The Cuisine of the United Kingdom

[John Whiting]

John - my comments were honest critic and not ment to be an attack on your friend, so sorry for any discomfort.

No offense taken. I declared my interest merely to discredit my own opinions.

[Adam Balic]

Sussex Pond Pudding. Just excellent really.

Ha! you beat me to it. Do you make it with or without the lemon?

Both, but mostly without (butter, brown sugar, lemon zest as replacement) as the lemons scare the guests and it is difficult to make the individual portion puddings using a whole lemon.

Lemon zest? Oh dear. I hadn't considered the problem of individual-sized puds, and I suppose I see the point, but still - seems a sad substitute for the opulent juiciness of the whole lemon harmonizing with the butter and sugar. Individual SP pud - sheesh. Not for me, thanks. Make a whole one and share it around, or don't bother.

(I was curious, though, about the version with no lemon at all, because I'd never even imagined such a thing until I stumbled across it in an early 19th-c recipe. I can see why, since lemons would have been so much less common/available, but it didn't seem right for both versions to carry the same name, given how completely different they are.)

Well I must confess that the first timeI had the pudding it was in Australia and it was the no lemon version (which is odd given how many backyards have lemon trees). I promise never to have the no lemon version again.

C. Anne Wilson - I have only read a few articles of hers and enjoyed her writing style. One article she wrote was about the connection between medieval european cooking, muslim cooking and the crusades. Very interesting, with the only criticism being that it didn't take into account Sicily, Moorish-Spain etc, but this is a small matter.

[Adam Balic]

John - my comments were honest critic and not ment to be an attack on your friend, so sorry for any discomfort.

No offense taken. I declared my interest merely to discredit my own opinions.

Oh, well that is OK then.

[Jonathan Day]

I wonder how strong the stereotype still is. Britain sustained enormous economic damage during and after World War II. Some rationing lasted into the 1950s. Yes, there was some horrible food around.

Things are very different today. Food and cookery are still not the national obsessions here that they are in France, nor can you breathe them in the air and drink them in the water as in Italy and perhaps Spain. But availability of ingredients, general awareness of cuisine and skill of cooks, in restaurants and homes, are increasingly strong here. On culinary grounds I would far rather be in the UK than in Germany, Austria, anywhere in Scandinavia, anywhere in Eastern Europe -- or in the US or Canada. Asia is a different story.

[jackal10]

I agree things have got a lot better.

For wine the UK has always had an advantage, because of the history as a trading nation, so we have advantages in range and good merchants. Although you can get excellent wine in say France or Spain, it tends to be of local (and sometimes very local origin. Rarely would you see, say a South American (or Californian) wine, or even wine not of the district. Even though the wine is outrageousely taxed in the UK, at the higher end, say $25 and up per bottle, the tax makes little difference. What we miss is cheap everyday modestly priced drinking wine.

I am constantly amazed at just how well the supermarkets do. Food items that were rare even a few years ago (dried morels, for example) are now on supermarkets shelves. There is an increasing empahsis on local and fresh ingredients, and in some on quality rather than lowest price. Organic foods are also increasing in availability.

[Adam Balic]

More good things:

Bath Chaps - one cannot have enough pig cheek IMO.

Black Bun -Scottish.

Buttery Rowies (Butteries, Aberdeen Rowies). Excellent regional pastry.

Selkirk Bannock.

Marmalade

Port

Oatcakes

Cumberland sausage

Bacon - Aryeshire sweet cure at the moment.

All of these items (OK, maybe not Port) depend on the skill of the maker and the quality of the ingredients used. Seems self evident, but given the terrible food I have found here using the names of these dishes, it obviously isn't.

[Andy Lynes]

In terms of how availability of good ingredients in the UK has changed, there is no doubt that there is an immense variety of produce in the supermarkets and specialist shops that simply wasn't there 15-20 years ago. However, when I was growing up in the late 60's/early 70's I clearly remember accompanying my mother to the local butcher, fishmonger, and grocer and buying fresh ingredients for our meals. I still recall seeing the carcasses being delivered to the butcher and that he would often cut a joint to order. Now, meat is often delivered to butchers pre-portion and even pre-packed.

My memory of food at home is that it was mostly cooked from scratch, despite my Mother hating the task. Of course we had fish fingers and burgers and the like, but more often than not it was freshly cooked fish or meat with veg, or a stew or salad and possibly a home made apple pie for dessert.

