Another one...
Here are some of the results done by a cultural anthropologist about
Filipino cuisine and I quote:
1. "....the consensus of Filipinos and American food critics is that
when Westerners think of Asian cuisine, 'Whether it is Thai, Burmese,
Indonesian', they always associate it with indigenous spices, 'which
Philippine cuisine does not have' (martel 1997)
(Source: Zialcita, "Why Insist On An Asian Flavor" p. 1.)
2. " A pan-Spanish way of cooking present in Spanish-inflenced
countries are such habits like sauteeing in garlic, onions and
tomatoes or stewing (puchero, cocido)..."
(Source: Zialcita,"Why Insist On Asian Flavor: The Hispanic World"
p.20)
3. "those who identify 'Asia' with complex seasoning find Tagalog or
Visayan cooking 'uninteresting' because of the restrained seasoning.
Worse still as unoriginal. Unfortunately, they overlook the
distinguishing feature of Lowland Christian Filipino cuisine which is
not the seasoning, but the fondness for sour flavors... the sour is
used as a foil against the texture of fat and oil... Adobo and paksiw
both pickle meat and fish in vinegar, pepper and garlic before
cooking them..."
(source: Zialcita, "Why Insist On An Asian Flavor"p. 15-16)
And finally, another conclusion which I equally share:
"Simplistic notions of what Asia is and should be in relation to the
West have succeeded in marginalizing, on the international scene, the
achievements of Lowland Christian Filipinos, not only in cuisine, but
in the arts as well. They have also succeeded in making many educated
lowland Christian Filipinos apologetic about their culture when they
reflect on it and have to articulate it before outsiders. Often they
assume that since the costume, the music, the architecture, and the
literature of lowland Christian Filipinos have an obvious Hispanic
component, they cannot be Asian, for to be Asian means to be non-
Western. Therefore, they cannot be 'authentic' either, for to be in
Asia means thinking and behaving like a true Asian. Thus the anguish
in defining the Christian Filipino's identity..."
(Source: Zialcita, "Why Insist On An Asian Flavor". p.2-3)
In other words, the very denial by the Filipinos of their own culture
because of their never ending quest for what's indigenous created
their identity problems. When everything has to be measured according
to the culture of their neighbors but not their own and use blame to
reject the outcome of history for what's politically correct. Then
there is no Filipino Nation to fight for because the factual Filipino
identity was not allowed to exist in the first place.
---
Prof. F. Zialcita
1) At least in Java and Sumatra, a taste for sourness is disliked. But
this is precisely what characterizes Tagalog cooking and some aspects of
Ilonggo/ Cebuano cooking. The idea of cooking in vinegar, as in adobo and
paksiw, repels my Indonesian students. They have a version of sinigang called "sayur
asam." Asam means both "sour" and "tamarind." But they sweeten the
sourness of the tamarind with sugar!
2) Garlic is also used in their cooking. Same word as here: "bawang."
Onion is "bawang putih" (white bulb). But they don't use it as much as we
Tagalogs and Visayans do. Like we enjoy sauteeing (guisa) our noodles and
fish in garlic. We even sprinkle raw garlic on our lumpia (spring rolls).
Not them.
Why the difference? The use of garlic for sauteeing is nto indigenous to
Luzon and Visayas. The main flavoring, according to the early 16th-27th
century accounts, was SALT. Plus presumably with patis and bagoong --
both of which are common throughout Southeeast Asia. The reasoin we like
garlic is because we have assimilated this very Mediterranean habit --
Spain, Southern France and Italy -- and made it our own.
3) Our pancit and other dishes are cooked with "achuete." We are unique in
the region for doing so. Why so? Because of Mexican influence.