There is much flap about the lowly Gallus Gallus Domesticus albeit in the dead form. The verbal fracas involves dinner invitation from one golfer to another with an offer to serve a certain form of dead chicken. The imbroglio highlights the cultural divides that separate continents and peoples of our world, not to mention their eating habits. Extreme Political correctness also features right up there along with these differences.
Much storm in a tea cup, you might say; never mind the injured party's preference for cups that runneth over but not with Tea. He appears to have got his knickers in a twist over a simple dinner invite, notwithstanding his reported aversion to this garment, the better to facilitate rapid short-game.
I am unable to understand what the birdly brouhaha is all about. People are what they eat and they eat what they can find in their immediate surroundings. The advent of rapid transport and modern "cold chains" changed all that, but that is a relatively recent development limited to a few affluent continents. Therefore you are, by and large, what you eat. Should you resent that fact or being known for that fact?
Despite the wide availability of different foods from different parts of the world many peoples still eat their traditional fare and consequentially they are known as eaters of certain foods. Do the French resent being called Cheese eating surrender monkeys? Do they object to references to their fondness for consuming frogs' legs? Would they mind being called Escargistes for their preference for Escargos? (They might conceivably object to my coining a new word which without the approval of the Academie Francaise). Would they be insulted if you included any of the above or duck liver pate in the dinner menu? Absolutely not. They are good sports, the French are, if you overlooked their tendency to resent all things English as well as to consume huge amounts of garlic, and a predilection to start wars they couldn't win. My personal experience of the French indicates a great fondness for "chisnaan" (a.k.a "cheese naan") which is not French despite the cheese stuffing.
Leaving aside the French and their peccadilloes, lets turn our attention to the fuss about a fried bird.
Sergio Garcia, the Spanish golfer, reportedly offered to serve fried chicken to Tiger Woods were he to invite the latter to dinner. To the African Americans - to use the politically correct expression lest I am misunderstood, vilified and crucified - Fried Chicken apparently remains a powerful reminder of the terrible period of slavery. I am unable to understand how a form of food associated with plenitude and celebration for one people - the Indians, for example - could represent the exact opposite to another, except to say that everyone else's "mostest" is utterly inadequate for the Americans.
Should I be offended if someone were to invite me to dinner and offer to serve "thair sadam" (curd & rice)? During my various trips to Paris I used to hanker for this simple fare, easily tiring of the supposedly excellent French vegetarian fare (an oxymoron) and would easily have killed for it, but not for being addressed as Monsieur Thair Sadam. Or should a Punjabi feel slighted if served Sarson ka saag and Makkai ka roti; a Bangalorean put off by reference to "Hathu Poli, Dappa Thuppa" (ten polis with a can of ghee) or "Bisibele"?
I grew up being referred to as "Thair sadam" both at school as well as in college. The term was a coined from the typical final course in a TamBram (=Tamil Brahmin) household and referred to the TamBram's less than adequate physique. At college it went further: they tried to ascertain if you were a "Pattai" (smearing of holy ash on the forehead in the form of three horizontal finger-width lines) or "naamam" (three vertical lines drawn on the forehead with sandalwood paste). The idea was to ascertain the exact degree of geekiness / nerdiness. Generally we Thair Sadams were thought of as no competition when it came to sports or girls and hence the need to identify and ignore non-competition (=TamBram).
Did we resent it? No. The sobriquets were worn as badges of honour for at an invisible level, underlying them, was the grudging admission of and admiration for our facility with academics in general and Maths in particular. Come exam time who else would help them pass their courses with educated guesses on likely questions and concise (=<10 sentences) answers for them?
Later in life I lived in another part of India where different languages were spoken and different foods eaten. There, people from the South were all referred to as Idli-Dosas in a reference to the popular snack from the South. The Northerners can never get into their heads that Idlis and Dosas are just two of scores of dishes which constitute our staple. We certainly are not impressed by their stupendous ignorance of our world; but insulted? NO.
