T&A (Tradition and Authenticity)

[porcupine]

I'm always entertained by the back-and-forth over what's authentic in a particular dish (Philly cheesesteaks, for example), or whether some ingredient is traditional or not. To me it's unimportant, as I prefer my food to be tasty first and foremost. But obviously it's very important to many people.

What's the big deal? Is it really, honestly better to you if you know it's authentic?

I was recommending pupusas in another thread and imagining another one of those "but is it authentic?" discussions starting. And I thought to myself, "I don't really care, because they taste good".

Cathal Armstrong and Frank Ruta cook up some mighty fine eats that aren't authentic Irish or Italian, as far as I can tell, but you don't see me turning my nose up at Restaurant Eve and Palena just because. But then maybe what they cook is authentically Cathal and authentically Frank, and that's important, too.

And come to think of it, my favorite Vietnamese place is one sometimes derided as not being authentic enough. Maybe that means I don't really like Vietnamese. But another consideration - there's a lot of French influence in the cooking, as a result of colonialization, so who's to say that a beef stew is no good because it marries French technique with Vietnamese ingredients?

How long does it take for a change to become traditional, anyway? Are tomatoes traditional in Italian cooking?

What defines traditional American? Have we been around long enough to have traditions?

Just some thoughts on a hot summer day. Please take no offense: I aim to start a cordial discussion, not a flame war.

edited for clarity. I hope.

[Tweaked]

I have found this to be interesting in the globalization debate especially now that certain countries/regions are starting to trademark products that are traditional from that area. For example, champagne can only be called champagne if it is produced from a certain region in France, the rest is just sparkling wine. However, can balsamic vinegar only come from the Modena region of Italy or is it a process that can be reproduced elsewhere. Or can feta cheese only come from Greece.

[deangold]

I am a personal fan of authenticity. I feel there is a conectedness with authentic foods and traditional ingredients and local wines. They all grew up together and make sense together. On the other hand, I have been quoting my chef... Just because the Italians didn't have soy sauce doesn't meat theywould not use it if they did. If you go to Florence today, you will pass as many Asian markets as Italian. Restaurants that bill themselves as traditional have Japanese sous chefs who have contributed their ideas to the cooking. Il Tufo Allegro in Pitgliano, Restaurante Ricchi in Santo Spirito in Florence and Cibreeo all come to mind. Their authenticity, however, is stil there in the spirit of how they use the new ingredients in their cooking.

I think that today there is a lot of cooking designed to shock the senses. El Bulli is a leader in this arena. Not having eaten at El Bulli, I will not comment. But palces that are taking foods and changing them beyond all recognition are not somewhere that I want to go. ust because we can do something doesnt mean we should.

I love street food. SImple dishes. Plain ingrediets of impeccable quality served simply. THis is the way I eat and what I love. But it does not amke it better. What is sad is when this concept gets attacked not as "I don't care for it" but as if the originators of the food are wrong for eating that way. When someone, as has been done here on the board, attacks a restaurant for serving chicken cChinese style, that is chopped with the bone and all, it shows a lack of knowlege on the part of that person. When a person says I don't like chicken chopped with the bone, that shows a preference that I cannot argue with, I can only disagree.

To me, authentic means the following: Paying respect to traditional means of production and traditional products; paying respect to a particular place and/or time; simple preparations that strive to show off the ingredients and not to mask them. When these ideals are honored, there is an authenticity in that cooking. The food can be modern but following those ideals will still speak to me as authentic. Authentic with a twist as Chef says.

[porcupine]

Another way of phrasing the question is: do concepts such as 'authenticity' and 'tradition' have the same meaning in an age of instantaneous communication and near-instantaneous travel?

To me, authentic means the following: Paying respect to traditional means of production and traditional products; paying respect to a particular place and/or time; simple preparations that strive to show off the ingredients and not to mask them. When these ideals are honored, there is an authenticity in that cooking. The food can be modern but following those ideals will still speak to me as authentic. Authentic with a twist as Chef says.

Good answer. But consider the following New World Foods: tomatoes, chili peppers, and potatoes. I could make the argument that southern Italian cuisine is bogus because tomatoes are a relatively new introduction. Or that Indonesians are faking it since they use chilis. Or that Irish food is a sham because potatoes are exotic to Europe. ...kinda nonsensical, isn't it?

