Thursday, December 21, 2006
Horse Mackerel by Any Other Name Would Apparently Taste Better
A while ago, my aunt loaned me Karin Muller's book Japanland: A Year in Search of Wa, since it had reminded her somewhat of my year in Japan. It's an excellently written book, which you'd expect from someone who makes documentaries for PBS and National Geographic. I'm actually sort of in awe of Muller, since she is really able to go out and really do things all by herself, where I often need at least the presence of another person to make me be adventurous. But after I finished the book, I noticed an item of linguistic interest.
At one point, Muller is staying in a ryokan run by a woman who apparently finds serving Westerners to be a huge chore, and delights in watching them fail to eat real Japanese food. Muller describes her breakfast like this:
Turns out, it isn't called horse mackerel. At least, not anymore. A week or so later, when I was read Forbidden Words, I read this:
A while ago, my aunt loaned me Karin Muller's book Japanland: A Year in Search of Wa, since it had reminded her somewhat of my year in Japan. It's an excellently written book, which you'd expect from someone who makes documentaries for PBS and National Geographic. I'm actually sort of in awe of Muller, since she is really able to go out and really do things all by herself, where I often need at least the presence of another person to make me be adventurous. But after I finished the book, I noticed an item of linguistic interest.
At one point, Muller is staying in a ryokan run by a woman who apparently finds serving Westerners to be a huge chore, and delights in watching them fail to eat real Japanese food. Muller describes her breakfast like this:
I march downstairs, determined to disprove her Western stereotypes and polish off my plate. The meal is already laid out on the table: dried grilled horse mackerel, as stiff as sawdust soaked in Elmer's glue; pickled radishes and strips of seaweed; rice and tea and soy sauce; and – my heart quails – two servings of natto. (113)The passage is of course followed by the requisite, in-depth, appalled and disgusted description of natto. (I can't recall having much of a reaction to natto, though I'm sure I must have had some at some point. I'll reserve my disgusted description for the stinky tofu dish encountered in China.) The thing that struck me out of the description above, though, was the part about the "horse mackerel." I've had this breakfast before, when the teachers went on the end of year trip to the really nice ryokan, and I knew the breakfast fish bits she was talking about. I actually thought they were good on the rice, and I thought it was interesting to find out it was called "horse mackerel," having been told the name only in Japanese.
Turns out, it isn't called horse mackerel. At least, not anymore. A week or so later, when I was read Forbidden Words, I read this:
Antipodeans are dubious about eating something called shark (perhaps it is because they sometimes eat us); so when shark is intended as food, it is called in Australian English flake, and in New Zealand English lemon fish. Well, why not? Apparently, no one would eat tuna either until the name was changed from horse mackerel – 'tuna' tastes better than 'horse mackerel', it seems. (182)So my question is, did Muller use horse mackerel as a conscious choice to make the breakfast sound intentionally that much more weird and unappetizing? Or was it a dictionary translation problem? The Japanese do use the English loanword "tuna", or rather tsuna, but only to talk about tuna-in-a-can, not regular tuna meat. So do Japanese-English dictionaries translate whatever the real Japanese word for tuna is as horse mackerel still? I wouldn't be too surprised. Or was she using an old dictionary? We may never know…
Labels: books, Japan, language
Comments:
<< Home
To me, "horse mackerel" sounds weird and interesting and I want to eat it more. I already know what tuna is.
Yes, but Neil, you have been known to eat bones and fire.
Also, if you'd been growing up way back when, "horse mackerel" would have sounded normal and boring, while "tuna" would have been exotic.
Also, if you'd been growing up way back when, "horse mackerel" would have sounded normal and boring, while "tuna" would have been exotic.
Regardless of what you may call it, seafood has no business at the breakfast table. Fish is not a morning food. This is certainly not a problem limited to Japanese cuisine. Our close friends across the pond are equally guilty of this indiscretion.
A little bit later in the day, though, and fish becomes a tasty treat that's good to eat.
A little bit later in the day, though, and fish becomes a tasty treat that's good to eat.
# posted by 
: 10:45 AM
: 10:45 AM
What about bagels and lox? That's a delicious way to start the morning. But then, I love dinner for breakfast and breakfast for dinner. And I will be calling tuna horse mackerel from now on, canned or not, because it sounds funny.
Despite being from a coastal state, I have always had a deep distrust of seafood, probably because I acquired a fear of choking on a fish bone at a young and tender age, so I'm not necessarily likely to think seafood is good for any meal, regardless of time of day. However, I have always made an exception for tuna, graduating from tuna-in-a-can to other forms, so to resolve the Mark-edict of no fish at breakfast, I am hereby declaring tuna to be an honorary not-fish. (Maybe lox will have to be not-fish, too. I haven't actually ever tried it. Is it fishy?)
I like lox on bagels just fine, but not for breakfast. It's seafood, and as such in a category of flavors that do not belong in the part of the day before about 11am. Breakfast food (the real kind that doesn't include seafood) is good any time of the day or night, however.
# posted by : 11:23 PM
: 11:23 PM
Lox is smoked, cured, salmon, and I think salmon is less "fishy" and more flavorful than other fish, probably because of the fat content. I always buy fish filleted becauseI don't like bones either.
Post a Comment
<< Home
