The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus Volume 9 Issue 5 N.docx

The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 9 | Issue 5 |
Number 2 | Jan 24, 2011
1
Sushi Reverses Course: Consuming American Sushi in Tokyo
寿司逆流−−東京におけるアメリカ風寿司
Rumi Sakamoto, Matthew Allen
Sushi Reverses Course: Consuming
American Sushi in Tokyo
Matthew Allen and Rumi Sakamoto
Introduction
Sushi, not long ago a quintessentially Japanese
product, has gone global. Japanese food, and
sushi in particular, has experienced a surge in
international popularity in recent decades.
Japanese government estimates that outside of
J a p a n t h e r e a r e o v e r 2 0 , 0 0 0 J a p a n e s e
restaurants, most of which either specialize in
sushi or serve sushi (MAFF 2006; Council of
Advisors 2007).1 Some estimate the number of
overseas sushi bars and restaurants to be
between 14,000 and 18,000 (in comparison, the
number of sushi restaurants in Japan is
estimated to be around 45,000) (Matsumoto
2002: 2). Sushi stores today can be found
across Asia, the Americas, Europe, Russia,

A f r i c a , O c e a n i a a n d t h e P a c i f i c . T h e
phenomenon has accelerated rapidly since the
turn of the millennium.
While sushi’s global expansion has attracted
the attention of Japanese and global media
(Kato 2002; Matsumoto 2002; Tamamura 2004;
Ikezawa 2005; Fukue 2010) and a number of
scholarly works address sushi’s global
popularity and its transformation outside Japan
(Bestor 2000; Ng 2001; Cwiertka 1999; 2005;
2006),2 little scholarly or journalistic work
exists on one important facet of sushi’s recent
global growth — namely, the return home of
transformed sushi to Japan, at times in barely
recognisable forms. This paper offers an
analysis of this “reverse import (gyaku yunyū)”
phenomenon and its specific expression in what
we refer to as “American sushi” in Tokyo as a
contribution toward assessing culinary
globalisation. The nascent American sushi
trend brings into relief aspects of Japan-US
relations that are seldom articulated in the
context of discourse about food – in particular
the continued symbolic dominance of the US in
Japanese eyes;3 and it also is emblematic of
how Japan engages aspects of globalisation, in
this case fetishising a mundane product that
has become something new in its reimported
form. By focusing on this relatively recent
phenomenon we also aim to contribute to and
complicate the contemporary arguments that
characterise cultural globalisation as a
unilineal process of hybridisation, often
through localisation.

Using the cases of two high profile “American”
sushi restaurants in Tokyo, we show that the
Japanese reflexive consumption of “America”
demonstrates that the sign of otherness
remains a significant factor in framing
domestic consumption. The return “home” of
the transformed product that is at once both
familiar and exotic occupies a different
symbolic space to the ideas formalised in the
so-called “McDonaldisation” (Ritzer 1993) of
global production, which dominates much of
the thinking about globalisation of culture.
While McDonaldisation may entail efficient,
standardised and controlled forms of cultural
hybridisation such as the teriyaki chicken
burger, American sushi in Tokyo presents a
different type of hybridisation characterised by
the playfulness and unpredictability of its
production and consumption. To draw this
point out, we employ the concept of “fetish”
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
2
and offer a reading of cultural globalisation
that is not just about products expanding out
from a centre to the periphery where they are
modified, but is also about producing and
consuming a fetishised object of desire that has
accumulated extra social and symbolic capital
(Bourdieu, 1977) as it has crossed and re-
crossed national borders. As we will see, the

marketability and desirability of American sushi
in Japan comes primarily from its symbolic
(that is, fetishised) value (we will discuss this in
some detail later).
Before examining American sushi, however, it
is important to locate this phenomenon within
the historical context of sushi both in Japan and
its expansion to the rest of the world, especially
to the United States.
Sushi, Japan and the US
Edomae sushi, or Edo-style sushi, associated in
Japan with the origins of sushi, is said to have
been created in Edo in the mid nineteenth
century. Although there were many other,
earlier forms of sushi developed in Japan, and
in other parts of East and Southeast Asia,
edomae sushi retains its iconic place as the
forerunner of the current nigirizushi. Its
premise, a rather simple one, was based on
sticky rice balls loosely held together with a
mixture of vinegar and sugar, topped with a
thin slice of raw fish. This is the basis for most
contemporary sushi, though outside Japan
makizushi (rolled sushi wrapped in nori
seaweed and filled with a range of different
i n g r e d i e n t s i n c l u d i n g r a w f i s h ) a n d
uramakizushi (rolled sushi with nori inside)
have become more popular.4 In Tokyo however,
and in most parts of Japan, the most commonly
eaten sushi is overwhelmingly nigirizushi.5
The greater Tokyo area consumes a great deal
of Japan’s sushi. Moreover, it is the market

leader in food trends. In the city there are
numerous tiny, highly rated and exclusive sushi
restaurants, where expensive and difficult to
obtain ingredients are put together into
beautifully crafted delicate food.6 Indeed, there
are many different types of sushi available in
Tokyo: ma and pa sushi stores, often suburban,
or located in entertainment districts, which
make much of their income from home delivery;
kaitenzushi (sushi often made by robot, and
served on a conveyer belt); wafū (Japanese
style) restaurants with sushi bars; family
restaurants that specialise in moriawase
(selection of different fish) sushi; drive-in take-
out sushi; upmarket sushi chain stores; street
side sushi vendors; depa-chika (department
stores’ basement food halls) sushi, supermarket
and convenience store sushi; and there are the
reverse import (American) sushi, which this
article highlights.7 Tokyo aside, sushi is
available in Japan in every village, town and
city in many forms, and is widely consumed by
most people.8
Sushi’s emergence in the United States was
initially linked to Japanese diasporas in places
like Los Angeles and Hawaii. Although the non-
Japanese population found the premise of raw
fish and rice unappealing, Japanese food,
including sushi, became available in major
centres in the early twentieth century, starting
with Japanese immigration and settlements in
the 1920s, particularly on the West Coast. It
was not until the 1970s, though, that sushi’s
popularity grew among non-Japanese. This was

influenced by a number of factors including the
rise of Japan onto the global economic stage,
which led to an increasing number of ambitious
Japanese chefs arriving on the West Coast, and
also to increasing numbers of Japanese
e x p a t r i a t e b u s i n e s s m e n a n d t h e i r U S
colleagues eating out in their new, Japanese-
run restaurants (Corson, 2008: 44-7).9 Other
factors that contributed to the late 1970s and
early 1980s expansion of the sushi industry
included the West Coast counterculture
m o v e m e n t , o r g a n i c a n d h e a l t h f o o d
movements, diet crazes, high-profile actors and
media ‘personalities’ proclaiming their love of
sushi, combined with Japan’s economic growth
and increased visibility around this time
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
3
(Cwiertka 2006: 182; Issenberg 2007: 97;
Bestor 2000: 56). Over the next two decades,
sushi in the US became a fashionable food for
sophisticated consumers and even a status
symbol for some. In Bestor’s words, “from an
exotic, almost unpalatable ethnic specialty,
then to haute cuisine of the most refined sort,
sushi has become not just cool, but popular”
(Bestor 2000: 56-57).
A second wave of popularisation took place in
the US in the 1990s, where sushi’s market
grew from primarily being a fetishised, exotic

food for the wealthy, to also becoming a cheap,
accessible populist food. Takeout sushi from
s u p e r m a r k e t s a n d f a s t f o o d o u t l e t s
proliferated,10 and immigrants from East and
Southeast Asia entered the sushi business in
large numbers. The introduction of kaitenzushi
(conveyer-belt sushi) and sushi robots from
Japan11 made sushi cheaper and even more
accessible. Today the sushi industry in the US
is large, growing, diverse, and idiosyncratic.
Almost any conceivable form of sushi is
a v a i l a b l e i n t h e U S , f r o m s u p e r m a r k e t
refrigerators stocking $5 take-out uramaki with
artificial crab stick and mayonnaise fillings to
$200 servings of fatty tuna at an upmarket
restaurant like Nobu’s in New York, with
almost everything in between. The popularity
and visibility of sushi has also opened the way
for other cheap and fast Japanese food such as
noodles and curry.
T h e U S h a s p r o v i d e d a p r o t o t y p e f o r
contemporary global sushi.12 Certainly many of
the more adventurous and imaginative rolls
have originated there. It is the home of various
uramaki (reverse rolls) – rolled sushi with nori
inside and rice outside – which became popular
in the 1990s because many Americans did not
like the “chewy” texture of nori on the outside
of their sushi. They preferred it on the inside.13
Using new ingredients, various rolls were
created in the US and spread to the rest of the
world: California Roll with imitation crab,
avocado, and mayonnaise, Caterpillar Roll with

sliced avocado on top, Rainbow Roll with multi-
coloured slices of fish and seafood on top, and
Spider Roll with fried soft-shell crab are some
of the US classics. There are even a few kosher
sushi bars for Jewish customers who do not eat
seafood without fins and scales (i.e. crab,
octopus. squid, eels, shellfish etc.), with
supervising rabbis in the kitchen (Lii 2009:
1-2).
Sushi comes home: Rainbow Roll Sushi
and Genji Sushi
Consider the American sushi restaurants in
Tokyo, that is, restaurants that flaunt their
Americanism in carving out a place in the
market of the world capital of the sushi
kingdom. They employ a fusion philosophy,
using Japanese products and “tradition,” while
i n c o r p o r a t i n g f o r e i g n i n f l u e n c e s f r o m
successful overseas sushi enterprises into their
new style sushi to suit the palates and the egos
of their customers. The sushi that is served in
these new-wave American sushi restaurants
(mostly roll sushi with ingredients other than
raw fish) is both similar to, and distinctively
different from most sushi available in Japan. It
is this difference that is emphasised – the
foreign flavours of something that is similar in
style to the everyday sushi available in Japan,
yet is quite different in taste and concept.14
We have chosen two of these restaurants,
Rainbow Roll Sushi and Genji Sushi New York,
because while they occupy quite different
market segments (the former is a moderately

upmarket restaurant while the latter is more
casual and inexpensive), both are owned by
large corporations which have strong links with
the US, and both trade on the image of the US
as a marketing device. That is, both foreground
the US as the origin of their concept to sell
their product as an object of fetishist desire for
consumption among young, predominantly
f e m a l e c o n s u m e r s , a n d t o p r o m o t e t h e
consciousness of consumers finding something
new, international and interesting in these
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
4
original iterations of sushi, something not
previously experienced in Japan. The more
upscale Rainbow Roll Sushi deploys America as
a symbol of cutting-edge sophistication,
whereas Genji Sushi New York promotes its
products relying on the image of wholesome
and organic food supported by “health
conscious New Yorkers” (GSNY website).
(Source
(http://spinshell.tv/cityguide/rainbow_roll_sushi
/))
Rainbow Roll Sushi was established in 2001 by
WDI, a company that brought Kentucky Fried
Chicken, Hard Rock Café, Spago and other
successful US eateries to Tokyo. Yoko Shibata,

