Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Edit History

huiray

huiray


Added ¶¶ note.

BTW in that old thread one of the posters says that..."In Malaysia the well established culinary traditions of both China and India have to some extent been assimilated into what we think of Malaysian cuisine today. Think of the many Malaysian curries for example - or fried noodles and laksa etc as examples of the Indian and Chinese influences repectively."

 

I think this is incorrect, or at least over-simplistic.  I think it more correct to say that "Malaysian Cuisine" is an amalgam of all these disparate cuisines which have absorbed each other's influences into their cuisines. So, for example, it is more like Regional Chinese cuisines (Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, predominantly) absorbing and incorporating MALAY influences and spices into themselves – rather than either Malay or "Malaysian" cuisine absorbing Chinese influences.¶¶ (Or one of the regional Chinese cuisines absorbing Southern Indian - Tamilian, or Keralan, for example - influences) There is a distinct difference between the two ways of saying it.  The Wikipedia article I cited above in my first post here actually is a decent summary of the cuisine.

 

The poster also ignored the influence of the colonial eras (both Portuguese and British) and both the Eurasian and "Colonial Hainanese" cuisines/dishes that resulted. "Hainanese Pork Chop", for example, is probably found nowhere else besides Malaysia (and Singapore) - deriving from when British colonialists employed cooks who happened to be Hainanese in their kitchens,** and these cooks adapted the ways and demands of their British/English employers to what they knew. Look up Hainanese Pork Chop, one might find it interesting. The Portuguese influence is frequently more pronounced in the Malaccan regions (NOT Moluccan - a completely different geographical place) and Eurasian Cuisine is a recognized sub-category in Malaysian Cuisine.

 

** The Hainanese were the last (in a general sense) of the regional folks from China to get to Malaysia/Singapore. Most of the regional/dialect-specific groups from China tended to cluster in certain industries or lines of work; and by the time the Hainanese arrived, cooking for others was one of the last things left for them to do if they could not establish themselves independently.

 

ETA: ¶¶ Of course the flow goes both ways - Malays also adopt some of the styles and character of Chinese/Indian etc cuisines, but with "halal" requirements and their own taste preferences coming into play. "Hainanese Chicken Rice" is much loved by the Malays, for example, but they put their spin on it and make the chicken into a ROASTED chicken. (Malays hate "rubbery" skin, in general, which normal HCR would have)

huiray

huiray

BTW in that old thread one of the posters says that..."In Malaysia the well established culinary traditions of both China and India have to some extent been assimilated into what we think of Malaysian cuisine today. Think of the many Malaysian curries for example - or fried noodles and laksa etc as examples of the Indian and Chinese influences repectively."

 

I think this is incorrect, or at least over-simplistic.  I think it more correct to say that "Malaysian Cuisine" is an amalgam of all these disparate cuisines which have absorbed each other's influences into their cuisines. So, for example, it is more like Regional Chinese cuisines (Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, predominantly) absorbing and incorporating MALAY influences and spices into themselves – rather than either Malay or "Malaysian" cuisine absorbing Chinese influences. (Or one of the regional Chinese cuisines absorbing Southern Indian - Tamilian, or Keralan, for example - influences) There is a distinct difference between the two ways of saying it.  The Wikipedia article I cited above in my first post here actually is a decent summary of the cuisine.

 

The poster also ignored the influence of the colonial eras (both Portuguese and British) and both the Eurasian and "Colonial Hainanese" cuisines/dishes that resulted. "Hainanese Pork Chop", for example, is probably found nowhere else besides Malaysia (and Singapore) - deriving from when British colonialists employed cooks who happened to be Hainanese in their kitchens,** and these cooks adapted the ways and demands of their British/English employers to what they knew. Look up Hainanese Pork Chop, one might find it interesting. The Portuguese influence is frequently more pronounced in the Malaccan regions (NOT Moluccan - a completely different geographical place) and Eurasian Cuisine is a recognized sub-category in Malaysian Cuisine.

 

** The Hainanese were the last (in a general sense) of the regional folks from China to get to Malaysia/Singapore. Most of the regional/dialect-specific groups from China tended to cluster in certain industries or lines of work; and by the time the Hainanese arrived, cooking for others was one of the last things left for them to do if they could not establish themselves independently.

huiray

huiray

BTW in that old thread one of the posters says that..."In Malaysia the well established culinary traditions of both China and India have to some extent been assimilated into what we think of Malaysian cuisine today. Think of the many Malaysian curries for example - or fried noodles and laksa etc as examples of the Indian and Chinese influences repectively."

 

I think this is incorrect, or at least over-simplistic.  I think it more correct to say that "Malaysian Cuisine" is an amalgam of all these disparate cuisines which have absorbed each other's influences into their cuisines. So, for example, it is more like Regional Chinese cuisines (Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, predominantly) absorbing and incorporating MALAY influences and spices into themselves – rather than either Malay or "Malaysian" cuisine absorbing Chinese influences. (Or one of the regional Chinese cuisines absorbing Southern Indian - Tamilian, or Keralan, for example - influences) There is a distinct difference between the two ways of saying it.  The Wikipedia article I cited above in my first post here actually is a decent summary of the cuisine.

 

The poster also ignored the influence of the colonial eras (both Portuguese and British) and both the Eurasian and "Colonial Hainanese" cuisines/dishes that resulted. "Hainanese Pork Chop", for example, is probably found nowhere else besides Malaysia (and Singapore) - deriving from when British colonialists employed cooks who happened to be Hainanese in their kitchens, and these cooks adapted the ways and demands of their British/English employers to what they knew. Look up Hainanese Pork Chop, one might find it interesting. The Portuguese influence is frequently more pronounced in the Malaccan regions (NOT Moluccan - a completely different geographical place) and Eurasian Cuisine is a recognized sub-category in Malaysian Cuisine.

huiray

huiray

BTW in that old thread one of the posters says that..."In Malaysia the well established culinary traditions of both China and India have to some extent been assimilated into what we think of Malaysian cuisine today. Think of the many Malaysian curries for example - or fried noodles and laksa etc as examples of the Indian and Chinese influences repectively."

 

I think this is incorrect, or at least over-simplistic.  I think it more correct to say that "Malaysian Cuisine" is an amalgam of all these disparate cuisines which have absorbed each other's influences into their cuisines. So, for example, it is more like Regional Chinese cuisines (Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, predominantly) absorbing and incorporating MALAY influences and spices into themselves – rather than either Malay or "Malaysian" cuisine absorbing Chinese influences. There is a distinct difference between the two ways of saying it.  The Wikipedia article I cited above in my first post here actually is a decent summary of the cuisine.

 

The poster also ignored the influence of the colonial eras (both Portuguese and British) and both the Eurasian and "Colonial Hainanese" cuisines/dishes that resulted. "Hainanese Pork Chop", for example, is probably found nowhere else besides Malaysia (and Singapore) - deriving from when British colonialists employed cooks who happened to be Hainanese in their kitchens, and these cooks adapted the ways and demands of their British/English employers to what they knew. Look up Hainanese Pork Chop, one might find it interesting. The Portuguese influence is frequently more pronounced in the Malaccan regions (NOT Moluccan - a completely different geographical place) and Eurasian Cuisine is a recognized sub-category in Malaysian Cuisine.

×
×
  • Create New...