In Search of Wok-Hay

London's multicultural ethos has made it a great city to eat in. Case in point: Char Kway Teow.

This particular plate of this Chinese flat noodle dish was found in a little stall in Camden Market. Camden Market, particularly on the weekend, is crammed with tourists, more Europeans than Americans, most of whom are not there for a culinary experience. Consequently there are countless of Chinese food stalls selling the exact same things (for all I know, it could all come from the same central kitchen), the food is just like what one would expect at Panda Express.

The stand where I got this was no exception. What was different about this one though is that it had a bigger stall than most, and in the back was a lunch counter filled with people eating off-menu dishes like this one. It was really delicious, some of the best Chinese food I've ever had, but not because of the traditional culinary merits on which one normally judge a dish. Rather, it had wok-hay.

It's hard to define wok-hay precisely, a one word synonym might be freshness, but it isn't quite adequate, sizzle might be another inadequate attempt. Unlike alot of Western dishes, which benefit from a brief rest, like large pieces of meat or pies, wok cooked items like stir-fry's have a quality straight from the wok that they start to lose immediately. (A better explanation of wok-hay can be found here.) In any case, this noodle dish came right from the wok to my plate with all kinds of seafood one doesn't sea alot of in British cooking. Totally delicious.

Some of London's best food is tucked away unostentatiously in side streets and behind signage that looks of an earlier era's earlier era. Case in point, baozi in Chinatown. There are a number of little stands selling "pork buns" along Charing Cross road, an authentic area in the midst of London's otherwise touristy West End. These are all pretty mediocre, if still a good value at £1.20 a piece. The best buns are found down an auto-less side street, and my are they glorious.

Spicy, porkly, and pillowy..all one could want in a bun, not that you could tell from the picture, which makes it look like a small creature from a horror film. In the next post I'll discuss the pinnacle of London street food, Borough Market.

Multicultural London

Those of you that know me best know that I love interesting food. Really, anyone that's ever had to talk to me for more than five minutes knows this about me. So to no one's surprise, my travels around London have focused on food. Through food, I've learned a little bit of London's vitality, its multiculturalism.

I'll begin by quoting a passage from London Perceived by V.S. Pritchett(1962):

One of the paradoxes of London's loss of colonial power is that it has made the contact with the people of the former colonies more intimate. In the past our never very large army of civil servants went out to these countries and the best of these men did, in fact, have a close knowledge of the place they were ruling. But now the traffic has been reversed. The people of these countries now come to London on terms of political, intellectual, and social equality....

At first the thousands at night look foreign; the sallow and swarthy seem to out-number the red-faced English, until one discovers many of the swarthy are English too; one can no longer speak certainly of London types. What has happened is that a new breed of Londoners has appeared. They are very young, and, for the first time for many generations, they cultivate a romantic style. (208-210)

Though the use of "swarthy" here is an unfortunate artifact of an earlier time, Pritchett's description of the new London rings true today. London, unlike Paris or Barcelona, for instance, feels intensely multinational, a consequence of the imperialism of the British Empire and its English language.

Cultural Confrontation in the World's Most Diverse City

London is often touted as the world's most diverse city. This is a distinction that makes for a vibrant city life and occasional cultural confrontations, like I witnessed today. I've already described Camden Town as home to various fringe elements of White Culture. But it's also home to Muslims of both African and Arab heritage. This leads to interesting juxtapositions like this one I saw today:

This image was captured in front of the Camden Town Tube station at a 6-way intersection, the area's busiest. It's hard to see from behind the large takeout sign, but there are men and women handing out leaflets urging readers to convert to Islam. This wouldn't be particularly striking except that the women were dressed in burqas, full body coverings worn as a sign of modesty by conservative Muslim women.

Passers-by were overwhelmingly young, overwhelmingly white, and assumably overwhelmingly socially permissive. The sight of English women, dressed in short skirts(the English are nothing if not resilient in the chilly weather,) being petitioned by women clad head to toe in black, save a slit for the eyes is striking, a signifier of the challenge of integrating Muslim immigrants into socially liberal London.

Of course, the presence of Conservative Islam does not pose a challenge itself, nor were the peaceful, if heated discussions taking place problematic. Rather, it was the cultural misunderstanding their leaflets laid bare that illustrated a deeper problem. From their leaflet, sponsored by islam4uk.com:

"Q: Why should I bother finding out about Islam?

A: Because Islam really is the Truth, and there is hard proof that invites you to check it and challenge it...

Q: The Jews and Christians also worship only one god...

A: All these people CLAIM to believe in only one God, but if you look closely at what they do, you will see they worship men and stones and have practices and rules that are made up be men without any evidence or proof that God said so."

In a country where one in ten go to church weekly, a figure that is surely much lower for this neighborhood, worship of the Royals and the gilded trappings of monarchy is far more common. The suggestion that Islam, or any religion is "the Truth" and confirmable by "hard proof"is difficult to accept in the country where empiricism was reborn. The trouble then is that these appeals betray no understanding of the English cultural identity.

A stated aim of Islam4uk.com is the abandonment of "man-made law" in favor of Sharia law in Britain. The Rule of Law, where "man-made law" is supreme over all was first proclaimed in the Magna Carta, written just a few miles from where I sit. The English gave the world the seeds of Democracy, for which the English are rightly proud; how then can a coherent Western nation be constructed in light of this cultural divide?

The American model, which the British have essentially rejected, is laissez-faire. Muslims immigrate, move to Eastern Michigan, and adopt a culture that is open to Western values while hanging on to their Muslim faith. While the hijab, a head covering that leaves the face exposed is common, face-veils much less so.

One would think that this would be the preferred means of assimilation for host countries, but it can result in unsatisfactory cultural conformity and is also difficult to accomplish. Put simply, it is the result of spontaneous assimilation rather than any particular process, and might not be possible in countries that emphasize cultural purity, like France.

The 7/7 bombings were committed by three muslims born in Britain and a British citizen born in Jamaica. The British government was forced to confront Muslims not integrating into British society and chose French-style cultural intervention to do so. What resulted was a government effort, led by Jack Straw, to define "Britishness," a phrase fraught with racial overtones and ignorant of Britain's colonial past.

It is precisely Britain's colonial history that made London the world's most diverse city. By making foreign lands economically subservient to Her Majesty's Kingdom while leaving local cultural norms in place, the UK distinguished itself from other colonial powers. It made both Crown and colony richer and left the ancestors of those colonized, if not the colonists themselves, better off. Indeed, if one had to be colonized, one should hope it be under the Union Jack.

But Britain did not take on colonies as a charitable endeavor, and though one might prefer the Union Jack to the imperial alternatives, maintaining independence is always preferable. As such, Britain's problems with cultural integration were brought on by their imperial past. Though their resort to Britishness ignores this country's culturally tolerant past. I don't expect Britain to embrace a concept of Britishness that includes the burqa or conservative Islam. Nor do I expect conservative Muslims in London to fully accept English history as their own, but both would become more British by doing so.

This is a glimpse of a London most foreigners don't see. Far away from the grand trappings of Westminster and the splendor of London Bridge, immigrants flood into Britain seeking economic opportunity, but unable to integrate themselves into a Western culture that is truly foreign. Just as the British conquered the world, so too must the British allow their country to be invaded by foreigners.

I don't think this spells the end of British culture. Instead it means that the British identity will become more inclusive while the essential institutional elements will inevitably remain in place.

They may have to exercise patience. What could be more British than that?