who started Rainbow Roll Sushi, is a Japanese
woman who at the age of 30 returned from the
United States, and decided to set up an
“American” sushi restaurant with a “rich and
casual” atmosphere (Kato 2002: 218-19). The
restaurant specialises in exotic sushi and offers
other mostly Japanese cuisine, including salads,
v e g e t a b l e a n d m e a t d i s h e s , a s w e l l a s
expensive foreign and domestic wines and
beers, and desserts. In particular the use of
unusual combinations of ingredients in the
production of sushi, the high class menu and
the interior decoration lead customers to
assume that the product is special. Rainbow
Roll Sushi is aimed at the top end of the
market, in particular at wealthy, trendy young
Japanese.
(authors’ photograph)
Genji Sushi New York is a chain restaurant
franchise with 83 outlets in the US East Coast
and the UK according to its website. It is aimed
at the middle of the market, especially
targeting the lunchtime office crowds, and
focusing on take-out and delivery. Introduced
into Japan in March 2008, it projects itself as
“contemporary, casual, stylish” with the
modifier “beautiful, delicious NY roll sushi” on
i t s w e b s i t e , a n d o n i t s m e n u s . T h i s i s
emblematic of the focus of the restaurant
c h a i n ; m o d e r n , c l e a n , f a s t , f o o d t h a t
emphasises style, health and convenience, and
also incorporates both English and Japanese on
the menu to ensure the foreignness of the

product is emphasised.
Rainbow Roll Sushi is located in trendy
Azabujūban on the second floor of a building,
which houses an Italian pasta restaurant on the
ground floor. The entrance is discrete, built
from concrete slab finished with a very rough
glaze. Waiting staff, both men and women,
dressed in black T-shirts and trousers greet
diners, and escort them to tables. In fact, the
http://spinshell.tv/cityguide/rainbow_roll_sushi/
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
5
“industrial chic” décor is consistent throughout
the restaurant. Bare minimalism is the
o r g a n i s i n g t h e m e , a n d t h e r e a r e f e w
decorations and table ornaments; indeed, grey
concrete is the dominant styling motif. There
are booths of concrete in stylish industrial style
on the first floor, with high backed western-
style seating.
(Source
(http://metropolis.co.jp/dining/restaurant-revie
ws/rainbow-roll-sushi/))
There is a substantial central table made of
backlit marble, around which perhaps 20 diners

can be seated, there are semi-enclosed split-
level zashiki (Japanese-styled tatami mat
booths) that overlook the central table, and
there are seats available at a sushi bar. With
the dim lighting, the panopticon-like views from
the central dining table over the restaurant, the
monochromatic décor, the Latin American
sound track, and the subdued but lively buzz of
conversation from the partially sound-shielded
booths, the restaurant would not be out of
place in New York, London, Rio or Sydney.
S t a y i n g w i t h t h e t h e m e o f d i s c r e e t
sophistication, most of the food preparation is
conducted behind the sushi bar, in a kitchen
that is not visible to customers. Sushi chefs do
make sushi at the bar, but they produce only
rolled sushi; the more exotic sushi that involves
items like seared scallops, cooked prawns, etc.
is made in the kitchen, as it is in most sushi
restaurants.
Rainbow Roll Sushi’s spider roll (Source
(http://www.umamimart.com/2009/04/American
-Sushi-at-Rainbow-Roll-Sushi-Tokyo/))
The pricing of the menu is about average for
upmarket restaurant dining in Tokyo; omakase
(degustation) menu is available at 5,300 yen
per person and the average price of sushi rolls
is around 1,400 yen. 1 5 The drinks list is
extensive; indeed the range of shōchū and
s a k e , a n d t h e l o n g E u r o p e a n w i n e l i s t
emphasise both the fusion nature of the
restaurant theme, and also perhaps the izakaya

(casual restaurant/bars, where drinking is the
main focus) roots from which part of the fusion
evolved.
Genji Sushi New York is quite different. From
the outside the message of a fusion restaurant
is very clear. With its lime green NEW YORK
SUSHI sign brilliantly illuminated, it is in fact a
fusion of a fusion. Located in Roppongi – hence
accessible to many foreigners as well as
younger Japanese – it is in a restaurant mall in
the basement of trendy Roppongi Hills. It is
built in light coloured timbers, with rounded
ceiling mouldings imitating the inside of a
railway carriage, is brightly lit, painted cream
http://metropolis.co.jp/dining/restaurant-reviews/rainbow-roll-
sushi/
sushi/
sushi/
http://www.umamimart.com/2009/04/American-Sushi-at-
Rainbow-Roll-Sushi-Tokyo/
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
6
and lime green, with frosted glass panes
surrounding the seated area.

Note the quotation marks around “sushi”
and the emphasis on New York in the
signage (authors’ photograph)
All seats are non-smoking, which is rare for a
Japanese restaurant.16 There is a takeaway
glass-fronted display with salads, sushi sets,
and other “healthy” foods displayed. The
signage is in English only, and the items on the
menu, written in English, have descriptions in
Japanese. The menu includes a vast array of
fusion sushi and donburi (rice with topping) –
California Don, Tuna and avocado Don, Genji
seafood salad, etc., with prices set at modest
levels. The average cost of a single meal “set”
was around 1,000 yen. There were only two
employees in the entire restaurant with seating
for about 30, so service was negligible,
reflected in the price of the food perhaps.
Some of the sushi available at Genji’s
counter (authors’ photograph)
Staff were dressed in white chef’s uniforms
w i t h t h e G e n j i S u s h i N e w Y o r k m a r k
prominently displayed on their breast pockets.
They also wore black baseball caps with the
company logo visible. Staff spoke no English,
perhaps unsurprisingly, as the company is
focused closely on the Japanese market, rather
than the expatriate market. The image of what
they were selling – cosmopolitan “New York”
sushi to Japanese clients – was the major
marketing point, and this was emphasised by

the décor, the menu, and by the food available.
Reading the local and the global
While Rainbow Roll Sushi and Genji Sushi New
York still serve some “traditional” sushi
(Rainbow Roll Sushi in particular boasts a sushi
counter reminiscent of older, more “traditional”
sushi establishments where customers watch
their sushi being made in front of them), their
main selling points are the image of the US as a
fetish for either fashion, health, or difference,
which is manifest in unfamiliar combinations of
i n g r e d i e n t s i n h i g h l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d
presentations. Such product differentiation
enables them to locate themselves within the
generic sushi market, while selling things that
average sushi restaurants rarely incorporate
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
7
into their menus in an environment that is quite
dissimilar to most sushi restaurants in Japan.
Clearly, too, the names of the respective
restaurants are relevant in determining their
clientele and their products: Rainbow Roll
Sushi, written in English and in katakana,
unsurprisingly makes and sells a large range of
unusual roll sushi. In addition to “standard”
American sushi like California Roll or Dragon
Roll, they offer an array of original roll sushi
with interesting and unexpected combinations

of fillings such as fried aubergine, shrimp,
jalapeno mayo, raw beef, kim-chee, in very
unusual combinations.
Rainbow Roll Sushi’s dragon roll (Source
Rainbow Roll Sushi consciously foregrounds
the signifier “America” in embracing the
reverse import philosophy. Its bilingual website
describes itself as “a brand new dining space
launched from America” and states that
American roll sushi “completely throws off the
preconception of sushi” with the use of non-
traditional ingredients. Japanese sushi, it
asserts, was “transformed and expressed in a
revolutionalised [sic] way in California, made
itself into the limelight [sic] of New York, the
state for cuisines from all around the world.”
With a large selection of California wine and
cocktails and stylish interior that its website
says is “reminiscence [sic] of a bar in New
York,” it differentiates itself from traditional
sushi restaurants, establishing an identity as an
American-style “unique” and “playful” sushi
dining bar (RRS website). It is designed to fit a
customer who is curious, creative, not
conservative, nor wedded to tradition. This
perspective was reinforced by the manager,
who informed us that many customers have
read about the restaurant in food magazines,
women’s magazines, and in newspapers, and
have been curious to see what the “fuss” is all

about (interview). Observing customers
consuming the food, it was noticeable that
there was considerable exchange of items
among diners, and many exclamations of
excitement and claims of “omoshiroii!”
(“interesting/different”) as people tasted the
unusual combinations of ingredients.
The emphasis is on originality, trendiness and
frivolity, and customers animatedly discuss the
highly original rolled sushi in particular: spider
roll (1,250 yen): made from soft shell crab,
cucumber, Japanese radish, carrot, lettuce, fat
rolled, and served with ponzu (citrus based
source); Anago sugata roll (1,450 yen): a fat
rolled sushi with sea eel, cucumber, carrot, and
kanpyō (dried gourd strips) – a fusion of
traditional Japanese ingredients with western
vegetables; or scallop and avocado spicy mayo
roll (1,200 yen): also a fat rolled sushi with
scallop, asparagus, tempura prawn, cucumber,
avocado, red pepper, mayonnaise, garlic chips,
with a spicy miso glaze. Such iterations of sushi
demonstrate the playfulness with which the
concept of fusion food is produced and
consumed. Customers have a wide range of
sushi and other dishes from which to choose,
and many of these are quite original fusions,
such as tataki (seared) beef roll, ikura (salmon
roe) and smoked salmon roll, an avocado and
raw tuna stack, or tempura, asparagus and
avocado roll. A survey of online restaurant

APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
8
reviews by customers also confirms that this
restaurant’s appeal is in its difference from
standard sushi restaurants in Japan.
Rainbow Roll Sushi’s tuna and avocado
stack (Source
Clearly, though, the rhetoric notwithstanding,
the restaurant is not conceptualised as purely
American either. In an interview with a
Japanese journalist, its creator Yoko Shibata
maintains that Rainbow Roll Sushi aims not to
directly import American sushi but to “pursue
the originality of ‘roll sushi in Japan’” and that
she wanted to prove that “although roll sushi
was born in America, its original came from
Japan” (Kato 2002: 220). According to her this
is achieved by adding some original elements to
American roll sushi, and she further suggests
t h a t s u b t l e a d j u s t m e n t o f t a s t e a n d
presentation in sushi is something “only
Japanese can do” (Kato 2002: 220). National
pride and desire for the foreign are thus subtly
balanced in the creation of American sushi at

