A little while ago I
read Colin Ho and Nicholas Jordan’s article ‘Australians love Asian food, so why doesn’t it win as many awards as Italian?’ I found the article insightful
and thought provoking. Not only do I agree with their line of questioning that
unmasks the racial economics of food in Australia, but I thought their tone and
approach were welcome. And so, I wanted to be in dialogue with them; to
complement their writing with my own brief set of thoughts. From this, one
could think about whether Asian food is a better fit for Australia than
European or whether that simply re-inscribes a new power relation that
continues to eras Indigenous presences. We could also ask ask whether money and
awards are the best barometers of quality. Of course, they go part of the way
to explaining good taste. But, the other aspect that matters is to think about
popularity and whether this can be a way to have a good life. As an analogue,
other arts, including literature, often try to boost the work of certain
individuals through prizes and best-seller status. And yet, these might not be
the books that linger longest, connect more truly with readers, or are
spiritually meaningful for the authors who wrote them. In that way, we can
carve out a space that is built on different foundations rather than simply
arguing for the assimilation of Asian flavours into European standards of taste
and hierarchy on a continent that is truly Aboriginal. This does not mean we
should close our selves, and our palates and terroir, off to the Michelin
guide. Rather, it is that we can create forms of criticism and understanding
that engage the faculties in new and distinct ways and that connect to our
individual traditions in a way that matters beyond ourselves. That is why pasta
vs. noodles is the wrong question as is lamb ragu vs roast duck vs kangaroo. We
must keep talking and tasting to find a true way forward rather than arguing
for one side against another in a food fight that no-one can possibly win.
No comments:
Post a Comment