Today, I have a very good butcher just around the corner from my house, but the nearest grocer's is the city centre open market, and the nearest usuable fishmonger is a 20 minute drive away. If I want to buy really good cheese and bread I have to find a deli whose prices are now aimed at those who can afford to treat food as a hobby rather than a necessity.

So the situation today is that the good basic food that was available to me as a child on my doorstep at prices my family could afford is now only obtainable as part of a treasure hunt around a 10 mile radius of my home, and at premium prices. This is progress?

[John Whiting]

It's often said that in London today it's possible to buy a greater variety of foods, both ingredients and already prepared, than in any other city. And where meats and cheeses are concerned, the quality is equal to the quantity.

[Adam Balic]

Good point Andy.

I am lucky enough to be able to get heirloom apples, many different types. Different textures, colours, sizes and shapes. The flavour range is incredible, bannana, pineapple, anise, nutmeg etc etc. Three or four differnent types in a pie gives a very complex mix of flavours and textures. But, these are dying out and most people prefer imported Braeburns. What I am unaware of is if this is due to peoples preferences or supermarkets preference?

I'm sure that the apples are one example amoungst many. What is sad about this thread is that many of the excellent foods that have been mentioned are not eaten very much at all and this is in an era where food shows are on TV at least once a week and it is common to see London described as one of the great food destinations of the world.

Edited February 28, 2004 by Adam Balic (log)

[Jonathan Day]

I clearly remember accompanying my mother to the local butcher, fishmonger, and grocer and buying fresh ingredients for our meals. I still recall seeing the carcasses being delivered to the butcher and that he would often cut a joint to order. Now, meat is often delivered to butchers pre-portion and even pre-packed.

Today, I have a very good butcher just around the corner from my house, but the nearest grocer's is the city centre open market, and the nearest usuable fishmonger is a 20 minute drive away. If I want to buy really good cheese and bread I have to find a deli whose prices are now aimed at those who can afford to treat food as a hobby rather than a necessity.

So the situation today is that the good basic food that was available to me as a child on my doorstep at prices my family could afford is now only obtainable as part of a treasure hunt around a 10 mile radius of my home, and at premium prices. This is progress?

Unfortunately this is a global phenomenon, almost as true in France and Italy and Japan as in the UK or US. Call it "walmartisation" but in reality it has nothing to do with Wal Mart and everything to do with cheaper and faster information and communication technology (ICT). It is simply more efficient nowadays to run larger shops. ICT means that supplies can be managed "just in time"; supply networks that once had many levels (farm to co-operative to aggregator to producer to distributor to sub-distributor ... etc., down to the retailer on the corner) now have perhaps two, or even one.

Governments can slow this down -- France, Italy and Japan each have mechanisms to favour smaller shops -- but they can't stop it. Consumers can favour markets and small retailers (and I do) but as Andy notes, they become a luxury rather than a source of basic supply.

There's good news in all of this. We wouldn't be communicating over eGullet in the "good old days", not just because the web hadn't been conceived, but because the cost of the computing power needed to make this work in the home would have been well into six figures.

And, to go back onto topic, home delivery of groceries is now easier and more prevalent. Sainsburys deliver in Brighton; not sure about Tesco; Ocado (Waitrose) don't. Ocado, especially, have some good products and we have found their delivery very reliable. Again, none of this would be possible in the good old days.

[Marco_Polo]

However, when I was growing up in the late 60's/early 70's I clearly remember accompanying my mother to the local butcher, fishmonger, and grocer and buying fresh ingredients for our meals. I still recall seeing the carcasses being delivered to the butcher and that he would often cut a joint to order.

Andy, that's still the way we shop where I live. In my small Devon town, we have two great butchers, a greengrocer, a fantastic fishmonger (enjoyed some incredibly fresh diver's scallops last night followed by a thick centre-cut of pollack), and an award-winning cheesemonger (a true artisan fromager-affineur who buys cheeses young and nurtures them to perfect condition). We only have to go to a large supermarket once a month or so.

To me, food in Britain today is not about historical or even regional recipes as no such canon exists that has been practised in households over the decades and centuries as it has been, say in Italy or France. Speaking locally, a dish such as star-gazey pie is an interesting curiosity, but not something I'd actually make myself very often (though we have made it!). What has changed most in the past twenty or so years since I've been down here is an appreciation and recognition of the quality of local foods: great fish and shellfish landed at Brixham and Exmouth (and the best is no longer just sent to France or Spain); grass fed and organically raised meats, especially Exmoor lamb, Devon beef, good organic pork; outstanding organic vegetables locally grown and distributed (we use a weekly box scheme from nearby Riverford Farm); outrageusly good dairy produce, including a range of cheeses that is unsurpassed anywhere in the world such as unpasteurised cheddars from Montgomery, Keenes and Weston, soft full fat cheeses from Sharpham that rival the best and richest from Normandy, great blues such as the sheep's milk Beenleigh Blue, pungent rind-washed cheeses such as Cardinal Sin, local goat's cheeses and even, my god, now buffalo milk cheeses, too (not to mention Devon clotted cream).

