| The Surprising Success Story of Fish Sticks .................................................. 
 April 26, 2021
 
 The Surprising Success Story of Fish Sticks
 
 The 1950s convenience food has enjoyed a winning streak -- no less so than during the Covid-19 pandemic
 
 
 /https://public-media.si-cdn.com/filer/da/b7/dab7d9cf-d87d-4e4d-8792-cf8ea7c8e586/gettyimages-3305193.jpg)  British schoolchildren dig into a lunch of fish sticks in  1974. Since its debut in 1953, the frozen food has proved to be a hit  among kids and adults, owing to its palatability, low cost, and  convenience.
 
 
 By         Ute Eberle,  Hakai Magazine
 
 
 smithsonianmag.com
 
 
 There are many curious facts about fish sticks. The invention of this frozen food warranted a U.S. patent number, for instance:  US2724651A.  The record number of them stacked into a tower is 74. And, every year, a  factory in Germany reportedly produces enough fish sticks to circle the  Earth four times.
 
 But the most peculiar thing about fish sticks may be their mere  existence. They debuted on October 2, 1953, when General Foods released  them under the Birds Eye label. The breaded curiosities were part of a  lineup of newly introduced rectangular foods, which included chicken  sticks, ham sticks, veal sticks, eggplant sticks, and dried lima bean  sticks. Only the fish stick survived. More than that, it thrived. In a  world in which many people are wary of seafood, the fish stick spread  even behind the Iron Curtain of the Cold War.
 
 Beloved  by some, merely tolerated by others, the fish stick became  ubiquitous—as much an inevitable food rite of passage for kids as a  cultural icon. There’s an entire South Park episode devoted to  riffing off the term fish stick, and the artist Banksy featured the food  in a 2008 exhibit. When Queen Elizabeth II celebrated her 90th birthday  in 2016, Birds Eye presented her with a sandwich valued at US $257 that  included blanched asparagus, saffron mayonnaise, edible flowers,  caviar, and—most prominently—gold leaf–encrusted fish sticks.
 
 
  A frozen block of fish is transported on a conveyor to be processed into fish sticks. 
 To explain why the fish stick became successful, there’s probably  no better guide than Paul Josephson, the self-described “Mr. Fish  Stick.” Josephson teaches Russian and Soviet history at Colby College in  Maine, but his research interests are wide ranging (think sports bras,  aluminum cans, and speed bumps). In 2008, he penned what is still the  defining  scholarly paper  on fish sticks. That research required him to get information from  seafood companies, which proved unexpectedly challenging. “In some ways,  it was easier to get into Soviet archives having to do with nuclear  bombs,” he recalls.
 
 Josephson dislikes fish sticks. Even as a kid, he didn’t understand  why they were so popular. “I found them dry,” he says. Putting aside  personal preference, Josephson insists that the world didn’t ask for  fish sticks. “No one ever demanded them.”
 
 Instead, the fish stick solved a problem that had been created by  technology: too much fish. Stronger diesel engines, bigger boats, and  new materials increased catches after the Second World War. Fishers  began scooping up more fish than ever before, says Josephson. To keep  them from spoiling, fish were skinned, gutted, deboned, and frozen on  board.
 
 Frozen  food, however, had a terrible reputation. Early freezers chilled meat  and vegetables slowly, causing the formation of large ice crystals that  turned food mushy upon defrosting.
 
 
  Fish sticks are cut from a block. 
 That all changed in the 1920s, when entrepreneur  Clarence Birdseye  developed a novel freezing technique, in which food was placed between  metal plates chilled to at least -30 °C. Food froze so quickly that the  dreaded ice crystals couldn’t form. But when used on fish, the method  created large blocks of intermingled fillets that, when pried apart,  tore into “mangled, unappetizing chunks,” wrote Josephson. The fishing  industry tried selling the blocks whole, as fishbricks. These were  packaged like blocks of ice cream, with the idea that a housewife could  chop off however much fish she wanted that day. But supermarkets had  little luck selling the unwieldy bricks, and many stores even lacked  adequate freezer space to display them.
 
 Success came when the bricks were cut into standardized sticks. In a  process that has remained essentially unchanged, factories run the  frozen fish blocks through an X-ray machine to ensure they’re bone-free,  then use bandsaws to cut them into slices. These “fingers” are dumped  into a batter of egg, flour, salt, and spices, and then breaded.  Afterward, they’re briefly tossed into hot oil to set the coating. The  whole process takes about 20 minutes, during which the fish remains  frozen, even when dunked in the deep fryer.
 
 In 1953, 13 companies produced 3.4 million kilograms of fish  sticks. A year later, four million kilograms were produced by another 55  companies. This surge in popularity was partly due to a marketing push  that stressed the convenience of the new food: “no bones, no waste, no  smell, no fuss,” as one Birds Eye advertisement proclaimed.
 
 The  appeal of fish sticks is somewhat paradoxical. They contain fish, but  only that with the mildest flavor—and that fish has been dressed up to  resemble chicken tenders.
 
 
  Factory employees sort fish on a conveyor. 
 The battered disguise may be needed because, at least in North America, seafood has often been second-tier. “We’ve mostly considered the eating of fish to be beneath our aspirations,” writes chef and author Barton Seaver in American Seafood.  Traditionally, fish was associated with sacrifice and penance—food to  eat when meat was unaffordable or, if you were Catholic, to eat on the  many days when red meat is verboten. Fish also spoils fast, smells bad,  and contains sharp bones that pose a choking hazard.
 
 The advent of fish sticks made eating fish easier and more  palatable for the seafood wary. “You can almost pretend that it isn’t  fish,” says Ingo Heidbrink, a maritime historian at Old Dominion  University in Virginia. In his native Germany, where a reported seven  million people eat fish sticks at least once a week, companies changed  the fish at least three times since its introduction, from cod to  pollock to Alaska pollock, a distinct species. “Consumers didn’t seem to  notice,” says Heidbrink.
 
 Josephson calls fish sticks “the ocean’s hot dogs.” Served as  casseroles or alongside mashed potatoes, they quickly became standby  meals for school lunches and family dinners. During the pandemic, demand  has risen— in some countries reportedly by up to 50 percent—as families stock up on convenience foods during lockdowns.
 
 Surprisingly,  fish sticks are fairly sustainable. Today, most contain Alaska pollock,  which is largely sourced from well-managed fisheries, says Jack Clarke,  a sustainable seafood advocate at the United Kingdom–based Marine  Conservation Society. The climate impact of fish sticks is small, too.  “I was surprised at how low it was,” says Brandi McKuin, a postdoctoral  researcher at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who recently  studied Alaska pollock products. Each kilogram of fish sticks produces  about 1.3 kilograms of carbon dioxide, which “rivals the climate impact  of tofu,” she says. Beef, by comparison, produces over 100 times that  amount of carbon dioxide per kilogram.
 
 But not everyone seems confident about what exactly they’re  eating when they consume the breaded fish. In the United Kingdom, where  fish sticks are known as fish fingers, a survey revealed that one in  five young adults believes they are actually the fingers of fish.
 
 They still eat them happily.
 
 This article is from Hakai Magazine, an online publication about science and society in coastal ecosystems.
 
 © 2021 Smithsonian Magazine.
 
 .
 .
 .
 
 
 |