In praise of mass-market American tacos
economist.com
economist.com
In general, whenever there are debates about the authenticity of a certain dish, I can guarantee that people of the native country are doing even crazier "non-traditional" things with it, and no one cares.
After learning this fact, I stopped caring about a foods heritage. Who cares.
Korean food is notoriously spicy today, gochugaru and gochujang are fundamental condiments of modern Korean cooking, but pre-chili recipes for things like kimchi are not notably spicy.
It’s noticeable for both being the first Korean cookbook and being authored by a woman in the 1600s. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eumsik_dimibang
Just curious (and nosy), It is still early morning in the US but what did you end up having for lunch? :D
Tomatoes, potatoes, and chili ("red pepper") are all New World plants foreign to India.
Pretty sure the distinction of fruit is ignored often, as well. Coffee is my favorite example. Bean only in shape.
Do people actually use the word "spicy" for the latter?
Chili peppers did, but chili peppers aren't the only source of spiciness.
This is basically the trap of what spicy means. There are other spices than chili peppers, true. But if I say I'm getting spicy food, I'd wager most folks don't think of seasoned foods.
Edit: easy way to consider it. Spiced rum is not considered spicy. Nor is KFC, even though it famously has spices.
This doesn't sound like a claim for which there could be good evidence.
Yes, and just as it would be ridiculous to call items that originated through culinary fusion in Mexico “authentic” cuisine of the cultures from whence the various influences came, it is ridiculous to try to call American fusion dishes whose influences include, among others, Mexican cuisine authentic Mexican cuisine.
also, what did they irish eat before potatos were taken over there from south america??
* Early Irish Farming by Fergus Kelly (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/462769441) * Early Medieval Ireland, AD 400-1100 by Aidan O'Sullivan, Finbar McCormick, Thomas Kerr, Lorcan Harney (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1257790078)
https://www.bonappetit.com/trends/article/what-the-irish-ate...
What's your question? Why are Canadians known for speaking English?
Lots of dairy and grains
Most of what's available outside south Texas (and here and there through southwest) is knock off TexMex though lol.
I won't make any claims about my abilities, but I do really love trying to understand the basic concepts of food, so that I can figure out with why certain components are used, and what you can play around with to mix it up (both literally and figuratively).
Did you mean family? Gooseberries and tomatillos are different genuses, though the same solanaceae family. With that said, this is an interesting observation, and now I want to do a side-by-side comparison between tomatillos and gooseberries.
And if you can’t argue it as authentic just call it fusion.
American-style tacos are not authentically cuisine of Mexican origin of any time. They are authentically American food, developed in America, by Americans.
Those two things weren't even roughly contemporary.
> The main market for the food at this stage was the British Army and Royal Navy. By 1817, Donkin recorded that he had sold £3000 worth of canned meat in six months. In 1824, Sir William Edward Parry took canned beef and pea soup with him on his voyage to the Arctic in HMS Fury, during his search for a northwestern passage to India. In 1829, Admiral Sir James Ross also took canned food to the Arctic, as did Sir John Franklin in 1845.[7] Some of his stores were found by the search expedition led by Captain (later Admiral Sir) Leopold McClintock in 1857. One of these cans was opened in 1939 and was edible and nutritious, though it was not analysed for contamination by the lead solder used in its manufacture.
That doesn't sound popular to me.
> Large-scale wars in the nineteenth century, such as the Crimean War, American Civil War, and Franco-Prussian War, introduced increasing numbers of working-class men to canned food, and allowed canning companies to expand their businesses to meet military demands for non-perishable food, enabling companies to manufacture in bulk and sell to wider civilian markets after wars ended. Urban populations in Victorian Britain demanded ever-increasing quantities of cheap, varied, quality food that they could keep at home without having to go shopping daily. In response, companies such as Underwood, Nestlé, Heinz, and others provided quality canned food for sale to working class city-dwellers.
American-origin Mexican-inspired food is authentic American-origin Mexican-inspired food (or, simply, authentic American food.)
Its not authentic Mexican food. (Tex-Mex and Cal-Mex encompass some things that are Mexican in origin and some things that are not, just as Mexican food includes some things that are of Aztec origin and some things that are not.)
The classic Taco Bell taco is genuine southern California Cal-Mex cuisine. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/02/dining/north-of-the-border...>
Really? Hundreds?
There was an instant porridge campaign which had a wee scots laddy saying "thats noo how ye mak purridge" as various people made instant oats without a concern. So the idea "we know its not authentic, move on" is actually embedded in the model.
Probably in due course the explosion of ethiopian, somalian and other places using Teff to make giant grey rubbery pancakes underneath their food will morph into using more normalised grains, with necessary textural change to the pancake.
Most UK Chinese restaurants are Cantonese. Finding that northern Chinese eat grilled lamb and that not all Chinese food has cornstarch thickener was a revalation. But it would be a mistake to say "thick sauce Chinese food is inauthentic" -it's maybe just western palette adjusted.