[chef4cook]

Have you ever tasted Parmiggiano from South America? It hardly even resembles the genuine article from Parma. I believe that tradition and basics are the root of any cuisine. Without tratition you cannot move ahead and create. When I describe The Italian cuisine that I do I call it, "Traditional, Innovative and interpretive Italian Cuisine". I could not be innovative or interpretive without having the traditions of Italian cuisine. Having said that, I love a good Traditional Bolognese. But, I also do a superb version of Bolognese using duck. Is it traditional? It is cooked in the traditional manner with respect paid to tradition. Is it good? You bet it is. My point being, taking a product and preparing it in a traditional manner is perfectly ok. But to arrive there you must have tradition to start with.

[bilrus]

It helps to evaluate variations on a particular item if you have tasted what is considered the "definative" or at least "median" version of it.

Use your example of cheesesteaks - Can't you more authoritatively judge if Jerry's Cheesesteaks suck if you've also had Pat's and Geno's (or whatever others are considered the best)?

Another example is the CIA's American Chef cookbook. Most of the recipes in it come pretty close to the average version of a particular item. I use their coleslaw recipe and it is the creamy, tangy slightly sweet version that the majority of Americans would recognize as coleslaw. If you had never had that, but only a version of slaw with blue cheese and a vinagrette, could you really evaluate what is a good coleslaw?

[ScotteeM]

It helps to evaluate variations on a particular item if you have tasted what is considered the "definative" or at least "median" version of it.

Use your example of cheesesteaks - Can't you more authoritatively judge if Jerry's Cheesesteaks suck if you've also had Pat's and Geno's (or whatever others are considered the best)?

Another example is the CIA's American Chef cookbook. Most of the recipes in it come pretty close to the average version of a particular item. I use their coleslaw recipe and it is the creamy, tangy slightly sweet version that the majority of Americans would recognize as coleslaw. If you had never had that, but only a version of slaw with blue cheese and a vinagrette, could you really evaluate what is a good coleslaw?

You raise an excellent point, Bilrus! (And by the way, my family back home in Philadelphia let me know that they don't consider either Pat's or Geno's to be definitive--I think "tourist attraction" was a term that was used.)

We've already established that I'm old enough to have had Philly Cheesesteaks before Cheese Whiz was all the rage.

I also long for the Chinese food I remember from my younger days, before the Sichuan chefs visited DC in the early 80s (or was it the late 70s?). I fondly remember a place in Beloit, Wisconsin, that we called "Farmer In the Dell" (it had been that in a previous incarnation) that served what I thought was delicious Chinese food. The closest I've come to that here these days is the Peking Gourmet Inn and my beloved Chinatown Carryout in Burke. I've read that the former is not "authentic," but it's more what I think of as "Chinese food" than the mediocre dreck I find in most of the "Chinese" restaurants around the area, many of which are not staffed by anyone actually of Chinese descent.

There was a recent dinner organized by Grover and Escoffier to sample authentic spicy Korean dishes. They warned participants that it would not be as hot as some other cuisines, but would be authentic. I remember one participant commenting afterwards that s/he would have preferred more "heat." That's a great example of the conflict between authentic and personal preference.

I'm not talking here about authentic ingredients, such as real Parmesan cheese. For those there can be no substitute. Even substituting Gorganzola in a dish that calls for Stilton will alter the taste in a major way.

As we've seen in the Philly Cheesesteak discussions, tradition and authenticity can change over time. Some of us are old enough to have eaten things that later changed and became traditional. If we prefer our earlier versions, should we simply learn to love the new traditional? Not me--I'll still order my cheesesteaks with provolone, and preferably from an establishment that hasn't succumbed to the modern convenience of easy-melting artificial Cheese Whiz. (How could that ever become traditional, or be considered authentic, I ask?)

We may try lots of different things, but we will return to what we enjoy. If enough people enjoy it with us, it will become traditional. Otherwise, we'll still eat it because we like it.

[deangold]

Another way of phrasing the question is: do concepts such as 'authenticity' and 'tradition' have the same meaning in an age of instantaneous communication and near-instantaneous travel?

