Are Italians going to rate our pizza too? Neither one is much like the original. We Americans like our California, deep-fried spider roll, spam sushi, spicy tuna medleys. Japan it isn't, but people seem to like it, and more importantly most people probably don't give a hoot what Japan thinks as long as they can get what they like.

And yet, I'll be lookin' for that certification if I ever get the courage up to go in for some fugu...

So, you're against government programs to control wine appellations, too, and other such programs to protect products likely to be counterfeited? Really, this opinion makes almost no sense at all. What is harmed in labeling the genuine article? Especially when the benefit to the consumer is considered...?

Having been privileged to eat sushi in Japan, where at the most routine neighborhood bar the sushi is a superior product of long, rigorous training and adherence to tradition, I would welcome the opportunity (and gladly pay a premium) to get the same quality here. Except at a few sushi bars catering to Japanese business travelers and tourists, the standards and practices in most US sushi establishments, even "high end" shops, are laughable by Japanese standards. Certainly there will be many people -- most, probably -- who will always be happy to eat this stuff and call it sushi (no one goes broke selling low quality imitations in the US, ever) but there is no reason that people who want the real thing shouldn't have a certification program to guide them.

(and by the way...creativity with ingredients and combinations is the soul of traditional sushi, so if made properly your beloved Spicy Negihama Roll would present no certification problems...)

Stephen,

Japan's take won't work because there's several key difference between wine and sushi production, primarily that of time to consumption. Wine and cheese and other similar products have a built in storage life. A bottle of wine I make today or a block of cheese produced last month compete against other similar products. It makes sense for a government to protect what's a "Chianti" or what steps are needed to create parmigiano reggiano because these products have to compete in the marketplace.

With Sushi, because of it's negligible shelf life, doesn't compete against other types of sushi. Instead it's the restaurants that compete. As Diane pointed out, it's similar to having officials come over from Italy to claim what restaurants serve traditional Italian pizza and which do not. They can go ahead and do that all they want, but beyond a small percentage of pizza fanatics, the American marketplace simply isn't going to care.

I'd say the same thing would occur with the Sushi certification. How many people are going to show up at a place that doesn't serve the California Roll? Clearly any attempt to guess at a number would be speculation, but I don't think that number would be that high.

I feel like it would be nice if restaurants could apply for approval and hence show their authenticity, but it seems a shame to stop the mixing of cultures that gives us some fun ideas. I dont think it should be compulsory.

Wow. That's kinda retarded. But on the up side, if the plan ever comes to fruition, food snobs everywhere will have one more device to fuel their superiority complexes. Of course most sushi isn't "authentic." What fun would food be if it didn't evolve? If you're dying to know if your sushi is name-brand or a knock-off, travel to Japan. I'm willing to bet most people will be just fine with the knock-offs.

Kate... as I suggested in the parenthetic remark at the end of my earlier comment, I very much doubt that the ingredients or combinations used in sushi, or in fact the finished product itself, will be the subject of a sushi certification program...it will certainly be the focused on the qualifications and actual performance of the sushi chefs (and probably the cleanliness of the joint, the adequacy of refrigeration and the standards for rejection of ingredients)...these are the things native Japanese travelers and sushi "purists" value about a good sushi operation...if they are in place, the product, no matter what the ingredients, will certainly be authentic and good....

FYI, California Roll (kashu-maki) is wildly popular in Japan and probably there isn't a single sushi bar there where you can't get it...and every good sushi bar there has its 'creative' offerings...off-the-wall combinations you can't get anywhere else...this is part of the charm of a good sushi bar and no one who loves sushi would ever move to freeze or stop development of new ideas....

...as to who would seek out the certified sushi bar: nearly all Japanese, who are usually sickened by the sloppiness of US sushi bars, and people like me, who know the difference and are willing to pay for it -- as you say, a small portion of the whole market...So the question I have is, why do you care about the idea in the first place? It clearly wouldn't have any effect on you or anyone else not interested in Japanese-quality sushi...

one more thing...

here's a more knowledgable article about the issue...

why do you care about the idea in the first place? It clearly wouldn't have any effect on you or anyone else not interested in Japanese-quality sushi...

I find it interesting that a foreign government would want to apply standards to our domestic restaurants. I'm not sure that's been done here in the US before. On that issue alone, it's a fairly remarkable story.

But from my own perspective, the certification seems Unneeded - Anyone who cares about sushi on say, your level, already knows who serves well and who does not. And if I head to a previously unvisited city here in the US, there are several resources easily accessible to anyone to find out what places to they should visit.

Additionally, we have Sushi places here in Seattle that serve wonderful meals, often without the ritual that is traditional in Japan. Will these be deemed "authentic" or not?

I could list several dozen questions of a similar vein here, but won't for the sake of brevity.

last comment for now!

..not sure what you mean by the 'ritual that is traditional in Japan' with respect to meals...

in any case, I think that (since our whole discussion is based on our speculation about what the certification might actually be, if it happens at all) the time has come to wait for something to ACTUALLY HAPPEN instead of going on and on about what MIGHT HAPPEN! ...will look forward to picking it up at that point...