Rainbow Roll Sushi. While it has an American
“flavour” it also retains a sense of Japanese
engagement with the medium.
Genji Sushi New York also has a large selection
of American-style rolled sushi (California Roll,
Philadelphia Roll, Rainbow Roll), with some
“standard” nigirizushi, complemented with
some donburi (rice with in this case rather
unconventional toppings) items such as
California-don (raw tuna17 and avocado) or
donburi with organic green onion and raw tuna
salad. Genji’s main selling points are that it is
“New York” sushi – it is the sushi that people in
New York eat – and that the food it sells is
healthy and stylish. In a slightly ironic twist,
the chain has employed the same marketing
strategy employed overseas to sell this
overseas variant of sushi to Japanese; that is, it
has emphasised the “healthy” aspect of eating
their particular kinds of sushi to an extent
almost never seen in Japan. Arguably, within
Japan sushi is not perceived as particularly
“healthy.” Rather it can be perceived as
convenient, cheap, accessible, familiar, or
expensive, distinctive and bought for special
occasions etc. But the population generally
does not need to be educated to eat sushi
(ultimately it is simply a matter of choice,
unlike in other nations, where marketing
strategies may involve educating customers
that eating sushi is a rational, healthy, and
economic choice).
Genji’s seared salmon rolled sushi with

salad (authors’ photograph)
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
9
Although Genji is marketed as “‘sushi’ from
N e w Y o r k ” ( t h e u s e o f E n g l i s h a n d t h e
quotation marks around the word sushi
indicating that their product is foreign, not
traditional, sushi), their menu is somewhat
different from that offered in the New York
branches. Genji in the United States, which
places a strong emphasis on “all-natural …
environmentally friendly … highest quality
Japanese inspired cuisine,” offers its customers
choices of white, brown, or multi-grain sushi.
And while the latter two were introduced into
the menu in Tokyo in 2009, they may appear
exotic/strange to the Japanese palate. In Japan,
the health discourse and the concern over the
“obesity epidemic” are not powerful enough to
persuade most consumers to eat sushi with
brown, let alone multigrain, rice. White rice
still is the staple,18 and the recent craze over
the health benefit of low-GI whole food in the
W e s t h a s n o t c h a l l e n g e d w h i t e r i c e ’ s
supremacy in Japan. Another type of sushi not

on Japanese Genji’s menu, but on overseas
menus, are rolls such as “Tokyo roll” that
contain multiple types of fish/seafood in a
single roll, a practice uncommon in traditional
sushi in Japan. On the other hand, Japanese
Genji sells roast beef and takana (pickled
vegetable) rolls. These are not sold in New
York outlets, where no meat is seen on the
menu. This is probably because, with Japan’s
generally low meat consumption, people are
n o t o v e r l y c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e r i s k o f
saturated fat in meat products, whereas in the
US “no meat” may be more immediately
equated with “health.” It seems that, thus, the
reality of the “‘sushi’ from New York” is that it
is “Japan-inspired American health food” that
has been re-Japanised and reintroduced to
Japan as something “genuinely” American.
While interviews with staff at Genji suggested
that many customers are young office women
interested in the healthful properties of the
food, Genji Japan in 2009 was not yet convinced
its customers would eat multigrain rice sushi.
Presumably this was too much of a stretch for
their Japanese customers, so multigrain rice
c u r r e n t l y i s n o t o f f e r e d . H o w e v e r , t h e
company’s marketing emphasis on the healthy
nature of its products seems to strike a chord
with consumers as something interesting,
American and different. Situated in the
basement food precinct of a very upmarket part
of Roppongi, it is surrounded by expensive
b o u t i q u e f o o d r e t a i l e r s , r a n g i n g f r o m
delicatessens that sell imported European

foods to niche retailers of pastries, specialist
cafes, and high end restaurants. Roppongi is
well-known to foreigners too, and it was
noticeable that there were many foreigners in
the precinct throughout the course of our study
there. The restaurant’s location among other
“foreign” restaurants and stores that sell
foreign foods is no coincidence; it clearly aims
to link its idiosyncratic health discourse with
America as the origin, in contrast to the
marketing of the American branches of Genji
which emphasise the health discourse and the
Japanese influence.
In these kinds of refracted movements,
transformations, and representations,
questions of “origins,” “authenticity” and
“ownership” take on new dimensions. And in
this reflexive movement back to Japan, the
transmogrification of sushi as a new object of
fetishist desire within Japan is driven by the
signifiers of “New York,” foreignness, and
exoticism. And the consumption of it is driven
by curiosity and playfulness.19
Engaging globalisation: locating American
sushi
How then, can this new form of sushi be
located within the current literature on cultural
globalisation? While it is tempting to see
g l o b a l i s a t i o n a s a e u p h e m i s m f o r
Americanisation, many authors now view
cultural globalisation as multilateral and
complex movements among plural origins and
plural destinations. Concepts of hybridity and

creolisation have become central to current
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
10
discussion of globalisation, which emphasise
t h e c r e a t i v e a n d o f t e n u n p r e d i c t a b l e
interactions between the local and the global,
problematising the idea of globalisation as
homogenisation that informed early accounts of
globalisation (Canclini 1995; Appadurai 1996;
Hannertz 2000; Pieterse 2004; Kraidy 2005).
In terms of challenging the idea of globalisation
as Americanisation or westernisation, Asia has
come to occupy a significant place. Phenomena
such as Japanese anime fandom outside Japan
(Kelts 2007) or the popularity of Bollywood
movies outside India (Rao 2007: 57-58) have
been considered as “counter-currents,” in the
sense of offering perspectives on how non-
western cultures have impacted on the west
a n d t h e w o r l d , i n c l u d i n g t h e U n i t e d
States.20 Some writers have examined inter-
Asian transcultural flows that bypass the west
altogether, again underscoring the importance
of Asia as a key player in today’s cultural
globalistion at a time when Asia is recovering
the position of centrality in the world economy
that it had occupied prior to the nineteenth
century (Iwabuchi 2000, 2004; Nakano 2002;
Fung 2007; Arrighi, Hamashita and Selden
2003).

On one level, sushi’s global popularity
constitutes yet another instance of “Asian”
cultural influence in other parts of the world.
Its transformation in different places due to the
influences of local markets and cultures could
be understood using hybridisation/localisation
models, as an instance of a Japanese original
inflected with some local flavour. For example,
customers can buy curry sushi in Singapore,
spam sushi in Hawaii, duck sushi in China, kim
chee sushi in Korea, and teriyaki chicken and
avocado sushi in Australia. Interestingly,
though, it is American sushi that has come back
to Japan, not versions from other parts of the
w o r l d . 2 1 A r g u a b l y t h i s i s b e c a u s e t h e
experimentation with sushi as fusion in the
U n i t e d S t a t e s f r o m t h e l a t e 1 9 9 0 s w a s
successful and sophisticated enough to spawn
imitators in other western nations, and now in
Japan. And it is this step – the coming home of
the localised, Americanised product – that
displays the explanatory limitations of these
models of localisation and hybridisation.
American sushi, on which this essay focuses,
illustrates how the global and the local interact
in much more complex ways than one-off
hybridisation between two elements. The
“reverse-import” sushi, we have observed, was
in fact a re-domesticated version of what is
available in the US. That is, although Genji
Sushi New York and Rainbow Roll Sushi
profess to produce “American” sushi, what they
are serving is fusion food that originated in

Japan, moved to the US, was modified there for
US domestic consumption, then was re-
e x p o r t e d t o J a p a n , w h e r e i t w a s
recontextualised, further modified and
fetishized.22 In short, the so-called American
sushi at these Tokyo restaurants is actually a
modified Japanese version of American sushi.23
The reverse import model thus complicates the
relationship between origin and destination. It
also problematises the assumption behind the
hybridisation model that it is about mixing two
separate elements. The concept of cultural
hybridity (e.g. hybridity as mimicry; hybridity
as syncretism) retains the notion of origin and
destination, original and copy, local and
foreign, all of which are seen as binary
opposites. In the reflexive movement of reverse
import sushi, however, these dichotomies seem
less certain or relevant. When cream cheese
and avocado sushi is served as “Japanese” in
the US, and “American” in Japan, where is the
origin, and where is the location of adoption?
The case of American sushi enables us to
understand the specific interactions between
the local and the foreign beyond the simple
model of two elements mixing into one. What
we read from the American sushi movement is
that localities cannot be defined as simply the
“origin” and/or “destination” of a cultural
artefact or practice. Rather, they contribute to
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2

11
the production of something that supersedes
both, or indeed multiple localities, with the
product even returning to the point of origin in
refreshing new forms.
Although, as we have noted, some authors have
written about sushi’s global popularity and its
transformation outside Japan (see introduction)
and others have looked at how “foreign” food
has been adopted in Japan, the American sushi
phenomenon in Japan has largely been
overlooked. Perhaps more importantly the
aspects associated with consumption have
often been elided in the context of globalisation
theory. That is, in the case of the consumption
o f A m e r i c a n s u s h i i n T o k y o , t h e m e s o f
p l a y f u l n e s s a n d f e t i s h a r e a p p l i e d b y
customers, who are looking to something
“different” or unusual.
Fetishising American sushi
We propose that American sushi’s consumption
in Japan can be understood, therefore, as a
kind of playful fetish. We are using the concept
of the fetish here as: “an artifice […] It is the
production of desire according to the double
genitive: produced by desire and producing
desire” (Jean-Luc Nancy 2001: 7). That is, we
are concerned with the symbolic capital which
is generated by the sign of the fetish. It is
desire for the sake of desire. Indeed, it is
arguable that fetishes in postmodern Japan are
recurring forms of social capital.24 Fetishism in

contemporary urban Japan, and Tokyo in
particular, is a constant motif in advertising,
entertainment, and consumption in general.
Blonde boy bands, flaxen-haired pop-singing
idols, maid cafes, butler cafes, cos-play stores
and costumers, gothic lolitas, mature women
dressing as school girls in advertising, nudity,
cuteness: these signs of the fetish are apparent
everywhere throughout Tokyo public spaces –
in subways, on billboards, in magazines, on
taxis, on building sites, on shop hoardings etc.
The fetish to desire the new sushi because it is
new, American, individualistic and original is
consistent with such cultural propensities.
American sushi has become something that has
superceded the original incarnation, has been
commodified as something that lies beyond the
everyday experience of consumers, and has
been marketed as an object of desire for
sophisticated clients who want to try something
different, challenging and new. American sushi
is unlikely to become a “mainstream” product
in Japan, but it has certainly differentiated
itself in the marketplace from traditional sushi,
and the fact that the restaurants we have
focussed on are still in business suggests that
their franchise-based market research was
probably accurate – they will enjoy modest
success in Tokyo’s highly competitive food
sector.
A s w e h a v e d i s c u s s e d , A m e r i c a n s u s h i
demonstrates a specific type of transnational
cultural interaction in which a hybrid cultural
commodity returns to the purported origin to

