The Heresy of Modifying a Traditional Recipe

The Late Night Gourmet said:
Yes...this is really the point of all this. I recall seeing countless cooking competitions where a contestant served a dish to the judges and called it something - say Hungarian Goulash - and the judges downgraded them if they, say, used ground beef. I used to think this was overly harsh, especially since the critique would often be, "It's delicious, but it's just not a Hungarian goulash."

But, I have come to accept that people are really territorial with their dishes. Carbonara is really clear-cut, but some things aren't. Philly Cheesesteak is an example of this.

I honestly get more annoyed when I see Authentic in the recipe title than I do if the recipe contains a different ingredient. But, I do crack up when I drive by a restaurant that puts Authentic on the name. There's a Mexican restaurant near my house that has Authentic Mexican Restaurant on their sign, and they're straight-up average when it comes to Americanized Mexican food. And, no, I wouldn't call them "authentic". I always think a restaurant is trying too hard when they have to tell you it's authentic. "American cheese on the nachos? It must be authentic because it says so on the sign!"
Click to expand...
Is there no set of official criteria and a process allowing a restaurant to put "authentic" on their name plate?

Like for a company name or a registered brandname?

If I were sewing pretty handbags made of recycled jeans and put "authentic" Lxxxi's handbag, I am not only lying to myself, but also violating many laws...I hope that is a good comparison, but you know where I am going...

E.g. some wine sorts have to undergo a series of tests or whatever it is to get the "autohtona" sorta label...and it sometimes escalates into a political and territorial dispute...

On the original question, my first reaction was how did she NOT know carbonara is senza tomate?? And second, as many of you, but me being a green tomato in cooking in addition, why did she have to call it carbonara? Why not Pedro's Marble Crown Delizia? And third, storms like that are a powerful marketing tool, look how everybody now knows about this...her books are selling, her movie is coming up😄...or correct me if I am wrong? Four, competitions , if Tier 1,are meant to be viciously strict, and in best case, you wear the award with immense pride, or worst case, you learn from your mistakes...

I thought I'd be short🙈😁

Edited to correct the typos🙈
 
Oh and about eating, if I saw a 'defined' dish on the menu, I' d expect to get it, especially if it were a good restaurant, someone wrote here about some fine nuances, and that is actually honest...if it was just a creative new dish by a creative chef...bring it on, as long as I know what the ingredients are and I like those and want those, I would be open to new tastes and would let myself be surprised...would not care if it is not strictly by rules...and which rules...
 
Timenspace said:
Is there no set of official criteria and a process allowing a restaurant to put "authentic" on their name plate?

Like for a company name or a registered brandname?

If I were sewing pretty handbags made of recycled jeans and put "authentic" Lxxxi's handbag, I am not only lying to myself, but also violating many laws...I hope that is a good comparison, but you know where I am going...
Click to expand...

There are some laws in the US that govern claims in advertising for things like curative properties and nutritional content. Companies are not allowed to advertise that they are The Best unless there is data they can produce to prove it.

But, restaurants signs are a different story. When a claim is subjective, it enters different territory. I have never heard of a restaurant that was forced to take Authentic from their sign because what they serve isn't actually authentic. There are also places that would put World's Best Coffee when there clearly wasn't any proof of that, and the police aren't arresting anyone.
 
It's like sparkling wine from California should not be called champagne, as that is reserved for sparkling wine only from that region. It has to stay sparkling wine if it's from anywhere else. Or at least that's how it should be, tsk tsk.
 
JAS_OH1 said:
It's like sparkling wine from California should not be called champagne, as that is reserved for sparkling wine only from that region. It has to stay sparkling wine if it's from anywhere else. Or at least that's how it should be, tsk tsk.
Click to expand...

We just had a big wine company fined for using imported wines in "their nz grown" wine. A disgruntled employee blew the whistle.

Another is an egg company selling free range, that weren't free range, another huge fine.

Russ
 
JAS_OH1 said:
It's like sparkling wine from California should not be called champagne, as that is reserved for sparkling wine only from that region. It has to stay sparkling wine if it's from anywhere else. Or at least that's how it should be, tsk tsk.
Click to expand...
They reached a compromise on that...now it's labeled "California Champagne." :)
 
TastyReuben said:
The 100-Year-Old Loophole That Makes California Champagne Legal
Click to expand...

I am all for people making something themselves for their own consumption, but for some reason it really bothers me that this is the case. I doubt sales would have been affected much if they had called it sparkling wine. It does feel a bit like an insult to the people in France who invented the style.