So what about serving a dead Gallus Gallus Domesticus to an African American Golfer? It is just a matter of excessive political correctness.
Would a Bengali be offended if offered Sinese Silly Sicken?
I think not.
Much storm in a tea cup, you might say; never mind the injured party's preference for cups that runneth over but not with Tea. He appears to have got his knickers in a twist over a simple dinner invite, notwithstanding his reported aversion to this garment, the better to facilitate rapid short-game.
I am unable to understand what the birdly brouhaha is all about. People are what they eat and they eat what they can find in their immediate surroundings. The advent of rapid transport and modern "cold chains" changed all that, but that is a relatively recent development limited to a few affluent continents. Therefore you are, by and large, what you eat. Should you resent that fact or being known for that fact?
Despite the wide availability of different foods from different parts of the world many peoples still eat their traditional fare and consequentially they are known as eaters of certain foods. Do the French resent being called Cheese eating surrender monkeys? Do they object to references to their fondness for consuming frogs' legs? Would they mind being called Escargistes for their preference for Escargos? (They might conceivably object to my coining a new word which without the approval of the Academie Francaise). Would they be insulted if you included any of the above or duck liver pate in the dinner menu? Absolutely not. They are good sports, the French are, if you overlooked their tendency to resent all things English as well as to consume huge amounts of garlic, and a predilection to start wars they couldn't win. My personal experience of the French indicates a great fondness for "chisnaan" (a.k.a "cheese naan") which is not French despite the cheese stuffing.
Leaving aside the French and their peccadilloes, lets turn our attention to the fuss about a fried bird.
Sergio Garcia, the Spanish golfer, reportedly offered to serve fried chicken to Tiger Woods were he to invite the latter to dinner. To the African Americans - to use the politically correct expression lest I am misunderstood, vilified and crucified - Fried Chicken apparently remains a powerful reminder of the terrible period of slavery. I am unable to understand how a form of food associated with plenitude and celebration for one people - the Indians, for example - could represent the exact opposite to another, except to say that everyone else's "mostest" is utterly inadequate for the Americans.
Should I be offended if someone were to invite me to dinner and offer to serve "thair sadam" (curd & rice)? During my various trips to Paris I used to hanker for this simple fare, easily tiring of the supposedly excellent French vegetarian fare (an oxymoron) and would easily have killed for it, but not for being addressed as Monsieur Thair Sadam. Or should a Punjabi feel slighted if served Sarson ka saag and Makkai ka roti; a Bangalorean put off by reference to "Hathu Poli, Dappa Thuppa" (ten polis with a can of ghee) or "Bisibele"?
I grew up being referred to as "Thair sadam" both at school as well as in college. The term was a coined from the typical final course in a TamBram (=Tamil Brahmin) household and referred to the TamBram's less than adequate physique. At college it went further: they tried to ascertain if you were a "Pattai" (smearing of holy ash on the forehead in the form of three horizontal finger-width lines) or "naamam" (three vertical lines drawn on the forehead with sandalwood paste). The idea was to ascertain the exact degree of geekiness / nerdiness. Generally we Thair Sadams were thought of as no competition when it came to sports or girls and hence the need to identify and ignore non-competition (=TamBram).
Did we resent it? No. The sobriquets were worn as badges of honour for at an invisible level, underlying them, was the grudging admission of and admiration for our facility with academics in general and Maths in particular. Come exam time who else would help them pass their courses with educated guesses on likely questions and concise (=<10 sentences) answers for them?
Later in life I lived in another part of India where different languages were spoken and different foods eaten. There, people from the South were all referred to as Idli-Dosas in a reference to the popular snack from the South. The Northerners can never get into their heads that Idlis and Dosas are just two of scores of dishes which constitute our staple. We certainly are not impressed by their stupendous ignorance of our world; but insulted? NO.
So what about serving a dead Gallus Gallus Domesticus to an African American Golfer? It is just a matter of excessive political correctness.
Would a Bengali be offended if offered Sinese Silly Sicken?
I think not.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.