Why is the education of a sushi chef so insanely long?(quora.com)
quora.com
Why is the education of a sushi chef so insanely long?
http://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-education-of-a-sushi-chef-so-insanely-long?share=1
15 comments
Yes, it's an excellent film. Makes you yearn for sushi, though you quickly realize that whatever sushi is in your vicinity, is not what you're actually craving; it's a taste of Jiro's mastery.
Apparently, Tampopo is in a similar vein (though fiction) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092048/?ref_=fn_al_tt_9
Apparently, Tampopo is in a similar vein (though fiction) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092048/?ref_=fn_al_tt_9
Keep in mind that Sushi Jiro isn't even in the top 10 (or 20?) ranked places in Tokyo on tabelog, although the low reviews might be since Jiro is so rude to everyone who comes in, especially the foreigners.
Sushi Sawada is a 3 Michelin star place in Tokyo run by a former truck driver who's studied for less than ten years.
http://www.andyhayler.com/restaurant/sushi-sawada
Sushi Sawada is a 3 Michelin star place in Tokyo run by a former truck driver who's studied for less than ten years.
http://www.andyhayler.com/restaurant/sushi-sawada
Tampopo is excellent. You must watch it. And I must watch it again.
Well, you could accept at face-value the self-congratulating laudatory first answer... or you could look at how apprenticeships traditionally work, the low wages, concepts like hidden equity, and the sale of restaurants to successors.
"And Jacob served seven years for Rachel", a very old and instructive tale ...
Maybe I'm mistaken, but when I read stories of succesfull startups (aside from the usual startup porn), I keep hearing stories of people who didn't know. Sure, they had ideas, intuition, a deep intuition about where the market was -- but they didn't really know.
So they tried experiments and learned. Then they did that some more. The constant refrain is intellectual humility and seeking to understand the people they are trying to help at a deep subconscious level.
Contrast this to the way I and many others think about various skills. We take a few classes, we play around and are able to achieve some simple level of competence. Somebody then gives us a certificate or other form of public "gold star". Then we feel like we know something.
Socrates was right: true wisdom comes from understanding how little you know and using all of your energy instead to concentrate on asking better questions.
So they tried experiments and learned. Then they did that some more. The constant refrain is intellectual humility and seeking to understand the people they are trying to help at a deep subconscious level.
Contrast this to the way I and many others think about various skills. We take a few classes, we play around and are able to achieve some simple level of competence. Somebody then gives us a certificate or other form of public "gold star". Then we feel like we know something.
Socrates was right: true wisdom comes from understanding how little you know and using all of your energy instead to concentrate on asking better questions.
When you don't know, the fastest way to learn is to find someone who does know, and ask them.
If one sushi chef likes another chef's sushi, why doesn't the one just ask the other how to make it? Because of social reasons?
If one sushi chef likes another chef's sushi, why doesn't the one just ask the other how to make it? Because of social reasons?
They probably do, but I also imagine that a lot of things just can't be taught and instead come from experience. For example, I used to train with an Olympic gold medalist in badminton, and he would tell me that the thing I really need to bring my playing to the next level is to be able to take risks and gamble by predicting what the opponent was going to do.
The theory made complete sense: you just need to be able to guess with hopefully high accuracy what they were going to do so that you could take advantage of it and it's fine because even if you are wrong sometimes you just still end up positive. Of course, the problem is you can't actually really assign probabilities to your guesses and you might have less than a second to decide what to do.
I imagine this is the same with making sushi. You might understand that if a fish is a certain way, you need to add more rice, or vice versa, but you can't just "measure" the fish and instead go off your intuition.
Honestly I don't know a thing about making sushi but the post described having to go off intuition, and it's just not something that can really be taught easily.
The theory made complete sense: you just need to be able to guess with hopefully high accuracy what they were going to do so that you could take advantage of it and it's fine because even if you are wrong sometimes you just still end up positive. Of course, the problem is you can't actually really assign probabilities to your guesses and you might have less than a second to decide what to do.
I imagine this is the same with making sushi. You might understand that if a fish is a certain way, you need to add more rice, or vice versa, but you can't just "measure" the fish and instead go off your intuition.
Honestly I don't know a thing about making sushi but the post described having to go off intuition, and it's just not something that can really be taught easily.
I can understand part of it is muscle memory, and part is experience in the space.
