Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Okraphobic ..what do you see in this stuff anyway?


Gifted Gourmet

Recommended Posts

I suspect that if we start arguing the true origin of words we could fill a zillion volumes.

Words do morph and change meanings over time and with cultural changes.

Since the beginning of time, people have felt the urge to travel and explore other lands...and their languages and foods came along with them, to become parts of other languages and mixed up with other foods to create new things.

The wonder of creation and exchange.

It is good to know where a thing started...and what it was when born. It is also good to see it grow and change. Both can be appreciated, and hopefully both can be accepted and smiled upon by those that watch with interest and curiosity about both new and old.

Canned okra in France, huh? Well, then. Let us snap our trouser suspenders proudly here in the USA.... :laugh::rolleyes:

Edited by Carrot Top (log)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gumbo or more precisely ngumbo, is not an english word.  Gumbo [they way african slaves used it] is okra....the original word for okra in the United States.  The dish gumbo was created by those slaves who imported it here.  The original creators of the dish [the african slaves] named it for the prime ingredient .... gumbo/okra. 

The word gumbo (in English) then evolved to mean any sort of southern seafood/chicken stew or ragout.

This is a common linguistic shift in the English language, one in which a specific term is broadened to apply to a more general concept. The opposite (a shift from broad to specific) also happens. A good example of that is the word "hound". In today's English, it means a certain type of dog but, in its original usage (also in English but from long ago), it simply meant dog. In German, it has retained its more general meaning and Hund is indeed the German word for dog.

Do you want broccoli replacing green beans in your green bean casserole?

That's not a very good comparison. A better example would be a food dish that was named based on a word borrowed from another language.

A good example of a shift in a food where the name remained the same but the dish itself changed would be mincemeat. It's not too often anymore that one actually has a meat product in mincemeat but the original dish certainly contained it. I'm curious as to whether or not you refer to it by some other name or if you call it mincemeat.

Another good example is barbacoa. Originally, barbacoa meant any roasted meat and now it has come to mean a specific dish of roasted meat.

If you prefer to maintain the original meaning of the word "gumbo", that's fine. But some of us like to go with the flow of language shifts. And that's okay too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that if we start arguing the true origin of words we could fill a zillion It is good to know where a thing started...and what it was when born. It is also good to see it grow and change. Both can be appreciated, and hopefully both can be accepted and smiled upon by those that watch with interest and curiosity about both new and old.

The point I was trying to make here is that we should know the original dish, what it is and why and how it was created, before making variations of it. Of course, we will always adapt recipes to suit our own tastes, but knowledge of the original is important. Otherwise, you can call a dish by a certain name, but that name may not fit it anymore -- maybe a new name is needed to avoid confusion.

And you are also correct, that there are food trends and changes, but when the trends and changes go out of style, we can not go back to the original recipe if it has been lost in the translation. I think that is the point that I am trying to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canned okra in France, huh? Well, then.  Let us snap our  trouser suspenders proudly here in the USA.... :laugh:  :rolleyes:

I am not sure I understand why it isn't grown in France. If there is a demand for it in the local population one would think that the local farmers would try and possibly get a good price for it. They could get a good price, it would probably sell cheaper than the imports and the consumers would get a better, fresher product. It really isn't a demanding plant.

Linda LaRose aka "fifi"

"Having spent most of my life searching for truth in the excitement of science, I am now in search of the perfectly seared foie gras without any sweet glop." Linda LaRose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really isn't a demanding plant.

That is an understatement, or so I've been led to believe.

Isn't okra one of those plants that can take over the garden if you give it half a chance?

I would guess that in France, it simply is not a 'traditional' vegetable.

I have heard that fresh corn (maize) is still thought of as cattle feed at best in parts of Europe... :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think that a book should be written with okra as a magnificent, quiet, yet powerfully courageous symbol of family life in the South...sort of like 'A Tree Grows in Brooklyn' but instead of that weedy tree that grows everywhere...okra as the definitive symbol?

( :wink: )

No, sorry. Let's make that Okra. Capitalized, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love okra. I don't care if its slimy, or dry. Fried or stewed, boiled, broiled, grilled, I'm thrilled. You don't like it? So? I'f you've given it a fair try and still don't find it to your taste, move on. More for me, have my caviar!! Trade ya!! :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh... You can have my okra AND my caviar.

Linda LaRose aka "fifi"

"Having spent most of my life searching for truth in the excitement of science, I am now in search of the perfectly seared foie gras without any sweet glop." Linda LaRose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I was trying to make here is that we should know the original dish, what it is and why and how it was created, before making variations of it.  Of course, we will always adapt recipes to suit our own tastes, but knowledge of the original is important.  Otherwise, you can call a dish by a certain name, but that name may not fit it anymore -- maybe a new name is needed to avoid confusion.

And you are also correct, that there are food trends and changes, but when the trends and changes go out of style, we can not go back to the original recipe if it has been lost in the translation.  I think that is the point that I am trying to make.

In total agreement with you. For all sorts of reasons it is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm, I love okra, though sometimes I like to get hoity-toity and call it ladies' fingers, it sounds so cute!

Anyway, I found this recipe and it just may be dinner tonight! I think I may make it a bit spicier, has anyone tried Bamia?

Yetty CintaS

I am spaghetttti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic has veered increasingly from the subject about an aversion to the vegetable commonly known as okra, into a linquistic debate about "gumbo" that (at best) is only loosely related to the original inquiry.

Several of the most recent posts have been deleted, not only for being increasingly off-topic but also for having an increasingly personal tone.

Jon Lurie, aka "jhlurie"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...