"Ethnic" food

[Pan]

Many Americans seem to know what they mean when they speak of "ethnic" food. It appears to me that it covers food that is in some way viewed as not fully "mainstream" or "high-class," regardless of how popular or widespread it is in the U.S. today. In other words, it usually excludes that which is called "American food" in the U.S., but it also tends to exclude French food, which occupies a unique position at the top of the fine-dining totem pole. As the son of an anthropologist, I see the use of "ethnic" as demonstrating that the thing being discussed is a marked category, a "not-American, not-French" foodstuff. But I tend to consider everything ethnic, just as I consider everything cultural (repeat after me: "Beethoven is cultural music"). What's not "ethnic" about American food or French food? Why is Chinese food more ethnic than Provencal cuisine? How are Maryland Chicken, Boston Chowder, Philadelphia Cheesesteaks, and Southern Pecan Pie anything other than regional ethnic American foods? Finally, why on Earth do we continue to use such a designation as "ethnic food," and is it really fundamentally more useful than the obsolete designation of records produced and marketed for the black community as "race records" (assuming that you, like me, do not favor reviving such a term)?

I'd like some responses not only from Americans and residents of the U.S. but also from Canadians, Britons, and anyone else who would like to discuss this from their perspectives. Perhaps we can have a cross-cultural (and cross-ethnic) exchange on the uses of the term "ethnic food," and any related terms used around the world.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Your post is truly excellent. And I don't have any real answers for you. But I can add the following. British cuisine, nor British people are considered ethnic. And I think that is a clue. "Ethnic" probably started as meaning not white anglo-saxon protestant.

[torakris]

Just to make this even more confusing, in Japan the term Ethnic (usually referring to food or trinket type things) is normally referring to 3rd world countries particularly those in Asia. An Ethnic restaurant will usually include from a variety of S.E. Asian countries and occasionally India as well.

I have never seen it to mean North America (though occasionally South America) or Europe. Africa tends to be included as well.

[Pan]

Thank you for your compliment, Steve.

Both your response and Torakris's tend to reinforce my point that the word "ethnic" is really a code word that can be regarded in a certain light as an implicit putdown, and perhaps even in some ways a more or less dim echo of racist Cultural-Evolutionist terms like "uncivilized" and "primitive." I think that what prompted this post from me was the confusion in the following thread (see link) about whether upscale Indian food can or can't be called "ethnic," or whether it should or shouldn't be included in a discussion of "ethnic" food: Ethnic food recommendations in NYC. It's not like anyone has been accusing the food Diwan serves of being inauthentic; it's that for some people, there's clearly a cognitive dissonance between the prestige of "upscale dining" and the "commonness" or even "low-class nature" [my words, not quotes from anyone] of "ethnic food."

Naturally, I don't want anyone jumping to the conclusion that I'm accusing people who use the term "ethnic food" are all racist troglodytes, LOL!! But still, something perhaps not fully acknowledged and confronted is going on here.

[Edit for punctuation and clarity]

Edited February 23, 2003 by Pan (log)

[Suvir Saran]

Thank you for your compliment, Steve.

Both your response and Torakris's tend to reinforce my point that the word "ethnic" is really a code word that can be regarded in a certain light as an implicit putdown, and perhaps even in some ways a more or less dim echo of racist Cultural-Evolutionist terms like "uncivilized" and "primitive." I think that what prompted this post from me was the confusion in the following thread (see link) about whether upscale Indian food can or can't be called "ethnic," or whether it should or shouldn't be included in a discussion of "ethnic" food: Ethnic food recommendations in NYC. It's not like anyone has been accusing the food Diwan serves of being inauthentic; it's that for some people, there's clearly a cognitive dissonance between the prestige of "upscale dining" and the "commonness" or even "low-class nature" [my words, not quotes from anyone] of "ethnic food."

Naturally, I don't want anyone jumping to the conclusion that I'm accusing people who use the term "ethnic food" are all racist troglodytes, LOL!!    But still, something perhaps not fully acknowledged and confronted is going on here.

[Edit for punctuation and clarity]

Interesting points raised by all.

Upscale or quick and cheap, if Indian food is ethnic, that should not depend on what price point the food is being served at. Or should it?

