Why the British are firmly set on ‘pudding’


The first time I visited my husband’s family in England, one of his little cousins asked, “What’s for pudding?” after lunch. As an American, I was surprised. I had never met a family who loved that gelatinous and jiggly stuff so much that the question “What kind are we having today?” was warranted. But when cookies were produced instead, I understood that in Britain, pudding simply means “dessert.” 

The first puddings were neither wobbly nor eaten for dessert, however. They were more like sausages: made from minced meat, a grain such as oatmeal, dried fruits, spices, and salt, and stuffed into a casing. The word pudding (first used circa 1200) in fact comes from boudin, a French word for a type of sausage. Haggis, the national dish of Scotland and “Great Chieftan o’ the Puddin-race,” as poet Robert Burns called it in 1786, is perhaps the best-known example.

This combination of protein, grain, and fruit, odd to modern American palates, was a handy and economical way to preserve meat. The fruit sugars, salt, and spices slowed the spoilage of the meat; the traditional method of preparation – boiling, for as long as eight hours in some cases – probably helped too.

Puddings were practical, but they were also beloved by the British. French scientist Samuel de Sorbière, who spent a year in England in 1663, reported with amazement that “The English ... very much delight in pudding. ... They think themselves so happy when they have a Pudding before them.” 

In the 17th century, an innovative chef wrapped and cooked a pudding in cloth, making it seem less like a sausage. Sugar and dried fruit became less expensive, and other ways of keeping meat were developed, further freeing the pudding to become a dessert rather than part of the main meal. By the beginning of the 20th century, pudding referred to a cold, sweet, custardlike concoction in the United States, while it had come to stand in for all desserts in the United Kingdom. 

This Christmas, my British relatives will be eating a plum pudding, which has been the pièce de résistance of holiday dinners since the Victorian era. It clearly echoes puddings past – it is a dark brown, dense combination of dried fruit, breadcrumbs, spices such as cloves and cinnamon, and beef suet, and it gets boiled for hours and hours. What it doesn’t have are actual plums, as plum here refers to raisins and currants. 

In “A Christmas Carol” (1843), Charles Dickens describes the presentation of one such magnificent pudding: “Hallo! A great deal of steam! ... A smell like an eating-house and a pastrycook’s next door to each other, with a laundress’s next door to that! ... [A] speckled cannonball, so hard and firm.” Sounds, um, delicious? I’ll be sorry to miss it this year.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why the British are firmly set on ‘pudding’
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today