There has been some hoohah over the registration of the 'yeesang' (Chinese New Year festive delicacy Raw Fish) with recent listing of world-renowned food by the UNESCO.
Singapore's rush to apply and claim to the creation of this dish caused much ruckus amongst the Malaysian Chinese community.
It is easily understandable as to why Singapore has to rush to claim ownership to this dish.
They being a more advanced country, have over the years nurtured an understanding to the importance of 'History and memories'. They have dozens of museums and exhibition centres dedicated to display things and events with historical/ knowledge/ information values. It is natural that they would have always been alert about archiving anything worth doing so.
On the other hand, Malaysians uproar and dispute about Singapore's claim to the 'yeesang' ,could be noted as a passive move. Even though I am a Malaysian, I have to say that, without Singapore claiming 'foundership' to this dish in the first place, the uproar wouldn't have happened.
Now, what's the use of claiming 'foundership' to this yeesang dish, when we don't even have a proper museum or library to house such info? Lest said about the historical artifacts that went missing from our very own Muzium Negara.
We were even adamant about dropping the Hang Tuah legend from our history books, not to mention other events that occurred on this land 500 years ago.
If the country can close one eye on the disappearance of important history, what good can the ownership of a food concoction do us?
When you go around and shop for a serving of commercially available 'yeesang', you will find that the ingredients served are mostly, if not all, of low quality. Some of the ingredients were substituted with entirely different materials, making this 'yeesang' a joke.
I bet, the new generation of 'yeesang' lovers won't even know what the original ingredients were. So, why bother to claim 'foundership' when the 'yeesang' suppliers don't even bother to produce quality ingredients, in the name of making MORE profit (MONEY)?
After all, owning the 'foundership' won't promise anyone any monetary value in terms of royalties, will it?
Singapore's rush to apply and claim to the creation of this dish caused much ruckus amongst the Malaysian Chinese community.
It is easily understandable as to why Singapore has to rush to claim ownership to this dish.
They being a more advanced country, have over the years nurtured an understanding to the importance of 'History and memories'. They have dozens of museums and exhibition centres dedicated to display things and events with historical/ knowledge/ information values. It is natural that they would have always been alert about archiving anything worth doing so.
On the other hand, Malaysians uproar and dispute about Singapore's claim to the 'yeesang' ,could be noted as a passive move. Even though I am a Malaysian, I have to say that, without Singapore claiming 'foundership' to this dish in the first place, the uproar wouldn't have happened.
Now, what's the use of claiming 'foundership' to this yeesang dish, when we don't even have a proper museum or library to house such info? Lest said about the historical artifacts that went missing from our very own Muzium Negara.
We were even adamant about dropping the Hang Tuah legend from our history books, not to mention other events that occurred on this land 500 years ago.
If the country can close one eye on the disappearance of important history, what good can the ownership of a food concoction do us?
When you go around and shop for a serving of commercially available 'yeesang', you will find that the ingredients served are mostly, if not all, of low quality. Some of the ingredients were substituted with entirely different materials, making this 'yeesang' a joke.
I bet, the new generation of 'yeesang' lovers won't even know what the original ingredients were. So, why bother to claim 'foundership' when the 'yeesang' suppliers don't even bother to produce quality ingredients, in the name of making MORE profit (MONEY)?
After all, owning the 'foundership' won't promise anyone any monetary value in terms of royalties, will it?
Next, they will claim Arawana fish is theirs.
ReplyDelete