Diwan is serving Indian food (and to many it is Ethnic food) and food that is based on restaurant, home and ancient and contemporary Indian cuisine.

One has many smaller more humble restaurants, but their food and look do not make them more authentic and ethnic just because they look a certain way. In fact it is a shame to me that some of the most Indian seeming restaurant are hardly doing anything to share in the amazing wealth of Indian variety when it comes to food.

Price point alone cannot be used as a means to judge something as being ethnic or not. Hence, I respect your opinion. And hope we can have more getting us people together that what separates us.

[Pan]

I agree, Suvir. Price point is an absurd criterion to use in determining whether something is "ethnic" or not.

[Steve Plotnicki]

I really think it is simpler then that. If you start with my WASP premise, and then consider that people who typically immigrated to America were poor and Catholic, it was easy to identify all cuisines coming from poor immigrants as ethnic cuisine. The French were exempt because they exported a rather upscale cuisine. Do you think of Swedish cuisine as being ethnic? Norwegian? I don't. How about cuisines like Jamaican or other Caribbean cuisines? Not ethnic unless they are Hispanic, then they are considered ethnic. Canadian cuisine isn't ethnic either. But Mexican is. Do we see a pattern here?

[Haggis]

One possible reason why French food may not be seen as ethnic in the United States: nothing comes to mind when I try to think of a French neighborhood! The French seem not to have confined themselves to ghettos. This is true of every city or state I can think of. New Orleans is a unique exception, and guess what? I *do* think of Cajun/Creole food as ethnic, perhaps in small part because the Acadians and Creoles did concentrate themselves there. There are Germantowns all over the USA and lo and behold - German is definitely considered an ethnic cuisine. Same deal with Swedish food, especially smorgasbords. Germanic and Scandinivian folk are considered to be as white as anyone, yet because they have enclaved themselves upon immigration, their cuisine falls under the ethnic category. I bet if there were such a thing as a French section of Manhattan at the turn of the 20th Century, that French food would be seen as ethnic to this day. I'm no expert, but my guess is that some Anglo Canadians view French food in Quebec as ethnic food, and it probably has to do with there being such a thing as French neighborhoods there. Either that, or the inescapable fact that poutine is as ethnic as vindaloo ANY day!

[Pan]

Steve, I'm not sure how many people would agree with your perception that Anglo-Caribbean cuisines aren't "ethnic." I think they're as "ethnic" as Indian or Chinese or what have you, but then I also consider French food and American food ethnic, so I'm not that useful as an example for this usage question.

[Fat Guy]

Both your response and Torakris's tend to reinforce my point that the word "ethnic" is really a code word that can be regarded in a certain light as an implicit putdown, and perhaps even in some ways a more or less dim echo of racist Cultural-Evolutionist terms like "uncivilized" and "primitive."

I have definitely heard the word used to convey that kind of sentiment. At the same time I think it would be dangerous to imply that everybody who refers to "ethnic" food is speaking in racism-echoing code. When Robert Sietsema wrote a book entitled Good and Cheap Ethnic Eats In New York City I do not believe he used the term as code. I believe he used it to communicate.

Pan, I would urge you to think of this in terms of communication. In many cases, the reason a word is used is because it's the best word for the job. I think if you want to topple the use of "ethnic" as a culinary descriptor, you should try to come up with a better word or phrase. Otherwise you won't make much headway.

In my own writing I have occasionally used the term in the manner described above and have then apologized in parentheses for using a term I know really applies to more than that. But I haven't come up with a better term, so I'm not sure how best to fix the problem. Let's try to come up with some good alternate wordings. If we find an agreeable one, let's try to make it an eGullet convention and move from there.

[g.johnson]

Plotnicki is not quite right. Ethnic doesn't mean non-WASP*, but non-European. Everyone knows it means that and it's a perfectly serviceable term.

*Gore Vidal points out that the 'white' is redundant and that ASP more perfectly describes our venom.

[Fat Guy]

Plotnicki is not quite right. Ethnic doesn't mean non-WASP*, but non-European. Everyone knows it means that and it's a perfectly serviceable term.

I didn't know that, and I think most people think of Spanish food, for example, as ethnic. How about Greek and Turkish? I think it's more complex than you make it out to be.

For reference, Merriam-Webster says:

ethnic

Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin ethnicus, from Greek ethnikos national, gentile, from ethnos nation, people; akin to Greek Ethos custom -- more at SIB

Date: 15th century

1 : HEATHEN

2 a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background b : being a member of an ethnic group c : of, relating to, or characteristic of ethnics

[Anna N]

...In many cases, the reason a word is used is because it's the best word for the job. I think if you want to topple the use of "ethnic" as a culinary descriptor, you should try to come up with a better word or phrase. ...

I think we are all ethno-centric when we use the word ethnic to refer to food (and other things) as "foreign" to us and that, I think, is the word is largely replaces. I don't like using the word but I know it communicates a message and that most people receive my message in the right context. So, I'm with you if I understand you correctly - that the word is not entirely desirable but currently no better word exists. When a better word emerges I will be happy to use it but I'm betting it will soon take on the same potentially offensive overtones as "ethnic" does now. Anna N

[nerissa]

......I bet if there were such a thing as a French section of Manhattan at the turn of the 20th Century, that French food would be seen as ethnic to this day. I'm no expert, but my guess is that some Anglo Canadians view French food in Quebec as ethnic food, and it probably has to do with there being such a thing as French neighborhoods there. Either that, or the inescapable fact that poutine is as ethnic as vindaloo ANY day!

Pan, this is an excellent question. And, haggis, I am glad to see that you brought in spatial considerations. I can't think of any singularly French neighborhood in NY or Chicago. Since I am a youngin' on this board, didn't "ethnic" food gain popularity in the 70s'/80s's when going to get Thai, Indian, Carribiean, Greek etc food was as much as a trip into another part of the city? Such a spatial practice may be less common with all the g.d. gentrification occuring. I think Pan's correct assertion that ethnic is often implicit putdown can be extended to those neighborhoods. The preppy term of "slumming" is a prime example.

Edit: replaced of with or

Edited February 23, 2003 by nerissa (log)

[g.johnson]

Plotnicki is not quite right. Ethnic doesn't mean non-WASP*, but non-European. Everyone knows it means that and it's a perfectly serviceable term.

I didn't know that, and I think most people think of Spanish food, for example, as ethnic. How about Greek and Turkish? I think it's more complex than you make it out to be.

I think you'll find exceptions to every definition*. But I'm not sure I'd describe Spanish as ethnic (unlike South and Central American). Maybe Greek but then, as we have learnt, Greek is really Turkish and Turkey is not in Europe**. This may be an Anglo-centric view. Perhaps 'non-recent-immigrant' is a more workable definition.

*Is Diwan ethnic? Tabla?

**Unless you go by the Eurovision Song Contest***. In which case Israel is also in Europe.

***Don't ask.

[stefanyb]

The words ethnic food, at least in this country, refer to the food prepared and eaten by poor immigrant populations. If there was ever an influx and resultant neighborhood development of a particular poor immigrant group then their food, which was obviously rustic due to the economic conditions, is considered ethnic.

Also, the English settlement of our country introduced foods by which all other cuisines are measured. The level of difference between a particular cuisine and English food is another kind of measurement of how likely a cuisine is to be considered ethnic.

The typical specious arguments against immigrants, i.e. uncivilized, unclean, unworthy etc. have also been put forward in the case of ethnic food but as history has shown, when assimilation occurs acceptance follows and those who put forth the argument move on. The cuisine in its rustic form may continue on and evolve over time or even be coopted by "American" cuisine as is exemplified by Italian food.

Edited February 23, 2003 by stefanyb (log)

[Steve Plotnicki]

I think that Tabla is considered less ethnic then Diwan is. Just like Patria is less ethnic then Havana Chelsea is.

[Fat Guy]

I agree, and I think it's because the former examples are more generically white-breaded and Americanized. I like them very much and think they can serve delicious food, but those are the facts.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Well it is based on who they are intended to appeal to. Diwan appears to be trying to appeal to a higher percentage of Indian diners then Tabla is, and as such the cuisine is more traditional or "ethnic" as Pan has put in this thread. Doesn't Nobu seem less Japanese then Sugiyama or Hatsuhana? But even then, I don't think people consider Japanese to be ethnic cuisine in the same way they think of Chinese and Thai as ethnic. But is Shun Lee Palace considered as ethnic as Grand Sichuan International? Nope. The further away you get from the concept of poor immigrants the less ethnic things seem.

