Do You Care if a Recipe is Authentic?

[The Late Night Gourmet]

I think there have been similar discussions in the past, and I apologize for not being able to find them. I am reminded of this after seeing caseydog's kind comments on my Recipe - Creole Jambalaya. I used red onion, knowing full well that red onion isn't Traditional. I don't see know anyone could taste the difference between red, white, or yellow onion with all the other flavors. But, I do know that there are people who care deeply about Tradition and Authenticity in a recipe.

As I related in the recipe thread, one of the reasons I came to Cookingbites is because I posted a gumbo recipe on Discusscooking, and some people were offended by my ingredient choices (the red onion may have been that hot button item). Then, some idiots decided that I was claiming my recipe was Authentic, which I wasn't. That board didn't have the quality moderation that we have here: anyone could post what they wanted, including harassing other members, and there were no repercussions (other than people leaving).

The first time I make something, I always want to make a recipe Authentic. This becomes tricky when there are differences in interpretation of how to make something Authentic. Cajun/Creole recipes are notorious for this:

• Some say you must use file powder. Others say that you must use okra. Still others say you can use both.
• Some say you shouldn't combine seafood with other meats. Others say that you must have chicken, sausage, and shrimp. Still others say it's okay to mix and match.

Sometimes, substitutions are required because I can't find an ingredient. But, ultimately, I don't really care as long as it tastes good. I really don't understand getting offended because someone has a different interpretation. This, to me, is like getting offended that the cars in front of you aren't going fast enough on your way to work.

But, where do you draw the line? Are you fanatical defending the sacred traditions of how one thing is made, but you feel comfortable switching things up in other preparations?

 

[TastyReuben]

I blow raspberries and give the finger to “authenticity” and “tradition,” as I don’t think they really exist.

Interesting, because I was listening to one show or another on NPR last weekend, and one of the topics was “authentic” cooking, and the guest was saying exactly the same thing, that the concept of authenticity is extremely personal, meaning your Italian grandma may have made her sauce one way, so that’s authentic to you, while my Italian grandma who lived across the street made hers another way, and that’s authentic to me, so the point of authenticity is really…pointless.

Throw in the fact that dishes are carried from one culture/locale to another during immigration, get changed, but keep the same name, or a similar name, or maybe not, and it’s all too muddied to even bother with.

I’ve been saying that for years, so I was glad to hear a culinary expert on a national radio program finally agree with me!

 

[medtran49]

I don't mind if people make small changes in ingredients or technique, but do if there are huge changes. In other words, if you add tomatoes to carbonara, don't call it carbonara. Don't call something risotto if you boil the rice in water, then add cream and other things to get a creamy sauce. Baba ganoush without eggplant isn't. I've actually seen the 3 noted above done.

If you make a major change in a traditional (notice I didn't use the word authentic) then call it what it is now.

I personally think there are very few "authentic" recipes. Authentic IMO would have to be a brand new dish that had never been made before, not based on another dish, and could be directly attributed to a person or group in collaboration, and would always be made the same way with the same ingredients.

Traditional dishes on the other hand usually have similar ingredients and similar techniques because they are regionally based and are made with local ingredients and cooking methods of that region. There would be small differences, but nothing major.

 

[kaneohegirlinaz]

Having been born and raised on Oahu, the culture of food is the same but different, you know?
Like you said TastyReuben about dishes immigrating with folks. America as I know it, is pretty much made up of immigrants.

 

[CraigC]

Don't like the word "authentic".

 

[The Late Night Gourmet]

Throw in the fact that dishes are carried from one culture/locale to another during immigration, get changed, but keep the same name, or a similar name, or maybe not, and it’s all too muddied to even bother with.

Traditional dishes on the other hand usually have similar ingredients and similar techniques because they are regionally based and are made with local ingredients and cooking methods of that region. There would be small differences, but nothing major.

Now that you mention it, Tradition starts because certain ingredients are available in certain regions, so it makes sense that they'll use what they have. If jambalaya somehow was started by people in Michigan, they wouldn't use okra. It's funny when you think of it that way: people are getting offended because you're using ingredients local to you instead of local to the people who created the recipe.

I don't mind if people make small changes in ingredients or technique, but do if there are huge changes. In other words, if you add tomatoes to carbonara, don't call it carbonara. Don't call something risotto if you boil the rice in water, then add cream and other things to get a creamy sauce. Baba ganoush without eggplant isn't. I've actually seen the 3 noted above done.

