For and against fish and chips

a dreadful mush of artery-hardening grease"

Alexi Duggins, The Guardian

or

"moist white fish in crisp golden batter, served with a generous portion of hot, fluffy chips." James Alexander, BBC News

We had a night away with friends in Ballarat on Sunday and went out to dinner by Lake Wendouree. It was a nice setting but the food was a bit ordinary I guess. So I chose fish and chips over the riskier items on the menu. And I was rewarded with light, crisp batter enclosing moist fish and crunchy chips. Yum. Comfort food at its best. So I thought I would do fish and chips for today's post. But how not to repeat what everyone else has said? Well I can't really - particularly as I think this is probably going to be a bit quote laden.

Nevertheless I think the pictures and the statements above pinpoint a dilemma that can be applied to so many different foods and I guess really just point to the fact that anything has to be cooked properly and well and with care in order to be good. Is there anything delicious that can be just thrown together? Well probably - bearing in mind the modern focus on quick, light, easy. And it is true fish and chips can be a complete disaster - especially if you buy them at a takeaway and then have to travel home to eat them. They should be eaten straight out of the sizzling fat. So save them for a really good restaurant, though when you're sitting in an expensive restaurant dithering about what to choose, it seems a bit stupid to go for fish and chips doesn't it? No matter what they call it. And if you save it for the local chippie, then they might end up as The Guardian's Alexi Duggins describes:

"As a meal, it’s a conceptual disaster. There’s one flavour: grease. There’s one texture: mush. In an era where even the most basic cook knows that you need to serve something sharp with fatty food to cut through the oil, what do we serve with our fish? Something light and sharp? Something zingy to counteract the grease-heavy assault on the palate? Nope. It’s chips. Oil-sodden chips, fried into a mushy, cottony pulp. Go to a bad chippy and it’s hard to tell whether you’re eating food or a duvet and pillow set that has been sliced up and lobbed into the deep-fat fryer."

The picture on the left at the top of the page is what he used to make his point and he is a bit right. The other one shows what it should be like. But I do think he overdoes the criticism. Are fish and chips 'a conceptual disaster'? No, no, no say I. Indeed I really think that, overall fried fish should be eaten with chips. Nothing else will do. In posh restaurants it seems to increasingly be served with mash or rice, neither of which I think are appropriate. And that something light and sharp can be provided by lemon juice. Traditionally, in England the tang comes from vinegar - malt vinegar - and here in Australia it seems it's sauce tartare. Or tomato sauce, which is something else again, and not really right to my mind. But then the Australians are in love with tomato sauce.

No, crisp is really what you are aiming for, crisp and crunchy as a contrast to the soft and moist fish and the fluffy potato. And there are plenty of restaurants that achieve this. I remember many in Tasmania especially.

Felicity Cloake goes as far as to say that the fish is irrelevant and it's all about the batter:

"with fish and chips, the fish, if fresh and well-cooked, is largely irrelevant, a mere supporting actor to the star of the show, its crispy coating." Felicity Cloake

Nigel Slater too goes for the light and crispy and more or less ignores the chips:

"I prefer my batter barely there, a crisp, almost transparent coating, as light and thin as ice, and just as easily shattered. Something fragile and toothsome to flatter the delicate seafood underneath. Nigel Slater

"Then, it was about wrapping my batter in newspaper. Now it’s about the batter being thin enough to read a newspaper through. ... a very thin, Japanese-style batter – we are virtually talking tempura here – holds very little oil after it leaves the deep fryer. And you can flavour it, too, with cayenne (not chilli flakes, which burn as soon as they hit the oil), finely chopped dill, lemon zest or Nigella seed. A new batter for a new season." Nigel Slater

Which more or less sums up the modern approach. Not that this is what you will get in a chippie - there it will batter of the thick variety - and there are some who maintain that the batter should be thick. Oh and the chips should be thick too. Not those fancy French frites.

And how do you achieve a light batter? Well according to Felicity Cloake:

"everyone agrees that good batter should be light and crisp, which means getting some air into the mixture. There are two principal methods for doing so: adding a raising agent, such as baking powder or yeast, or making up the batter with a carbonated liquid, such as sparkling water or beer." Felicity Cloake

She then proceeds to give various examples, some of which are pretty complicated and involve leaving the batter to rest. One of them even has yeast in it. Read her article for the alternatives.

Then there's the fat - what kind - I won't even go there - and how hot it has to be. Some say you should chill the batter and the fish before you put it in the very hot fat. All of which is leading to the conclusion that it's best not done at home. I don't I have to say and neither does Nigella Lawson who says it's not easy to get it just right and besides you have to cope with the smell. So there you are - fish and chips - a real comfort food, that is best eaten out and preferably in posh restaurants.

it seems the British are moving away from fish and chips as their favourite takeaway food. It's fifth, after hamburgers, Chinese/Indian, chicken and pizza. It used to be top.

And to finish with a little bit of history - read the BBC article for a detailed account. Fried fish comes from Jewish immigrants to Britain back in the 16th century. Chips from either France or Belgium - they're still fighting about that. And the two were put together some time in the 1860's. The north and south of England are still fighting about that too. Here in Australia the first fish and chip shop is generally credited to a Greek in Sydney in 1879 though it is actually thought he copied a Welshman. So no agreement there either. Interestingly though, at least in my early days in Australia, most of the fish and chip shops were run by Greeks and I don't think it's a particularly Greek dish. Fried fish yes, but not in batter and not with chips. As for the newspaper wrapping - well that was an economy measure, banned in the 80s for health reasons. Now you have to have some greaseproof paper between it and the food - if you use it at all. Most chippies don't.

I'll leave the last to the ultimate fancy chef - Heston Blumenthal - a picture and some words from Felicity Cloake.