The best chefs today, whether in restaurants or gastro-pubs, don't necessarily cook regional British recipes per se: but they use (and trumpet the fact that they are using) these fine local ingredients creatively and imaginatively to result in fantastic dishes that are wholly modern yet at the same time unashamedly British. Down here I'm thinking particularly of Michael Caines, the two-star Michelin chef at Gidleigh Park (and MC at the Royal Clarence Exeter) who, though classically French trained, is a champion and ambassador of the foods and produce of his home region, the West Country.

If your conception of British food dates from the 70s or 80s, make no mistake: there has been a truly remarkable renaissance in British cooking and food in recent years (reflected not only in restaurants and gastro-pubs, but, yes, in homes too).

As for the history of food in Britain, I certainly agree with my friend John that Colin Spencer's magnificent work is unsurpassed. It is not only massively knowledgeable, it is also hugely readable, written with considerable wit, humour and affection.

MP

[Adam Balic]

Darn, I wished I lived in a small Devon village, it sounds idealic.

I think there is room for many points of view. The statistic availble indicate that people are eating a much wider range of food stuffs then 20 years ago, but there is also a large increase in the prepared foods and in some respects food is becoming more standardised. Strange really, uniformity in diversity. There is also a range of regional differences, in terms of preferences, eating patterns and consumption levels. Scotland, where I reside, has the lowest per capita consumption of fruit, veg, highest level for soft drinks.

[John Whiting]

What it comes down to is that, as a random member of the public, you are more able to eat real food but, following the path of least resistence, less likely to do so.

[John Whiting]

Call  it "walmartisation" but in reality it has nothing to do with Wal Mart and everything to do with cheaper and faster information and communication technology (ICT).

That's a bit like suggesting that Hitler wasn't responsible for WWII, it was the technological revolution which enabled the Blitzkrieg. WalMart has not just ridden the crest of the wave, it has manned the wind machine which makes the wave crest ever higher. As the world's largest corporation, expanding exponentially, it's not merely a passenger.

EDIT: Let me quickly add, before someone makes a logical leap, that I'm not implying that you would indeed make such an excuse for Hitler. It's merely an analogy. WalMart has made ingenious use of ICT for its own purposes.

Edited February 28, 2004 by John Whiting (log)

[Jonathan Day]

Call  it "walmartisation" but in reality it has nothing to do with Wal Mart and everything to do with cheaper and faster information and communication technology (ICT).

That's a bit like suggesting that Hitler wasn't responsible for WWII, it was the technological revolution which enabled the Blitzkrieg. WalMart has not just ridden the crest of the wave, it has manned the wind machine which makes the wave crest ever higher. As the world's largest corporation, expanding exponentially, it's not merely a passenger.

I am no admirer of what WalMart have done to small retailers in the US.

But it's important to get the facts right. Wal Mart is not the world's biggest corporation, except perhaps by revenue (sales), a measure so economically irrelevant that in some industries it isn't even provided in press releases. Microsoft's last reported annual sales were $32 billion with net income of about $10b; Wal Mart's sales were $256b with income of $9b. Oil companies, for example, hardly report sales, since the only relevant fact is income.

Wal Mart's current market capitalisation -- a far better index of whether it is the "world's largest corporation" -- is less than that of Exxon, GE, Microsoft, among others.

Wal Mart's sales grew by 12.5% per year over the last 5 years; earnings grew at 14.5%; the shares increased by 7.5%. Respectable, especially for a retailer in some tough economic times, but hardly "exponential" (well, a very small exponent).

(Source for these numbers: Reuters)

Wal Mart's UK business (remember the subject of this thread?) is ASDA, which have arguably had far less impact on retailing than Tesco. One reason for this is that ASDA didn't start out with the giant store "footprints" so essential for operating mega-retailers. Given the density of the UK, it's hard to get these "boxes" if you don't have them already.

In France, the dominant players are groups like Carrefour. Wal Mart isn't a player. They have a small position in Germany.

