Frogleg wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 10:13:43 GMT, "Charles Gifford"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>"Jim Lane" > wrote
>
>
>>>There are only two questions to ask about food. Is it good? And is it
>>>authentic?
>>>
>>>We are open to new ideas, but not if it means destroying our history.
>>>
>>>And food is history.
>>>
>>>Giuliano Bugialli
>>
>>No reason not to start a conversation about this again Jim. Bugialli is
>>honored, but I suggest a longer list. This list starts to describe
>>authenticity and its destruction or abuse. Food IS history.
>>
>>1. New ideas should be welcomed, but not at the expense of forgetting or
>>corroding the traditional nor its terminology.
>>2. An history is reflected in an historical diet.
>>3. Culture is described by the development of a cuisine.
>>4. The destruction of a culture is marked by the destruction of its cultural
>>cuisine.
>>5. The borrowing of food cultures, without the destruction of two or more
>>cultures, can only be accomplished by recognizing the history and culture of
>>both the originator and the borrower.
>>6. Adaptation and absorption of one food culture into another creating a new
>>sub-cuisine must be reflected in terminology and acceptance of the reality
>>of the new sub-cuisine.
>
>
> I quarrel passionately with the term 'authentic.' Just taking an
> American example, look at the recipes/methods for chile or barbecue.

Good thoughts, Frogleg. I'll divide the list up into separate threads
later tonight. It should help keep things "clean."

So we don't have a quoting problem, would you then cut and paste your
thoughts to the individual threads?

Hmmm, I see I'll probably have to do the subthreads now. Oh well, its
only a short delay for my ride.


jim