"Ethnic" food

Steve Plotnicki · February 23, 2003

How about FKAE (formerly know as ethnic?)

Edited February 23, 2003 by Steve Plotnicki (log)

Pan · February 23, 2003

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.

I hate the term "politically correct," both because it was originally a Communist (originally Maoist?) term and because it implies unthinking adherence to a rigid political line today, as well. But that aside, my point really deals with both counts. I consider it inaccurate to have a "non-ethnic" category because I believe that everything is more or less relevant to an ethnic context, since human beings generally have some kind of ethnic identity, but I also object to the patronizing tone and code-word aspect of the expression "ethnic food."

Fat Guy:

I think it would be dangerous to imply that everybody who refers to "ethnic" food is speaking in racism-echoing code.

My claim is subtler than that sounds to me. I'm claiming that most of the people who use "ethnic" to indicate a marked category of food (as opposed to the unmarked category of "non-ethnic") are non-racists who are nevertheless in most cases unthinkingly using a code word for "non-normal," "non-mainstream" - in other words, "other." And the again often unspoken implications of cheap, low-class food give the term "ethnic" a certain type of unprestigiousness in comparison to the normal and thus implicitly approved "non-ethnic" category. One doesn't have to be a racist to exhibit some forms of thinking that are more or less dim echoes of Cultural-Evolutionist thinking.

Pan · February 23, 2003

Another point against the idea of ethnic as applying only to groups of people who started out in the U.S. as penniless peasants: I believe most of the Koreans who started coming to the U.S. en masse in the 80s (and perhaps the 70s) came with money and immediately established themselves in business (mostly fruit & vegetable stores and cleaners). Does that make Korean food "non-ethnic" in the U.S.? I doubt it!

Steve Plotnicki · February 23, 2003

Hey at least I got the concept right!

The problem with the term ethnic is it implies not really American which is not really true. Immigrants with citizenship are just as American as the natives are. But what the term is trying to say is *not reflecting the influence of having lived in America* which is accurate, but has no derogatory implication. So what if it was termed, "Multi-Cultural Cuisine or something like that?

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

C.O.I.C.

Cuisine Of Immigrant Cultures

Steve Plotnicki · February 23, 2003

How about just Cultural Cuisine?

Pan · February 23, 2003

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.

Well, I've never had any reason to use it. I refer to, for example, Latin American cuisine(s), Asian (usually with some qualifier, e.g. East Asian, Southeast Asian) cuisine, Indian cuisine (referring to the whole subcontinent, often), Caribbean cuisine, and so forth. But then, I'm not a food writer.

Part of the problem is the very imprecision of the word. I see that some people in this thread consider Italian food to be "ethnic" and some people don't. I always thought it was considered an "ethnic" cuisine, though it's so widespread and popular, but perhaps pizza by itself, when bought from pizzerias and especially from a chain like Pizza Hut or Domino's, is no longer considered "ethnic" and eggplant parmigiana in a "full-service" Italian restaurant is.

Perhaps you could discuss a context in which "ethnic food" seems to you to be the clearest term that could be used.

Pan · February 23, 2003

How about just Cultural Cuisine?

Same problem: Everything is cultural.

macrosan · February 23, 2003

I seem to have misunderstood the thrust of your question, Pan. Soory about that :rolleyes: I have to say that I have never detected "politically incorrect" undertones in the phrase "ethinc cuisine", either in my own usage or anyone else's. Maybe I've been missing something.

However if that is the case, and even if only to remove the inherent vagueness of the phrase, I also vote for a replacement.

Pace an interesting thread in another place :wink: what about "regional cuisine" ?

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

How about just Cultural Cuisine?
Same problem: Everything is cultural.

Thats why I said Cuisine of * Immigrant* Cultures

Edited February 23, 2003 by stefanyb (log)

Pan · February 23, 2003

C.O.I.C.
Cuisine Of Immigrant Cultures

Good thought, but the British who turned into the "White Anglo-Saxon Protestants" in the U.S. were also an immigrant culture. So were the Irish, and is Irish cuisine "ethnic"? I'm not sure it's regarded that way.

