Why Not Lamb?

[Jinmyo]

Mr. Cutlets, in your opinion why has lamb been a relatively uncommon meat in North America?

[Mister_Cutlets]

I don't know. Waverly Root asserts, in Eating in America (1976), that it is a distant forth among American meats, and that the average american only eats four pounds of it a year. It has something to do, I think, with the historically timid palates of Americans. Lamb has a distinct taste, and that in itself is enough to put off a lot of people, who prefer skinless chicken breasts and filet of sole to meats that know their own mind. Lamb is pretty popular overall; what strikes me is why people don't eat more mutton. Lamb is a pallid version of mutton, and resembles its rank majesty only as much as a game hen does a full-bodied roaster.

I think, too, that lamb has been under-utilized by cooks. When people think of lamb they think of lamb chops and leg of lamb. Lamb chops are relatively expensive, and of course the contemporary obsession with fat causes them to "frenched" by butchers, which makes them hardly worth eating. Leg of lamb, meanwhile, is an old-time classic, but only when made carefully in a slow oven. Just popping a leg of lamb into an oven won't get you far, and it will be chewy if you overcook it.

Finally, I think that the relative obscurity of lamb can be accounted for not by any of its own deficiencies, but rather by the comparative excellence of beef and pork. Cattle are really the perfect meat animal, and it was our country in which beef production on a truly vast scale, of the kind never imagined in the old world, enabled every man, woman, and child to enjoy the bounty of fresh beef every day. And the humble pig, of course, which eats garbage or even forages for itself, and then gives to the world a hundred tasty kinds of meat, will always be the staple meat of family farms. Just like movies, cars, gunnery, and so many other european inventions, beef and pork were taken by the American genius to unforeseen heights, and lamb was left behind. People still like it, esp. Greek-americans, but it never found its way into the starry dynamo of American development, and remains a backwater in the land of meat.

yrs,

Mr. Cutlets

[MichelleW]

Mr. Cutlets, what are your thoughts on the less expensive cuts of lamb, like shoulder?

[Foodie_Penguin]

I don't know.  Waverly Root asserts, in Eating in America (1976), that it is a distant forth among American meats, and that the average american only eats four pounds of it a year.  It has something to do, I think, with the historically timid palates of Americans.  Lamb has a distinct taste, and that in itself is enough to put off a lot of people, who prefer skinless chicken breasts and filet of sole to meats that know their own mind.  Lamb is pretty popular overall; what strikes me is why people don't eat more mutton.  Lamb is a pallid version of mutton, and resembles its rank majesty only as much as a game hen does a full-bodied roaster.

I think, too, that lamb has been under-utilized by cooks.  When people think of lamb they think of lamb chops and leg of lamb.  Lamb chops are relatively expensive, and of course the contemporary obsession with fat causes them to "frenched" by butchers, which makes them hardly worth eating.  Leg of lamb, meanwhile, is an old-time classic, but only when made carefully in a slow oven.  Just popping a leg of lamb into an oven won't get you far, and it will be chewy if you overcook it.

Finally, I think that the relative obscurity of lamb can be accounted for not by any of its own deficiencies, but rather by the comparative excellence of beef and pork.  Cattle are really the perfect meat animal, and it was our country in which beef production on a truly vast scale, of the kind never imagined in the old world, enabled every man, woman, and child to enjoy the bounty of fresh beef every day.  And the humble pig, of course, which eats garbage or even forages for itself, and then gives to the world a hundred tasty kinds of meat, will always be the staple meat of family farms.  Just like movies, cars, gunnery, and so many other european inventions, beef and pork were taken by the American genius to unforeseen heights, and lamb was left behind.  People still like it, esp. Greek-americans, but it never found its way into the starry dynamo of American development, and remains a backwater in the land of meat.

yrs,

Mr. Cutlets

Enjoying lamb and having some difficulties finding it locally, I've done some local research into lamb.

Having lived in the UK and eaten Welsh and English lamb, I found that most lamb in the US is imported from Oz or NZ. This is a no-no for me. Can't stand the taste of NZ lamb and having tried Oz lamb, I didn't like it either.

After visiting a local sheep farm, I now know the reason why I don't like Oz and NZ lamb and this may explain why lamb is not so popular in the US.

Oz and NZ lambs are slaughtered at a more mature age, hence the stronger taste. US lamb and UK lambs are slaughtered at a younger taste and so they don't have that strong taste that may put off some diners.

Fortunately, I can find US raised lamb on an irregular basis and enjoy roasting a lamb from time to time. I also do a mean grilled lamb chop. Now is the time to prepare lamb shanks, a great winter food.

Foodie_Penguin

[budrichard]

I think the difference besides age of the lamb is that US lamb is fattened on corn and NZ and OZ are grass fed. I prefer US but have tried NZ and it is more gamey or stronger without the fat content. There are many sources for US lamb. A Greek grocery will only have US lamb. There is also a mail order supply from Penn but I have never used them. -Dick

[Mister_Cutlets]

Interesting posts...to go back a little, though, I welcome the economy cuts of lamb, such as the shoulder and shank, as being the best parts of the animal. You don't really get much lamb taste from chops or leg, other than the fat; and as I regretfully mentioned in my first post, the lamb fat is often gone by the time it comes out on the plate in most US restaurants. Shoulder is as wonderful in lamb as it is in every other animal; there are three or four different groups of muscles running in different directions, all with their own collagen to break down and melt away, and with plenty of fat to help the process along. And of course the value of lamb shanks to human happiness is beyond question.

Yet my favorite piece of lamb is almost surely the breast. It's very fatty, and you have to slow roast it for a very long time, but if you do, and keep cutting away the strata of lamb rib meat as the fat melts, you are left with the most lamby, saltry, fibrous, and vivid faux-cutlet you could hope for. And if you don't roast up some little potatoes in the clear hot lamb fat that came out, you should have your head examined!

Unhappily I almost never see lamb breast prepared that way. Two little restaurants called Moustache serve what they call "lamb ribs," but which is really breast-flap meat; but it's not as good as I make it at home. Lamb breast may have to stay as one of Mr. Cutlets' many solo and unwholesome in-house treats.

yours,

Mr. Cutlets

[Foodie_Penguin]

I think the difference besides age of the lamb is that US lamb is fattened on corn and NZ and OZ are grass fed. I prefer US but have tried NZ and it is more gamey or stronger without the fat content. There are many sources for US lamb. A Greek grocery will only have US lamb. There is also a mail order supply from Penn but I have never used them. -Dick

That's right. That's one reason I don't enjoy the taste of NZ lamb. It's the grassy smell. Puts me off.

When I see lamb on a menu at restaurants, I always ask where it's sourced from. So far, it's always been from Australia and this includes an upscale Greek restaurant in Durham, and a French upscale restaurant (now RIP) in Durham.

Foodie_Penguin