Good answer. But consider the following New World Foods: tomatoes, chili peppers, and potatoes. I could make the argument that southern Italian cuisine is bogus because tomatoes are a relatively new introduction. Or that Indonesians are faking it since they use chilis. Or that Irish food is a sham because potatoes are exotic to Europe. ...kinda nonsensical, isn't it?

One of my tenants of authentic is respecting a time. Yes Tomatoes were introduced later into Italy and thus that are less historic than say eggplant. Pasta did not come into tuscan cuisine till much later, I think the 1800's Polenta was used previously. Cous cous or something similar was used in the days when the Florentine Navy was to be feared (1600's when Firenze captured Pisa). It is not hip and trendy to use cous cous in Tuscan cooking except for the grandmothers who ahve inherited the knowlege that cous cous has a long history in Tuscany.

So is tomato sauce authentic in Tuscan cooking? Yes. Is ketchup slathered on a fritatta? No way. One had been incorporated over time in a way consistent with theculture and history of the place. The other is just glop from one culture spread on to cover up another culture.

We use soy, molassas, Thai fish sauce (Garum, Roman fish sauce dates back 3000 years), sel gris and more in our kitchen. Are we leaving authenticity behhind? well yes and no. We are using things that the Italians might have incorporated in their cooking in the past if they had access to them. But we are using them in a very similar way to how other similar ingredients are being used in Italy today and in the past. We are using them with respect and with the willingness to let these ingredients shine as Italians have shown off their ingredients over 100's of years. When you lose sight of that, then the crossover and inauthenticity quotiens, in my opinion, goes off the roof.

I believe I read about one of the molecular chefs who takes prosciutto and freeze dries it into something unrecognisable. My question to him is are you familiar with 500 day old authentic hams? Are you familiar with Iberico Belota Pata Negra and Prosciutto di Cinta Sinese (In my opinion a more delicious ham then even the pata negra and I have ahd them side by side!)? Or are you just going off on a tangent without revealing the incerdible flavors to be had with these traditional products?

[blakegwinn]

This is a really interesting post. Can you truly improve on "classic" dishes that have very specific qualities in people's memories. Hell, I still LOVE Kraft mac n cheez. And as someone originally from Kansas City I can't imagine BBQ as anything but a burnt end sandwich or pulled pork at Arthur Bryant's or Fat Charlies. If you gave, Chef Morou a prime cut of organic meat, artisan rolls and all premium ingredients and a smokepit with any kind of wood imaginable I am sure he could make you some experimental crazy sandwich with african influences that would be an out of this world experience. But for me I will always consider the best BBQ to be that cheapest available cut of pork shoulder slow cooked in the dirty 50 year old smoke pit slapped on a nearly stale white "Wonder" bun and slathered with sauce and a few pickles on the side. Same goes with philly cheese steaks. Would a philly native prefer his dollar a pound frozen steak froma dirty grill with cheese whiz or shaved kobe beef on an artisan roll with real provolone put together by Furstenberg? I think everyone knows the life cycle of "authentic" or "traditional" foods. Most traditional foods were made by the lower class trying to make something edible out of what they had access to. As the techiques and dishes catch on people with access to all the best start getting their hands on it and introduce prime ingredients. So which is preferrable, the 30 dollar lobster roll at the 4 star or the 7 dollar one from the dockside shack? A Bayless tamale or one wrapped in newspaper from a stand in Tijuana? I know I just try not to think about it and enjoy whatever is in front of me but isn't it interesting that we would even be comparing 2 dishes from such different quality of ingredients, chefs, etc? I think if we didn't have all those memories and history attached to the original the discussion would seem silly. Like comparing a frozen microwaveable Trader Joes pasta dish to Dino's Wild Boar Pappardelle.

