I happened to be doing some research on global tuna catches yesterday when I came across a review of the latest David Mamet play, November. The play centers on a hapless President (played by Nathan Lane) who is looking to bump up his poll numbers. Here's John Lahr's description of one of the plot points:

"...wrapping himself in the robes of his authority, the President sets out to change the story of the Thanksgiving feast. First, he contemplates pork, then he seizes on the notion of the Thanksgiving Day tuna. When Brown reminds him that tuna come from the Pacific, Smith, undaunted, spitballs the idea for Bernstein to finesse."

Is it not enough that Atlantic tuna are disappearing after centuries of fishing--now we have to pretend that they never existed at all? Even the Bush Administration has recognized that Atlantic bluefin exist , even if they're just barely hanging on. If NOAA Fisheries can talk straight about tuna, I'd hope that one of American's great playwrights could get it right.

I mean, I understand the fabulism of the stage, suspension of disbelief and all that. People probably don't walk away from Glengarry Glen Ross thinking "Wow, I really understand the real estate market after seeing that play." But how often do tuna get a mention on the Great White Way? Can't they get a better role? It's entirely possible that American settlers and Native Americans ate tuna, though perhaps not at Thanksgiving as tuna move farther offshore in the late fall. According to one food historian, Mamet could have chosen deer or seals as his turkey alternative.

Don't forget about the Atlantic bluefin tuna. They're real, and they'd greatly appreciate it if you could stop eating them for a little while.