Wal Mart has been a powerful demonstrator of what is possible -- in that sense, I guess they aren't a "passenger", though groups like Carrefour and IKEA led similar revolutions in Europe, independently of Wal Mart.

A lot of Wal Mart's philosophy, starting from its founder and continuing today, is about so-called every day low pricing (EDLP), i.e. constantly lowering the cost of living for middle America. Do they have more sinister objectives? I don't know.

I think the story is more convincing as an example of how well intentioned actions -- making more goods available to more people at lower prices -- can have adverse consequences.

In any event, I can't see how Wal Mart have negatively affected food in the UK, which, if I recall, was what we are talking about here.

[John Whiting]

Respectable, especially for a retailer in some tough economic times, but hardly "exponential" (well, a very small exponent).

I used the world "exponentially" carelessly, much as the world "decimated" is usually thrown around. My apologies.

Given the density of the UK, it's hard to get these "boxes" if you don't have them already.

ASDA (and others) are making use of legal loopholes which allow them to reallocate interior space so as to double shopping and display area.

In any event, I can't see how Wal Mart have negatively affected food in the UK, which, if I recall, was what we are talking about here.

WalMart, through ASDA, has only just begun. Tesco and ASDA between them are redefining supermarkets so as to make the food segment increasingly marginal and increasingly industrialized.

This is getting off topic, but I suggest that in a few years it will be central to any discussion of British cuisine.

[Stigand]

Britain sustained enormous economic damage during and after World War II. Some rationing lasted into the 1950s. Yes, there was some horrible food around.

Paul Krugman's old article Supply, Demand and English Food is an interesting and readable account of how Britain lowered its expectations of food over the last two centuries and how an economist might think of the changes in the food scene over the last few decades.

I agree with John Whiting that much of the damage occurred during the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions, as people migrated from the countryside to towns, generally leaving behind family life and traditions as well as traditional sources of food. The Industrial Revolution in France was much less demographically dramatic (less migration, less population growth and - it is thought - less social disruption), so older foodways persisted even before large-scale government intervention in the C20th. What would be interesting to compare is the different evolution of _urban_ eating in the UK and in France. Why did C19th England, with its dynamic and wealthy urban middle class, not develop a cuisine bourgeoise in the way that France did?

And to return to real issue: pork pies, kippers and smoked eel.

[Adam Balic]

Why did C19th England, with its dynamic and wealthy urban middle class, not develop a cuisine bourgeoise in the way that France did?

And to return to real issue: pork pies, kippers and smoked eel.

In part because the food that was in vogue at time wasn't looking to English food for inspiration, but in general more to the French style. I quick look at most mid-late 19th century cook books shows a large amount of Frenchified names, even if the dishes are not.

Curry.

[Stigand]

For wine the UK has always had an advantage, because of the history as a trading nation, so we have advantages in range and good merchants. Although you can get excellent wine in say France or Spain, it tends to be of local (and sometimes very local origin.

I think you could argue that England's influence on the development of wine over the centuries has been massive. Not least becasue as a wealthy, wine-consuming but (largely) non-wine-producing country, it seems to have been responsible for the creation (or at least the popularisation) of all sorts of fortified wines: port, sherry and madeira spring to mind.

And of course there's the old claim that the English invented Champagne...

I'd be interested to know how much the need to ship and store wine for markets like England also led to the development of more robust styles of regular wine, intended to be drunk mature rather than fresh. I assume that in the middle ages a lot of the wine of (English) Gascony was exported to England rather than drunk locally. I suppose we'd need to consider how much quality French wine was sold within France compared to the amount exported to England in the period afterwards to form an idea on this (but since much of the exports were smuggled, I don't know if any really indicative figures exist). Any thoughts?

Edited February 28, 2004 by Stigand (log)

[Jonathan Day]

I agree with Krugman's assertion:

...even on so basic a matter as eating, a free-market economy can get trapped for an extended period in a bad equilibrium in which good things are not demanded because they have never been supplied, and are not supplied because not enough people demand them.

And conversely, a good equilibrium may unravel. Suppose a country with fine food is invaded by purveyors of a cheap cuisine that caters to cruder tastes. You may say that people have the right to eat what they want, but by thinning the market for traditional fare, their choices may make it harder to find--and thus harder to learn to appreciate--and everyone may end up worse off.