Stephen,

Agreed. Let's pick this up again when there are words on paper (so to speak).

Thanks for your comments tho'

I think the idea is great. I am going to start a business that will certify the authenticity of food. High on my list are the following:
Mashed potatoes made from flakes
Fried Chicken that isn't fried
Spaghetti that is overcooked and not the traditional al dente
Anything labeled bisque that doesn't contain crustaceans
Cream soups that contain no cream
White chocolate
Yams and sweet potatoes used interchangably
Tapioca pudding without tapioca starch

I don't care if my pizza is really Italian style. I don't care if my lo-mein isn't like what I get in Asia. I don't care if my Indian food really has goat in it or not. And I don't care if my sushi is up to some arbitrary standard perpetrated by a group of folks who want a giant homogenous food culture.

Wow! Passionate debate here. I see both sides' points of view. But let's step outside food for a moment. Should we send American rock & roll experts there to make sure the Japanese bands who play American rock music are doing it correctly, particularly their Elvis impersonators?

Regarding visitor Stephen's first shot over the bow regarding wine appellations, you're missing the mark. Those control products that come from a particular place and are made in a particular way. I don't think any restaurants here claim their sushi is imported from Japan.

And echoing George's comment, even fast food behemoth McDonald's allows for differences in cultures and tastes. So you can get wine in Paris and lots of vegetarian choices in India, for example.

If Japan wants to do anything to up the quality of sushi here, they should offer training seminars to chefs and restaurants who want it. I'm sure higher end restaurants would be delighted to have their people so trained--and to tout the news when they did. That would raise the standards everywhere.

That's gotta be one of the lamest idea i have ever heard.

First: is all sushi in japan controled by a central sushi authoring agency?
there's no way im believing that. and until that happens theres no point in having a certificate of authenticity for sushi places anywhere else. Sure a sushi bar will have a lot more prestige if it has a japanese academy certified sushi chef, but that doesnt have any influence in the administration or the ingredients used in a restaurant.

PS. farm raised fugu is harmless, only wild fugo can be poisonous.

I've got a problem with national governments certifying businesses in other countries for "authenticity." There are so many potential conflicts of interest, not the least of which is the possibility of exporting institutionalized racism, that the idea makes me really uneasy.

Diane, re: Are Italians going to rate our pizza too?

They already are. The Verace Pizza Napoletana Association certifies authentic Neapolitan pizza around the world, here's a list of approved pizzerias in America: http://www.verapizzanapoletana.org/vpn/vpn_frames-index.htm

Personally, I think it's a great idea, whether for pizza, sushi or anything else. As has already been pointed out, there are enough people who don't care about authenticity (and there's nothing wrong with that) that uncertified shops will hardly be in trouble. And the people who do care will have an easier time finding what they are looking for. What's the big deal?

I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of certifying sushi, and taking away the, in most cases, very ingenious sushi combinations I've had the pleasure to experience.

At the same time, I wish there was some kind of standard training for people who prepare sushi (let's be honest here, not all people who are hired to prepare sushi are "Chefs") so that there is some consistency in the quality of the preparation.

I think that rather than certify the sushi, they should certify that the chef has been properly trained, competent and that his standards are high. Then the chef would be free to use his creativity producing the type of sushi that his customers demand.

Being a sushi chef myself, I find it disappointing to see others who have little skills and almost no formal sushi training call themselves sushi chefs.

Here's the scenario, an Asian immigrant discovers that with very little training or command of either English or Japanese they can get a job as a "sushi chef." They are hired cheaply, with no benefits and forced to work 6-7 days a week, sometimes 12 or more hours a day. As this is all they are qualified for, they are often exploited in this manner. This ruins the job market for skilled, professional sushi chefs who take the time and spend the money to educate themselves and undergo years of rigorous training. Why spend the time and money if you won't be rewarded for your efforts by being lumped together with those less qualified?

Having an official Japanese certification would set one's self apart from the masses of poorly trained counterfeits. This would ultimately benefit the consumer, allowing them to either choose cheap sushi made by an uncertified chef, or a safer, higher quality product made by someone with the proper training, irrespective of style.

Would you seek the services of a doctor or lawyer who didn't have the proper board certification? It takes a sushi chef just as long as any other professional to receive the neccessary skills to ply his craft.

I have a BS degree and have been practicing the art of sushi for over 15 years, yet I'm comsidered a nakaita or middle sushi chef by Japanese standards. It takes at least 20yrs of devotion to the art of sushi to be classed a true sushi master.

I think everyone would benefit from voluntary sushi chef certification.

Doctors, Lawyers, Architects etc all hang their training certificates on the wall thereby certifying the business they work in/own

I would say that this negates any further certification of an external governing body.

If a certified chef runs a certified establishment for its owner and decides to leave then what??

A sushi bar is as good as its staff