become re-hybridised. Sushi is not a ubiquitous
transnational commodity that exists globally in
identical formats, but rather has transformed
itself and accumulated different forms and
meanings as it has crossed multiple borders.
The reflexivity of American sushi being sold as
something consumed by Americans overseas,
hence desirable to Japanese consumers at
home, adds a new dimension of complexity to
cultural globalisation.25
I t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e i m a g e o f A m e r i c a ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t o f “ N e w Y o r k ” a n d
“California”, is very powerful for Japanese
consumers, particularly for young, wealthy
urban professionals with a sense of adventure.
The attraction of consuming “America” in Japan
is powerful, though of course the reality here
can be read as America consuming Japan in the
first instance by buying into the sushi fad. It
c o u l d b e t h a t t h e p r e s t i g i o u s n a m e s o f
California and New York, when attached to
food that otherwise might not appeal to young
Japanese, do indeed increase the appeal of such
food for people who seek difference and
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
12
something new.26 Currently in Tokyo there are
many Korean run sushi stores in places such as
Shin-Okubo that sell Korean-styled sushi,
including kim-chee, though these are not

marketed as creative and playful reverse
import sushi; these are catering to both the
developing Korean Wave, and the Korean
tourist market in that part of Tokyo.27 American
sushi, or the re-engineered Japanese American
forms, on the other hand, targets a different
kind of consumer; typically young, Japanese,
educated, curious.28
W e s u g g e s t t h a t t h e A m e r i c a n s u s h i
phenomenon is partly to do with the branding –
the fetish – of “America,” and partly a product
of Japan’s desire for and consumption of
(imagined) America. Moreover its symbolic
value relies on the inherently hierarchical
structure of self-other along the hackneyed
east/west divide, though with a twist. This twist
is that the fetish of consuming the otherness of
America is contextualised within the form of
sushi, which carries the signifier “Japan.” And
it is consumed playfully, reflexively.
The foundation for the marketability of the
American sushi we have looked at is that
America – since 1945 Japan’s dominant other
and a model, a goal of modernisation, and a
source of pop culture to emulate29 – has now
embraced Japanese sushi as its own. Moreover,
the form of sushi has become something quite
different to what it was when it “left” Japan.
The “reverse” in “reverse import” sushi takes
o n s p e c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e b e c a u s e o f t h e
hierarchical relationship between the two
nations. This is clear, for example, in WDI’s
concept statement for Rainbow Roll Sushi that
sushi has “captivated countless gourmet

celebrities and executives” in America. Tokyo
consumers of reverse import sushi are
encouraged to identify themselves with
imaginary US celebrities and executives with
sophisticated tastes and a penchant for
innovation and new sensitivity. This is certainly
about consuming America, but not in the sense
of consuming hamburgers, fried chicken and
a p p l e p i e , t h a t i s “ a u t h e n t i c ” A m e r i c a
(whatever that might mean). Eating American
sushi in Japan is about consuming a new kind
o f c o o l a n d h i p f o o d t h a t e m b o d i e s
sophisticated, urban, trendy America that in
turn adopts and adapts foreign cuisine as its
own, while also retaining significant references
to Japan’s status as the origin. This desire to
consume the American perspective on sushi is
reinforced by the proliferation of articles in
popular magazines and newspapers, popular
books etc in Japanese on the spread of sushi
worldwide.
Conclusion
A m e r i c a n s u s h i i n T o k y o r e f l e c t s t h e
sophistication and unpredictability of global
processes. Starting with an iconic Japanese
dish and mixing elements of contemporary US
and European influences, reverse sushi
restaurateurs do not simply pay homage to
other, foreign roots that their cuisine employs,
but also redomesticate a product which has
become internationalised. The two examples we
cite can be seen as variations on a theme – that
of transforming something that was originally

Japanese into something that is simultaneously
both Japanese and something else, and
marketing it as something exotic and out of the
ordinary.
But it is the unlikely nature of the food that has
been re-imported (conceptually) that is most
noteworthy here; it is the significance of what it
is they are selling to Japanese people that
stands out. That is, these restaurants use a
global marketing strategy – the same sort of
strategy employed to sell, for example
McDonalds, Starbucks, Kentucky Fried
Chicken, etc. – to sell “American” sushi to
J a p a n e s e . I n e a c h o f t h e a b o v e c a s e s ,
concessions have been made to Japanese
tastes, and menus invariably have “local”
versions of what were once “American food
items.” What we see in the American sushi
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
13
movement is that global corporate models have
b e e n e m p l o y e d t o s e l l t h e r e d e p l o y e d ,
relocalised, and reinvented forms of sushi to
Japan in more or less the same way that
McDonalds has been localised for the Japanese
market. The significance of selling sushi to
young Japanese as an imported concept – a
f e t i s h i n t h e s e n s e t h a t i t i s a b o u t a
manufactured symbolic desire – cannot be
overlooked, nor underestimated.

We think, then, that the marketing of sushi as
“American” and “reverse import” in Japan adds
a new dimension to the understanding of
globalisation. As we have noted, the current
literature on cultural globalisation typically
emphasises products and ideas coming from
increasingly diverse sources (mostly America,
A s i a , a n d E u r o p e ) t h a t a r e m o d i f i e d
(localised/hybridised/indigenised) in their new
destination. The case of American sushi
suggests a further dimension of global
transformative processes; that is, it invites
examination of how the relationship between
the origin and the destination becomes more
layered, more nuanced than current models
suggest.
We have also noted that in the way American
sushi is sold and consumed in Tokyo, there is a
significant element of playful fetishist
behaviour involved. In this respect this case
differs markedly from such instances as
M c D o n a l d ’ s i n J a p a n ( w i t h t h e i r m u c h
discussed teriyaki burgers; less discussed are
their fried potato with nori flavour, or
croquette burger); these products were
d e s i g n e d b y l a r g e U S c o r p o r a t i o n s t o
specifically target Japanese who, they believed,
wanted familiar flavours in alien food types
with fast food convenience; that is Japanese
influence inserted into a US-based product
which retained the signifier “America.” In
American sushi, the product with its own
American branding has already become exotic –
a Japanese product with American influences

inserted – but it has retained the signifier
“Japan.” So when it is consumed in Japan it is
as though consumers are eating the others’
versions of their own food. And consumers eat
it with curiosity, playfulness, and at times even
with irony, conscious that they are consuming
others’ perceptions of something they are
familiar with in its “authentic” Japanese form.
I t i s a p p a r e n t t h a t s u s h i i s b e c o m i n g
increasingly sophisticated both overseas and in
Japan, as it is adapted to new environments and
tastes by chefs who demonstrate multiple
culinary influences and agendas. In each of its
iterations the signifier “Japan” is retained. And
now sushi has come home to Japan in a new
g u i s e , w h i c h r e l i e s o n o v e r l a y i n g t h e
“Japaneseness” of sushi with the signifier “the
US” in creating its chic appeal in Tokyo. The
tight linkages between foreign, cool, hip,
different, omoshiroi, and the new and original
sushi labelled with “the US” as branding, are
undeniable. This reverse movement, where
products and ideas move from the “origin” to
o t h e r d e s t i n a t i o n s , a n d t h e n r e t u r n ,
transformed, to the “origin” replete with added
meanings, illustrates a complex dimension of
globalisation that has rarely been addressed.
Interestingly, Japanese consumers seem to
have embraced the new fetish of this American
sushi. Perhaps this reflects the growing
confidence of Japanese consumers to ironically
and playfully consume the other’s version of
something of their own as a fetish – a sign
perhaps that globalisation processes may be

becoming increasingly sophisticated over time
and exposure to global forces.
Matt Allen is professor and head of the School
o f H i s t o r y a n d P o l i t i c s , U n i v e r s i t y o f
Wollongong, Australia, and a Japan Focus
associate. Rumi Sakamoto is a senior lecturer
in the School of Asian Studies, the University of
Auckland, New Zealand, and a Japan Focus
associate. Rumi and Matt are coeditors of
Popular Culture, Globalization and Japan
http://www.amazon.com/dp/041544795X/?tag=theasipacjo0b-20
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
14
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/041544795X/?tag
=theasipacjo0b-20).
Recommended citation: Matthew Allen and
Rumi Sakamoto, Sushi Reverses Course:
Consuming American Sushi in Tokyo, The Asia-
Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 5 No 2, January 31,
2011.
Endnotes
1 The number of Japanese restaurants outside
Japan could be considerably larger than the
government’s estimate; Mr Uesawa, from the
Tokyo Sushi Academy, for example, informed
us in a 2009 interview that there were more

than 30,000 Japanese restaurants overseas,
though the actual numbers were difficult to get
and can be possibly even larger than this.
2 There is increasing interest in Japanese food
in English-language scholarship. See, for
example, Rass and Assmann (2010) and Ishige
Naomichi (2001) that examine the history of
Japanese food, as well as Aoyama Tomoko
(2008)’s work on Japanese food in literature. A
few others have looked at how “foreign” food
such as curry has been adopted in Japan
( M o r i e d a 2 0 0 0 ; C w i e r t k a 2 0 0 5 ) . S e e
Krishnendu Ray (2004) on Indian consumption
patterns in US.
3 See Gavan McCormack’s Client State: Japan
in the American Embrace (2007) for a detailed
discussion of what he refers to as the client
relationship between Japan and the US, citing
both the 1947 Constitution and the US-Japan
Security Alliance as the foundations for the
dependence of Japan on the US.
4 And this trend has since spread to the rest of
the world. For example, makizushi now
accounts for more than 75 percent of all sushi
sales in New Zealand (Nick Katsoulis, owner of
St. Pierre’s Sushi, interview Auckland, 16 May
2008).
5 Sushi in Japan does include many forms of
rolled sushi, but these are commonly seen as
supplements to nigirizushi, which is far more
popular.

6 These restaurants are often small, boutique
sushi establishments, where the prices are not
printed on menus and customers rely on the
chef to provide then with what he (it is always a
m a l e w h o r u n s s u c h s t o r e s ) t h i n k s i s
appropriate for the individual patron. This
system is referred to as ‘omakase’ (literally to
trust in the chef’s judgement) and is similar to
the French idea of a gustacion menu.
7 Although in places like Shin-ōkubo ‘Korea
T o w n ’ o n e f i n d s K o r e a n - o w n e d s u s h i
restaurants that sell kimbap (a Korean rice roll
similar to makizushi, but without vinegar and
with sesame flavouring, and commonly pickled
radish and beef fillings), the reverse import
sushi in Tokyo has been largely an ‘American’
phenomenon. There are a couple of French and
Italian inspired sushi restaurants owned by
Japanese, as well as a couple of branches of a
high-profile Hong Kong sushi restaurant, but
they mostly serve ‘traditional’ Japanese sushi
plus some US-style creative sushi, rather than
distinctively French, Italian or Hong-Kong
inflected versions of sushi. One slightly
different case is a ‘Handroll sushi’ café that
opened in 2010 in Osaka, which serves
‘Australian-style’ handroll sushi (uncut roll
sushi that are shorter and fatter than Japanese
hosomaki roll, with a larger proportion of
fillings like avocado and deep-fried chicken).
8 According to The New York Times (Tabuchi
2010), the restaurant business in Japan is in
decline, and sales in 2009 dropped almost 3

percent from 2008 figures. Sushi businesses
have also suffered, but there has been an
increase in the number of successful low-end
kaitenzushi (conveyer belt-served sushi) such
as the 260 restaurant Kura chain, which uses a
low-price, heavily-automated system of
manufacture and delivery.
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
15
9 According to Hirotaka Matsumoto (a Japanese
sushi restaurant owner who became a food
researcher), the 1977 publication of Dietary
Goals for the United States by the US Senate’s
Select Committee on Nutrition and Human
Needs was instrumental in creating the
conditions in which the sushi boom took place
in the US. The report warned readers of the
unhealthy nature of the average American’s
diet, and recommended that Americans eat less
meat and more fish. This, he argues, in
combination with the idea that raw food is
healthier than cooked or processed food, made
sushi suddenly popular (Matsumoto 2002:
10-12). While such views need to be treated
with extreme caution because the ascribed
causality is rather over-simplified, health
concern is perhaps a long term factor behind
sushi’s sustained popularity in the US.

