So remember that time I wrote that blog post on that “creole” restaurant that opened up in Melbourne which led to a huge debate over authenticity? Yeah well, I’m kinda floored by how far the debate over food authenticity in this city has gone.
I’m not arrogant enough to assume my little post was the starting point of any such dialogue within the food community here, but for my own journey it was the beginning, and an interesting exchange on Twitter this week has me again thinking about the issue of “authenticity”.
When I wrote many months ago about My Mexican Cousin, the purpose was not to demonstrate my knowledge of Louisiana cuisine as being superior to theirs, or even to scoff from lofty heights of food snobbery. The number one reason I was driven to write the open letter was because (at the time) out of 15+ menu items, only one dish had any sort of connection to Louisiana Creole food. They’d advertised their fare as being Louisiana Creole, yet been developing their recipes from a Caribbean cookbook.
I thought then, and still believe now, that such an enormous discrepancy warranted a correction. This wasn’t interpretation gone awry, but rather an actual miscommunication of the brief between owners, management and chef, which the restaurant later attempted to correct.
So yeah, seems reasonable in my mind that the dining public should at least be made aware that (at the time) they were not eating something even similar to the cuisine that the restaurant was advertising.
Flash forward a couple of months, and the question of authenticity within the Melbourne dining scene appears to have reached preposterous heights. It seems with every new foreign-based-cuisine restaurant that opens, nothing is more important that how authentic it is, as though it’s the ultimate marketing objective and message.
For some eateries, the pursuit of authenticity will even surpass the importance of the food, engaging the whole “I don’t care if you like it or not, because at least it’s authentic” mentality.
Well folks, that way of thinking and the emphasis placed on authenticity has become just plain ridiculous.
Yes, I definitely think that the food needs to at least have a connection to it’s cuisine of origin. But let’s take tacos, for example. Can we all agree that a taco is in fact a taco so long as it is made with a tortilla (flour OR corn!) and has some kind of filling? And can we then simply judge said taco on how good it is, or how much we enjoyed it, rather than how authentic it is?
Yesterday, a chef decided to grace myself and Red River BBQ with his esteemed opinions on our cuisine. This American, who has a truly impressive resume of work in acclaimed kitchens, argued (in 140 characters or less) that we had no right to call our food Texas BBQ, because only BBQ made in Texas, from Texan cows (and presumably by Texans) can be considered Texas BBQ.
Despite an interjection from Daniel Vaughn (a veritable Texas BBQ authority) who weighed in on the conversation of his own accord to correct some of the chef’s misconceptions, this chef continued to argue that even something like the terroir of the cows and microbes in the water determine authentic Texas BBQ.
Sparing you the rest of the exchange, the logic behind the chef’s argument was that no cuisine can be deemed authentic outside of the parent country. So by the same reasoning, any restaurant attempting anything other than Australian or innovative cuisine apparently now needs to have the word “style” in it’s name.
So when it comes to the issue of authenticity, who is setting the standards? What are the guidelines? And most importantly, does it actually matter?
Posted on Jul 18, 2012
Clearly the word ‘style’ is implied. Otherwise it’s a stretch to blame a restaurant if I’m under the impression we somehow ended up in Texas after walking through the doors.
I eat Korean BBQ quite a lot but rarely do I ask for the chef’s passport. And while never having gone to Kentucky my guess is they aren’t all sitting around at home eating double downs. The list could obviously go on, Thai, Vietnamese, Chinese food all prefix with the name of the style but omit the actual word style and we all seem to be able to get on with our lives.
The real discussion should be – does it actually taste good ?
I agree with you in that said chef is clearly drawing an unstringable long bow with arguments such as the location of cooking and provenance of ingredients. However, I think that whether we like it or not, authenticity carries with it a social cache, that is often exploited or abused by restaurants and their marketers.
It’s not unlike the rather intangible markers ‘organic’, ‘sustainable’ or ‘local’ though, and I think if you’re going to seriously question if it matters or not, by rights the question should apply to these socially loaded marketing claims too.
Just my two cents.
That chef sounds like a real fuckin’ douche.
i appreciate this blog post and the open-ended nature of it. it leaves much room for discussion and ooooooh BOY, when ppl have emotional attachments to the cuisine they are eating, there can be A LOT of debate!
firstly, it sounds like the chef dude who was quick to judge about texas bbq being done here needs to visit australia – which has some of the most amazing meats and spice in the world. secondly, he sounds like a stick in the mud and maybe even “threatened and territorial”.
food authenticity, if gone awry, impacts people who have a direct attachment to the food – it holds for them memories, family, nostalgia and most of all, heritage. sharing, enjoying and loving the food one creates in celebration of this should never be frowned upon. instead of pointing fingers at “imposters” and engaging in character wars, foodies should embrace those who have a real passion for the food, instead of just the “idea” of what it should be.
Tam – he’s an american living in Australia. He is about to open his own restaurant with a US/Aussie hybrid menu (from what I understand) so it could just be a clever marketing ploy.
What`s this chef even complaining about? (I, for one, tend to avoid complainers, arguers, as they are a waste of time). You listed it as Authentic Texas Style bbq, using the word “style” at least twice in your blog post about the RedRiver BBQ shortorder nights (the saucy one)… Maybe it`s time for a “We reserve the right to refuse sevice to anyone” sign, unless you already display one, lol.
IM gettin out my sharpie now to get that sign together!
And FYI – the Texan crew who were there last night went away with the biggest smiles on their faces with promises to return – so you are obviously doing it right!
And for someone to attack on Twitter and not even come down to see what gets dished up and taste the real thing is a bit rich from such a stupid character.
We are coming back with a different bunch of friends in a week or two – don’t let one ‘chef’ put you off your game.
Nic
Thanks for your comments Nic. IN fairness to the chef, he has tried our food and from what I understand, enjoyed it. He made it clear he wasnt commenting on our food but rather the idea that we’re calling our food Texas BBQ.
So far, every single Southerner and Texan who has eaten our food has been thrilled, most saying its the first time they have avoided disappointment when attempting to try a taste from home. And hell, that’s the point of the whole thing!
Im not at all phased by this chef’s opinions in regards to Red River, I just thought his strict views lead to some interesting debate.
Looking forward to seeing y’all again.
Splitting hairs comes to mind. Are we at the point with food similar to wine where only Champagne can be called such if the grapes are sourced from the region? In my view, I’m capable of cooking Creole and Cajun food with ingrediants sourced from Vic. I can smoke ribs, pulled porked and brisket with Vic produce and call them authentic Texan/South Carolina/ etc etc.
Keep on pushing the southern cuisine Jess, god knows we need it.