[Bux]

In regard to

I agree, and I think it's because the former examples are more generically white-breaded and Americanized.

and

Tabla is considered less ethnic then Diwan is. Just like Patria is less ethnic then Havana Chelsea is.

I suspect authenticity is part of most people's definition as well as apartness from one's own ethnicity.

[macrosan]

As with so many words, ethnic has both a dictionary definition and a common usage definition. I think it is immediately clear that in the phrase "ethnic food" the dictionary definition is not being used, since the phrase could have no intelligent meaning.

The trouble with common usage is that it's common but not universal so there is plenty of room for mis-communication. I think Anna has it about right. Most people use the phrase "ethnic food" to mean food from a foreign (to them) culture. Pan's interesting observation that people don't class food as ethnic is true of the Western world, because French food (and indeed Italian) is not foreign to us --- we've been eating it for a long long time

In Britain, ethnic food broadly means Asian foods, because the phrase was coined as shorthand for the wave of Asian restaurants that opened up here in the last 30 years. Chinese, Indian, Turkish, Greek were the main ones, and now Thai, Japanes, Korean and so on. I think G.Johnson is wrong to say that European food is considered non-ethnic in Britain. Interestingly, we have very little European food in Britain so maybe the point is moot. But I'm pretty sure that a German or Swedish restaurant in London would be classifdied by most people as ethnic.

America is, I think, quite different. America is inherently multi-ethnic, so there is no American ethnicity. The spread of national cuisines throughout America is so complete that very few Americans are not continuously exposed to all of them. So Tex-Mex is as familiar to New Yorkers as to San Antonians, and Cajun as familiar to San Franciscans as to New Orleanites. I think !

In summary, I think Anna has the right "working definition" and I think Fat Guy has the right approach to the phrase. It is just a shorthand method of communicating about a broad group of cuisines. If precision is important, then don't use the phrase

Edited February 23, 2003 by Martin Rosen (log)

[Steve Plotnicki]

I don't think Pan's original post is asking whether the phrase is an accurate description of the food or the people. I thought he was inquiring about the political correctness of using the term. The inference I drew from his post was, we might have used this term in the past because it was easy, and Fat Guy, Anna N and Martin explained where that easiness came from, but isn't it about time that we got beyond this word as a matter of respect to the various national cuisines we patronize and the people who practice them? I think he happens to have a very good point even though I'm not sure how practical the implementation is. But now that he has raised it, in the future I will try to be more aware and sensitive about it, lest someone is actually offended by the use of the term.

[Pan]

One possible reason why French food may not be seen as ethnic in the United States: nothing comes to mind when I try to think of a French neighborhood!

And I can't think of any Burmese or Indonesian neighborhoods in any U.S. city I know of, yet Burmese and Indonesian cuisines are considered "ethnic," n'est-ce pas?

[Fat Guy]

Again, I think the key to a solution is to come up with a better term. I would be willing to try to put the weight of this site -- to the extent I can as an administrator -- behind the concept if someone came up with a good one. I'd champion a better way of talking about this issue, if someone were to invent it.

[KatieLoeb]

Wow. All such interesting points. I agree on one hand about the implicit put down aspects of using the term "ethnic", but again, I think that depends on whose doing the talking. I, as well as I'm certain many other folks here, use the term "ethnic" to describe "foreign", "non-local" cuisine. But again, does a cuisine qualify as "non-local", depending on one's locality? For example, is Indian food less "ethnic" in London, than it is in New York? Is Indonesian cuisine less ethnic in Amsterdam than it is in Paris? Is Moroccan cuisine less ethnic in Paris than it is in Philadelphia? I think there's also a thread of colonialism in the history of "ethnic" cuisines that no one has touched upon yet. And now that many of those immigrants from former colonies are well established and less "ghetto" than in previous times, does that make their cuisines somehow less "ethnic" in the places that the culture of the particular ethnicity is more pervasive? Since the United States is basically ALL immigrants (with the exception of Native Americans - and how come that's a cuisine that doesn't stand on it's own??), my example doesn't hold up as well here. I have no evidence for this, I merely wonder if someone could answer this question for me that might live in a place that has a large population of former "occupied colonists".