Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Once more, it was eating out with the Hub that led to a conversation that I had to tell you about. Usually, it was when we went out to our favorite diner, but this time, we had decided to go to our favorite Indian restaurant. As always, it was a thoughtful comment by the Hub—this time, as he was examining his fork as he was about to tuck into his dahl—wondering why it is that some cultures use forks and spoons, while others (notably, in Asia) use chopsticks.
I was an anthropology major, so I could hazard a guess about some of this—but only some, because I was a linguistical anthropology major (language was my forte, not sociocultural norms), and the most I would easily be able to hazard a guess about would be the terms used in utensils. But that wasn’t the question, was it? Anyway, I felt a need to do a little research.
The way these things go, I still don’t have a definite answer about why one was adopted over the other, considering both the chopsticks and the fork are of prehistoric origins, although the entire topic was an intriguing one. And I can’t help but think that it may be like the chicken and the egg: did one set of cultures adopt the chopsticks because the foodstuffs available there were easier to manipulate with one over the other? In that case, if it’s true that Marco Polo brought pasta back to Italy from his adventures in China, why didn’t the Italians promptly adopt chopsticks, because the hashi (as the Japanese call chopsticks) work so much better on noodles? For that matter, did Marco Polo really do that? I gotta check that out, too. Back in a bit. (Well, I’m back. Apparently the tale about Marco bringing back pasta from China originated from the trade periodical The Macaroni Journal, which, come to think of it, I remember hearing about from watching the TV show Good Eats. Is that true? This may take a while longer, and I’ve got a deadline.)
Anyway, chopsticks were being used in China as early as about 3,200 years ago. But the earliest chopsticks weren’t for individual use, for eating, according to Wikipedia. They were most likely used for cooking, and eventually, of course, chopsticks became the main choice of utensil in East Asia (with subtle differences among different cultures for their proper use), although forks are in plenty evidence these days. (As an aside, I present a series of workshops online and at conferences with my copresenter Jacquie Rogers called “Myths and Legends Along the Silk Road,” looking at how various mythological figures appear and change between Western and Eastern cultures. One thing that I found interesting is that vampire myths don’t appear a whole lot in the Far East, with the exception of the legend of the hopping vampire in China. I posit a theory here: most of the vampires there have been killed off, having been stabbed into oblivion by wooden chopsticks! Anyway.)
And speaking of the fork — which we were before I teetered off into another topic — it apparently had some history on its own, with evidence that it was around as early as Mesopotamia, ancient Greece, and the Roman Empire. The Byzantine Empire is about when the fork for you and me came about, finally becoming in common use starting from the 18th century. Of course, it didn’t come into broad use without some complaints (“Fancy high-tech!” probably being somebody’s sniffed comment), of course, including some church folk who apparently pointed out that fingers were mankind’s proper utensil and the fork was an affront to the Deity (and even though the fork is referred to in the Bible, and not in a negative way).
Back to the original topic — which came first, the fork or the chopstick? After looking at the references I could find off-hand (without enrolling in graduate school somewhere to study the topic for several years before defending a thesis for what possible use I cannot imagine), I have to conclude that they probably came about in the same period, maybe in the same area, maybe distant from each other — hard to say. The fork would have been more useful for stabbing and handling larger hunks of food, while the chopsticks would have been better for stabbing vampires (just kidding!) and tackling smaller items. Like so many other things in mankind’s development, things change and even (dare I say it?) evolve, depending on how it’s most useful to the situation at hand.
What all this means, of course, is that we can take advantage of all of our choices. So what’s this mean for you? It means you’re free to use whatever utensil you want. And if that involves using your fingers to eat soup, well, wait until it cools off a little, because otherwise it’s going to be not only messy but painful.
Eilis Flynn likes Indian food, which is why we got into this topic in the first place. She can be found to argue with at Facebook, Twitter, or at her website at www.eilisflynn.com.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Eventually he figured it out because here we are many years later, but I look back at that now that I'm a writer and when I'm reading another writer's story and ask myself, what are we looking for? As writers and readers, how is true love expressed in your favorite stories, movies?
What is the love readers want to see portrayed in fiction? Is it the HEA (For anyone who's never heard that term, it's "happily ever after".) Is it some more "realistic" depiction of love with all its challenges no matter how it ends? Or is it somewhere in between?
When I read or write or dream the love between two committed individuals this is what I think of it as:
A "You're it for me" and "All I want is you" desire whether hot and passionate or burning slowly and deeply that can keep the attraction alive through the years, a desire for the other person's body but even more for their stellar humor or intelligence or kindness.
Acceptance of each other for who they are, appreciation for how the other's differences can challenge and complement the relationship, and at least respect for how they are different.
Consideration and kindness and care for each other's well being.
An "I'm-on-your-side" mentality when everyone else isn't.
Trust and a lack of competition.
Someone who shares the same vision of life, the same priorities.
My favorite contemporary depictions of love are Jamie and Claire in Gabaldon's Outlander series, Roarke and Eve in Robb's In Death books and most recently the Windhams in Grace Burrowes' books, especially Lady Maggie's Secret Scandal.
How about you? Who are your favorite lovers portrayed in recent movies or books?
Monday, December 3, 2012