I freely admit that when I use a food court, my sense of real or unreal is heavily conditioned. I reject an aussie roast with trimmings because they don't give me decent crackling and go for the "real Japanese curry" option which is an analogue of the actual curry-don experience, passed through a sieve of what works with the tools and inputs in an Australian food court. They're using much the same ingredients. The Aussie roast is but a shadow of the english roots, but when you need some crispy pork skin, its good to go. Should the gravy be bonox or somebodys stock pot? Chicken Salt or not on the chips?
That tempura? It was the Portugese...
That spam fritter in the Philippines...
I discovered Ethiopian cuisine a few years ago, and once you know about it it can be found in large-ish cities in the US, but the businesses all seemed like they were on the edge of collapse. It makes no sense because the food is incredibly delicious, approachable, and unique.
And I guess by taking off I mean: likely to be present in small communities, present in abundance (competition, market segmentation) in large communities, and available (not in an exclusive way) in a form tailored to western lifestyles (on DoorDash/ Deliveroo, available as supermarket kits comparable to the taco shell kits or pizza-making kits, or made into fast food like Taco Bell, KFC, Burger King, Panda Express, etc).
It seems like it’s about time for a new cultural cuisine to be mainstreamed in the US, IMO.
I wouldn't expect large fast-food chains to appear in the UK -- these are almost exclusively American food. Indian and Chinese food has been widespread for years, and there are many restaurants and takeaways but they are all small/local businesses.
There are 11 Ethiopian options on Deliveroo in London: https://deliveroo.co.uk/cuisines/ethiopian-takeaway/london
It was really tasty, from what I remember a lot of it was mashed up in a texture similar to hummous. No idea how authentic it was as I have nothing to compare it to but amazing whatever it was.
so I wouldn't so it's taking off yet, but it probably will :)
Do they have fast food offerings like wraps and pies? Also, what do you mean by "approachable"? Convenient?
Not that there’s anything wrong with those things - Americans do in fact eat those things, but there can be some mental hurdles around eating something that is identifiably an insect.
The Ethiopian food I’ve seen is injira and various combinations of spices, chicken, beef, eggs, and common vegetables. The least “approachable” part is that you eat it with your hands, but in practice it’s not any different from a burrito or taco.
A fast food take on Ethiopian would almost certainly include a wrap made with injera, maybe tibs, and gomen wat. Doro wat would work as well. In restaurants it is often served platter style, which is directly analogous to many Chinese restaurants in the US.
What makes Mexican cuisine popular beside the usual reasons like taste and flavors is that it lends itself very well to the operations of fast food businesses with all those diverse and rich offerings that make the life of the business owner easier and enjoyable than with other challenging cuisines like that of Horn of Africa to adopt to the type of operation seen in this kind of establishments.
And like I said, approachable means approachable to western audiences. In other words, less of a hurdle than asking people to eat bugs. I don’t see anything about the Ethiopian cuisine at restaurants that explains why those restaurants aren’t more successful or common (like Thai, Mexican, Italian, Chinese, Sushi, etc).
It’s not really about adventurism or exoticism because I think Ethiopian is plenty adventurous and exotic for probably a sizable portion, if not majority, of Americans.
So the first approximation here might be, individual portions. Once you morph to serving single-serve plates from a communal platter, its down the road to wrapping the meat and veg stew to make an enchilada and calling it "ethiopian tacos" or something.
and then they have to outdo the established items in that food category from other international cuisines like burritos and pizzas, and the outlook doesn't look very promising for the Ethiopian fast food.
Most of the cuisines you cited in your defense of Ethiopian cuisine has robust and rich fast food offerings esp. those of Mexico, Italy and China, a point which is lacking in that of Ethiopia and thus poses a challenge to enjoy wide adoption and achieve the status of mass-market fast food category.
As we internationalize we can pick from the wide bounty of ingredients to our personal tastes and allergic requirements... I will be a happy man if I never again eat mock duck (aka wheat gluten with weird things done to it) in a vegan chinese dish.
It is not a word for gravy. In Tamil kari can refer to any cooked accompaniment to rice or bread. Even a dry stir fry. The Telugu equivalent kura is even more generic and can mean either a cooked dish or a vegetable.
And Tamil and Telugu are both distinct languages, not dialects.
Every single assertion in that sentence is wrong.
Hindustani is only spoken by ~60% of the population and a even lower percentage speak it as a first language. It is not a pan-Indian language. Hindustani is not a pidgin. Hindi and Urdu are both standardized registers of Hindustani. And Telugu and Tamil are not even in the same language family as Hindustani.
So, no. There is no singular Indian language.
Just one cooking show does not prove anything. Curry is not an "indial dialect word for gravy". Some curries maybe gravy-like, but others may not be.
Also Bangladesh was partitioned off from India, so food culture is common between India, Bangladesh and pakistan
Food is supposed to taste good and food is made fresh(ish) everytime you make it - you're never going to eat a feast served by Emperor Nero because his cooks are dead and cooking is a very artistic job - even a contemporary of theirs wouldn't cook a precisely identical feast. Make food how you want to eat it and enjoy.
