I return to my American diplomatist and the subject of
food. This adaptable citizen of the United States found that he could enjoy his food everywhere, even in Japan: but not in England. He contended that the muffin was the only edible product of the English kitchen. I remember that even Monsieur Andre Maurois (that undaunted anglophil) had said more or less the same. With infinite delicacy he had advised his fellow-countrymen, if they desired to feel happy in England, to dispense with luncheon and dinner , they would find that our breakfast and tea foods were delicious. In fact, Monsieur Maurois, with that courtesy which befits a Knight of the British Empire, could not say enough about the excellence of our teas. Yet a certain stigma remains behind. Man cannot live by teas alone, and it is regrettable that we as a nation, in that we possess the finest food-stuffs in the world, should make such a hash of our raw material. Many friendly foreigners have tried to explain away our indifference to the art of cooking. It was M. Andre Simon (if I recollect aright) who suggested that our lack of canary tradition was due to the fact that forks were only introduced towards the end of the reign of James I. Yet cooking does not really depend on forks ; to this day the Moors eat with their fingers, and yet their dishes are among the best on earth. Others have contended that the ordinary Englishman has an insensitive palate. This is untrue. The British working man can detect imme- diately the slightest variation in his beer or tobacco. Others again suggest that it is the puritan tradition which is respon- sible, and that to enjoy one's food appears to us tantamount to lusting after the pleasures of the flesh. If this were the reason, then the Americans would be equally impervious to cooking. Whereas in fact they fuss inordinately about their terrapin, their squabs and their sweet scented salads.
Previous page