Tequila can only be made in five provinces in Mexico. Anything outside those regions with the same ingredients and process must be called Mezcal. The fact that there are no loopholes, and that all countries of the world respect this tradition, warms my heart, much like tequila warms my belly.
 
Last edited:
The Late Night Gourmet said:
I am all for people making something themselves for their own consumption, but for some reason it really bothers me that this is the case. I doubt sales would have been affected much if they had called it sparkling wine. It does feel a bit like an insult to the people in France who invented the style.

Tequila can only be made in five provinces in Mexico. Anything outside those regions with the same ingredients and process must be called Mezcal. The fact that there are no loopholes, and that all countries of the world respect this tradition, warms my heart, much like tequila warms my belly.
Click to expand...

But, did you know that to be called tequila, it only has to be 50-percent blue agave alcohol? If you want the good stuff, look for 100-percent blue agave on the label. The most popular tequila (in sales numbers) worldwide is Jose Cuervo Especiale. It is one of the 50/50 tequilas (and a hangover in a bottle).

A good tequila, like Patron or my favorite, Cabo Wabo (Sammy Haggar's brand), can be sipped without salt, lime or a grimacing face.

CD
 
Last edited:
TastyReuben said:
They reached a compromise on that...now it's labeled "California Champagne." :)
Click to expand...

I am curious to know how French has taken this compromise. Regardless, I always have the feeling that most of these “compromises” (whatever they are) tend to copy or adjust something just for marketing. I mean, why call it “Champagne” which has already its clear definition, history, etc, and not to call it as California sparkling or similar? California Champagne sounds a bit to me as “vegan meatballs” ( please please, I’m referring to the label/name and not to the quality)
 
The Late Night Gourmet said:
I am all for people making something themselves for their own consumption, but for some reason it really bothers me that this is the case. I doubt sales would have been affected much if they had called it sparkling wine. It does feel a bit like an insult to the people in France who invented the style.
Click to expand...
Ahh but did they???

Dom Pierre Perignon is widely credited with inventing the process in 1697, but in reality a guy called Christopher Merritt was the first to document how to make wine sparkle - his paper was presented to the Royal Society in 1662. And actually the whole invention and popularisation of "Champagne" is closely tied to the export of French wines to the UK: wines from Champagne were exported in casks and bottled on arrival by the wine merchants. Due to the stronger bottles used in the UK secondary in-bottle fermentation was possible without the bottles exploding and the sparkling wine became very popular. Traditionally the producers in the Champagne region were making still wines, and worked hard to prevent the secondary fermentation (which often caused their bottles to explode). But eventually as the sparkling wine became more and more popular they changed their focus. Funnily enough, I don't remember any of the French winemakers covering this part of the story when we've visited them for tastings :laugh:

Within France but outside Champagne sparkling wine is called Crémant - I guess that its a triumph of marketing that Champagne is considered something different, but actually its just one of many sparkling wines :whistling:

I guess its precisely because they didn't invent it (or even make it popular) that I have little patience for the preciousness around using the name Champagne for other wines.
 
If we had to dig into the ancient history every time, we won’t never finish. Considering that some things have been qualified and recognised as authentic for some Countries, who are we to say the contrary? Some things are like Country labels, let’s them rest where they are.
 
Last edited:
MrsDangermouse said:
Ahh but did they???

Dom Pierre Perignon is widely credited with inventing the process in 1697, but in reality a guy called Christopher Merritt was the first to document how to make wine sparkle - his paper was presented to the Royal Society in 1662. And actually the whole invention and popularisation of "Champagne" is closely tied to the export of French wines to the UK: wines from Champagne were exported in casks and bottled on arrival by the wine merchants. Due to the stronger bottles used in the UK secondary in-bottle fermentation was possible without the bottles exploding and the sparkling wine became very popular. Traditionally the producers in the Champagne region were making still wines, and worked hard to prevent the secondary fermentation (which often caused their bottles to explode). But eventually as the sparkling wine became more and more popular they changed their focus. Funnily enough, I don't remember any of the French winemakers covering this part of the story when we've visited them for tastings :laugh:

Within France but outside Champagne sparkling wine is called Crémant - I guess that its a triumph of marketing that Champagne is considered something different, but actually its just one of many sparkling wines :whistling:

I guess its precisely because they didn't invent it (or even make it popular) that I have little patience for the preciousness around using the name Champagne for other wines.
Click to expand...
Stunning! Thank you so much!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom