#obvious disclaimer I dont make it a business to repeat previously proven to be unpleasant experiences

[b4kuch1n]

review of every type of meat that’s ever been subjected to me

disclaimers: this will include offals when I have personal experiences with that. score is subjected to personal taste and accessibility price- and prep-wise. YMMV, etc., etc. "meat" here includes non-mammal non-avian animals, as long as it comes directly from the body (which means eggs and such are not included). I tried to find the closest english word for some of these that I only know as local ingredients, but the taxonomical orders at least should be correct.

pork: 9/10. classic. a bit finicky to prep and cook, which is why it doesn't get full mark, but re-heats nicely. very versatile, though on the heavy side as is the case with most bigger animals. the amount of fat and gelatin that comes with a belly cut makes it ideal for new year aspic, which very few other types of meat can be used for. pig offals are of acceptable textures most of the times, though they've overall softened as time goes on, which may lead to one point docked as I don't like that texture.

chicken: 8/10. also very versatile and takes on spices very well, but experiences may vary much more due to the large difference in texture and taste between dark and light meat on a chicken. the big reason why I mark chicken one point lower than pork is that I find reheated chicken much less pleasant than reheated pork. phantom extra point for show of skill with eating bone-in chicken with chopsticks. remove phantom extra point for overrepresentation in every offering meal. offals are inoffensive, but overly soft for my taste. blood however is more tolerable than pig blood.

beef: 8/10. I love beef. beef is great to eat and great to cook, especially viet beef, since you're either sautéing it on high or stewing it until it falls apart anyway. but not only is beef expensive, quality also varies greatly with different price points. beef fat is also very hard to deal with and it makes me mad to throw away a whole puck of fat. as a casual source of protein it falls firmly into the "more troubles than it's worth" category. the one thing keeping its score in the high range is phở and beef jerky.

duck: 9/10. far superior to chicken in my sincere opinion, but a chore to eat in the summer. in no way an every day meal, but this only secure its place as a treat, which gets it graded on the treat ladder, and it scores high there. the only thing keeping it from perfection is the heavier musk that limits its versatility compared to its land-bound counterpart.

muscovy duck: 7/10. taste-wise deeper than duck, but texture-wise much chewier, which makes eating it even more of a task. cooking options have been pretty much limited to roast and poach. it being bigger than a duck makes prepping and portioning it just slightly off as well, so most often you go out to eat it, which docks point for convenience.

squab: 6/10. the problem here is maybe lack of dedication to the craft. or maybe it's that it's very little, not very exciting meat for too much effort. putting a tentative question mark here for this score because I believe there is a squab experience out there that doesn't feel gimmicky but will blow the doors wide open to new horizons for me. I see potential in this, and I'm not yet sick of disappointment.

silk worm: 8/10. the reason why it's not getting a higher score is because there's one single dish I like with it as an ingredient, which is roasted dried silk worm with fish sauce, but the reason why the score's still an eight is because that dish slaps mad shit. it tentatively falls on the treat scale because it's not very easy to acquire, but once you get a bag of it you're pretty much set for several months, so I would still consider it casual-meal-worthy. may be an acquired taste, but I fully recommend acquiring that taste.

snail: 5/10. abhorrent texture, mild taste. better as ingredients for more complex dishes than as a standalone protein. my mom likes it though so it gets passing grade.

oyster: 3/10. worse texture than snail, even worse taste. doesn't get better when you season it, only makes the seasoning itself worse. not getting a zero only because it's good for blood and I'm open to a chance of redemption down the road.

shrimp/crab: 6/10. get the same mark because I eat them at the same frequency and the amount of paperwork required to eat them is equally excessive. take on spices fairly well, but it's not enough. if I could hold a crab like a hamburger and take a big bite this score would change. saved from the mid grade by their seasoning quality for delectable summer broths.

eel: 4/10. the only good way I've found to eat eel is to deep fry it until it denatures and turns into basically seaweed chips. this is good for sour soup rice noodle, but for that same palate a number of different fishes do the job better with more personality. it's okay with a heap of sauce japanese style, but the price discourages exploration.

tuna: 7/10, and mostly for canned tuna salad. eaten raw I find it mid and unexciting. a nice tuna salad sandwich is fun and childlike in its appreciation of the simple things though, so I wholely respect it.

salmon: 9/10. about as versatile as a seafood can get, and is fun to experience in any form. only one point docked for price and lack of excitement - I also, like with squab and oyster, await a life-changing salmon experience that makes this protein perfect once and for all.

clam worm: 8/10. like with silk worm, I only find it edible in one single form, which is minced clam worm patty fried up, but it excels at that one single thing. also stays in the high grade for fun factor of being a seasonal treat.

frog: 6/10. I really like frog legs. it has the tenderness of white fish with the ease of access of a chicken wing, and the taste is delicate in a delightful way. but I really dislike most of the rest of the frog to put in my mouth. this makes it kinda wasteful as a meat option. overall just kinda better enjoyed alive than cooked for like a third of its body.

dog/cat: 3/10. grouped up once again because they're equally unpleasant texture-wise and limited in prep options. I find meat from mammals of this size downward soft in a really off, is-it-going-bad-or-is-it-just-like-this way. the musk borders on off-putting, which is why prep options are limited to heavy seasoning and stew or roast. overall just way too little bangs for their bucks.

rabbit: 5/10. texturally worse than dog and cat, but the musk is much lighter and takes on seasoning much better. not really something you can find casually in the wet market, so exploration of the possibilities here isn't of convenience. this score may be subjected to change in the future.

deer: 6/10. interesting taste, but tough texture and a bit hard to figure out how to season. very hard to get one's hand on in the city, and honestly from my exposure to it I wouldn't go out of my way to acquire a cut. firmly in the "sure, if I come across it" category.

water buffalo: 6/10. beef but chewier. makes for good drinking food, but I barely drink, so mostly not my thing. also limited in ways to prep - most commonly sautéd with garlic or made into jerky. I feel like there's a depth to this protein I cannot access, which makes me mad, but also earns it respect.

field mouse: 4/10. texturally even worse than rabbit, taste-wise extremely inoffensive. verges on the low end because it just raises the question of why. why is this a local specialty. it's mouse, dude. you can not be gentrifying that. they failed to make it a big deal btw so I'm correct on this one.

lobster: 6/10. gets this score for lobster freaks who spent decades studying how to make this big shrimp taste better and furiously honed their craft with cheese and butter and garlic. 80% of lobster experiences happen at the hands of those people, so the median score averages out at pretty ok. I am, however, lactose intolerant, and thus unwelcomed by these lobster zealots. this, combined with lobster being a luxury food, lowers the score to slightly above passing grade.

snake: 5/10. literally the only impression it left me with was that it was snake meat ooh how rare and cool. texturally more pleasant than eel and more versatile, but that ends up landing it squarely in the “utterly unremarkable” zone. at least now I��m pretty confident I would bite a chunk off a snake if I’m ever lost in a jungle with no way out. passing grade for the worth of information.

horse: 7/10. has the taste depth of deer, but with the texture of beef when simmered for a long time. literally had this first time today so my experience with it is extremely limited, but I can't really imagine it being easy to chew if roasted. two outstanding features are that the fat is really nice to eat even in larger pieces, and the blood cooks into a texturally acceptable jelly, which is not the case with any other animal blood for me. score may be up to change in the future as well.

mantis shrimp: 8/10. lobster wishes it has the playful zeal and easy-going nature of mantis shrimp. the amount of paperwork required to enjoy mantis shrimp is half of shrimp's or crab's, and texture-wise it's just better. literally crack this one in half like a flip phone and put some salt and lime on it, that's a treat. so far the gold standard for shelled seafood. only gets an eight because I don't really think about eating it every day, but I have hope this can be turned around in a shocking and life-changing event as well.

anchovy: this one doesn't get a score due to its ritualistic importance. really is included here because I ritually cleaned and cooked way too many of these so a job I was gunning for could go through successfully. it worked btw. still don't know if I recommend it