I'm reading Consider the Fork, by Bee Wilson, which explores the history of cooking technologies all the way back to fire. In it, there is an illuminating passage that's very Guns, Germs, and Steel-y in explaining England's reputation for bad food that I wanted to share and expand on since it really struck me as seeming to make a lot of sense. One of those "aha moment" feelings.
Basically, compared to other parts of the world, England was both densely wooded and grassy, providing a lot of fuel for roasting, which is a very energy-intensive method of cooking, and a lot of feed for raising grazing animals. Around Europe, the English were known as masterful roasters, and they developed expertise in open-hearth roasting to the extreme. Wilson also notes that besides roasting, through the middle centuries of
the second millennium CE, England was particularly fond of bread and
beer, which were also reliant on copious supplies of firewood. However, this blessing of resources was also a curse in that it allowed them to rest on their laurels and not develop more creative and varied cuisine (I suppose it could be related to the natural resource curse that some countries suffer from).
To expand on this point a bit, it's always seemed a little odd to me that so much of more traditional American cuisine, with its roots in England/Europe, relies on roasting and baking since heat transfer through air is one of the least efficient ways to cook (as Scott McGee discusses in On Food and Cooking). So why would so much of any culinary tradition lean on those techniques? At least on the face of it, growing from a tradition rooted in roasting (which evolved toward contemporary methods of baking and "roasting") and in which fuel supply was not a problem could be an explanation or part of one.
In contrast to England's case, Wilson highlights China,
which was relatively fuel-poor. Although Chinese cuisine also has roasts, wok frying was and is the basic and
dominant cooking technique, and cutting foods into small pieces
increases their surface area and enables quicker cooking with less fuel.
After cooking technologies evolved away from open-hearth roasting, though, Wilson notes that "English cooks were left with an entire group of skills that couldn't easily be transferred to other cooking methods." So they were caught up a dead end and have been playing catch up.
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Have I told you how great black beans and corn are together? Because black beans and corn are great together. Toss 'em together and you can't go wrong. Though, of course, you could add other things to them, too, and make a deeper flavored salad.
One note: fresh, raw corn is fantastic in salad; it has a nice crispness to it that is a great textural pairing with the softer, cooked black beans (and other ingredients one might add as I did in this salad). Canned corn, on the other hand, has been cooked through, and thus is soft.
Here's what I did this time:
Black Bean and Corn Salad
1 (14-15 oz.) can black beans, drained and rinsed
2 ears corn, kernels sliced off and separated
1 avocado, diced
1 jalapeno, ribs and seeds removed, diced very small
1/2 pint cherry tomatoes, quartered
1/4 tsp salt
1 shallot, diced very small, soaked in cold water for 10+ minutes and drained (skip the soak if you like the spice/bite)
1/2 tsp salt
1/2 tsp pepper
1/2 tsp ground cumin
2 limes’ juice
1/4 cup chopped cilantro
1/4 cup chopped scallions (1-2 stalks)
- Toss tomatoes with salt and set aside for 10 minutes. Rinse and drain.
- Combine all ingredients in large bowl and gently mix thoroughly. Serve cool or at room temperature.
Happy Cinco de Mayo!