To compare with welding: Seasoned welders discuss heating and cooling a weld, pulling from top or bottom, dragging this molten liquid around the narrow crack between metal pieces, and how using different techniques can fine-tune a weld, making it easier to grind and make invisible.
From another angle, at 40 hours per week, it takes over 4.5 years to hit the mythical 10,000 hours. And so 5 years is usually a reasonable benchmark for mastery of any profession of tasks.
Probably at least some of this is marketing - an 8-year sushi chef is probably only marginally better than a 3rd year sushi chef, and most non-connoisseurs would have trouble telling the differences between their creations.
To compare with welding: Seasoned welders discuss heating and cooling a weld, pulling from top or bottom, dragging this molten liquid around the narrow crack between metal pieces, and how using different techniques can fine-tune a weld, making it easier to grind and make invisible.
From another angle, at 40 hours per week, it takes over 4.5 years to hit the mythical 10,000 hours. And so 5 years is usually a reasonable benchmark for mastery of any profession of tasks.
Probably at least some of this is marketing - an 8-year sushi chef is probably only marginally better than a 3rd year sushi chef, and most non-connoisseurs would have trouble telling the differences between their creations.
I both agree and disagree. I imagine most people could tell the difference between an 8th year and 3rd year sushi chef. 3 years seems like such a short amount of time for something as complex as making sushi.
On the other hand, I also can see that when people reach a very high level of skill, it may be difficult for normal people to really see the differences in skill. But I don't know if you can really say there's only a marginal difference.
After all, if one person is 10000 miles away and another is 11000 miles away, they both are so far away you can barely see them. Indeed, I imagine they may be so far away you can't tell how far apart they are, or even which one is farther! But the reality is that one of them is 10% farther than the other: hardly a marginal difference.
Still I do agree that non connoisseurs probably would have difficulty truly appreciating the difference in skill.
On the other hand, I also can see that when people reach a very high level of skill, it may be difficult for normal people to really see the differences in skill. But I don't know if you can really say there's only a marginal difference.
After all, if one person is 10000 miles away and another is 11000 miles away, they both are so far away you can barely see them. Indeed, I imagine they may be so far away you can't tell how far apart they are, or even which one is farther! But the reality is that one of them is 10% farther than the other: hardly a marginal difference.
Still I do agree that non connoisseurs probably would have difficulty truly appreciating the difference in skill.
Can a blinded panel pick out top quality sushi? I hear sommeliers can't do so for wine, often failing to do well even at identifying red versus white. My first cynical guess for why the education is so long is that customers will pay more for it, regardless of whether or not the product itself benefits. Then again, I barely eat sushi.
> Can a blinded panel pick out top quality sushi?
Since fish can vary from practically tasteless to overpowering, it probably depends on the type of fish. But I've seen people can eat sushi and tell you the exact temperature based on the flavor. Or what part of the ocean the fish came from based on the flavor. Those are pretty objective metrics.
Then there's also the whole "people end up in the hospital if you screw up". If you're a poor and unclean sushi chef, you are going to make people sick eventually.
Since fish can vary from practically tasteless to overpowering, it probably depends on the type of fish. But I've seen people can eat sushi and tell you the exact temperature based on the flavor. Or what part of the ocean the fish came from based on the flavor. Those are pretty objective metrics.
Then there's also the whole "people end up in the hospital if you screw up". If you're a poor and unclean sushi chef, you are going to make people sick eventually.
That sound impressive, unless they didn't actually prove their claim. Did someone have a thermometer to stick in the fish? Did someone have evidence the fish came from that part of the ocean? They are objective ONLY if they were actually measured.
> Or what part of the ocean the fish came from based on the flavor
I can tell you what part of the ocean any fish came from too: The watery part. It's true, but not very useful. Other than that kind of statement, how do you know what they say is true?
It reminds me of the Shakespeare quote about the vasty deep:
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?
It reminds me of the Shakespeare quote about the vasty deep:
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?
> I hear sommeliers can't do so for wine, often failing to do well even at identifying red versus white.
This is a tremendous misreading of a study of dubious quality.
I have a few friends who have studied to be sommeliers. The training is intense and the exams arduous. There are several hundreds of different flavor profiles that have to be understood and picked out in real wines (and they map with objective chemical profiles). There is character in the wine that comes from specific characteristics of the regions and seasonality. And the tests to be a sommelier require months of study and are based on objective criteria.
This is a tremendous misreading of a study of dubious quality.
I have a few friends who have studied to be sommeliers. The training is intense and the exams arduous. There are several hundreds of different flavor profiles that have to be understood and picked out in real wines (and they map with objective chemical profiles). There is character in the wine that comes from specific characteristics of the regions and seasonality. And the tests to be a sommelier require months of study and are based on objective criteria.
Would you be able to tell apart a pizza from a top italian restaurant and a microwaved instant pizza? The differences between top-grade sushi and bad sushi are just as obvious, you really don't need to be an expert.
By the way, in japan there is a highly developed market for fish with many levels of quality, so the expensive restaurants get the best parts of the best fish and the leftovers end up in cheaper places.
By the way, in japan there is a highly developed market for fish with many levels of quality, so the expensive restaurants get the best parts of the best fish and the leftovers end up in cheaper places.
I think a better test wouldn't be whether or not there is sushi-so-bad-you-can-tell, it's whether a chef with 2 years of training can make sushi indistinguishable from a chef with 15 years of training. The pizza equivalent is quite different from what you suggest. That's not what I had originally thought of though, so your example is definitely a good point. I'm pretty sure I, at least, would be hard pressed to tell the pizza equivalent of guessing the less experienced chef.
Also, both chefs should get access to the same ingredients to test if the training is the important part.
Also, both chefs should get access to the same ingredients to test if the training is the important part.
It's only "insane" by myopic Western/American standards. Look at the martial arts of Japan (Judo, Jujitsu) where to earn a black belt--which is traditionally not the end of learning but merely symbolizes understanding of the basics--takes at least 10 years of dedicated study. Since martial arts began to be "Americanized" in the ~1980s, we now see black belts handed out to 8 year old children after a year or two of study (in fairness, Tae Kwon Do is the more common offender in that regard).
Instead of forcing a person thru a decade of trials in the dojo, and promoting those that manage to learn how to pass the trials one way or another - we took the successful people and had them teach how to be successful.
It's so much more efficient this way. It might still take 5 years of training for someone to have masterful control over her or his body, but so long as they obey and work hard, success will come eventually.
These aren't the stone ages, where we'd grasp around in the dark for effective self-defense techniques. The road to success is long and hard, but it's well-paved and clearly marked today. We have maps, and also Search & Rescue standing by to catch people as they wander out of the Rye field of success.
It's so much more efficient this way. It might still take 5 years of training for someone to have masterful control over her or his body, but so long as they obey and work hard, success will come eventually.
These aren't the stone ages, where we'd grasp around in the dark for effective self-defense techniques. The road to success is long and hard, but it's well-paved and clearly marked today. We have maps, and also Search & Rescue standing by to catch people as they wander out of the Rye field of success.
It's a more powerful reinforcement schedule (B. F. Skinner) than the old "wait for years and _maybe_ get a payoff" way, making students more motivated and aware of their mistakes.
The real reason is that giving a grade promotion to a young child every few weeks keeps them entertained and happy, which keeps their parents happy and therefore ensures that tuition money keeps coming in and new students continue to sign up. The integrity of the art is almost entirely irrelevant to most of these McDojo-style martial arts schools.
To be fair, the black belt implies only mastery of the standard practices of the discipline. It was originally the only belt awarded, and usually after a year or two of study.
So nothing has fundamentally changed, except that now there are more degrees of belts.
So nothing has fundamentally changed, except that now there are more degrees of belts.
The further differentiation of belt rank is an Americanization of the art - it's equivalent to handing out Participant medals once every few months.
When I learned, we had 9 ranks. Today, most studios have more than 27, so every form and throw and move has its own test and belt. It's maddening, but it's not unlike unit testing. (Should we apply principles of software development to martial arts education?)
When I learned, we had 9 ranks. Today, most studios have more than 27, so every form and throw and move has its own test and belt. It's maddening, but it's not unlike unit testing. (Should we apply principles of software development to martial arts education?)
This depends entirely on the art though. Arts like Tae Kwan Do or Karate have gone free for all, with many belt systems and rankings thanks to bastardization via profit motive. Judo and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu however have been a lot more successful at keeping its bar high. In general, the skill level of a purple belt in any population of purple belts will fall in a tighter spectrum.
It's insane because it covers a very narrow range of topics. We make people doctors after 8 years of study, only a few of which involve actual practice.
I'm not sure if you're referring to medical education in the United States.
If you are, individuals who ultimately care for patients must complete college (4 years), medical school (>4 years), and a residency program (3+ years).
