Authenticity as it relates to food

When it comes to food, authenticity is one of the most looked upon details. From the taste to the texture it’s no surprise that true food connoisseurs can tell of a food’s authenticity from just one look. But what exactly makes a food authentic and who is it that’s actual deciding what foods are authentic or not?

Saying that a food is authentic is saying that the food has been prepared traditionally. It is my personal belief that the authenticity of food derives not from the chef who prepares it, but from the origin and culture of the recipe itself. In order for a recipe to become authentic though it must follow the already accepted norms of that culture. For example: In Italy the portions are generally larger, and, more importantly, the meals have been organized as a primary entree, be it pasta, meat, or fish, with some sort of side dish all prepared with the freshest ingredients, whereas in Mexican culture the meals are usually served in smaller portions and include foods such as tomatoes, beans, rice, goat and fish.

But who exactly is it that’s deciding what foods are authentic? The answer to that question is an easy: the consumer. Whoever it is that is eating the food is the true deciding factor in the debate of authenticity. No American should walk into an Italian restaurant such as an Olive Garden and expect true, authentic Italian cuisine because ultimately it’s not. The “Italian” food is prepared in American fashion using frozen or pre-packaged ingredients and relying on mostly aesthetics rather than actual taste or authenticity. Hoping that as long as they can make a meal look Italian the consumer will believe that it is. Unfortunately most Americans still fall for such a simple marketing trick.

There are also many websites and magazines out in the world that claim to understand and appreciate authentic cuisine of any kind. But what exactly is the deciding factor for these beliefs? Through research it appears that websites such as chowhound.com conduct interviews and in-depth research of their own to decide what dishes can be considered authentic or not. The website travels to the origin of the meal to discovers it’s delicious history and then using the original recipe as a base, conducts taste tests with other “authentic” restaurants and makes it’s conclusion from there.

So much like it was stated in the beginning of this article, authenticity is all about taste, texture and origin. Most restaurants today boast the “authenticity” of their cuisine but non actually hold up to it. The only way to truly know is to get out there and familiarize yourself with the different tastes and smells of different cultures and their foods and to conduct your own research into authenticity. Only then will completely understand the word “authentic.”

The idiots guide to...being an idiot

Throughout this blog I have discussed my mother’s confounding relationship with cooking. Admittedly, I am a pretty bad cook, but I firmly believe this is because I have never really been taught how to do cook anything. Sure, I’ve picked up a cookbook in the past few years, but usually the idea of going to the store just to get all of the ingredients is more daunting than just pouring a bowl of cereal. Recognizing this tendency, my mom bought me The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the College Diet Cookbook when I moved into a dorm my freshman year. Writing this journal entry is the first time I’ve ever actually opened it, but hey, gotta start somewhere!

Obviously, this cookbook is aimed at college students who, like me, have little motivation to cook dinner for themselves. The table of contents is divided neatly into different types of food the typical American college student might want to prepare, such as “Mexican Flourish,” “Grains that Make the Grade,” and “Using your Noodle,” and are accented by cute little symbol the indicating the type of machinery needed to make it. I guess they assume I would own an electric wok and a slow cooker. Go figure.

I happened to flip to a recipe in “Meaty Meals” on how to prepare “Crowd-Pleasing Mac and Dogs $.” Evidently this is a pretty inexpensive meal to make, and will please the roomies as well! Despite this, the ingredients look more advanced than what can be typically found in my cupboards, such as tomato soup minced garlic. The book also instructs me to look for terms in recipes such as meanwhile so that I know to do something else while one portion of the dish is being prepared. I guess they assume women won’t be reading this ;) All in all though, it’s not so bad of a cookbook. All of the recipes look easy enough to follow, even for someone like me who has no knowledge of cooking. I’m still not sure about that electric wok though…

