Ayale-com.1026
net.cooks
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!yale-com!karzes
Thu Feb 25 23:14:04 1982
back to basics
I'd like to comment on some rather disturbing trends I've noticed
recently. While boiled wontons and ultimate chocolate chip cookies
and such are all very nice, I have yet to see any exotic or original
foods and recipes appear in this newsgroup. Without even thinking about
it, I could probably find 10 recipes for chocolate chip cookies or most
other food I've seen mentioned. Sure, there are tricks and improvements
which can be pointed out, and a lot to be learned by experimentation
and experience, but when you get right down to it, it's all very run-
of-the-mill.
What I'd like to present here is not a specific recipe, but a few
examples of the sorts of original, classical, or exotic foods which I
feel would be far more interesting and stimulating for all of us.
While most Americans and Europeans are all very conservative about
their foods, they are at the same time limiting themselves to a very
small subset of the savory and nutritious cuisine available to the
true gourmet. For example, most people I know balk at the thought of
eating (yech!) insects, grubs, and other assorted arachnids. However,
there are many more practical people in the world who would laugh at us.
While we stuff our faces with starches and junk foods, they prefer
the more sensible protean-rich arthropods. Now, most Americans see
nothing wrong with lobster or crab, so why does the thought of eating a
foot-long, half inch thick millipede bother us? In many places, it is
considered a treat.
Even when we are resonable about these matters, we have to kid
ourselves into believing that we are better than the "uncivilized
barbarians" who would stoop so low as to eat insects or grubs. When
the would-be gourmet refers to a jar of "baby bees", which basically
look like maggots and have a rather pleasant pasty taste, why is this
somehow different from eating a grub or termite found in one's back yard?
Indeed, there is a wealth of untapped foods to be tried, and I can
hardly do it justice here, so I will stop preaching and simply cite a few
more examples.
The Australian aborigines have a simple but elegant recipe for python.
It is similar to the method they use to cook most of their fish. They
cook their fish on hot rocks, scales and all, and then serve. Similarly,
to prepare a python they simply coil it about a stick and hold it over a fire.
In many parts of Malaysia, people exchange various tecniques for
preparing "household deer". To them, this is a perfectly resonable food.
So why, when informed that "household deer" are really just rats, do
Americans cringe? The ancient Romans nobility had a very interesting
recipe for baby rats which some readers may wish to try. They would
take small, blind, hairless baby rats, and fill stuff them with honey
(while alive), right before they were served. The guests would then
pop them into their mouths as they squeeked about the table, while
making light conversation.
Some of the more wordly people reading this have no doubt tried
calves brains, or those of pigs or sheep, cooked to blandness and
served in some sort of sauce. There is a classic chineese tradition
for the consumption of monkey brains which dates back thousands of
years. Although it is supposedly illegal today, there are still
some steadfast connoisseurs who continue the tradition secretly, deep
in some remote jungles.
The tecnique is basically this: in some sacred spot in the jungle,
a large circular granite table is kept. The center of the table has
a hole in it. Beneath this hold, a monkey is placed. The monkey is
tied in the position of a praying Buddah, with its head protruding
through the center of the table, chattering away at the top of its
lungs. A very skilled and honored man weilding a razor-sharp axe must
now perform a very delicate task. He must remove the top of the monkey's
skull with one blow, exposing but not damaging the brain. This done, the
monkey is now in a state of hysteria, but not really much pain. The
diners now bring forth several long-handled spoons and consume the
living brain.
For the more adventurous of you who may wish to try this with
a monkey from the local primate lab, a word of caution is in order.
If the monkey was born in captivity, there is little to fear. However,
if the monkey was born in the wild, and particularly if it hasn't been
in captivity for very long, there is a grave risk. It is not uncommon
for some of these monkeys to harbor parasitic worms which can be
contracted by eating the uncooked brain. Symptoms don't appear
right away, but after some time, when the worms have grown sufficiently
large, they migrate to the brain and slowly destroy it. Victims of
this ghastly disease usually lose their minds long before death.
Another point which I would like to make is the fact that several
foods which are still quite common are now completely ignored as
food. Consider some of the very small dogs, particularly some of the hairless
varieties. It is well known that these dogs were originally bred as
food, much like rock cornish game hens. However, at this point you'd
be lucky if the ASPCA would even let you try it (why this is so is
beyond me). As long as the animal is legally obtained, and humanely
killed, I see no harm whatsoever in it. Although it would be expensive
and time-consuming, the effort would probably prove well worth it.
It wouldn't be too difficult to bleed and gut one of these small dogs,
and the hairless variety could be cooked skin and all. Furthermore,
there are no noxious musk glands to be removed, as in deer and other
wild game. One could probably prepare these small dogs the same way
one would prepare a chicken of comparable weight.
One type of meat I've always been curious to try is long pork. For
those of you who are unfamiliar with this meat, it is reputed to taste
somewhat like pork, but the animal is somewhat longer and leaner. It
is, of course, human flesh, and that is a common term used for it
among cannibalistic tribes.
Although adult flesh may prove a bit tough, I suspect that the flesh
of infants and small children would be quite tender and juicy, and
a rare treat. Now, I am not the sort of person who roams the streets
snatching up small wandering children for the pot, and I am not
advocating such behavior. However, there are circumstances in which I
personally see no harm, all religious superstitions aside. I do not
see a great need to bury the deceased. If someone can donate his/her
body for medical research, then why not for culinary research as well?
Is it legal for a person to will his/her body to a friend or relative
to be ingested? Such practice is the norm in some "primitive" tribes.
The only real danger is if the person died of some infectious disease
or poisoning or such. However, if someone is run over by a truck
and his skull is crushed, what is the point of throwing away all of
that good meat? Particularly if it is a small child who was still
quite tender. Another reasonable source of edible human flesh is
the untapped supply of aborted fetuses, or the placenta (afterbirth)
of a normal delivery. Why must a senseless emotional reaction
deprive the world of such embryonic delights? In almost all placental
mammals, the mother eats the placenta following the birth of her
litter. Why, then, do humans feel compelled to throw such a portion
of nourishing food away?
As for the preparation of human flesh, I really know very little
of the subject. Certainly, it could be prepared just as any large
animal. However, the only traditional recipe with which I am at
all familiar is the method used by some tribes of American Indians.
When a member of an enemy tribe was captured, they would tie the victim
to a stake and build a fire beneath him. Members of the tribe would then
take turns thrusting burning sticks into the flesh, searing it to
a savory crisp. They would then tear large chunks from the burning body
and consume them, acquiring, as they believed, some of the man's
"life energy".
While some of these foods may seem appalling, none of them are new
and all have at some time or other been regarded as perfectly normal.
Now, I'm not saying I'm against chocolate chip cookies. Quite
the contrary, I happen to like them. And though I don't happen
to be terribly concerned with hollistic approaches to cooking, or
macrobiotic theories on food, I believe they should all be given
their fair share of attention in a democratic newsgroup. However, I
also feel that it is only fair to give equal time, or at least a
reasonable amount, to some of the fascinating foods which have
been enjoyed for thousands of years all over the world, which the
average beer-guzzling American can't be concerned with.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>
of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.