I totally agree. Even if you omit the words Authentic or Traditional, I don't like when someone misrepresents something. I won't be offended, but I will probably say something (depending on how much time and energy I have for it). I don't mind if someone calls the recipe Carbonara with Tomatoes, however, or Grilled Zucchini Baba Ganoush.

 

[The Velvet Curtain]

If we stuck to authentic then all pizzas would have a topping of rubbed tomato and nothing else.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I think there have been similar discussions in the past, and I apologize for not being able to find them. I am reminded of this after seeing caseydog's kind comments on my Recipe - Creole Jambalaya. I used red onion, knowing full well that red onion isn't Traditional. I don't see know anyone could taste the difference between red, white, or yellow onion with all the other flavors. But, I do know that there are people who care deeply about Tradition and Authenticity in a recipe.

As I related in the recipe thread, one of the reasons I came to Cookingbites is because I posted a gumbo recipe on Discusscooking, and some people were offended by my ingredient choices (the red onion may have been that hot button item). Then, some idiots decided that I was claiming my recipe was Authentic, which I wasn't. That board didn't have the quality moderation that we have here: anyone could post what they wanted, including harassing other members, and there were no repercussions (other than people leaving).

The first time I make something, I always want to make a recipe Authentic. This becomes tricky when there are differences in interpretation of how to make something Authentic. Cajun/Creole recipes are notorious for this:

• Some say you must use file powder. Others say that you must use okra. Still others say you can use both.
• Some say you shouldn't combine seafood with other meats. Others say that you must have chicken, sausage, and shrimp. Still others say it's okay to mix and match.

Sometimes, substitutions are required because I can't find an ingredient. But, ultimately, I don't really care as long as it tastes good. I really don't understand getting offended because someone has a different interpretation. This, to me, is like getting offended that the cars in front of you aren't going fast enough on your way to work.

But, where do you draw the line? Are you fanatical defending the sacred traditions of how one thing is made, but you feel comfortable switching things up in other preparations?

Full disclosure, I didn't read the comments on the Jambalaya thread yet.

Generally, I think some people can be overly sensitive when they are from the region where the dish in question is coming from, but I think its how you present yourself that may or may not put a target on your back.
I can only use examples I am familiar with, so I'll use Jamaican cooking for this example. If you SAY you made Jerk seasoning, I would ask what ingredients are in there. I would understand a substitution like habanero for scotch bonnet peppers (availability of ingredients), but if you added something "foreign" like coriander/cilantro to the mix I would straight up tell you that you've made your interpretation of the recipe, inspired by Jamaican Jerk Seasoning. I take less offense to individuals who do this compared to companies that market a finished product because to me that is egregious misrepresentation and sometimes cultural appropriation.

When I was trying to start my YouTube channel, an endeavor I have all but abandoned, I strove to use reference material for the sake of authenticity. Yet, I knew there would always be someone out there who cooked the dish differently or may challenge my methods. I'm surprised my Korean fried rice wasn't instantly blasted, but I didn't have the reach to offend too many people haha! I digress...

In summary, I approve of making a dish the "authentic/original" way first and subsequently altering it to your tastes, but when you do that you should add a disclaimer that its "your version" of said dish. Then you can, with a clear conscience, tell whiners to ****-off and find someone else to harass.

 

[kaneohegirlinaz]

When I write up recipes I do say up front that this dish is “my way”

 

[caseydog]

I blow raspberries and give the finger to “authenticity” and “tradition,” as I don’t think they really exist.

I am flexible, but nowhere near to the "flying the finger" level. Show up at my house with ham and pineapple pizza, and I'm not sure we can be friends anymore.

As I touched on in LateNite's thread, cajun and creole are similar, but not the same. A lot of people, even TV "chefs" use cajun and creole interchangeably. That waters down both types of food to"anything from Louisiana" status. LateNite very appropriately referred to his dish as Creole Jambalaya. I honestly don't have much experience making or eating creole food. Where I lived, cajun cooking was dominant.

When I am in another country, I eat what is traditional there -- it seems older countries and there people are more attached to their traditions than Americans, since we are a nation of immigrants from all over the world. In Italy, I understand it is a faux pas to order something as common as Spaghetti Bolognese (or SpagBol in the UK). Pineapple on pizza might be a criminal offense.