Thoughts on cuisine

Cuisine is a characteristic manner of preparing food. Though it is not defined by food alone, cuisine is largely influenced by foods that can be locally grown or traded, and is shaped by traditions over a long period of time. The tradition of soul food, for example, is directly connected to the foods eaten during slavery. Because of the physical nature of slave work, food needed to be high in fat and energy. Breakfast was typically a large meal, and provided the proper nutrition necessary for grueling hours of physical labor. Lunch typically consisted of leftovers from breakfast, and dinner was either prepared by women during their down time, or a “kitchen staff,” so to speak. Sundays and holidays were group time in which a community of slaves typically gathered. Communal eating eventually grew to be a hallmark of African-American culture, both in times of slavery and freedom. As such, African-Americans were able to form bonds between each other through food preparation and family gathering. As migration occurred and the population of African-Americans began to leave the South, soul food became an enactment of the past as well as the present. It gave the opportunity to rekindle and maintain connections between families and friends, and provide a greater sense of community within the African-American culture. As evidenced by soul food and African-American culture, subordinate groups can have their own cuisine. Indeed, it is subordinate groups which often have the richest cuisines because of cultural histories and the need to develop a bond in the face of oppression.
Though white people are not an oppressed group, I would say that they do have their own cuisine. Because cuisine is shaped by food as well as culture, “white” cuisine (for lack of a better term) may be better understood in terms of American cuisine as a whole. “White” cuisine is shaped by individual experiences and history, such as roots to foreign countries and traditions mixed with American staples such as hamburgers and macaroni and cheese. In comparison to soul food, which has definitive staples and implications to term, there is no white people’s cuisine, per se. It is instead shaped by a conglomerate of outside influences, which is reflective of the great melting pot of the United States.

Selections from Through the Kitchen Window

Through the Kitchen Window examines the way in which women’s relationship has changed as a result of industrialization in the modern world. By drawing on anecdotes of a variety of cultures and identities, the collection of essays demonstrates that food has a practical purpose as well as a spiritual one. Through women’s history as mothers and nurturers, every woman’s identity is deeply entwined with food and its production, be it historically or more presently. In the ever-shifting and evolving western world, many women are at odds with their immediate relationship with food, however Through the Kitchen Window explores the universal dimensions as food being a source of not only sustenance, but of memory, tradition, and identity.
In “Mother I Hardly Knew You,” Pogrebin describes her unwitting housewife mother who, despite her best attempt at femininity and stereotypical axioms, cannot peak her husband’s interest more than his public interest groups. Though Pogrebin does not know it at fifteen, her mother’s recipes serve as a vessel of tradition among Jews who survived the Holocaust. Similarly, as women, Pogrebin recreating her mother’s recipes acknowledges and honors her memory. The value is not in the food itself, but rather in the handwritten notes that outlast her mother. By cooking her mother’s recipes, Pogrebin is in effect keeping her mother alive. By including this essay, Avakian demonstrates that food can have meaning besides in its practical application and preparation. In this case, the divorce between food and culture is transcended in order to keep memories alive and well.
Similar to Pogrebin’s story, “The Power of the Pepper: From Slave Food to Soul Food” exemplifies the way food can serve as a way to reconnect with family. Though Ire’s story is one of contempt to the westernized society that enslaved her ancestors, Ire comes to accept the gross injustices her ancestors face in centuries of slavery. Though she is at first physically sick and ashamed of her connection to the food that was denied to her ancestors, she is able to transcend this history and accept the ways in which culture has shifted her own identity. Though she is undeniably tied to her ancestor’s slavery, to say it defines her would be inadequate. Her connection to her ancestor’s food and way of life provides just a small part of a largery cultural history that she also embodies in the present.
Salibian’s “Sacred Food” also recognizes and explores the inherent bond that lies between her and her ancestors. She is able to reconnect to food in ways that many of the authors cannot. She writes, “Experiencing food…puts me in touch with something sacred, and with that what it means to be a woman. These two turn out to be same thing…I feel and see how women moved in the bodies when they knew they were world creators, culture creators, and feeders of their people.” With this essay, Avakian finally comes full circle from Smyth’s foreboding. In women’s efforts to gain autonomy, which necessarily results in a divorce from child rearing and nurturing, our cultural bonds to food have been displaced. Salibian, however, is able to recapture this union that women as a history hold. By acknowledging women’s role in cooking and care giving, she is also reclaiming a collective past that women are bound to. Though it has been systematically devalued, “Sacred Food” captures woman’s beauty and talent as bearers of children, creators of poetry, medicine, and pottery, and restores the value of women as people and free sprits. In effect, she realizes that women do not have to be like men to be successful, and indeed, they never will be men. Women instead are deeply and beautifully tied to the earth and nurturing in a way that men will never experience.

Agriculture as it relates to race, class, and gender

Que Vivan los Tamales is an excellent source of understanding how race, class, and gender are shaped by food and its development. Throughout the text, Pilcher examines the way that food production historically shaped women's identity. Women's power was placed in their food, and they used tortilla making as a form of self-expression. The advent of industrialization and mills, however, permanently altered the place of women's work in Mexican culture. Although wealthier women were able to stay at home and continue to make their own tortillas and meals, poorer women had to leave their homes and enter the factories so that they could work in markets with the time saved. This ultimately changed the structure of race, class, and gender as corn agriculture that was once women’s work became mechanized. This effectively altered Mexican culture as industrialization made their long-established agricultural system ineffective and irrelevant. As time progressed, the mills took over, and identities and gender roles were no longer necessarily shaped by food production. Over time, industrialization exacerbated the differences within race and class, and permanently shifted Mexican identity away from agriculture.
In more contemporary times, this domino effect plays out again and again. In Ghana, for example, the country receives federal food subsidies from the United States in the form of rice. Rice, however, is the most grown crop in the country. The American rice that is sent to Ghana is whiter, less grittier, and most importantly, free. Women in particular in Ghana are most disenfranchised by the federal subsidies as people who are desperately poor understandably take the free rice over the rice they have to pay for. These subsidies have wholly depleted Ghana’s economy, and it was said that giving them rice was the same as giving Inhuits snow. Women in Ghana lose their livelihood, which is necessary to support their family. Similar to what happened in Mexico with industrialization, the class system is illuminated, as it is impossible to get ahead. The intersection of race, class, and gender in agriculture is undeniable.

The Pinky Show and...

In this video from The Pinky Show, Pinky and the crew give a quick rundown on the way the old colonial powers impact the world today. The IMF and World Bank are recognized as corrupt systems created by the UN after the end of WWII. As such, Pinky examines how these powers systematically incorporate corruption and an inability to advance. By outsourcing branded products, food included, the United States is in a position of great power. Consumers are able to buy cheap products because laborers are hardly paid anything at all, and companies make enormous profit through worker exploitation. The consumer mindset is oblivious to this: we see price tags, not the faces of the poor indigenous people who make the products we crave. By using terms such as "free market" and "aid", there is no reason from a consumer's view for wealthy Americans to consider the true cost of the goods that they are buying. This consumer ideology comes at a huge price that the people of third world countries pay. They live and work in economies that are entirely depleted because of the corrupt systems that the country's infrastructure is built upon. As a result and as Pinky demonstrated, there is literally no way for these third world countries to get ahead, gain their political independence, and become self-sufficient. What can be done? What are we supposed to do? How do we make the world more egalitarian and get countries to give up colonial powers? Even radical critiques of capitalism are widely recognized and even acknowledged as accurate, and yet there is no solution offered. I would like to be part of a culture that supports sustainability in thought and in action, promotes healthy interdependence among peoples, and acknowledges the schizophrenia of contemporary American society. HOWEVER

From another excerpt of The Pinky Show:

Part 2 of 5: The dominant structure will not produce a cure for itself.


Pinky: So who's going to stop this downward, suicidal spiral? The oppressed? Maybe.


Bunny: Yeah, and while that's going on, the oppressors will be standing around, on top of people, trying to figure out how to continue their catastrophe-habits. They'll be like, "Whoo! I just threw a water bottle in the recycling bin! The planet is saaaved...!"


Kim: Yeah, and socially conscious yuppie mommy will fight for social justice by... shopping at Whole Foods, and maybe like doing four hours of charity work at her church every week - the other 164 hours of her week will be for sleeping and sleepwalking through life! lol!


Bunny: Yeah! "Gee, I hope my good intentions makes a big difference!"

Sometimes i don't see the point

The Art of the Commonplace

I have always been moved by Wendell Berry’s philosophy in Art of the Commonplace. I began reading it last semester in my Ecofeminist literature class with Dr. Sterner and was immediately captured. Berry focuses his essays on agrarian lifestyle and the cultural implications of a global market. Berry begins with an explanation the violent destruction of the earth by colonial settlers. The notion of abundance, which the settlers faced when they reached the Americas and saw vast and seemingly infinite amounts of trees and land, allows for destruction. Instead of creating a small, contained shelter that could be sufficiently heated, the early settlers created no shelter, and produced instead an extremely large fire that was impractical and largely wasteful. White settlers took over the land in a violent, destructive manner that offered no regard for the inherent worth within the land. This means of consumption has in many ways defined our history and the western way of thought. In a previous entry I discussed food in relation to colonialism, patriarchy, and racism. Berry’s essays are perhaps a good place to start in understanding the exploitative nature of colonialism and its deep cultural impact on indigenous cultures and societies. He posits that under capitalism, our relationship with the earth and all of its inhabitants becomes exploitative rather than convivial and collaborative. Consumer culture has become so entrenched with image that food production is but one aspect of a growing problem. There is little authenticity in production under capitalist ideology as all value is placed in monetary gain. Food has become processed, genetically manipulated, and altered so incredibly that there is an entire counter culture against this mode of thinking. Is capitalism that bad? Are we as an industrialized nation so far removed from our relationship with the earth that we fail to recognize our own destruction? In many ways, I think that we are. Berry’s philosophy is at once eye-opening and terrifying, empowering and dumbfounding in its oblique obviousness. I think that his essays have the capacity to provide an important link to the agrarian movement and the mainstream as his philosophy is concise and effective.

Hedging monoculture

In the essay, “Hedge Nutrition, Hunger, and Irish Identity” in Through the Kitchen Window, Marie Smyth questions the changing role of traditional foods in American culture. Though she was raised in a family rich with memory and Irish traditions that provided a sense of place and history in her life, she questions what sense of self children raised on steady diet of hamburger helper and macaroni and cheese will create. Because there is no inherited meaning to this food, no sense of culture or history, American children in today’s society are perhaps left without a sense of place or identity. The bond between food and its preparation is actively and systematically corrupted by fast-food chains and children bred on pizza and fast food. This upset has left generations of children without the bond to food carried on by their ancestors. In this way, food holds little meaning besides being absolutely necessary for sustenance. At face value, there seems be little need for tradition, for passing on recipes, or even the value of the taste of food as monoculture abounds American society and travels up and down the class system. As women leave the home and enter the workplace to gain autonomy, they are often forced to choose between making dinner and making a living. Though this transition has undoubtedly created more opportunities for fulfillment for women, children are often left to fend for themselves, and without the parental guidance previous generations had. Many cultural ties leading back to food and its preparation are lost. In many ways, the effects of globalization and feminism can be endearing and worthwhile modes of fulfillment and growth. Women can have their cake and it eat it too. The converse, however, is a total rewriting of social structures and a gradual erosion of individual cultural traditions. As Smyth demonstrates, we can now go to Switzerland and enjoy a McDonald’s hamburger just like at home. But what is the cost? How does globalization impact cultural relativism? Does it do away with the need for tradition in lieu of capitalism and the freedom to choose?

What's in a meal?

What counts as a meal? This is a difficult question for me. My mom has always hated cooking, which has of course translated into me hating cooking (at least until recently!). I usually stick to simple meals for myself like stir fry, pierogies, or baked sweet potatoes. Because of my pretty limited skills in cooking, I can easily consider toast a meal. Meals to me do not have to be intentional, planned out dishes that take more than ten minutes to prepare. I suppose that the division between meal and snack for me occurs in preparation. Though the meals I prepare are far from elaborate, it does take some effort and intention to prepare dinner for myself. I have only recently begun to explore foods. Lately I have been experimenting with spicy noodles and sauces, vegetarian meat substitutes, and the many different ways to cook a potato. I’m aware that the rest of the modern world has far surpassed my cooking standards, however, I have been finding a certain sense of accomplishment in cooking for myself.
I also find some validity in sharing foods. My roommate and I can share a bag of gummy worms for lunch and that is sufficient. I think what I am trying to get at is the idea that when prepared by myself, meals are defined by being intentionally made and consumed. Cooking for me is an effort. I have to consciously decide to cut up vegetables or even go to the grocery store when there is nothing left in the fridge. With friends, however, meals can be anything from carrot sticks to coffee shared together over conversation. Though I would be hard pressed to explain to anyone why there is such a distinction, I often find myself counting any food consumed in a social situation a meal. Unless, of course, I’ve already eaten. Then it doesn’t count as anything :). Interestingly, I do not think of meals in relation to how filling they are. Although I enjoy large meals shared with family and friends, they are like a special treat in my life. Meals to me are instead defined by either intention or shared company.

Intersection of capitalism, colonialism, race, and patriarchy

Capitalism is an economic system in which production factors are privately owned. As such, buyers have the ability to choose the goods they consume. This is known as a free market system. Food is an essential component of capitalism as it is obviously necessary for sustenance. As such, food functions in a free market system as a good that is grown and cultivated, and subsequently bought, sold, and traded throughout the market for a profit. Food has the ability to give power to those that have it, which translates directly into market value. Colonialism is the building and maintaining of colonies in foreign lands regardless of occupation by indigenous peoples. Colonial powers (traditionally western European countries) were able to develop the western world through oppression of people considered to be lesser. Africans were brought to the United States and enslaved on plantations and farms, and forced to work grueling hours of manual labor day in and day out. Patriarchy is related to food and production in terms of power and control. Colonial powers were always men in power, and women were left in the private sector. They cooked meals for their families and raised their children. Racialization is similar to patriarchy in that both categories have a clearly defined oppressor/ oppressed group. Under colonial rule, white men were able to enslave others, and force them to produce food with no consideration of basic human rights. Likewise, women functioned as the oppressed group under white men, and were considered to be the “second sex.” Colonial powers are based on patriarchal rulings in which women and minority groups were seen as inferior to white men. This efficiently and effectively placed food production and preparation in the hands of the “lesser” beings, while simultaneously establishing control for men (read: profit). Capitalism, patriarchy, colonialism, and racialization at their core all give power to a dominant group of people which in effect creates a marginalized group. Marginalized people are the ones that typically are responsible for food, however the aforementioned institutions prevent them from gaining power under the free market system.

Pangea

For the past year or so, I have spent nearly every Friday and Saturday night hostessing at Pangea in Shadyside. If you are unaware, this is a mostly upscale restaurant whose motto is “creative cuisine in the heart of Shadyside.” It is a beautiful restaurant with a unique décor and ambiance, and the executive chef is simply amazing at his work. Since working there I have tried all sorts of things I had never experienced before: homemade trenne ala Bolognese, fried calamari in a spicy-sweet chili glaze, and braised Elysian fields lamb osso bucco. Although I do not consider myself a particularly adventurous eater, there is nothing Ron cooks that I would not try! Although the food is undeniably delicious, there are issues with the staff at the restaurant. In the past year I have seen many servers come and go. In that time there have been three female servers, and probably a dozen male servers. This is interesting because the women who work there have stayed significantly longer—probably around 4 months more. Besides the front of house manager, I am the only female who has stayed longer than a year. Because I am not a server and spend most of the night standing near the door and reading for school, I am unaware of the more gendered aspects of work towards the servers. I have noticed, however, that males are more confident in their presentation. I notice the female servers at Pangea stumble over their words, apologize more frequently, and are generally more aware of their actions and presentation. This is perhaps detrimental to their tips as their efforts to be more presentable end up making them even more nervous. Is the reflective of cultural stereotypes in which women are taught to constantly self-monitor? Likely, yes. The males, conversely, seem to be more removed from their job; they are simply there performing a task and then they are done. They never seem frantic or particularly engaged. Likewise, because Pangea is privately owned and operated, they are very selective about the staff they hire. The servers are always attractive, Caucasian, and educated individuals. My feelings toward Pangea are confounding. Although I love the food and easy money, I disagree greatly with their often sexist views that give preference to men and their advancement.

Hummus

Hummus is an Arab dip or spread made from cooked, mashed chickpeas blended with tahini (sesame paste), olive oil, lemon juice, salt, and garlic. It has a mild taste, so sun-dried tomatoes, paprika, and olive oil are commonly added for flavor. It is a popular food throughout the Middle East, and is one of the oldest known prepared foods. In Hebrew and Arabic “hummus” simply means chickpea. Chickpeas, which are the main ingredient, have been used for over 10,000 years. It is rumored that a warrior from the second crusade created hummus. Its actual origins, however, are unknown. Despite this, it is known that hummus has been a staple of the Mediterranean diet for thousands of years. Hummus recipes vary between villages and cultures, as well as households. In Lebanon and Jordan, it is a staple of morning meals. Likewise, there are actual hummus restaurants throughout the Middle East, as well as books and essays dedicated to comparing recipes and means of preparation. Fresh hummus spoils quickly, so additives are added to imported brands. Despite wide, easy access to different varieties of hummus, home preparation is relatively inexpensive, as well as easy to make. Hummus is high in iron, folate, and vitamins C and B6. When eaten with bread it serves as a full protein. It is usually served as an appetizer or dip, and scooped with a flatbread such as pita. It is sometimes served in accompaniment to falafel, grilled chicken, fish, or eggplant.
BASIC HUMMUS DIP
(Serves 8-10)
1 pound, 2 ounces small dry chickpeas
1 tablespoon plus 1/2 teaspoon baking soda
1 cup raw top quality tahini
1 tablespoon freshly squeezed lemon juice
2 cloves garlic, crushed
Salt to taste

Soak the chickpeas overnight in a large bowl of cold water with 1 tablespoon of the baking soda.

Drain and rinse the chickpeas and put them in a large pan. Add water until it reaches 1 inch above the chickpeas. Add the remaining 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda and bring to a boil. Cook, covered, over low heat until the chickpeas are very soft — 2 to 4 hours. Cool slightly, drain and save some of the cooking liquid.
Put the chickpeas in a food processor, add 2/3 cup of the tahini and process until almost smooth. If the paste is too thick, add a few tablespoons of the cooking liquid. Season with lemon, garlic and salt; taste and adjust the seasoning.
For a richer, creamier version, add the remaining tahini and process until the hummus is completely smooth and fluffy.