Thus, training to be a physician in the US would require at least 11 years, of which at least five (the last five) would involve extensive patient contact.
If you are, individuals who ultimately care for patients must complete college (4 years), medical school (>4 years), and a residency program (3+ years).
Thus, training to be a physician in the US would require at least 11 years, of which at least five (the last five) would involve extensive patient contact.
technically, an undergrad degree isn't required, only a handful of courses
whether you'd actually get admitted without one is an exercise for the reader
whether you'd actually get admitted without one is an exercise for the reader
I'm not aware of any accredited, MD-granting US medical school that don't require an undergraduate degree prior to matriculation - do you have examples?
There are accelerated bachelors+MD programs that high schoolers can apply to; these would shave off two years of overall training time. Notably, despite being accelerated programs, these grant a bachelors degree before program participants advance to medical school.
There are accelerated bachelors+MD programs that high schoolers can apply to; these would shave off two years of overall training time. Notably, despite being accelerated programs, these grant a bachelors degree before program participants advance to medical school.
Technically, most US medical schools don't require an undergraduate degree. However, the amount of coursework required is so large (about 3 years) that it makes sense to do a little bit extra work and get the BS anyway. It's good to have a BS degree in case you don't get into medical school.
I'm still curious about specifics - can you link to a US, MD-granting institution that doesn't require an undergraduate degree?
EDIT: I'm aware that this used to be the case but I don't believe that any schools still allow this.
EDIT: I'm aware that this used to be the case but I don't believe that any schools still allow this.
The entire point of the Quora answer (by a sushi chef of 14 years) is that there is a limitless depth of knowledge for what at first glance might appear to be a "narrow range of topics".
I mean sushi is just cutting fish right? Just like programming is just typing instructions into a computer, or painting is just smearing pigments on a surface. Nothing to it. :)
I mean sushi is just cutting fish right? Just like programming is just typing instructions into a computer, or painting is just smearing pigments on a surface. Nothing to it. :)
Kaz Matsune's insights on the training of suchi chefs are very insightful: http://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-train-to-be-a-master...
I was also surprised to find out how difficult it was to make good sashimi: Does a sashimi chef really need that much skill? http://www.quora.com/Sushi/Does-a-sashimi-chef-really-need-t...
I was also surprised to find out how difficult it was to make good sashimi: Does a sashimi chef really need that much skill? http://www.quora.com/Sushi/Does-a-sashimi-chef-really-need-t...
He explains things well generally, and then lists off a bunch of different examples, but I don't think we gets specific enough.
For example, he says, "I think my nigiri is still far from perfect: could use improvement to reach the perfect fish and rice balance with firmness and texture."
Why does this take years as opposed to taking standardized pieces of fish and testing by simply adding more or less rice to it. Why would this process take years?
I get what he's saying in general, that things can be infinitely improved, but why years and decades?
For example, he says, "I think my nigiri is still far from perfect: could use improvement to reach the perfect fish and rice balance with firmness and texture."
Why does this take years as opposed to taking standardized pieces of fish and testing by simply adding more or less rice to it. Why would this process take years?
I get what he's saying in general, that things can be infinitely improved, but why years and decades?
I completely agree. It's just a process. The people trying to say that it takes years are just glorifying old standards
Today people are still buying hand-made portrait paintings. They could easily spend x10 less and take a photo or hire a digital painter. However, they still choose the old, irrational way.
The process itself is the value. The years spent mastering the little things is the sacrifice that makes it valuable to the costumer. In return, the chef follows the path to satori by sticking to his chosen kata, the way. Japanese work ethic is deeply rooted in the zen tradition.
The process itself is the value. The years spent mastering the little things is the sacrifice that makes it valuable to the costumer. In return, the chef follows the path to satori by sticking to his chosen kata, the way. Japanese work ethic is deeply rooted in the zen tradition.
I get what you are saying, and I'm just thinking about it from the perspective of a blind taste test because that's honestly all I care about. Others may love the experience of a person making it beautifully but I'm fine with a robot banging out high quality sushi for me.
Probably because there is more than just nigiri on the menu... and there is more than one kind of fish, etc.
Yeah I get that, and of course I'm just picking at just one example. But if you watch the Jiro movie, there's an apprentice who spends a full year just learning to beat an octopus. His job for one year is simply to beat an octopus to learn how to tenderize the meat. The same goes for making sushi rice. Why do these chefs have to dedicate themselves for a year to learn how to make rice when surely it can be taught in a week to a point of minimal palatable difference.