10 Matsumoto estimates that the number of
Japanese restaurants in the US increased from
3,300 in 1993 to 4,100 in 1995 and that the
increase was largely due to the increase of fast
food sushi outlets (Matsumoto 2002: 32).
11 A sushi robot shapes rice into uniformly-sized
pieces. Such a machine can produce up to
3,600 sushi pieces per an hour, and is much
more economical than hiring trained chefs.
12 Sushi’s incarnation outside Japan, however, is
often quite different from that within Japan. In
China, one finds Beijing roll made with Beijing
duck; in Hawaii, there is spam sushi; in
Singapore, there is curry sushi; and in Australia
there is smoked chicken and avocado – the
most popular type of sushi. Check to see
whether this repeats what is in text. According
to the owners of Sushi Train restaurants in
Sydney and Cairns, and a variety of other
owners of sushi bars in Sydney, Australians
consume more smoked chicken and avocado
than any other single variety. However, raw
salmon and avocado has become increasingly
popular in recent years.
13 Interview with staff at the Japan Restaurant
Organisation, Tokyo, 11 January 2009.
1 4 While the number of self-proclaimed
“American sushi” restaurants is still very
limited (we have identified around 20 such
restaurants with some online presence in
Tokyo), US- style sushi – sometimes called
“creative,” “new wave,” “fusion” or “fashion”

sushi without professing to be American – is
now served everywhere in Japan. In many
kaitenzushi, as well as casual “sushi dining”
a n d u p m a r k e t “ s u s h i b a r s ” a n d f u s i o n
restaurants, one finds avocado, cheese,
mayonnaise, chilli pepper and other new
ingredients alongside more “traditional” tuna
and shellfish. While highly trained edomae
sushi chefs and patrons of exclusive and
traditional tachino sushi are likely to dismiss
the new-style sushi, American-style sushi has
d e f i n i t e l y p e r m e a t e d t h e m a i n s t r e a m ,
becoming one of the factors behind the current
sushi boom and opening the door to other
foreign sushi restaurants such as “French,”
“Italian” or “Australian” (but seemingly never
“Asian”) reverse-import sushi shops. For the
Japanese sushi industry, part of the attraction
of American sushi is the higher profit margin of
rolled sushi (up to 80%) compared to that for
nigiri with raw fish (40-50% on average). With
the increasingly competitive market and the
uncertainty that surrounds the price and
availability of raw fish such as tuna, even
traditionally trained sushi chefs have begun to
learn how to make American sushi. Sushi
industry magazines now regularly carry reports
on overseas trends and recipes for new and
creative sushi, and American chefs are invited
at seminars and cooking demonstrations for
Japanese sushi chefs (Nikkei BP Net 2002). A
number of recipe books that cover American-
style rolled sushi have also been published.
15 All prices are as of 2009.

16 Currently Tokyo and other Japanese cities
have policies that prohibit smoking in public
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
16
places. According to one of our informants in
Tokyo, these policies have led to a substantial
rise in smoking within Japanese restaurants
and bars.
17 While Genji uses raw tuna – by far the most
popular ingredients for sushi in Japan – in their
‘California-don’, California Rolls in the US are
typically made with avocado (a replacement of
tuna), imitation crab or sometimes with cooked
and tinned tuna (known as “sea-chicken” in
Japan).
18 See Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney (1993)’s account
of the importance of rice in the Japanese diet.
19 In interviews with customers at the Roppongi
Genji restaurant, most said they were initially
interested in trying the sushi because it was
“omoshirosō” (appeared curious); others said
that they liked the funiki (feeling/atmosphere)
of the restaurant. There was a strong sense of
curiosity evinced by the mostly young people
we spoke with.
20 Of course, Japan occupies an ambivalent
position in the “west and the rest” scheme due

to its early and thorough westernisation and
becoming the only colonial power in Asia. We
n e e d t o b e c a r e f u l n o t t o t r e a t A s i a n
‘countercurrents’ as one monolithic trend.
21 As we have noted, though, Korean sushi in its
kimbap form, and with specifically Korean
fillings is available in Korea Town – Shin-ōkubo
– in Tokyo, for example, but in terms of a
product specifically aimed at sophisticated
consumers, American sushi has a particular
“gloss” that appeals.
2 2 Rainbow Roll Sushi is even considering
opening branches in New York, Paris and
London (Kato 2002: 221). If this happens, this
will add another stage to the already complex
domestication-exportation process. It opened
its first overseas branch in Taipei in 2009.
23 What makes this process of domesticating the
imported version of the domestic so fascinating
in this context is that Japan has so readily
mixed fusions into everyday cooking practices.
Imported foods such as Italian, Indian, Chinese,
Portuguese, Korean, Thai, Mongolian and other
exotic restaurants are all domesticated to meet
local tastes, as such restaurants are in most
parts of the world.
24 For concepts of social capital, see Bourdieu
(1977) and Putnam (2000).
2 5 A m o n g o b v i o u s q u e s t i o n s J a p a n e s e
consumers could ask is: can you tell that it

is “authentic” by the number of foreigners
eating there?
26 Presumably, too, for expatriates living in
Japan, there is an air of nostalgia attached to
restaurants with such names.
27 The Korean Wave, driven initially by the
popularity of Korean television dramas, has
become more sophisticated today, and young
pop idols from Korea have a new fan base
among young Japanese women, primarily. The
areas around Shin-Okubo are crowded with
y o u n g w o m e n b u y i n g p o p m u s i c , a n d
accessories, and eating in Korean sushi
restaurants.
28 There are, however, a number of fashionable
bars and restaurants, where sushi is served in
combination with Italian or French food,
usually with wine.
2 9 It should be noted too that the US also
maintains a very significant military presence
in Okinawa and some other parts of Japan,
strongly influencing Japanese politics and
military strategy, a position that is very
unpopular with sectors of the Japanese, and
particularly the Okinawan, public.
Works Cited
‘About Genji’ Genji Sushi New York. Genji
Sushi New York, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2008. (link
http://www.genji-newyork.net/about.html

APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
17
(http://www.genji-newyork.net/about.html))
‘About RRS’ Rainbow Roll Sushi. Rainbow Roll
S u s h i , n . d . W e b . 1 5 S e p t . 2 0 0 9 . ( l i n k
(http://www.rainbowrollsushi.com/about.html))
Aoyama, Tomoko (2008). Reading Food in
Modern Japanese Literature, Honolulu:
University of Hawai’i Press.
Appadurai, Arjun (1996) Modernity at Large,
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Arrighi, Giovanni, T. Hamashita and M. Selden
(eds) (2003) The Resurgence of East Asia: 500,
150 and 50 Year Perspectives. London:
Routledge.
Bestor, Theodore C. (2000) ‘How Sushi Went
Global.’ Foreign Policy Nov/Dec: 54-63.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977) Outline of a Theory of
Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Canclini, Nistor Garcia (1995) Hybrid Cultures.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Corson, Trevor (2008) The Story of Sushi: An
Unlikely Saga of Raw Fish and Rice. New York:

Harper.
Council of Advisors for the Recommendation of
Japanese Restaurants Outside Japan (2007)
P r o p o s a l f o r J a p a n e s e R e s t a u r a n t
Recommendation Program (Draft) 16 March.
( l i n k
(http://www.maff.go.jp/gaisyoku/kaigai/proposa
l_e.pdf))
C w i e r t k a , K a t a r z y n a ( 1 9 9 9 ) ‘ C u l i n a r y
Globalisation and Japan.’ Japan Echo 26.3:
52-58.
--- (2005) ‘From Ethnic to Hip: circuits of
J a p a n e s e c u i s i n e i n E u r o p e . ’ F o o d a n d
Foodways 13.4: 241-72.
--- (2006) Modern Japanese Cuisine. London:
Reaktion Books, 2006.
Fukue, Makoto (2010) Nihonjin ga shiranai
sekai no sushi [world sushi that the Japanese
do not know]. Tokyo: Nikkei shuppansha.
Fung, Anthony (2007) ‘Intra-Asian Cultural
Flow; cultural homologies in Hong Kong and
Japanese television soap operas.’ Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media 51.2: 265.
Hannerz, Ulf (2000) ‘Flows, boundaries and
h y b r i d s : K e y w o r d s i n t r a n s n a t i o n a l
a n t h r o p o l o g y . ’ W o r k i n g P a p e r , ( l i n k
(http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20p
apers/hannerz.pdf))

Ikezawa, Yasushi (2005) Amerika nihonshoku
wōzu [Japanese food wars in America]. Tokyo:
Asahiya shuppan.
Ishige, Naomichi (2001) The History and
Culture of Japanese Food, London: Routledge.
Issenberg Sasha (2007) The Sushi Economy.
New York: Gotham Books.
I w a b u c h i , K o i c h i ( 2 0 0 2 ) R e c e n t e r i n g
Globalisation: Popular Culture and Japanese
Transnationalism. Durham: Duke University
Press.
--- (ed.) (2004) Feeling Asian Modernities.
Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Kato, Hiroko (2002) Sushi, puriizu! [sushi,
please!]. Tokyo: Shūeisha.
Kelts, Roland (2007) Japanamerica; how the
Japanese pop culture has invaded the US. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lii, Jane (1996) ‘Three Restaurants Make
Kosher Sushi (Hold the Shellfish).’ New York
T i m e s 5 J u n e . W e b . 2 2 J u l y 2 0 0 9 . ( l i n k
(http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/05/garden/th
ree-restaurants-make-kosher-sushi-hold-the-
shellfish.html))
http://www.genji-newyork.net/about.html
http://www.rainbowrollsushi.com/about.html
http://www.rainbowrollsushi.com/about.html

http://www.maff.go.jp/gaisyoku/kaigai/proposal_e.pdf
http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20papers/hannerz.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/05/garden/three-restaurants-
make-kosher-sushi-hold-the-shellfish.html
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
18
Matsumoto, Hirotaka (2002) Osushi, chikyū o
mawaru [sushi goes round the world]. Tokyo:
Kōbunsha.
--- (2007) ‘The Internationalisation of Sushi.’
Food Culture 15 (2007): 2-6. Web. 22 July 2009.
( l i n k
(http://kiifc.kikkoman.co.jp/foodculture/pdf_15/
e_002_006.pdf))
McCormack, Gavan (2007) Client State: Japan
in the American Embrace. London/New York:
Verso.
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
of Japan (2006) Japanese restaurants outside