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

C.O.I.C.
Cuisine Of Immigrant Cultures
Good thought, but the British who turned into the "White Anglo-Saxon Protestants" in the U.S. were also an immigrant culture. So were the Irish, and is Irish cuisine "ethnic"? I'm not sure it's regarded that way.

If you read my original post I had specified *poor* immigrant groups and the level of deviation from English food, the original immigrant cuisine of this country.

Pan · February 23, 2003

I seem to have misunderstood the thrust of your question, Pan. Soory about that I have to say that I have never detected "politically incorrect" undertones in the phrase "ethinc cuisine", either in my own usage or anyone else's. Maybe I've been missing something.
However if that is the case, and even if only to remove the inherent vagueness of the phrase, I also vote for a replacement.
Pace an interesting thread in another place what about "regional cuisine" ?

That's not bad, but note that it would also encompass Southern food, places featuring New England dishes like Boston Clam Chowder, and French food. But "regional" as compared to "international" (which I think would mean eclectic, rather than clearly French) does make sense as a somewhat specific and non-loaded term. Perhaps "regional," "international," and "fusion" (which is a conscious attempt to combine two or more cuisines, rather than an eclectic mixture of elements from different cuisines according to the creativity of the chef?) What do you think? "The 50 best inexpensive regional-food restaurants in New York"? The only problem is that the expression "regional-food" is longer than "ethnic," and otherwise, "regional" could seem to be referring to a region within (in this case) New York City, rather than a region somewhere else, if you see what I mean.

Pan · February 23, 2003

C.O.I.C.
Cuisine Of Immigrant Cultures
Good thought, but the British who turned into the "White Anglo-Saxon Protestants" in the U.S. were also an immigrant culture. So were the Irish, and is Irish cuisine "ethnic"? I'm not sure it's regarded that way.
If you read my original post I had specified *poor* immigrant groups and the level of deviation from English food, the original immigrant cuisine of this country.

I did read your original post, but my objections stand. Also, what about the Koreans, most of whom came here with money, not poor?

vengroff · February 23, 2003

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.

I think it's pretty difficult to come up with a replacement term. The inherent problem is that it's pretty damn hard to come up with a term that whose definition is, "the wildly varied food eaten by the overwhelming majority of people on earth every single day, minus the cuisine originating in a certain parts of Western Europe and North America." There's nothing positive to hold the definition together. Thiebou dienn has nothing to do with chicken mole, and neither of them have anything to do with pho. All that brings them together into a category is what they are not.

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

I have to say, once again, although it isn't perfect- *immigrant cuisine* carries the general meaning, is not perjoritive and therefore is workable.

Pan · February 23, 2003

I'm not sure it isn't pejorative. For how many generations is one a member of an "immigrant culture"?

I think Vengroff really went to the heart of the issue when he said, about "ethnic" cuisines:

All that brings them together into a category is what they are not.

And that's the problem to me, in addition to the question of exactly what it isn't. After all, is Diwan not a restaurant of an "immigrant culture" in the U.S.? "But it's upscale," some will object. Edited February 23, 2003 by Pan (log)

hjshorter · February 23, 2003

How about cuisines like Jamaican or other Caribbean cuisines? Not ethnic unless they are Hispanic, then they are considered ethnic.

I would disagree with these two examples. In our area Jamaican and other Caribbean cuisines are considered "ethnic."

I'm not sure whether it's about race or the degree of perceived assimilation into the larger "American" culture and the assumed attendant prosperity. For example, Italian used to be considered ethnic, but I'm not so sure that it is anymore.

Suzanne F · February 23, 2003

It seems to me that "ethnic food" is just a lazy, catch-all phrase for those cuisines that have not yet hit the mainstream. That's all. As AnnaN said, foreign to one's customary cooking and eating habits. So its definition also shifts, depending on who is saying it. Those familiar with different countries' foods refer to them by nationality, or even region; those unfamiliar may simply call them "ethnic." But that's just my thought.

If not for the possibility of further misunderstandings, I rather like thinking of various other cuisines as "exotic" -- as in "strikingly, excitingly, or mysteriously different or unusual" (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 10th edition).

