Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Animal activists, defend the pie!

OK - I know I'm about 2 weeks behind the story on this, but needed to vent a little on it as it's still floating around. (Hattip: Stuff, Stuff)

Proposed changes to the rules on what can go into meat pies means that snouts, tongues and lung material may be on the way out.

The question I have to ask is why - who really cares? Is it not actually a good thing that all those parts of a beast that you would not normally purchase nor eat have actually found a way to be made appetizing and be used? Surely this should be something that people are behind - as long as these parts of the animal are rendered in such a way as to be unrecognisable, I really don't care whether they are in there - and if that is what tastes good in my pie then I'm happy that I'm not wasting a perfectly good steak in there which would have cost a further animal its life.

While in Europe I had a number of meals from animal parts that I would not normally touch; pig trotters,
pig head, horse, etc. And each time my only question before trying these things was to make sure that they were not going to come out in a recognisable fashion (IE the trotters had been deboned, the head comes out as just meat, didn't actually worry about the horse...) - and they were spectacular. As most people who can bring themselves to eat well cooked offal will tell you - it really does tend to be the most flavoursome parts of the animal; it just isn't easy to eat them when you know what they are.

Step in that wonderful encasement of pastry and sauce and those less adventurous can still join in the culinary journey. Until they can only contain "flesh".


burt said...

It's a storm in a pastry dish.

Ask anyone who has worked in a processing plant making sausages what gets biffed into them. If it can be ground up... it's in.

peterquixote said...

jeex yous eatena horse what he taste like what his name