Oishinbo - Vol. 7 Ch. 55 - The Tea Master and His Strawberries

[MangaDex]

 

[d_a_renoir]

Ok, either there was a variation of the melon story that was different, or Oishinbo's author is actually surprisingly bad at samurai anecdotes. I know that in another chapter about salmon he screwed up another story.

In the story that was commonly told, Rikyū didn't reprimand the person who served the melon. He did eat the watermelon, but selectively chose the parts with no sugar, and then immediately left. His attendant later asked why, and Rikyū called the host bad at hospitality and explained the thing about the melon's natural sweetness to the attendant.

Also, just an addition that is only barely related to the chapter. Rikyū's wabisabi philosophy was not against adding condiments, so hopefully people don't assume that based on this. He was actually credited to be he first person to eat watermelon with salt. He just had issue with sugar because the melon is sweet already. Salt for contrasting flavour was fine with him.

 

[Mugiwara325]

Ok, either there was a variation of the melon story that was different, or Oishinbo's author is actually surprisingly bad at samurai anecdotes. I know that in another chapter about salmon he screwed up another story.

In the story that was commonly told, Rikyū didn't reprimand the person who served the melon. He did eat the watermelon, but selectively chose the parts with no sugar, and then immediately left. His attendant later asked why, and Rikyū called the host bad at hospitality and explained the thing about the melon's natural sweetness to the attendant.

Also, just an addition that is only barely related to the chapter. Rikyū's wabisabi philosophy was not against adding condiments, so hopefully people don't assume that based on this. He was actually credited to be he first person to eat watermelon with salt. He just had issue with sugar because the melon is sweet already. Salt for contrasting flavour was fine with him.

When I was reading up on the watermelon story, there were a lot of variations. Sometimes Rikyu ate parts of it, sometimes he didn't, sometimes he was angry, sometimes he calmly reprimanded the host. I'd attribute that to the story being a tale passed down through spoken word, and thus, capable of molding to fit whatever the storyteller wants.
Another factor to consider is that this sugar watermelon story appears to be an embellishment and may not have actually happened, so there might not even be a set truth to follow or be wrong about.

The salt on watermelon story is a separate anecdote, but one that didn't really contribute to the message Kariya wanted to convey. Either way, you're correct. Rikyu's issue is not with garnish as a concept, but with unnecessary garnish, or garnish that masks the identity of the ingredients. Looks like I'll need to work on the wording a bit more if that was too ambiguous.

 

[d_a_renoir]

When I was reading up on the watermelon story, there were a lot of variations. Sometimes Rikyu ate parts of it, sometimes he didn't, sometimes he was angry, sometimes he calmly reprimanded the host. I'd attribute that to the story being a tale passed down through spoken word, and thus, capable of molding to fit whatever the storyteller wants.
Another factor to consider is that this sugar watermelon story appears to be an embellishment and may not have actually happened, so there might not even be a set truth to follow or be wrong about.

The salt on watermelon story is a separate anecdote, but one that didn't really contribute to the message Kariya wanted to convey. Either way, you're correct. Rikyu's issue is not with garnish as a concept, but with unnecessary garnish, or garnish that masks the identity of the ingredients. Looks like I'll need to work on the wording a bit more if that was too ambiguous.

Oh no, your wording is fine. I only added that salt part as a general comment on the subject of Rikyu. This one was in the Ala Carte books and in the past while I was talking to someone about it, they had thought that it meant Rikyu just didn't want seasoning at all.

About the watermelon story. That one supposedly does have a "correct" version, even if it may not be a real incident. It's not like ghost stories that can be told however. Historical anecdotes often times actually have a source, and the distortion only comes about in modern day because of genuine error in transmission.

It's pretty common for TV dramas or historical novel to purposely adapt a historical narrative differently, and people then confuse the fiction for fact. These TV drama "wrong" version of the stories have seriously been printed in books claiming to be compilation of real historical anecdotes.

For this one, I don't remember what the name of the account is, but the cited origin of it was some document from the 1700s. It could be that there had been some alternate account that describes the event differently that I hadn't read about, but it's also possible that the authors of Oishinbo made a mistake because of the above reason. If they read it in a book or saw it on TV, the book or TV could've been just wrong.

 

[Mugiwara325]

Oh no, your wording is fine. I only added that salt part as a general comment on the subject of Rikyu. This one was in the Ala Carte books and in the past while I was talking to someone about it, they had thought that it meant Rikyu just didn't want seasoning at all.

About the watermelon story. That one supposedly does have a "correct" version, even if it may not be a real incident. It's not like ghost stories that can be told however. Historical anecdotes often times actually have a source, and the distortion only comes about in modern day because of genuine error in transmission.

It's pretty common for TV dramas or historical novel to purposely adapt a historical narrative differently, and people then confuse the fiction for fact. These TV drama "wrong" version of the stories have seriously been printed in books claiming to be compilation of real historical anecdotes.

For this one, I don't remember what the name of the account is, but the cited origin of it was some document from the 1700s. It could be that there had been some alternate account that describes the event differently that I hadn't read about, but it's also possible that the authors of Oishinbo made a mistake because of the above reason. If they read it in a book or saw it on TV, the book or TV could've been just wrong.

That's good to know. I double checked the manga text and what Kariya wrote is as I translated: Sen no Rikyu remarked how the host is not good, stood from his seat, and left.

I'll give Kariya the benefit of the doubt here, and assume that he's just abridged the anecdote a little to focus on the key point he wants to get across.

 

[d_a_renoir]

I'll give Kariya the benefit of the doubt here, and assume that he's just abridged the anecdote a little to focus on the key point he wants to get across.

That is true, the difference is minor enough.

Rather than when or how Rikyū made the negative comments about the host, though, what I was thinking more is the difference of Rikyu actually eating the melon before leaving.

In the old manuscript he respected the host (or at least the food) enough to eat parts of it. Oishinbo's creators seem to think he didn't eat a bite. Walking out leaving the food untouched just came off as really high handed or arrogant, though.

Maybe they changed it a little to emphasize the point stronger,. Kaibara and Yamaoka acts like that all the time anyway.