What I wonder is when the biggest decline in standards took place in the UK: was it over the last 200 years, or was it largely a result of deprivation and substitution coming out of the war? I have seen menus and read desriptions of meals served in prewar clubs and restaurants suggesting that fine foods were available, that ingredients were sourced and prepared carefully -- at the top of the market, at least.

The renaissance in English cuisine that Krugman describes took place relatively swiftly. How long did the decline take?

[John Whiting]

Why did C19th England, with its dynamic and wealthy urban middle class, not develop a cuisine bourgeoise in the way that France did?

And to return to real issue: pork pies, kippers and smoked eel.

In part because the food that was in vogue at time wasn't looking to English food for inspiration, but in general more to the French style. I quick look at most mid-late 19th century cook books shows a large amount of Frenchified names, even if the dishes are not.

Food historian Rachel Lauden writes:

The well-to-do in most countries--with the exception of India and China--ate some more or less distant version of French cuisine. The 19th century family cookbooks I'm helping a Mexican friend transcribe include more recipes for dishes such as turkey in aspic and strawberry charlotte than for tacos and tamales.

[Adam Balic]

For wine the UK has always had an advantage, because of the history as a trading nation, so we have advantages in range and good merchants. Although you can get excellent wine in say France or Spain, it tends to be of local (and sometimes very local origin.

I think you could argue that England's influence on the development of wine over the centuries has been massive. Not least becasue as a wealthy, wine-consuming but (largely) non-wine-producing country, it seems to have been responsible for the creation (or at least the popularisation) of all sorts of fortified wines: port, sherry and madeira spring to mind.

And of course there's the old claim that the English invented Champagne...

I'd be interested to know how much the need to ship and store wine for markets like England also led to the development of more robust styles of regular wine, intended to be drunk mature rather than fresh. I assume that in the middle ages a lot of the wine of (English) Gascony was exported to England rather than drunk locally. I suppose we'd need to consider how much quality French wine was sold within France compared to the amount exported to England in the period afterwards to form an idea on this (but since much of the exports were smuggled, I don't know if any really indicative figures exist). Any thoughts?

At the time when a great volumes of wine were being imported from Bordeaux, the 'claret' was quite different to the modern time. From memory it was a young fresh wine, more a rose then a red and sometimes fortified for shipping stability. Pepys mentions 'an unusaul and very good claret', which may have been one of the modern style.

Much of this claret wasn't named either, so it would be difficult to get any real figures relating to export figures.

[Stigand]

Do we know when Bordeaux stopped being claret in the literal sense of 'clairet' and when it became the weightier stuff it is now? The Pepys reference is interesting.

I suppose the question I'm asking is really a hypothesis in two parts:

i) For a long time England was by far the largest wine importing country

ii) Importation of wine led to stylistic innovation (including fortifying wine, making more robust styles that would stand up to the vicissitudes of shipping, and making better wine to justify the cost of shipping).

One objection might be that the French have always demanded good, aged wine, and that the English market was incidental to this - as you say, it's pretty hard to come up with data.

Edited February 28, 2004 by Stigand (log)

[Stigand]

In part because the food that was in vogue at time wasn't looking to English food for inspiration, but in general more to the French style. I quick look at most mid-late 19th century cook books shows a large amount of Frenchified names, even if the dishes are not.

Food historian Rachel Lauden writes:

The well-to-do in most countries--with the exception of India and China--ate some more or less distant version of French cuisine. The 19th century family cookbooks I'm helping a Mexican friend transcribe include more recipes for dishes such as turkey in aspic and strawberry charlotte than for tacos and tamales.

[Adam Balic]

Do we know when Bordeaux stopped being claret in the literal sense of 'clairet' and when it became the weightier stuff it is now? The Pepys reference is interesting.

I suppose the question I'm asking is really a hypothesis in two parts:

i) For a long time England was by far the largest wine importing country

ii) Importation of wine led to stylistic innovation (including fortifying wine, making more robust styles that would stand up to the vicissitudes of shipping, and making better wine to justify the cost of shipping).

One objection might be that the French have always demanded good, aged wine, and that the English market was incidental to this - as you say, it's pretty hard to come up with data.

Claret is thought to have developed into the modern type wine in the mid 18th century. Cork closures were developed at the beginning of that century, the two points are not un-connected. Cook books from this period use red wine, white wine or claret, so claret was a different style to the more robust Southern reds.

So later then Pepsy, Johnson was able to say

“He who aspires to be a serious wine drinker, must drink Claret”

But wine was only imported bottled from Bordeaux in the begining of the 19th century. So I would think that the modern wine really developed from this point.