David Hammond wrote:
…I witnessed this:

Please refrain from posting offensive images!

I would love to see his brother, ESPN in-house douche analyst Skip Bayless, critiquing his food.


"Serving Cabo Wabo at a high end Mexican restaurant is more of a travesty than Van Halen was without David Lee Roth!"

David Hammond wrote:

seebee wrote:I probably will not express this sentiment the best way possible -

I'm starting to think that many of the people who use the word "authentic" only use it because they have no other way to express what they'd like to say - much like the way the word "foodie" is thrown about these days.

That may be true, but that doesn't invalidate the term "authentic" or mean it has no meaning.

This is a great topic, worthy of its own thread. I was thinking that using the word "authentic" to describe food could be a direct backlash to the bastardization of certain ethnic or regional foods? Think about a Taco Bell taco. Not an "authentic" taco but is considered "Mexican food" by some relatives of mine who live in Decatur. I took one of these relatives to La Pasadita for steak tacos and his response was, "wow, I've never had real meat in a taco before!"

I would argue that some of the people on this board have ventured here to find "authentic" versions of certain dishes. What does that mean really? I think the word "authentic" means very little by itself (when describing food). I would offer that you need to add a qualifier - like - authentic "Texas" chili or "Chicago-style" hot dog. Even then you may find some variations but they would be acceptable for there should at least be some consensus of what that really means.

When I first saw this thread, I thought about living in Bucktown in the late 90's. I used to shop at the Jimenez grocery (now Tony's). I asked a lot of questions, mainly because I wanted to make or buy "authentic" Mexican food. I obviously got a lot of answers. One woman told me to never put tomatoes in guacamole because "only white people do that" (I'm white) - it should only consist of avocados, onion, cilantro, lime juice and salt. When I asked about ground beef for tacos, Tony (the owner) told me that he makes it like his mom used to, just ground beef and onions but rolled his eyes and said that his kids use the taco bell seasoning mix and it drives him crazy. Needless to say, everybody has their own opinions.

I think it's important to understand the foundations of regional food, what products are typical and available, and what certain "traditional" dishes could look and taste like but it is a moving target.

The part of the Bayless piece that jumped out at me is that it seemed that Bayless and his "accusers" had two different views of "authentic." Although Bayless claims he never said "authentic," he comes off sounding a little presumptuous by saying something to the affect that he's bringing some Frontera flavors to Southern Cal. Any Mexican food loving SoCal resident would immediately become defensive and say that a "non-latino" has no idea what he's talking about. From watching the Bayless shows and eating at his restaurants, I feel he's done a great job of educating and introducing Americans to the different regional ingredients and cuisines of Mexico. He seems to understand the flavor profiles and how the dishes are prepared and then puts his own twist on them in the restaurant. The bloggers that are blasting his recipes at RedO seem to be comparing his "authentic" dishes to the dishes that they can pick up in dozens of local Mexican restaurants throughout L.A. Bill Esparza's review (where I'm getting most of the quoted phrases from) may have summed up what most people view as "authentic" best when he says, "But luxury ingredients are not what this dish is about, it's about taking a simple piece of meat and elevating it with spice, and a Mexican mother's touch."

Well, if it's between Rick Bayless' "luxury ingredients" and a "Mexican mother's touch," I don't think chef Bayless is going to stand a chance.

Hi,

Authenticity has been discussed and could be expanded upon: here, too.

Regards,

When I was in San Francisco a few weeks ago, imagine my surprise when I walked past Frontera Fresco. I had no idea Rick had started a fast food chain. Before I had left Chicago, his restaurants were my absolute favorites. I've cooked a bunch from his first cookbook.

I would've loved to try a bunch of items but had a big dinner in a few hours. I decided to sample tortilla soup and was pleasantly surprised how tasty it was. I'm not sure it was as "authentic" as what is served at his restaurant, but it was quite respectable.

tyrus-did you watch his knbc interview? he most assuredly says he's interested to bring the "true flavors" to LA. and he clearly states that LA is dominated by bastardized Mexican street food from the north. Bayless is talking in marketing-speak for the most part, as his menu has more antojitos than anything else.

I can see how Angelenos are insulted. He's basically put his name on a night club complete w/ bouncers, and really he's not serving anything that we weren't serving at Border Grill 25 years ago, a couple blocks down the street from RedO. Except for moles, but that I attribute to the fact that four of us were in a 10x10 kitchen w/ 4 burners and the kitchen sink.
Thank god we were all skinny then. And Border Grill was basically adapting/stealing the recipes from their Mexican cook's mothers and aunt's. Check out Gold's 1996 review of Border Grill II, which I found by googling Eulalia's chips. IIRC, the name comes from the aunt of one of the old cooks.

tyrus wrote:I would argue that some of the people on this board have ventured here to find "authentic" versions of certain dishes. What does that mean really? I think the word "authentic" means very little by itself (when describing food). I would offer that you need to add a qualifier - like - authentic "Texas" chili or "Chicago-style" hot dog. Even then you may find some variations but they would be acceptable for there should at least be some consensus of what that really means.

I would argue that the closer you get to the real food of the people, the less consensus you'll find. We all know what a "Chicago-style hot dog" is, in part, because Fluky's, Vienna Beef and others have spent millions telling us. (I have written elsewhere that Vienna Beef marketing is a valid standard, and I still believe it, but restaurant fare is easy to standardize.) Texas chili, meanwhile, is more defined by what's not in it than by what is.

You'll be harder pressed to find a definitive description of "authentic" kneidlach or carne en su jugo. For dishes like that, you're basically reduced to arguing about whose grandmother is most authentic, and that's a debate impossible to win.