140
Fish and chips (introduced to the UK by Jewish immigrants in the 1800s) (en.wikipedia.org)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/wikipedia@lemmy.world
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 19 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Well thanks, Fish and chips is just wonderful, very expensive these days but a truly beautiful dish.

I'm old enough to remember it being served in old newspaper.

The Vinegar is not as good as it used to be, but the main dish is fine.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 2 points 3 days ago

    The fish part is true at least. It was called “fish jewish style” as you can fry it on Friday and it’ll keep til Sabbath. The chips were added to the fish supper later.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] -3 points 4 days ago* (16 children)

    I've never been in the UK and this dish is confusing to me on so many levels, and the article doesn't really help me. How are the chips an essential part of the dish? What's special about the fish? Is it just that it's battered? If the fish is special, shouldn't we just say that chips are the traditional accompaniment, but there's nothing special about the chips?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 26 points 4 days ago (4 children)

    It's fish and chips, of course the chips are essential, without them it's just fish.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 days ago (7 children)

    Peanut butter and jelly

    Spaghetti and meatballs

    Get it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago

    No way, that's not at all the same thing. You don't serve a glob of peanut butter next to the sandwich and the meatballs go into the pasta.

    The equivalent is burgers and fries. Bacon and eggs. Soup and crackers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    Almost. It still feels weird somehow.

    Peanut and jelly, I would consider that too simple to be a dish, but it's an emblematic pairing. Maybe if "fish and chips" were presented as an emblematic pairing rather than a dish, that would make sense. I mean, do you consider "hamburger and fries" to be a dish? Or is the hamburger, the dish? I certainly think of the hamburger as being a dish (or rather a template with many variations), and the fries to be the traditional accompaniment.

    Meatballs are a prepared ingredient. One that you normally put on spaghetti.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    A dish is merely an emblematic grouping of ingredients which we give a name

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 days ago* (2 children)

    I don't consider chana masala, fagioli all'uccelletto, shepherd's pie, tourtière du Lac-Saint-Jean or crepes to be merely groupings of ingredients which we give a name. They all have a varying set of ingredients with a set of steps, and it gives a final result that's better (or at least different) than putting each of those ingredients next to each other.

    That's my main issue with considering "fish and chips" as a dish. Unless I'm missing something, it sounds like you're just putting battered fish next to chips, and they're not interacting or integrated in any way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 4 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    They go together really well, and a piece of fried fried cod or pollock feels lonely without some chips to sop up the excess fishy flavor. The oily flavor of the fish is spread further by the crispy absorbent starch of the chips. They are almost always paired together in the UK and elsewhere because they are very complementary. Beans and toast are similarly popular in the UK as a dish, but haven't been adopted more broadly. You're entitled to your somewhat esoteric and clearly strong opinion. Please contribute to the respective wiki entries for "fish" and "chips" with these points and see how they are received.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    If I had just the fish, I would miss the chips. And apparently chips were popular in the UK before the fish, which came later. So really the chips are more than just an accompaniment. The fish, meanwhile is special because people like it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [+] -7 points 4 days ago (7 children)

    Where are the chips?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago (6 children)

    Right next to the fish.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 days ago (5 children)

    Those are fries

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (2 children)

    Surely you mean frites.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Whatever you wanna call them, but they aren't chips thats for damn sure

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    Firites is where Americans got the term fries from Europe. The UK always called hunks of things cut off chips. So cut off chunks of poatoes are chips.

    Fish and chips, which is the correct term in the US too, when it's fish and chips, so they are in fact chips, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [+] -15 points 4 days ago (3 children)

    That's anti semitic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •