A case of culinary misappropriation?

The Bandlawn Grill featured pulled Tandoori ‘vegan lamb’ on its menu, which caused some discussion around the nature of the lamb, its provenance, and diet before being served up on tzatziki-coated flat bread with mango relish. Appetising as the description of the lamb-referenced offering was, we opted instead for the chuck rib and beef burger with all its attendant adornments, including chorizo, pico de gallo, mayonnaise and provolone cheese. It proved to be a very tasty choice and just about worth the €10.50 price tag, even if a well-dressed burger is usually somewhat cheaper at less salubrious locations. But then, location is everything and there seems to be a general expectation that big ticket events involve higher-than-normal expenditure on food and drink. The provolone cheese, incidentally, is Italian. 

Over-descriptive menu creation?

Anyway, back to the vegan lamb. Could I be assured that the lamb was actually meat and not some alternative vegetable-based composition masquerading as the real thing? In the absence of such reassurance and making an assumption that the lamb in question once bounded across the Connemara hills or some other suitable lamb-rearing terrain, the question arises as to what makes a lamb vegan. Is it just a case of over descriptive menu creation? Sheep, generally, are herbivores, so any reference to confirm that the lamb had not enjoyed a carnivorous diet prior to its demise, seems a little unnecessary. On the other hand, if the contents of the menu offering are, in fact, not meat-based at all, then the description is equally disingenuous. 

We hear a lot about cultural misappropriation in relation to dress, hairstyle or other adoptions. Is culinary misappropriation a valid accusation? When is a burger not a burger? And, could a burger with a non-meat-based filling be a valid case of culinary misappropriation. There are any number of purveyors of non-meat offerings that seem to believe their products need a meat-related reference to attract consumers. I often wonder why this is the case. 

Since consumers who purchase these non-meat-containing alternative foods presumably have an aversion or at least a mild dislike for meat products, or just want an alternative to a meat offering, it seems a little peculiar, even weird that they should be attracted to a product that has the appearance and nomenclature of being a meat-rich product, while containing no meat whatsoever. 

Although I have heard it explained that these familiar terms like burger and make it easier for consumers to understand how to incorporate such foods into a meal. A burger is well understood but a plant-based disc, maybe not so much. 

Perhaps the situation can be compared to an alcohol-free drink. The pint looks like the original, it tastes, almost, like the original, but it differs in one material aspect. It contains no alcohol. Is an alcohol-free gin still a gin since, by definition, gin is an alcohol-based drink? Ditto lager, stout and other alcohol-associated beverages. Apart from their increasing popularity and profitability, the advertising of alcohol-free beverages under well-known brand names has proven useful in avoiding Government-imposed advertising bans on alcoholic products in various media. The brands, long associated with alcoholic drinks, can be displayed on billboards and sports pitches, while the companies remain within the letter, if not the principle, of the ban on alcohol advertising. 

Despite my efforts to get clarity, it is still not clear whether the vegan lamb product was sourced from a lamb reared on a vegetation-based diet or was, itself, entirely composed of vegetative matter. I wonder, does it really matter?