Because they're not going for "minimal palatable difference", they're going for "perfect".
Languages all seem to lack the right word for it. "Mastery", "wisdom" etc. all don't seem to quite capture the essence of it.
I'm frequently glad for Heinlein's invention of the word "grok" to finally give a name to it. I just wish it was a prettier word.
I'm frequently glad for Heinlein's invention of the word "grok" to finally give a name to it. I just wish it was a prettier word.
There's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany_(feeling) , although it's not a verb, and would probably be rather weirded if verbed.
(That page ends up referencing, among other things, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori , which may go well with sushi.)
(That page ends up referencing, among other things, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori , which may go well with sushi.)
I think Satori is translated into English as "understanding in fullness".
'Grok' has always seemed to mean to me something kind of like this, where no further epiphanies are possible.
'Grok' has always seemed to mean to me something kind of like this, where no further epiphanies are possible.
Except grok simply means to comprehend/understand something to the level of competence.
I've never heard of anyone using grok to mean something along the lines of "mastery".
I've never heard of anyone using grok to mean something along the lines of "mastery".
For me it's somewhere in between 'competence' and 'mastery', but really slightly different from both. I suppose that's why the term exists separate from 'competence' and 'mastery'.
I'd say 'grok' generally means that you truly understand something in a fundamental way, rather than just being 'competent' or 'masterful' at that thing. It's a crucial step on the path to mastery, but mastery might still require a lot of practice.
I find 'Your problem with Vim is that you don't grok vi [1]' to be a classic example of proper usage. It explains fundamental principles of vim's 'grammar'. Once you've read and understood it, you 'grok' vim. But even though this knowledge is crucial in being a 'master', it does not make you one. That would require a lot of practice (in this particular case, for me, a few weeks).
I've had similar experiences with functional programming. There was a point, after much reading, where I felt that I truly 'grokked' the approach, but I'm still far away from being a master at functional programming. Old imperative habits die hard.
[1]:http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1218390/what-is-your-most...
I'd say 'grok' generally means that you truly understand something in a fundamental way, rather than just being 'competent' or 'masterful' at that thing. It's a crucial step on the path to mastery, but mastery might still require a lot of practice.
I find 'Your problem with Vim is that you don't grok vi [1]' to be a classic example of proper usage. It explains fundamental principles of vim's 'grammar'. Once you've read and understood it, you 'grok' vim. But even though this knowledge is crucial in being a 'master', it does not make you one. That would require a lot of practice (in this particular case, for me, a few weeks).
I've had similar experiences with functional programming. There was a point, after much reading, where I felt that I truly 'grokked' the approach, but I'm still far away from being a master at functional programming. Old imperative habits die hard.
[1]:http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1218390/what-is-your-most...
Programming should be like this. When you're in your twenties thinking you know everything you should have have an old master slapping you on the writs telling you that even if you think you are - you actually are not ready building real systems yet. ;-)
I don't think programming is any different. It takes years and years to build an intuition for what works and what doesn't, to develop the theoretical knowledge that allows you to immediately know when your problem can be solved by a well-known algorithm (or when your problem has already been reduced to the halting problem!), to be able to predict from observation where the root of a bug will be found, etc. You have to read a lot of code and write a lot of code to be able to develop taste.
Older programmers may not know the latest hip language and frameworks, but are closer to the essence of their craft. Past experiences open the mind to patterns and ways of doing the 20yo code monkey can't quite conceive yet.
And 20 year olds have a perspective of the world that older generations can't appreciate. Who's to say which has more value?
We shouldn't glorify youth or age, just quality.
We shouldn't glorify youth or age, just quality.
That may simply be because they know better ;-)
I wonder how much training sushi chefs had when it was first invented during the Edo period. Sushi then was a cheap fast food you ate with your hands, and for a long time only a part-time side business for chefs who worked with other foods.
I'll stop short of a comparison between sushi mastery and programming but I recognise the feeling when the more advanced your skills, the further you recognise you are from (unattainable) perfection.
Part of the Japanese culture is the achievement of perfection. One will never achieve perfection in art, such as making sushi, hence the paradox.
People should see the "Bite of China" series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRHNa9qdtlw
It contains plenty of examples of amazing craftsmanship.
It contains plenty of examples of amazing craftsmanship.
To be able to eat Fugu and still live to tell about it?
Great watch, even if you never had sushi or don't like sushi. The extreme drive for perfection is admirable.