Now, I don't go as far as demanding "no beans in Texas chili." The original Texas Red was often served with beans on the side. I'm sure that somewhere in the internet there is a Chili recipe with pineapples. I'd have to draw a line there. That just ain't right.

Likewise, there is the traditional French omelet, and there is the American style omelet. The are different, and I like them both. But, if some restaurant had French Omelet on there menu, and I got served an American Style omelet, the chef/cook doesn't know the difference (and should).

Again, I'm flexible, but if you are going to call something "authentic," you should be able to back it up with some history.

CD

 

[karadekoolaid]

The first thing I think about is the word "authentic". Just to be a pedantic pain in the a***, I looked it up:
"of undisputed origin and not a copy; genuine."
That description would probably cover Champagne, Cognac, Kentucky Bourbon, Aceto Balsamico di Modena, Scotch Whisky, etc. Carved in stone, almost.
The only "authentic" I might accept would be the first edition of a recipe written in the fair hand of the inventor, so if Caesar Cardini had actually written down his recipe for Caesar Salad in his own fair hand, for example, I´d consider that "authentic". Perhaps a typical dish from a particular region of the world might also be "authentic". "Aguachile de camarones" is a Mexican version of shrimp ceviche, and if it were prepared and served in exactly the same way all across Mexico, then yes, authentic.
Let´s be polemic. "Fettucine Alfredo". First prepared by Alfredo di Lelio in Rome, it´s fettucine, butter and parmesan. Apparently, because his wife was pregnant and wasn´t eating anything elaborate. "Alfredo Sauce"? Yes, it´s a huge US success dish - but is it always made the same way? No it isn´t, so I wouldn´t describe it as "authentic".
When I want to prepare something as authentic as possible, I always try to find a recipe as close as possible to its roots. If it were Jambalaya, I´d try to find as many recipes as possible from the region where it´s prepared, and make a valiant attempt at copying it as closely as possible. If there were something I didn´t like very much, or something I thought would make it better (for me), then the NEXT time I made it, I´d make the changes.
A finger to authenticity and tradition? Definitely not. Many countries are fiercely attached to their food and dishes. If you told a Venezuelan that their hallacas and arepas were neither, you´d probably be lynched. Or thrown in jail. Try telling a Frenchman that the "baguette" is just another bit of bread, or an Austrian that a "wienerschnitzel" is simply a bit of breaded meat.

 

[SatNavSaysStraightOn]

But, where do you draw the line?

I have a very easy line drawn in the sand, rice, flour, bread, food...

It amounts to "do I like it?" And that 1 letter "I" is the most important part. Yeah, OK, I probably extend to hubby and I, but you get the idea.

 

[caseydog]

Anyone remember the Great Jaime Oliver Paella scandal?

Jamie Oliver has done the seemingly impossible and united the whole of Spain. Against him

Some traditions are engrained in the people from whom they came. I'm okay with that.

Look at Tejano fajitas. Although fajita originally referred strips of beef skirt, fajitas now are made with all kinds of grill "stuff," including vegetarian options such as green/red/yellow peppers, onions, chilies, and jalapeño peppers. What's the difference between a fajita and a taco? About five bucks.

People make chili out of all kinds of stuff. Vegan chili? Is that chili to me? No. That's a soup.

I do try to differentiate "Immigrant Italian" popular in the US with the Italian food traditional to the various regions of Italy. Like LateNite said, foods change according to what's cheap and available when people move across the world.

CD

 

[caseydog]

As I touched on in LateNite's thread, cajun and creole are similar, but not the same. A lot of people, even TV "chefs" use cajun and creole interchangeably. That waters down both types of food to"anything from Louisiana" status. LateNite very appropriately referred to his dish as Creole Jambalaya. I honestly don't have much experience making or eating creole food. Where I lived, cajun cooking was dominant.

BTW, Creole food in Louisiana came from Africans by way of the Caribbean, while Cajun food came from French Canadians who were run out of Canada and ended up in Southeast Louisiana.

CD

 

[medtran49]

BTW, Creole food in Louisiana came from Africans by way of the Caribbean, while Cajun food came from French Canadians who were run out of Canada and ended up in Southeast Louisiana.

CD

And from the second, third, etc. sons/families of French nobility who had immigrated. The wives and the slave cooks adapted their Old World dishes to what was available in the New World, and the slaves added in their touches.

Contributors to Cajun food were also indigenous Indians and escaped slaves.