Food from good ingredients prepared well matters more than if the cheese was stared at for two hours by the sheepwife of the mayor of Scrumthrorpeshireffield.
For example: Wine tasters were clear that French wine just tasted better than Californian wine. They were extremely convinced. Then they tried a blind test and hoo boy did everyone get pissed when they couldn’t tell the French wine was better without knowing it was French first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Paris_(wine)
Tradition and authenticity are good and important if your goal is to experience the culture.
If your goal is to just eat good food, then they’re not important at all.
For example, if you go to Italy and want to really experience Italian food culture, then you should be looking for tradition and authenticity. But if you go to Italy and you just want some good, tasty food … then you don’t need to worry so much about that.
I think people also get touchy on what is “authentic”. Italian cuisine in Italy changed in a similar manner to Italian-American cuisine in the USA. So, you can have “authentic” Italian-American cuisine that comes from Italian roots, but Italians from Italy don’t want that cuisine to be seen as authentic.
Chicken Parmesan is what happens when you take Italian people and put them in America. You take Italians, with the cooking methods they know, their tastes, and set them down in 19th century New York, they make Chicken Parm. This is a well-tested hypothesis.
True. Culture, history, etc as an experience is valid.
It is where people pretend it is important to quality and taste, I call bullshit.
As for the experience… If the old bearded Italian man who served you traditional cheesemelt pig in wooden clogs while singing Por Trancone Parditto were to, say, replace the cheese with Swedish Gulost and not tell you… You would have the same experience.
Not saying it’d be the same, but that the food taste and quality are entirely separate from the authenticity.
Thinking of for recipes, authenticity matters if you’re wanting that specific thing the way you’ve always (more or less) had it. Otherwise, go wild.
I’m always reminded of the time a chef my mother was dating tried to impress me by cooking pierogi (my favorite non-seafood food). He tried to make it fancy with toppings and it was so unsatisfying. Just give me my fried onions and sour cream.
I don’t entirely disagree. But the thing about tradition is, it’s done the same way every time. I’m more likely to trust the person who has done a thing their whole life and learned from their parents rather than someone who started last week.
But I’d prefer either of them over mass-produced versions.
I get what you’re saying, and it’s true, but “wine” is a horrible choice…
It can take five years for a vine to produce wine grapes. And even after they’re harvested, its a long process where lots can go wrong.
It wasn’t that people really thought no one could make better wine than France, it’s that no one else was consistently doing it yet. Everyone knew if Cali vineyards kept at it, they’d eventually level the playing field.
Most of the “outcry” about the result, was in France and made by the insanely wealthy people who owned the French vineyards
Not quite. French wine was diverse, with different regions producing the type of wine they did best.
California came along with marketing and convinced everyone wine should all be a heavy oaky drink that overpowers your food. They turned wine into McDonalds where it all tastes the same. Pretty sure Cali vineyards are owned by insanely wealthy people. Wine is just marketing now, people don’t want diversity, the want a big mac in every bottle.
Professional wine tasting seems like a scam anyway. Somehow, professional wine tasters are unable to tell red from white wine in blind tastings that hide the visual information.
For example: Wine tasters were clear that French wine just tasted better than Californian wine. They were extremely convinced. Then they tried a blind test and hoo boy did everyone get pissed when they couldn’t tell the French wine was better without knowing it was French first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Paris_(wine)
Two Buck Chuck (an inexpensive blend of wines sold by Trader Joe’s) also has scored well among California wines. So it’s not like expensive California wines are obliterating more-pedestrian counterparts, either.
Charles Shaw is an American brand of bargain-priced wine.[1] Largely made from California grapes, Charles Shaw wines include Cabernet Sauvignon, White Zinfandel, Merlot, Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Shiraz, Valdiguié in the style of Beaujolais nouveau, and limited quantities of Pinot Grigio.
The cost of the wine is about 30 to 40 percent of the price, with the bottle, cork and distribution the larger part.
Charles Shaw wines were introduced at Trader Joe’s grocery stores in California in 2002 at a price of USD$1.99 per bottle, earning the wines the nickname “Two Buck Chuck”, and eventually sold 800 million bottles between 2002 and 2013.[2]
At the 28th Annual International Eastern Wine Competition, Shaw’s 2002 Shiraz received the double gold medal, beating approximately 2,300 other wines in the competition.[13]
I’d add that the same sort of thing goes for “audiophile” gear. Things should be blind-tested. It’s very easy to have a perceptually different experience when you know what it is that you’re using.
I remember a point where Joshua Bell was busking in the New York subway.
He’s one of the finest talents in the classical music world, and in 2007 violinist Joshua Bell went busking as an experiment. Would the public realise just what was happening, alongside their daily bustle?
Music director of the Academy of St Martin in the Fields, worldwide star soloist, and former child prodigy. His instrument is a Stradivarius from 1713 and his hair is an icon of classical music in itself…
Joshua Bell is one of the world’s great virtuosos, and one of the biggest names in classical music.
And in 2007 he did some anonymous busking, as a little social experiment to see what might happen.
Over a period of 43 minutes, the violinist performed six classical pieces, two from Bach pieces, one Massenet, and one each from Schubert and Ponce.
Out of 1,097 people that passed by Bell, 27 gave money, and only seven actually stopped and listened for any length of time.
In total, Bell made $52.17 (£42.18). And this includes a $20 note from someone who recognised him.
I remember the violinist one when that came out, and watched some of the videos. He made terrible choices for songs to play that would be nonsensical unmelodious noise if listened to in a second or two of passing by. If someone on the street just hears a disconnected sequence of unrelated notes they’re not going to stop unless they are specifically looking out to be entertained. I’m sure he’s an incredible musician but musician and busker are different skills. A good busker can be a mediocre musician but play catchy, immediately compelling or memorable songs that are recognizable and instantly understood, and have a distinctive stage/street presence.