[blakegwinn]

Oh and on a similar note a funny story. When I was in college my next door neighbor had a house on the Jersey shore. A bunch of us were planning on going out there for some 5 day weekend. So for three weeks this girl (Name redacted) was talking about how she was going to have her mom make lasagna, and it was the best we were ever going to have etc. etc. We had met her father before, italian guy who grew up in an italian neighborhood right outside of NYC so our expectations were high. What we didn't know is that he had married a girl from the midwest with zero ethnic roots or cooking background to speak of. Needless to say the lasagna was an ABOMINATION. Awful. It was seriously like a can of tomato paste with a shake or two of dried basil on undrained ground beef with some over/undercooked (depending on which side you took yours from) lasagna noodles and some cottage cheese. We all choked down a few bites except for the girl who ate like 3 platefuls and kept asking questions like "Isn't my mom's lasagna the best ever?" We were looking for a hint of sarcasm in her eyes but unfortunately it wasn't there. But that is what she grew up with and she loved it. Whenever someone brings up that trip that is the first memory everyone always has. Still laugh about it. All we could think about was how her NY italian father must have silently cried himself to sleep everytime she cooked italian. (Name redacted) told me one time that growing up her dad worked late most nights and usually wasn't there for family dinners. Coincidence.....?

[Ericandblueboy]

I wonder if he thinks other factors, such as race, affect the quality of the food?

I certainly think someone who grew up with the food is going to be more "authentic." My theory is that you develop your palate while you're growing up. If you grew up eating good Thai food, you know what it's supposed to taste like and you're more likely to be able to reproduce it. I'm not so sure anyone who didn't grow up eating something can become a master of that cuisine by taking a culinary tour. Some of the best dishes also involve secret recipes that no one else will know.

[goodeats]

I certainly think someone who grew up with the food is going to be more "authentic." My theory is that you develop your palate while you're growing up. If you grew up eating good Thai food, you know what it's supposed to taste like and you're more likely to be able to reproduce it. I'm not so sure anyone who didn't grow up eating something can become a master of that cuisine by taking a culinary tour. Some of the best dishes also involve secret recipes that no one else will know.

This theory seems a little flawed. While it's true that your palate develops while you're growing up, I am not sure why someone cannot master something something by studying it carefully? What of those who transition into second careers and are successful? Or a cook that transitions to master a pastry chef? Or a head chef that transitions to master as a sommelier? Please elaborate.

[DonRocks]

I certainly think someone who grew up with the food is going to be more "authentic." My theory is that you develop your palate while you're growing up. If you grew up eating good Thai food, you know what it's supposed to taste like and you're more likely to be able to reproduce it. I'm not so sure anyone who didn't grow up eating something can become a master of that cuisine by taking a culinary tour. Some of the best dishes also involve secret recipes that no one else will know.

This theory seems a little flawed. While it's true that your palate develops while you're growing up, I am not sure why someone cannot master something something by studying it carefully? What of those who transition into second careers and are successful? Or a cook that transitions to master a pastry chef? Or a head chef that transitions to master as a sommelier? Please elaborate.

An entire book could (and probably has been) written on this subject - hell, even I could probably toss off 300 pages about this. It's too complex to break down into a binary answer (which is why discussion about it is usually interesting and thought-provoking).

[Ericandblueboy]

This theory seems a little flawed. While it's true that your palate develops while you're growing up, I am not sure why someone cannot master something something by studying it carefully? What of those who transition into second careers and are successful? Or a cook that transitions to master a pastry chef? Or a head chef that transitions to master as a sommelier? Please elaborate.

I think your palate is kind of like your native language. Few Chinese who didn't speak English growing up can be accent-free and there are no American that I ever met that speaks Chinese perfectly. Maybe years of immersion and studying can get your palate to be close to a native's palate. I'm just saying that people who do a little culinary tour and then opening a restaurant probably can't do the cuisine justice.

One personal example comes to mind. I don't understand the bias for cheasapeake crabs. By the time it's cooked and doused with old bay, I can't taste any sweetness of the crab meat. While I love Faidley's crab cakes (presumably made with cheasapeake crabs), I'm not so sure that I can tell it from crab cakes made with Georgia crabs. Personally, I rather eat dungeness crabs pretty much under any circumstance.

[ktmoomau]

To me, if something that my Amish Nanny or my Mother made are not made how they make them, they aren't as good to me. But if they are so different that there isn't really a comparison I don't care. I like new modern takes on items, so if it is vastly different or updated that doesn't bother me, unless the vastly updated isn't very tasty.