J a p a n , N o v e m b e r . ( l i n k
(http://www.maff.go.jp/gaisyoku/kaigai/confere
nce_e/01/data03.pdf))
Morieda, Takashi (2000) ‘The Unlikely Love
Affair with Curry and Rice.’ Japan Quarterly
47.2: 66-74.
Nakano, Yoshiko (2002) ‘Who initiates a global
flow? Japanese popular culture in Asia.’ Visual
Communication 1 (2) 229-253.
Nancy, Jean-Luc (2001) ‘Two Secrets of the
Fetish.’ Diacritics 31.2: 3-8.
Ng, Wai-Ming (2001) ‘Popularisation and
L o c a l i s a t i o n o f S u s h i i n S i n g a p o r e : a n
ethnographic survey.’ New Zealand Journal of
Asian Studies 3.1: 7-19.
Nikkei BP Net (2002) ‘Sōsakuzushi o dōnyu
suru mise gea fueru wake’ [The reasons why
many restaurants are introducing creative
s u s h i ] ( l i n k
(http://www.nikkeip.co.jp/archives/194/194984.
html)) Web. 2 August 2009.
Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko (1993) Rice as Self:
Japanese Identities Through Time. Princeton
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, Robert (2000) Bowling Alone: The
Collapse and Revival of American Community.
New York: Simon and Schuster.

Rao, Shakuntala (2007) ‘The Globalisation of
Bollywood.’ Communications Review 10: 57-76.
Ray, Krishnendu (2004) The Migrant’s Table:
Meals and Memories in Bengali- American
Households, Philadelphia, Temple University
Press.
Ritzer, George. The McDonaldization of
Society: Revised New Century Edition,
Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.
Russ, Eric C. and Stephanie Assmann (2010)
Japanese Foodways, Past and Present, Urbana
and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Pieterse, Jan Nederveen (2004) Globalisation
and Culture, Lanham: Roman & Littlefield.
Tabuchi, Hiroko (2010) ‘For Sushi Chain,
Conveyor Belts Carry Profit.’ The New York
T i m e s D e c e m b e r 3 1 . ( l i n k ( a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/31/busi
ness/global/31sushi.html)) Web. 4 January
2010.
Tamamura, Toyoo (2004) Kaiten sushi sekai
isshū [conveyer-belt sushi around the world].
Tokyo: Chienomori bunko.
http://kiifc.kikkoman.co.jp/foodculture/pdf_15/e_002_006.pdf
http://www.maff.go.jp/gaisyoku/kaigai/conference_e/01/data03.
pdf

pdf
pdf
http://www.nikkeip.co.jp/archives/194/194984.html
http://apjjf.org/a href=
APJ | JF 9 | 5 | 2
19
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/041544795X/?tag=theasipacjo0b-
20)
Click the cover to order.
The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 7 | Issue 18 |
Number 2 | May 01, 2009
1
Asia's Contributions to World Cuisine
Sidney Mintz
Asia’s Contributions to World
Cuisine

Sidney W. Mintz
Abstract
The movement of food ingredients, cooking
methods and dishes across the earth’s surface
is ancient, and in large measure only poorly
recorded. While the West has documented its
contributions to global cuisine, those of the rest
of the world are less well recognized. This
paper takes note of Asia’s role in enriching the
world’s foods, both nutritively and in terms of
diversity and taste.
If any of us were asked -- in the classroom, or
during a radio interview, for instance --
whether Asia had made any significant
contributions to a global cuisine, I am certain
that all of us would answer spontaneously, and
in approximately the same manner: ‘Absolutely.
Asia has contributed enormously to a global
cuisine.’ Despite what would probably be our
unanimous agreement, this exploratory paper
demands that the reader accept provisional
definitions of two relevant terms, because the
question itself is actually so vague. One term
concerns the boundaries of Asia; the other, the
meaning of ‘global cuisine’. How we delimit
and define Asia is open to arguments, both
broad and narrow; and precisely what is meant
by ‘global cuisine’ is similarly unclear. I am not
by training an Asia specialist, and here I begin
with my own quite tentative answers.
For the purposes of this paper only, I take

‘Asia’ to mean East and Southeast Asia; the
n o r t h e r n b o r d e r s t a t e s o f t h e I n d i a n
subcontinent; and Myanmar, Mongolia, Tibet,
and China I intend to deal with food systems
that fall within the region as I have arbitrarily
defined it here. In drawing what are meant as
provisional boundaries I have in mind not so
much political systems, as limits set by
ecological and cultural factors, which have
shaped cuisines over time. Foods and cooking
methods can become deeply rooted locally,
even without political or religious pressures.
They can also diffuse widely, and sometimes
quickly, without regard to political boundaries.
Group food behavior, like group linguistic
behavior, seems to follow rules of its own.
By ‘world cuisine’ or ‘global cuisine’, I really
have in mind a process, more than a stable
system. That process is now nearly continuous
and ongoing, but it is also surprisingly ancient.
World food history has involved the gradual but
uneven spread of plants and animals, foods and
food ingredients, cooking methods and
traditions, over larger and larger areas, often
penetrating and sometimes blending with local
food systems, which vary in their openness –
and the effects of that spread. This process has
g o n e o n i n t e r m i t t e n t l y f o r m i l l e n n i a .
Interpenetration of local food systems, which
now takes place on a world scale, at times with
great speed, has its roots in the past. The
current vogue for global analysis ought not to
b l i n d u s t o t h e a n c i e n t h i s t o r y o f t h i s
phenomenon. Probably of equal importance

today is the common disappearance – of
species, of other resources, sometimes of whole
religions, languages or peoples – and the
consequences, often known only imperfectly, if
at all, for localized food systems. In any event,
my rough approximations here, both of Asia
and of the global system, are certainly
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
2
arguable. Admittedly, it is only by being so
arbitrary that I am able to proceed at all.
Students of Asian food may find instructive a
wonderful passage in Anderson’s The Food of
China (1988: 117-18), where he describes the
production of wheat in ancient China in relation
to wheaten products (bread, dumplings,
noodles), both there and in neighboring lands.
In a few brief paragraphs, Anderson exposes
the wheat-related methods and substances, and
the words to describe them, embedded in
complex relationships of exchange and
invention, distributed over a vast area that
stretches from northern China to southern
Europe. Much of this complex of wheat-related
culinary culture was probably developed
several millennia ago. Though Anderson is
writing primarily of China, in this description
‘Asia’ and ‘Europe’ are not separate entities,
but an enormous patchwork of neighboring
peoples, some of them migratory, some

invasive, who took and gave, both what they
grew and what they cooked, over the course of
long centuries.
There is no doubt that some regions -- because
of their native richness in food resources;
because the cultures in them had developed
particularly effective means of aggregating and
tapping those resources; or because food itself
proved to be a central interest to people
culturally, beyond matters of nutrition – have
contributed more to the global culinary
repertory than others. But at least as important
as autochthonous or local developments have
been the important flows of cultural materials,
of the kind labeled ‘diffusion’ by anthropology,
often including foods, food ingredients, and
methods of food preparation, as for cooking
and preservation. The following is the most
famous illustration of such flows.
The Columbian exchange -- as the Old and New
World interchange of plants, animals and foods,
after the European discovery of the Americas,
has been described-- completely remade world
diet (Crosby 1972). Specific plants, animals and
foods traveled enormous distances. The sweet
potato, for example, a vital supplementary food
o r ‘ s i d e d i s h ’ i n A s i a d e s p i t e i t s l o w l y
reputation, crossed the Pacific westward from
the New World in the sixteenth century,
probably entering China via the Philippines.
Maize and peanuts also reached Asia in that
century. All are from the New World, and
exemplify old and important changes in the

global system. Once such introductions are
accepted, of course, their origins no longer
matter to their users, and may be remembered,
if at all, only in particular words or phrases
(often geographically misleading, such as
’Guinea corn’) in the everyday course of life.
But it is important to understand that all of the
i n t e r c h a n g e s o f t h e p r e s e n t a r e b e i n g
superimposed upon those of the remote past.
The Columbian Exchange
I wish to begin here, though, not with some of
the most dramatic global borrowings from the
East, but with some of the least noticed. It may
be of interest that an American in what was
then the colony of Georgia, Mr. Samuel Bowen,
produced noodles, sago flour and soy sauce
from plants imported to and growing in
America. He carried them to Britain, was
received by King George III and awarded a gold
medal for his work, and this happened in 1766,
just ten years before the start of the American
R e v o l u t i o n . T h o u g h l i t t l e o f e c o n o m i c
importance resulted from Mr. Bowen’s
experiments, his success suggests that these
Asian foods had already greatly interested
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
3
European colonists in the New World, as well
as the Europeans themselves (Hymowitz and

Harlan 1983). A letter from Benjamin Franklin
to his friend John Bartram in Philadelphia,
written in 1770, explains how one could make
‘cheese’ (by which he meant curd) from beans –
indicating that tofu, a remarkable Asian
achievement, and the legume from which it was
processed, were known to the pre-revolutionary
American colonists and held their interest. I
note these matters to remind those readers
who are excited by today’s global trends in food
that modern globalization lies on the surface of
a truly lengthy history, one that we ignore at
our peril, lest we be ridiculed for our lack of
knowledge about plant history and the history
of trade.
Though western acceptance of soybeans and of
beancurd as food would be delayed for
centuries, we know Europe developed an early
craving for Eastern spices, and the Columbian
voyages and those which followed were
inspired by a desire to find a sea route to Asia
t o o b t a i n s u c h t h i n g s . D i s c u s s i o n s o f
Columbus’s achievements dwell on his courage
and his search for that sea route. They do not
often mention that marine trade was needed by
Europe in the fifteenth century because
superior Islamic military and political might
had made land trade with Asia both costly and
dangerous. Spices figured importantly among
the desired items. Most, such as cardamom,
cloves, turmeric and black pepper, were drawn
first from India and Indonesia, and particularly
f r o m t h e M o l u c c a s o f t h e M a l a y s i a n
archipelago, the so-called ‘spice islands’. But
not all of those tastes which Europe desired

came from the islands.
Asian spices
Though not often remarked, an important
flavoring of Chinese origin seems to have
reached Europe in the seventeenth century.
Dutch traders carried soy sauce to Europe,
where it enjoyed an early popularity. Soy sauce
turns up thereafter in unexpected places. In the
1960s, we should not be surprised when we
find soy sauce reappearing in the first edition
of the late Julia Child’s famous The Art of
French Cooking, in which she instructs readers
how to make a ‘classic’ French roast lamb with
mustard dressing. Classic it may be; but the
main ingredients of the dressing, in addition to
the mustard, are powdered ginger and soy
sauce. I have not done the historical research
that might help me explain how ginger and soy
sauce came to be part of a ‘classic’ French
recipe. I leave that task to someone more
energetic than I.
But ginger deserves at least another word.
Ginger is, of course, also Asian in origin.
Galanga or galangal, known as ‘galingale’ in
medieval England (Alpinia galanga, A.
officinarum or Kaempferia galanga), often split
into lesser and greater galingale, flavorings
found in Southeast Asia and in China, differ
from true ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe),
but are of the same botanical family. They turn
up in England, together with true ginger, at an
early time. Indeed, The Shorter Oxford English
Dictionary gives as its first written reference to

APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
4
both ginger and the galingales a work in the
Saxon language, dated to about the year 1000
A.D. But like many other eastern spices, ginger
almost drops out of sight in British cuisine after
1650. It has been suggested that during the
Commonwealth, under Oliver Cromwell, spice
use in Britain may have declined sharply. I
k n o w o f n o g e n u i n e e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e
humorless austerity of the time reached even
into the spice pantry. But except for such
special holiday treats as fruit cake, cured
gammon or ham, and cookies, in which the
traditional cloves, nutmeg, cinnamon and
ginger still commonly appear, British spice use
did seem to contract in the seventeenth
century.
A wholly different, non-traditional and curious
Asian food-related import to the West is
monosodium glutamate, the substance first
isolated from seaweed by the Japanese chemist
Ikeda Kikunae, in his work on the elusive taste
now known as umami or, in Chinese, as xiãn
wéi. MSG was sold widely, though in tiny
quantities, in the U.S. after 1908, turning up in
showy green-and-gold tin boxes, decorated with
dragons and other Asian art, and labeled
‘epicurean powder’. My hunch is that it had
been laboriously extracted from natural

sources, such as seaweed. Before World War II,
however, its principal users in the U.S. were
probably Chinese cooks. The first MSG factory
in the U.S. opened in 1934; the appearance of
aji-no-moto, and its rebirth after World War II
as the trade product Accent, are relatively late
events.
These odd bits and pieces of Asian food
exportation to the West serve to remind us that
the diffusion of a plant or spice to a different
continent or country may predate by many
years its significant use in the larger local food
system. The uses made of garlic and the
capsicums in the U.S. before 1945 were largely
limited to ethnic communities. Indeed, some
food plants may diffuse first because of their
medicinal or ornamental uses. Second, we need
to be reminded that restaurants, while not the
only, or necessarily even the main, channels for
the transmission of new foods, may bring in
items otherwise not known in the host society.
Gentleman farmers such as Thomas Jefferson
envisioned the cultivation, processing and use
of new agricultural products as part of the
farmer’s profession. People like him, by their
energy and curiosity, ensured that many
unfamiliar food ingredients would reach foreign
shores and new enthusiasts. Only in the course
of the last century have foreign cooks and
ethnic restaurants become major sources of
new dishes and ingredients in the West, New
foods are disseminated today not so much by
i m a g i n a t i v e f a r m e r s a s b y a g g r e s s i v e

restauranteurs and corporate organizations.
I want to turn now to diffusions that dwarf
these early borrowings. Rice is surely one of
Asia’s greatest gifts to the West. It was
probably first introduced to Europe after 711
A.D., when the Moors invaded Spain. Not until
the mid-fifteenth century did Spanish farmers
plant the variety called Arborio on the Po Plain
in northern Italy. That short-grained rice then
became the basis for the famous Italian risotto.
European rice is Asian in origin, the species
Oryza sativa. Arborio, and numerous other
European varieties used in local cuisine, are all
of these species.
R i c e r e a c h e d t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n t h e
seventeenth century, but was not planted
commercially until nearly 1700, in South
Carolina. This rice, too, is Oryza sativa, just like
the rice that reached Europe. Rice became well
known in the Americas by the nineteenth
c e n t u r y , t h o u g h i t h a d e a r l y b e c o m e a
commodity in international trade, thanks to the
labor and skills of enslaved Africans in South
Carolina (Carney 2002), centuries earlier.
During the more recent spread from its center
of cultivation in the U.S. South during the last
century, it has been transformed from a
somewhat localized food or dessert ingredient
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
5

into a daily near-necessity for countless
millions, Asian and non-Asian alike, across the
Americas.
Rice field, Japan
One of the most important general trends in
world food choices concerns rice, I believe.
There has been a widespread, long-term
increase in cereal consumption, worldwide,
which has involved a shift from coarser cereals
such as sorghum and millet to rice. In Latin
America, Africa and Asia, traditional food
patterns based upon such tuber foods as sweet
potatoes, yams and taro have been maintained,
but particularly by the poorer sectors; and
sweet potatoes are used more and more as
animal feed in Asia. Though the aggregate
world production of tubers has kept pace with
increases in population in most of the world, I
think that in the last half century, tubers have
b e e n l o s i n g g r o u n d t o m a i z e , t o w h e a t
products, and especially to rice. There are
multiple factors involved in this secular change,
and I cannot go into them here. But among the
cereal grains, rice has repeatedly supplanted
other complex carbohydrates, particularly in
the diets of members of the rising middle
classes in developing countries. In past
centuries, rice had become the complex
carbohydrate of choice throughout the
Caribbean region of the New World, where it
remains the favorite, in countries such as Cuba,
Haiti, Jamaica and Trinidad. I have already

referred to its importance in the antebellum
(pre-Civil War) South of the United States,
where it is still produced and much favored.
Another important Asian crop that early
changed Western food habits is of course tea.
Its story deserves a book, not a few lines (for
example, see Macfarlane 2003). It was taken up
i n G r e a t B r i t a i n i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e
seventeenth century, because of the influence
o f t h e P o r t u g u e s e q u e e n o f C h a r l e s I I ,
Catherine of Braganza, who introduced tea at
t h e c o u r t . I n a m e r e c e n t u r y , B r i t i s h
consumption rose from a few thousand to many
millions of pounds. As this writer suggested
when writing about the history of sugar, sugar
and tea were among the first true commodities,
and the first overseas food products in history
to become items of mass consumption in
Europe (Mintz 1985). Exploding British tea
consumption in the nineteenth century, and the
Chinese insistence on being paid for tea with
specie, played a critical part in the British
decision forcibly to impose the sale of opium
upon China; but to document those events fully
would sidetrack us here.
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
6
Green tea field, Korea
As a third and final example of diffusion, one

that happened in totally unexpected ways, I
refer to the spread of the soybean and its
byproducts. Soybeans, as I noted, were known
in the West at an early time. But not until
W o r l d W a r I d i d t h a t i n t e r e s t b e c o m e
commercially relevant, as wartime demand for
oil, particularly for industrial uses, shot up. In
the U.S., soybean production rose, but
principally for its oil, while the plants were
ploughed under to enrich the soil. Between
world wars, American soybean production
remained minor. But with World War II,
soybeans became economically important once
more. Once again, though, soybeans were not
important as a primary food. This is the most
dramatic aspect of the diffusion of soybean
c u l t i v a t i o n a n d u s e t o t h e W e s t : a
transformation of the uses to which soybeans
were put. The stress upon exportation, the
manufacture of cooking oil, and the provision of
animal feed became the fate of what had been
Asia’s greatest contribution to global vegetable
protein consumption. When we note that the
annual soybean crop in the U.S., the world’s
leading producer of soybeans, provides enough
protein for the needs of the U.S. population for
three years, it is startling to realize that hardly
any humans get direct benefit of that protein.
In the U.S., much of the protein is fed in meal
to chickens, which are then fried in soybean oil
in fast-food restaurants. It is the birds – or pigs,
or cows -- not the human beings, who get the
protein directly. And so soybeans have made an
enormous contribution to Western diet, but
mostly so far in the form of an oil cooking

medium and a protein-rich animal food. The
Western lust for animal protein, now rapidly
spreading to other regions, has been fed by the
conversion of the soybean into a primary food
for food animals (Dubois and Mintz 2003).
That is by no means the whole story, of course.
Soy milk consumption is flourishing in the U.S.;
so-called nutraceuticals made with soy enjoy a
growing market; soy-based infant formula is
doing well; and of course soy protein is being
used for famine relief, by the military, and in
many other ways. Something like 70% of
packaged food products in the U.S. now contain
some soy-derived ingredient, such as lecithin,
or soybean oil or soy protein. But this does not
alter the fact that the principal use of soy in the
U.S. turns out to enable people to eat less
healthily at the top of the food chain, rather
than more healthily near the bottom. There is
another important side to the diffusion of the
soybean to the West. In the U.S., and now
increasingly in Latin America, especially Brazil
and Argentina, soybean farming has become of
prime economic importance. Brazil is a major
exporter of soybeans to China, where soy meal
is now a first-rank animal feed. On the one
hand, this has meant big increases in animal
protein consumption in Asia. On the other, the
environmental impact upon Amazonia has been
disastrous, and is still growing. This odd
transformation by the West of what was Asia’s
greatest legume cannot detain us here; but its
implications are better documented elsewhere
(Du Bois, Tan and Mintz 2008).

Rice, tea, soybeans – though these Asian foods
have become enormously important outside
Asia, they merely scratch the surface of the
transfers of Asian food substances and
techniques to the rest of the globe. The spread
of methods for cooking ingredients -- old and
new -- in different ways likewise deserves a
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
7
word, for in this regard as well, Asia has been
very influential. Two Asian cooking techniques
in particular have spread rapidly, and with
outstanding success in the West: stir-frying and
steaming. Both have been publicized in Europe
and in the U.S., as more healthful than many
Western cooking techniques. In the case of stir-
frying, there has been stress upon reduction in
the amounts of fats used, and upon the
nutritive benefits of less thorough cooking.
Some attention has also been paid to the way in
which a quality of ‘meatiness’ can be imparted
to the food, using only minimum quantities of
a n i m a l p r o t e i n a n d f a t s . I n t h e c a s e o f
steaming, the stress has been on the virtual
absence of cooking fat and, again, on the
nutritive gains possible from neither baking nor
boiling the food for a long period. Though it is
not easy to judge just how deeply these two
Asian techniques have penetrated into the daily
eating customs of Europeans and Americans,
the sales of rice cookers, woks and steamers