Broaden your culinary horizons by tasting meals based on historic recipes if you want, have someone's home cooked dinner where they use a mix of ingredients and spices that they like or try and replicate something you ate at a restaurant but tweak it to be more to your liking.
Food is an extremely ephemeral thing that we consume everyday because we need to love - we can enjoy this daily task by making it to our own tastes without fearing judgement from others.
Food is constantly evolving.
Something that is what it claims to be; “authentic” isn’t a free-standing adjective for cuisine (I mean, beyond that if it is food that it is intentionally prepared, it is “authentic cuisine”.) It applies only to some claim about the cuisine, e.g., that is of a particular origin. So, the question isn’t “is X dish authentic” but, e.g., “is X dish authentically Mexican”
> I ate “authentic” Alsatian food that would be entirely unheard of a thousand years ago in the region
That’s…not surprising. I mean, its not “authentic pre-1000-BCE Alsatian food”, then, but…
(OTOH, American-style tacos are an invention of Americans in the United States. They are authentic American cuisine, but not authentic Mexican cuisine. They are inspired by Mexican cuisine, and they have also inspired some things in newer Mexican and Mexican-American cuisine, but they themselves are just plain American.)
Tomatoes came to Europe from America as a consequence of settlement, so you have that backwards.
> That makes tomatoes in Italy as authentic as Mexican cuisine.
Well, it makes it almost as old as Spanish-derived Mexican identity. There is quite a bit of cuisine now identified as “Mexican” that is older, e.g., of Aztec origin.
i dont dispute that authenticity can be hard to nail down at times but there are plenty of situations where it isn't, so why does the whole concept need to be tossed out? saying american tacos are not like mexican tacos is objectively true; if someone lets that affect how they enjoy american tacos, that's a personal problem, but the statement itself doesnt imply american tacos have no value
i feel like this is a touchier subject than people realize. many cultures have rich and storied culinary traditions regardless of all the one-off examples like fry-bread and so on. saying "authenticity is meaningless" is easily interpreted as an attack even if that wasn't the intent.
Since "authentic" is such a weird and ephemeral thing that's hard to pin down, policing people's language generally just comes across as petty and small.
Taco Bell made a hard shell taco with a soft shell wrapped around it - that worked fine.
I’ve also had tacos where the tortilla was fried so that it had crust, but still had enough give and integrity to hold together. Those were excellent!
I suspect that the hard shell taco kit format was developed because it was easier to make it shelf-stable, not because it tasted good. But I don’t have any evidence.
The double decker taco supreme did not “work fine”. It was the undisputed apex of humanity’s culinary development.
The perfect vessel to combine the crunchy mouth feel of a hard shell taco, with the practical consistency and resilience of a soft shell wrapper. Bound together by a mix of refried beans.
I still can’t believe they removed it from the menu.
I saw a “Taco Bell Cantina” the first time the other day. Their “urban, open kitchen” experiment with alcohol, but with the regular Taco Bell stuff. Kind of fun.
Actual corn tortillas are an absolute royal pain to work with - they need to be reheated in a pretty precise manner to avoid cracking and damage and their shelf life is extremely short. I agree that it's probably more mundane concerns that led to the innovation of hard taco shells.
I'm not sure if you mean something specific by reheating, but I've always just toasted them in a pan on medium heat for a bit. I'm sure a good Mexican cook puts more finesse into it than I do, but there's at least enough structural integrity when I toast them to get the filling down your gullet with minimal complications.
Damn I miss living where the grocery store had a cooler of this morning's fresh-made corn tortillas. La Banderita is better than nothing, but it's just not the same.
Like any food item, it depends? To me Taco Bell tasted terrible. Having existed for 50 years doesn't make it any better or 'authentic'. Are pop tarts "authentic"?
I can't say for sure if Pop Tarts suffered a similar fate but I'd say there's a pretty good chance.
There’s a Mexican grocery store in San Francisco that sells these big crispy tacos. Now those are good (and seemingly authentic)!
Perhaps, but the crappiness of mass-market American-style tacos compared to Mexican tacos (also widely available in many parts of America, especially places where there are lots of people of Mexican descent, including the parts that were once part of Mexico) is a separate and very real issue (common to mass market American food generally, regardless of cultural inspiration or authenticity of general ingredients and stylistic choices.)
Not that I would expect a New York writer for a British-headquartered magazine devoted to ideological defense of neoliberal corporate capitalism to really have much of use to offer on discussion of cuisine in general, much less Mexican-inspired American food, though the defense of mass market anything from that source is…rather painfully on-brand.
(Yes, there are good, even if not-authentically-Mexican, American-style tacos; they are, however, not the mass market ones, though I’ve certainly had many made at people’s homes using mass market taco shells.)
Why is the Economist hawking 20-year-old Anthony Bourdain takes on food authenticity? "Um actually, processed food is good and delicious you guys." Lmao. Is the war in Ukraine not going so well or something?
What a cushy sinecure these people have. And they don't even have bylines!