Fruit is amazing. This is one aspect of creation that never fails to astound me. The colors are phenomenal. Painters have the hardest time trying to copy the pure, bright, rich yellow of a lemon or the luscious translucent purple of a grape. In my oil painting class I must have spent two weeks trying to capture the right vibrancy, shape, and texture of an orange for my still life. Granted, non-amateur painters can do it much faster because they have learned the tricks and have the best, lead-based cadmium paints, but even so, fruits (and vegetables) are an endless subject for painting because of their variety and pleasing appearance.
If it's good fruit, the inside will be even better than the outside. How can it be that this fruit, spawned by millions of years of evolution, has decided that is advantageous to be the right size for a human hand. To be tough on the outside to resist insects and other damaging forces? To be juicy and easy to eat on the inside? To be ready to eat without any preparation?
When you want to eat it, you can cut it in half. But until you cut it in half, exposing the succulent inside, the rind or peel protects the fruit from spoiling. It almost seems like fruit was made to be eaten...
There are "personal" fruits like:
Kumquats (I've never actually eaten one of these)
And then there are some fruits, like the pineapple, that are clearly meant for group consumption. I can't think of any ontological reason for this, but it is interesting.
Coconut (does that count as a fruit?)
Then there is pomegranate, which is just plain strange. Is it a personal or a shared fruit? Surely pomegranates are not actually meant for any sort of nutrition. I mean, they taste great, but they are so much work to eat. You eat 10 seeds and are then too tired to eat any more. Maybe they are dieters' fruit.