I was so frustrated by the implication that because he made a pittance that “people don’t know good quality” etc. No, he was just terrible at busking. Honestly he was lucky that he pulled even that much doing it for the first time. What do you honestly think is more attention getting, Violin Partita No. 2 in D Minor played by some white dude in a ball cap or a keytar wielding bear playing a cover of Watermelon Sugar with his whole heart and soul?
I went to a blind dinner recently (You eat in a completely dark room, and are served by blind people).
After each course, the guests had to guess what they were eating, and what sort of wine was served.
Literally no one was even able to tell the difference between white wine and rosé.
Tradition and authenticity is bullshit.
Food from good ingredients prepared well matters more than if the cheese was stared at for two hours by the sheepwife of the mayor of Scrumthrorpeshireffield.
For example: Wine tasters were clear that French wine just tasted better than Californian wine. They were extremely convinced. Then they tried a blind test and hoo boy did everyone get pissed when they couldn’t tell the French wine was better without knowing it was French first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Paris_(wine)
Tradition and authenticity are good and important if your goal is to experience the culture.
If your goal is to just eat good food, then they’re not important at all.
For example, if you go to Italy and want to really experience Italian food culture, then you should be looking for tradition and authenticity. But if you go to Italy and you just want some good, tasty food … then you don’t need to worry so much about that.
I think people also get touchy on what is “authentic”. Italian cuisine in Italy changed in a similar manner to Italian-American cuisine in the USA. So, you can have “authentic” Italian-American cuisine that comes from Italian roots, but Italians from Italy don’t want that cuisine to be seen as authentic.
Chicken Parmesan is what happens when you take Italian people and put them in America. You take Italians, with the cooking methods they know, their tastes, and set them down in 19th century New York, they make Chicken Parm. This is a well-tested hypothesis.
but then again culture is not comprised only of traditional ways of preparing food but also how it evolved to where we are
True. Culture, history, etc as an experience is valid.
It is where people pretend it is important to quality and taste, I call bullshit.
As for the experience… If the old bearded Italian man who served you traditional cheesemelt pig in wooden clogs while singing Por Trancone Parditto were to, say, replace the cheese with Swedish Gulost and not tell you… You would have the same experience.
Not saying it’d be the same, but that the food taste and quality are entirely separate from the authenticity.
Thinking of for recipes, authenticity matters if you’re wanting that specific thing the way you’ve always (more or less) had it. Otherwise, go wild.
I’m always reminded of the time a chef my mother was dating tried to impress me by cooking pierogi (my favorite non-seafood food). He tried to make it fancy with toppings and it was so unsatisfying. Just give me my fried onions and sour cream.
I don’t entirely disagree. But the thing about tradition is, it’s done the same way every time. I’m more likely to trust the person who has done a thing their whole life and learned from their parents rather than someone who started last week.
But I’d prefer either of them over mass-produced versions.
I get what you’re saying, and it’s true, but “wine” is a horrible choice…
It can take five years for a vine to produce wine grapes. And even after they’re harvested, its a long process where lots can go wrong.
It wasn’t that people really thought no one could make better wine than France, it’s that no one else was consistently doing it yet. Everyone knew if Cali vineyards kept at it, they’d eventually level the playing field.
Most of the “outcry” about the result, was in France and made by the insanely wealthy people who owned the French vineyards
Not quite. French wine was diverse, with different regions producing the type of wine they did best.
California came along with marketing and convinced everyone wine should all be a heavy oaky drink that overpowers your food. They turned wine into McDonalds where it all tastes the same. Pretty sure Cali vineyards are owned by insanely wealthy people. Wine is just marketing now, people don’t want diversity, the want a big mac in every bottle.
You can pour cheap, bad wine into an expensive looking bottle and people will like it more. Marketing is pretty much all wine has going for it.
But it was a blind taste test by experts which showed that the best Californian wines could beat the best French ones, not marketing.
Professional wine tasting seems like a scam anyway. Somehow, professional wine tasters are unable to tell red from white wine in blind tastings that hide the visual information.
When served correctly, you can easily tell them apart by temperature.
Two Buck Chuck (an inexpensive blend of wines sold by Trader Joe’s) also has scored well among California wines. So it’s not like expensive California wines are obliterating more-pedestrian counterparts, either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Shaw_wine
I’d add that the same sort of thing goes for “audiophile” gear. Things should be blind-tested. It’s very easy to have a perceptually different experience when you know what it is that you’re using.
I remember a point where Joshua Bell was busking in the New York subway.
https://www.classicfm.com/artists/joshua-bell/violin-busking-washington-subway/
I remember the violinist one when that came out, and watched some of the videos. He made terrible choices for songs to play that would be nonsensical unmelodious noise if listened to in a second or two of passing by. If someone on the street just hears a disconnected sequence of unrelated notes they’re not going to stop unless they are specifically looking out to be entertained. I’m sure he’s an incredible musician but musician and busker are different skills. A good busker can be a mediocre musician but play catchy, immediately compelling or memorable songs that are recognizable and instantly understood, and have a distinctive stage/street presence.
I was so frustrated by the implication that because he made a pittance that “people don’t know good quality” etc. No, he was just terrible at busking. Honestly he was lucky that he pulled even that much doing it for the first time. What do you honestly think is more attention getting, Violin Partita No. 2 in D Minor played by some white dude in a ball cap or a keytar wielding bear playing a cover of Watermelon Sugar with his whole heart and soul?
I went to a blind dinner recently (You eat in a completely dark room, and are served by blind people).
After each course, the guests had to guess what they were eating, and what sort of wine was served.
Literally no one was even able to tell the difference between white wine and rosé.
That tells me there was something wrong with the rosé, honestly.