By the way, for a long time French food WAS considered exotic, if not "ethnic." And in NYC, the West 40s and 50s, a little closer in than the Irish neighborhood of Hell's Kitchen, was a large French enclave. Some of the French restaurants in the theater district go back to the days when someone could get off a ship, walk a few blocks inland, and find work immediately as a cook or waiter (or waitress) and find a place to live upstairs as well.

CathyL · February 23, 2003

Stef's point is a good one, as are all the others made in this fascinating thread. But 'immigrant' still leaves us with the conundrum of English, Irish, Australian and other immigrant-but-English-speaking populations, as Pan points out. How much of 'ethnic' has to do with perceived 'exoticism,' in either ingredients or technique?

To me, the reason Tabla is not 'ethnic' isn't price point. It's auteurism (is that a word?). Floyd's food reflects his own sensibilities more than it does the food of India, although that influence is certainly apparent as well. I don't think any of us would call El Bulli 'ethnic' either.

I'm tempted to say that cuisines typically considered ethnic are more rooted in home cooking - or attempts to replicate a feeling of home - than in restaurant cooking. That's imperfect too, I know.

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

I'm not sure it isn't pejorative. For how many generations is one a member of an "immigrant culture"?

The cuisine can be immigrant cuisine as long as the foods and dishes remain relatively true to the original ones ( lets not even approach the *authenticity* argument here :wacko: ). The people themselves can assimilate to their hearts' content.

Take me, for instance. I would describe myself as second generation American and my kids third. We certainly are not immigrants, only the original generation would be that, but the cuisine of my grandparents survives to some extent and would be considered immigrant cuisine.

I don't see anything negative about the term immigrant.

Edited February 23, 2003 by stefanyb (log)

Suvir Saran · February 23, 2003

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.

Very interesting point.

Not sure it can be very true, but interesting it is.

Will get back to it when I have the statistics from the last census in the US.

I remember Indians being just about 1 percent of the US population.

And yet they accounted for over 20 percent of the countries doctors. 30 percent of NASA's scientists and some very high percentage of the financial analysts in Wall Street.

Makes me wonder how poor this group is and how that poverty affected the food they crave in this country.

I shall find the press release that I was sent by Columbia Universities Journalism School upon my return to NYC. It would give me more accurate and complete statistics.

It would change the meaning of ethnic in regards to "Indian Cuisine". And absolutely if we treat Indian Cuisine as the foods of only the one country called India. If poverty is of concern for the word ethnic being appropriate, I guess in the US, Indian food could not be called ethnic.

Sorry, I am in Denver and far from the press release. I shall get back to it soon enough after my return.

stefanyb · February 23, 2003

I'm tempted to say that cuisines typically considered ethnic are more rooted in home cooking - or attempts to replicate a feeling of home - than in restaurant cooking.

Yes, I'd agree with that. Its all of a piece. Being away from their original home, immigrants try to recreate their past pleasures.

Edited February 23, 2003 by stefanyb (log)

Steve Plotnicki · February 23, 2003

"the wildly varied food eaten by the overwhelming majority of people on earth every single day, minus the cuisine originating in a certain parts of Western Europe and North America."

Vengroff - This has to be the post of the day. Congratulations.

Pan - The way to do this is to be dogged about identifying each cuisine by their country of origin and if you are going to describe them in the aggregate, the only type of term that will make you happy is American-Immigrant cuisine

Pan · February 23, 2003

I'm not sure it isn't pejorative. For how many generations is one a member of an "immigrant culture"?
The cuisine can be immigrant cuisine as long as the foods and dishes remain relatively true to the original ones ( lets not even approach the *authenticity* argument here ). The people themselves can assimilate to their hearts' content.
Take me, for instance. I would describe myself as second generation American and my kids third. We certainly are not immigrants, only the original generation would be that, but the cuisine of my grandparents survives to some extent and would be considered immigrant cuisine.
I don't see anything negative about the term immigrant.

Your points are well-taken, Stefany, but I'm not sure everyone would agree that "immigrant culture" is not pejorative, for the reasons you stated.

Sign In

"Ethnic" food

Recommended Posts

Similar Content

Recently Browsing 0 members