have been of considerable importance for
several decades; and demonstrations of both
steaming and stir-frying have become very
frequent, in supermarkets, gourmet food
stores, and on TV. The phrase ‘stir-fry’ – though
I admit that it sometimes seems to describe
barely recognizable cooking methods – has
entered into culinary rhetoric in magazines,
and on packages of prepared foods of all kinds.
It is worth observing that the successful
introduction of a different cooking method can
sometimes play a part in further innovation.
Americans, for example, have learned to stir fry
such items as maize kernels, chayote (Sechium
edule), jícama or yam-bean (Pachyrrhizus spp.),
sunchokes (Helianthus tuberosus) and squash
blossoms, which they either had not eaten
before in any form, or had otherwise eaten only
in very different ways. What is worth remarking
in such cases is that the plants I have listed are
all Native American in origin – but the mode of
preparation is Asian.
To my knowledge, no one has seriously
attempted to work up a history of the diffusion
o f t h e s e c o o k i n g m e t h o d s , o r o f t h e i r
transformation in the hands of western cooks.
Such a study would serve to make clear how
the appropriation of cultural materials
‘indigenizes’ them, rather the way that sushi
has, to all intents and purposes, become as
American as bagels, pizza, pasta and pita.
That we now have in the U.S. a score of such
delicacies as the California roll, Rock-and-roll
a n d s i m i l a r i n v e n t i o n s , a t t e s t s t o t h e

appropriation of cultural traditions by alien
societies and their subsequent hybridization –
just as had happened with chop suey and chow
mein, a century ago. When this happens, the
borrowed element is no longer what it once
was -- even if it is or seems to be identical.
More commonly, modification, simplification
and reintegration typify food history, as they do
in so much cultural borrowing, and tell us
about culture’s absorptive power. It is for this
reason that I want to call attention to the
distinction between an innovation sent, and an
innovation received. Whether we have in mind
an ingredient, a plant, an animal, a cooking
method, or some other concrete culinary
borrowing, when such things spread and they
come into the hands of the receiving farmers,
processors or cooks, they have been detached
from some particular cultural system; and
w h e n t h e y a r e t a k e n u p , t h e y b e c o m e
reintegrated into another, usually quite
different one.
Of course the spread of Asian food ingredients,
dishes and cooking methods has been matched,
at the very least, by the diffusion of non-Asian
foods and food materials within Asia. This
began at least as early as the Columbian
exchange -- which is to say five centuries ago –
even if we omit such items as sweet potatoes.
But in recent centuries, Europeans in Asia and
returning Asians have had at least a modest
impact upon traditional indigenous cuisine.
Cwiertka (1999: 44) points out that it was
Europeans who introduced such vegetables as
potatoes, cabbage and onions to Japan in the

mid-nineteenth century, and some of these
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
8
were rapidly assimilated to Japanese cuisine.
The far earlier introductions of maize, the
capsicums (peppers) and peanuts, all New
World cultivars, to China are not credited to
anyone in particular; but these, too, were soon
“indigenized” within Chinese cuisine. Anderson
(1988) discusses the much more recent spread
of refined Western wheat flour and wheaten
products to China, and surmises that their
nutritional effects have been mostly negative.
But the interpenetration of cuisines in this
manner has led, on the part of some, to concern
about the standardization or ‘uniformization’ of
food worldwide. Of this concern, two things
may be said. First, I know of no effort so far to
work up a thorough history of the diffusion of
cooking methods, or of their transformation in
the hands of “national” cooks – that is, of the
ways that Chinese or Korean cooks, for
example, have creatively incorporated culinary
elements from elsewhere into Chinese or
Korean cuisines. But we know perfectly well
that these processes occur – the place of
peanuts or hot peppers or maize or tomatoes
today in Asian cooking, for example, is eloquent
evidence. That there is a continuous, creative
culinary process by which the new or unusual

is embedded effectively in the everyday, usually
by the replacement or intensification of a
customary or familiar item with a new and
different one, seems absolutely true. I do not
think that this kind of change has abetted
standardization, at least not yet.
But second, this qualification does not address
what may be far more effective in modifying
radically some local cuisine: large-scale
economic changes that move masses of people
around, shift the rural-urban balance, or create
big migrant labor forces. These changes may
not have to do with food itself, but with the
conditions for its production, the circumstances
under which people eat, and the place of
domestic groups in reproducing the eating
habits of the previous generation. It should be
clear that what I am enumerating does describe
much of what has been happening in China, for
example, in the last two decades. If by “cuisine”
one means the haute cuisine (or grande
cuisine) of the ruling stratum, that will
probably survive nearly all of these large
changes. But if one means the way that most
people eat (or “most ordinary” people eat, in
the American paraphrase), then the possibility
of radical change and eventual standardization
of some food habits on a global basis certainly
exists.
I have suggested elsewhere (Mintz 1996: 25-6)
that nothing changes food habits more
effectively than war. This is not meant as a
sarcastic assertion. Perhaps nothing comes

closer to war in effecting such change than
famine. But next in line as a change-making
force, I believe, is radical economic and
demographic change. Even without war or
famine, basic economic changes are occurring
in much of Asia, as people migrate to cities or
overseas in search of work, state-sponsored
engineering remakes transport systems and
increases total societal energy by dam building,
and state and private capital create factories,
mines and new ports. Such development is
considered the pathway to raising productivity
and standards of living. But it can also take a
h e a v y t o l l u p o n c u l t u r a l l o c a l i t y a n d
distinctiveness. The belief that such change (in
analogy to the tide) ‘raises all boats’ is naive, I
think. How much of their income people can
assign to food -- and indeed, how much time
they can give to preparing and even eating it --
is a vital factor in the persistence of tradition
and the shaping of change. When such change
has the effect of revolutionizing both food
production and the circumstances of its
preparation and consumption, that means its
lived impact falls squarely upon existing
patterns of eating. In China’s case, for example,
recent sharp increases in the consumption of
animal protein, sugars and fats, occurring as
i n c o m e s r i s e a n d p e o p l e b e c o m e b o t h
physically and spatially more mobile, appears
to have medical consequences parallel to those
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2

9
i n t h e W e s t a t a n e a r l i e r t i m e , a n d t h e
implications for individual health are extremely
worrisome.
Let me conclude with an example, a tribute to
Asian culinary genius, but one completely
transfigured by borrowing. It is embodied
within a recipe, distributed in a box that
contains what is probably the most famous
trademarked American relish, Tabasco Sauce.
This condiment contains the juice of pickled
capsicum – ‘hot’ red peppers – vinegar, and
salt. The recipe I cite, recommended by the
makers of Tabasco Sauce, is called ‘Cajun Fried
Rice’. And since the word ‘Cajun’ (from the
term ‘Acadian’, referring to the francophone
Canadians, mostly driven elsewhere by the
British, many settling in the Louisiana
Territory) is associated with Louisiana, the
inference is that this will be a Louisianan
recipe of some kind. Hence it is entertaining to
discover that its principal ingredients include
soy sauce, sesame oil, bean sprouts, ginger,
rice and peanut oil.
Cajun fried rice
To call it ‘Cajun’ is a convenient example, as I
have said, of the way foods can be painlessly
borrowed and assimilated. But imitation is
supposed to be the sincerest sort of flattery.
The spread of Asian foods, flavorings, cooks
and restaurants to the West, however mangled

they become in the process, may be the best
measure we have of the greatness of the
cuisines they claim to represent. But a more
thorough discussion of Asian contributions
would fill volumes, and this paper is meant at
best as a mere appetizer.
This is a slightly revised version of a chapter
that appeared in Sidney C.H Cheung and Tan
Chee-beng, eds., Food and Foodways in Asia:
Resource, Tradition and Cooking. The author
recognizes the preliminary character of the
a n a l y s i s a n d r e q u e s t s s u g g e s t i o n s f o r
improvements.
Sidney Mintz has studied Caribbean rural life,
social history, and the Afro-Caribbean tradition
from the time of his first fieldwork in Puerto
Rico (1948), through his presentation of the
W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures at Harvard (2003). He
h a s a t t e m p t e d t h r o u g h o u t t o w e d t h e
anthropological concept of culture to historical
materialist scholarship. His major books
include Sweetness and Power: The Place of
S u g a r i n M o d e r n H i s t o r y
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140092331/?tag=
theasipacjo0b-20), and Tasting Food, Tasting
F r e e d o m
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/0807046299/?tag=
theasipacjo0b-20).
Recommended citation: Sidney W. Mintz,
"Asia's Contributions to World Cuisine," The
Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 18-2-09, May 1st,
2009

References
Anderson, E.N. 1988. The Food of China. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
____________ 2005. Everyone Eats. New York:
New York University Press.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140092331/?tag=theasipacjo0b-20
APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
10
Carney, Judith. 2003. Black Rice. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Cwiertka, K. 1999. The Making of Modern
Culinary Tradition In Japan. Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Leiden.
C r o s b y , A l f r e d . 1 9 7 2 . T h e C o l u m b i a n
Exchange. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Du Bois, Christine, and Sidney W. Mintz. 2003.
‘Soy’. In Solomon Katz ed., Encyclopedia of
Food and Culture, Vol. III, New York: Charles
Scribner’s Sons, pp. 322-325.
Du Bois, Christine, Chee Beng Tan, and Sidney
W. Mintz, eds. 2008. The World of Soy. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press.

Hess, Karen. 1992. The Carolina Rice Kitchen:
The African Connection. Columbia, SC:
University of South Carolina Press.
Hymowitz, T., and J.R. Harlan. 1983. ‘The
introduction of the soybean to North American
by Samuel Bowen in 1765’. Economic Botany
37 (4): 371-9.
Katz, Solomon, ed. 2003. Encyclopedia of Food
and Culture. Three volumes. New York: Charles
Scribner’s Sons.
Kiple, Kenneth, and Kriemhild Ornelas, eds.
2000. The Cambridge World History of Food.
Three volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Macfarlane, Alan, and Iris Macfarlane. 2003.
Green Gold. The Empire of Tea. London: Ebury
Press.
Mintz, Sidney W. 1985. Sweetness and Power:
The Place of Sugar in Modern History. New
York: Viking Penguin.
Mintz, Sidney W. 1996. Tasting Food, Tasting
Freedom. Boston: Beacon.
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140092331/?tag=theasipacjo0b-
20)
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/0807046299/?tag=theasipacjo0b-
20)
Click on the covers

APJ | JF 7 | 18 | 2
11
to order.
In your response paper, identify an important new concept,
theory, or insight about globalization from Steger Chap. 2 and
discuss it in relation to the assigned readings by Mintz "Asia's
contributions to world cuisine" and Allen & Sakamoto "Sushi
reverses course."
Three readings must be all covered in response paper.
WORD LIMIT: 400 words (approximately three paragraphs)
The response paper is worth 10 pts. and will be graded based on
the following rubric:
Response shows good understanding of at least one concept,
theory, or insight from Steger Chap. 2 (3 pts.)
The concept, theory, or insight is applied appropriately to both
assigned readings by Mintz "Asia's contributions to world
cuisine" and Allen & Sakamoto "Sushi reverses course." (3 pts.)
Discussion is accurate and supported with relevant examples (4
pts.)
You analysis of assigned readings is not more of a summary of
authors’ points, but should be shown in your own words.

The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus Volume 9 Issue 5 N.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus Volume 9 Issue 5 N.docx

Similar to The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus Volume 9 Issue 5 N.docx (11)

More from aryan532920

More from aryan532920 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus Volume 9 Issue 5 N.docx