The beginning and end of it – the meal – of course names

 

In elegant or at least expensive dining, one main dish will not suffice. The meal needs a prologue and epilogue, as they say in theatre, to create a complete experience. However, the magic of the culinary art requires appropriate names for these extra dishes that start and complete the feast. The origins of this gastronomical nomenclature paint a picture of the development of food.

Upon sitting down at an elegant restaurant, diners enjoy a small but tasty dish to awaken their appetite. For this reason, some English speakers refer to them as appetizers. Other cultures merely note the timing, i.e., before the meal. Thus, Italians call it antipasto, which sounds anti-carbohydrate but means “before the meal” and highlights vegetables, and Yiddish speakers call it a forchpeiz, meaning before the meal. Granted, those two nationalities are not referring to the exact same dishes. The classic French word entrée got lost in translation in the US as the dish that one received upon “entering” the meal became the main dish in the United States, maybe because the Americans were not that keen on multicourse meals in the past. A classic American Sunday brunch clearly illustrates the chaos in the choice and order of the foods. At home, the French call it hors d’oeuvre, which literally means “outside the work”, implying that the addition of an opening dish was originally not an integral part of meal. The use of the term first course shows it truly was a burden on the kitchen staff as they had to “run” to bring the food on time and still hot from distant kitchens. Hebrew has two options, both quite concrete: mana rishona, first dish or mana pticha, opening dish. Arabic takes another approach, using the word mezza to describe a wide assortment of shared salads intended to create a social environment but often having the unintended result of filling up the stomachs of the guests. Linguistically and culinarily speaking, there are many ways to start a meal.

When dining out, the dessert is the dish that leaves the most lasting impression. However, somehow the name of the course does not do it proper service. The English term dessert is derived from the French word to clean the table. Likewise, the German Nachtisch means “after the table”, eliciting the picture of an almost empty but slightly stained tablecloth at a restaurant after the dishes from the main course have been cleared. By contrast, the root of the Hebrew word kinuach is “to clean” because dessert cleans the palate. Another English term for the last course is sweets, a view that the Italians share with their il dolce. Of stranger origin is the English term pudding, which originally referred to sausages, both sweet and savory, from a French word brought to English by those charming Normans. With the invention of the pudding cloth in the 17^th century, according to Wikipedia, it was no longer necessary to cook the ingredients in an animal’s stomach, which led to a wide variety of English sweet puddings.

I hope that these facts have opened up your appetite for food and its nomenclature. To borrow the concept from Gertrude Stein, the opening dish, regardless of its name, is meant to open up your appetite. My mother used to say “L’appétit vient en mangeant”, meaning that starting to eat makes you hungry even if you didn’t know you were. As for the last course, being full or overweight is irrelevant to the issue: a tasty, sweet bite is a perfect end of the meal, whatever you eat or call it. Enjoy both if you can.