (first place if you pretend John Williams doesn’t exist) [do yourself a favor and listen to Metallica’s cover if you haven’t its amazing]

If I didn’t have a series of other things to do this year – this would have probably knocked me into a Western movie rabbit hole. I still might go on one after this challenge is over because this movie is still resonating with me months after I watched it.

Worldwide Food Tour – Greece

Briam is a traditional Greek vegetable dish that showcases the Mediterranean diet’s emphasis on simple, wholesome ingredients. It consists primarily of sliced summer vegetables – typically eggplant, zucchini, potatoes, and tomatoes – layered in a baking dish and generously drizzled with olive oil. Red onions, garlic, and fresh herbs like parsley and oregano are added for extra flavor.

The dish has a rich, comforting taste with each vegetable maintaining its distinct character while melding together through slow roasting. The tomatoes and olive oil create a light sauce that brings everything together, while the edges of the vegetables become slightly crispy, adding textural contrast. When properly cooked, the potatoes become tender, the zucchini maintains a slight bite, and the eggplant develops a creamy texture.

Briam is believed to have originated in Turkey and spread throughout the Balkans, with each region developing its own variation. In Greece, it’s particularly popular during summer when the vegetables are at their peak. It’s a prime example of “ladera,” Greek dishes cooked in olive oil, and reflects the resourceful nature of Mediterranean cooking where simple ingredients are transformed into satisfying meals.

I made the dish with peak summer vegetables and it was really quite good – so much so that next summer I have plans to make it again, perhaps with some tweaks!

Worldwide Food Tour – Senegal

Maafe has its origins in the Manding (Mande) people, who historically inhabited present-day Senegal, Mali, and Guinea. It is believed to have been created centuries ago, when groundnuts (peanuts) were introduced to Africa through Portuguese traders in the 16th century.

Over time, peanuts became a staple crop in West Africa, leading to the development of rich, peanut-based stews like Maafe. The dish spread across the Sahel region, becoming a fundamental part of the cuisines of Mali, Gambia, Guinea, Nigeria, and Ivory Coast.

While Maafe is most closely associated with Senegal, it is widely popular across Francophone West Africa, with slight variations in ingredients and cooking techniques depending on the region.


What is Maafe?

At its core, Maafe is a peanut-based stew, thickened with tomatoes, spices, and vegetables, and often served with rice, couscous, or fufu. The dish’s rich, nutty flavor is balanced by the acidity of tomatoes, the savoriness of slow-cooked meat, and the earthy warmth of West African spices.

Essential Ingredients of Maafe:

  • Meat (or Protein): Typically chicken, beef, lamb, or even fish. Some vegetarian versions use tofu or chickpeas.
  • Peanut Butter (Groundnut Paste): The defining ingredient, giving the dish its signature creamy texture and nutty richness.
  • Tomatoes & Tomato Paste: Adds depth, acidity, and umami.
  • Onions & Garlic: Provide a strong aromatic base.
  • Vegetables: Often includes carrots, sweet potatoes, cabbage, okra, or potatoes for added heartiness.
  • Spices:
    • Ginger & Bay Leaves – For warmth and fragrance.
    • Chili Peppers or Scotch Bonnet – For a spicy kick (Maafe can be mild or fiery!).
    • Cumin & Coriander – For subtle earthiness.
  • Stock or Water: Helps create the luscious, thick sauce.

Some regional versions add coconut milk for extra creaminess, while others incorporate mustard, tamarind, or fermented locust beans for a deeper umami flavor.


Tasting Notes: A Perfect Balance of Nutty, Savory, and Spicy

A bowl of Maafe is deeply satisfying and complex:

  • The peanut butter gives it a creamy, silky texture, coating every bite with rich, nutty flavor.
  • The tomatoes add a bright acidity, balancing the richness of the groundnuts.
  • The meat is fork-tender, infused with the slow-simmered spices and sauce.
  • The vegetables absorb the flavorful broth, adding natural sweetness and texture.
  • The spices and chili bring a gentle heat, making every bite warming and fragrant.

Maafe’s comforting richness makes it the perfect dish for both everyday meals and festive occasions.


How Maafe is Served

Maafe is traditionally enjoyed as a communal meal, served with a starchy base to soak up the flavorful sauce.

Common Accompaniments:

  1. Steamed White Rice – The most common pairing, allowing the peanut sauce to shine.
  2. Couscous – Popular in Senegal and Mali, giving a light, fluffy contrast to the thick stew.
  3. Fufu (Pounded Yam or Cassava) – A traditional West African choice, perfect for scooping up the sauce.
  4. Bread – Sometimes served with crusty baguette (a French colonial influence).

In Senegal, Maafe is often eaten family-style, with people gathered around a large communal bowl, scooping up the stew with rice or bread.


Beyond Senegal: Maafe’s Influence Across West Africa

While Maafe is most famous in Senegal, it has many variations across West Africa:

  • In Mali, it’s called Tigadegena and often includes more vegetables.
  • In Gambia and Guinea, it is spicier and sometimes made with fish instead of meat.
  • In Nigeria and Ghana, peanut stews are similar but use local spices and ingredients.

No matter the version, the rich, nutty, and deeply comforting essence of Maafe remains the same.


Why Maafe is One of Senegal’s Most Beloved Dishes

Rich & Flavorful – A perfect harmony of peanuts, tomatoes, and spices.
Comforting & Hearty – A warming, satisfying meal that fills you up.
Versatile – Can be made with chicken, beef, lamb, fish, or even vegetarian.
A Dish with History – A centuries-old recipe with deep cultural roots in West Africa.
Perfect for Sharing – A communal dish that brings people together over good food.

Whether you’re enjoying it in Dakar, Bamako, or your own kitchen, Maafe is a taste of West African tradition in every spoonful.

Margherita Sbagliata

Margherita Sbagliata is a pizza that turns tradition on its head while still honoring the essence of what makes a classic Margherita so beloved. In Italian, “sbagliata” means “mistaken” or “wrong,” a word that suggests a happy accident or an intentional twist on the original. Much like the Negroni Sbagliato, where prosecco replaces gin for a lighter, sparkling take on the cocktail, Margherita Sbagliata takes the familiar ingredients of a traditional Pizza Margherita and rearranges them in a way that challenges expectations while delivering a completely satisfying experience.

At first glance, it might not even look like a Margherita pizza. The typical structure—red tomato sauce, white mozzarella, and green basil, meant to mirror the Italian flag—is flipped, reimagined, or even deconstructed depending on the pizzeria or chef making it. In some versions, the tomato is no longer the base but instead appears in chunks, roasted or semi-dried, scattered atop a white pizza, where a layer of fior di latte or burrata takes center stage. The result is a pizza that still tastes unmistakably like a Margherita but with a different balance of textures and flavors. Instead of a thin layer of tomato sauce seeping into the dough, the concentrated bursts of roasted or blistered cherry tomatoes add a more intense, almost jammy sweetness that contrasts beautifully with the creaminess of the cheese.

Another version of the Margherita Sbagliata plays with the cooking process, adding the tomato only after the pizza has baked, rather than spreading it onto the dough before it goes into the oven. This method, sometimes referred to as a reverse Margherita, allows the crust to develop a deeper char and crispness without absorbing moisture from the sauce, resulting in a more defined chew and crunch. When the pizza comes out of the oven, crushed or puréed tomatoes—sometimes raw, sometimes lightly cooked—are spooned over the bubbling cheese, creating a fresh and slightly unexpected contrast between the warm crust and the bright acidity of the tomato.

Some interpretations go even further, introducing ingredients like stracciatella, ricotta, or even smoked mozzarella to enhance the richness of the cheese element. Instead of the traditional basil leaf, some versions finish with a basil-infused oil or delicate microgreens, offering the herbal note in a more subtle, modern way. The flexibility of Margherita Sbagliata makes it an exciting canvas for chefs to experiment with while still keeping it firmly rooted in Italian tradition.

Despite the changes in presentation and technique, the fundamental appeal of this pizza remains the same as the original Margherita: a perfect harmony of dough, tomato, cheese, and basil. The “mistaken” part of its name is, in reality, anything but a mistake—it’s a rethinking of a classic that brings out different elements of its flavor profile, sometimes highlighting the brightness of the tomatoes, sometimes leaning into the creaminess of the cheese, sometimes emphasizing the crispness of the crust. It’s a variation that celebrates tradition while embracing the creativity that has always been a part of Italian cooking.

In Naples, where pizza is treated with near-religious devotion, you’re more likely to find the traditional Margherita reigning supreme, but in cities like Rome, Milan, and even international pizza hubs in New York or London, Margherita Sbagliata has carved out a niche as a modern, inventive alternative. Whether ordered in a trendy pizzeria or recreated at home with high-quality ingredients, it offers a fresh perspective on something familiar, proving that even a classic like the Margherita still has room for reinvention.

Goal Met: No Fast/Junk food for 30 days

This one was a bit more of a challenge than I originally anticipated. While I don’t frequent fast food places with any regularity I did hit them up a couple of times a month when I was in a hurry or was leaving work late and needed to grab something for myself on the way home. Tacking on “junk” food also ramped up the difficulty because I do love snacking throughout the day. Given all these factors, I knew that I would need to plan accordingly to counteract some pretty ingrained habits.

I stocked up on healthy snacks like nuts and fruit and in order to not grab a McMuffin on the way to work (a sometimes vice I quite enjoy) I opted to make this 30 days the one where I did intermittent fasting as well. By avoiding breakfast altogether there’s no need to figure out what I needed to replace my weekly stop with.

The first week was the roughest – mostly due to having to reprogram some habits that were pretty ingrained. Late afternoon hunger hit and where I would normally grab some chips or something like that I opted for some cheese or fruit. It just didn’t hit the same though. When I switched to some bread and olive oil with some spices in it that really became my go to snack.. sometimes with a bit of mozzarella or some fruit I think it was the savoriness I was missing which the peppery olive oil seemed to satisfy.

The weeks after because easier as I settled into a routine. The fasting helped by resetting my hunger signals (which has happened all the other time I fasted as well) allowing me to make more reasoned choices instead of just deciding to grab a burger or slice of pizza for lunch I opted for healthy choices instead.

I did, however, have pizza during this but it was pizza I made myself so I knew it was clean and had no chemicals or any additives but towards the end I really was craving a burger and fries.. so at the end of the 30 days I went to Red Robin with my kids and housed a burger and fries with complete abandon.

While my taste buds were happy the rest of my body was like ‘Bruv – what you doing?’ and I regretted not easing my way into a junk food meal – maybe a small burger and fries would have been a better option? I guess we’ll never know…

Regardless I found the month off junk food to be a mixed bag. I thought I’d feel healthier and have more energy but it was about the same which I found really odd. I know that the food is really not great for me so I’ve committed to eating less of it overall but cutting it out entirely? I don’t think that’s really something I’m willing to do as pizza and burgers are my comfort foods and my go-to when I just need something to slam my salt and fat receptors and kick off my dopamine rush.