tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7083730.post116051683260944991..comments2023-06-02T17:54:44.641+02:00Comments on Connaissances: The Raw and the CookedJonathan Wonhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09862200571016427320noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7083730.post-1160695801768100762006-10-13T01:30:00.000+02:002006-10-13T01:30:00.000+02:00Thank you Clare. I'm going to write more on this b...Thank you Clare. I'm going to write more on this because it is very interesting.<BR/><BR/>Coming next: the language of food...Jonathan Wonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09862200571016427320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7083730.post-1160572234762474362006-10-11T15:10:00.000+02:002006-10-11T15:10:00.000+02:00Jonathan this is such a rich post and so interesti...Jonathan this is such a rich post and so interesting. <BR/><BR/>The word 'eskimo' reinforces what you say. Its meaning- 'raw meat eaters' - is now thought to be so derogatory that it is now a politically incorrect term. I suppose this is because raw meat eating (which after all ensures that some of the vitamins essential to life in the arctic - vitamin C for instance which is found in the flesh of some animals - are not destroyed in cooking) is considered to be barbaric rather than just practical. But that still doesn't answer your question - why is eating raw meat considered barbaric?<BR/><BR/>However I think I can answer your daughter's question about fish. I think the origin for this tradition is in religion. Friday was the Christian fasting day - but 'fasting' for some meant just not eating meat. So fish was eaten instead. I think that's right. I agree with your daughter though - these days Sunday would be much mor sensible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com