http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7955040/The-turnips-of-Brussels.html
Nonsense, a pasty can contain anything you like. The distinctive bit is the hard pastry (not flaky!) shell.
The rutabaga, swede (from Swedish turnip), or yellow turnip (Brassica napobrassica, or Brassica napus var. napobrassica, or Brassica napus subsp. rapifera) is a root vegetable that originated as a cross between the cabbage and the turnip.
OK, is everyone clear on that? :-\ :D
I do so hate the spin the media put on anything ot do with Europe. For once, what is proposed is a good thing, not something gone mad. Pasty makers in Cornwall ( of which a friend of mine is an award winning one) want the same sort of protected status for the term 'Cornish Pasty' as many other local specialities have. In order for this sort of European wide status to be achieved, there has to actually be a precise definition of what a Cornish Pasty is. They want high standards to be a requirement of the name so you couldn't (for example) have a low meat content or use the wrong meat and still sell it as a Cornish Pasty. You expect Stilton to be produced in a precise way in a particular geographic area. For Cornish Pasties to get the same status needs a definition.
Wouldn't a cornish pasty traditionally contain any meat the cook could find? Not only the finest steak but the cheap bits and probably the bits most brits would rather not know about.
Just for once Brussels is being useful. Only 10,000 ish more times and they'll be even.
I always thought they they were full of corn!!
Historically a pasty was a self contained meal eaten by miners - the hard shell meant they could eat their lunch/dinner/supper without contaminating their food.
By rights the pasty should have one savory half and one sweet half - I bet that's not being made part of the definition. Another traditional item lost through beauracratic meddling.
Quote from: Vortex on August 21, 2010, 08:32:51
Historically a pasty was a self contained meal eaten by miners - the hard shell meant they could eat their lunch/dinner/supper without contaminating their food.
By rights the pasty should have one savory half and one sweet half - I bet that's not being made part of the definition. Another traditional item lost through beauracratic meddling.
So what did it taste like when they got to the middle :-\ maybe that's why they were called Bedfordshire 'Clangers'.(Suplied by the soup dragon?)
If they did it that way they put a pastry partition in the middle. The idea of a 'definition' of what goes inside really is a recent one, but it definitely wasn't made with flaky pastry! I do agree that the name needs some protection though, with the rubbish being sold everywhere as 'Cornish pasties'. Let the Cornish have the name, they badly need employment down there, and let the rubbish be sold as something else. It works for Melton Mowbray pies and a lot of other things; no reason why it shouldn't work for Cornish pasties.
I totally agree with you Robert.XX Jeannine
You see half the rpoblem is that Ginsters are in Cornwall. Hopefully any definition will be such that Ginsters have to improve their pasties in order to call them Cornish Pasties.
Quote from: djbrenton on August 21, 2010, 21:01:26
You see half the rpoblem is that Ginsters are in Cornwall. Hopefully any definition will be such that Ginsters have to improve their pasties in order to call them Cornish Pasties.
My mind boggles at the thought that there's anything that Ginsters could do to make their pasties any worse....