What Is Regional Food?

In my thread about Croatian Fish Stew (http://www.foodsoftheworld.activeboards.net/croation-fish-stew_topic4424.html?SID=98711613533c147e9fac153dbczaa663125) I raised the issue that we look at regional cuisines if not incorrectly than with blinders on. I thought this would be a good topic for its own discussion.

We blithely talk about Italian, or Spanish, or Hungarian foods, as if they were totally unique to those countries. But boundaries are political divisions, often having nothing to do with the lands within them. In Italy, for instance, we find several specialized cuisines, delineated by location, choice of, and use of ingredients. The cuisine of northern Italy, for instance, is more akin to Germany and Switzerland then it is to, say, the southern districts of Sicily, Calabria, and Sardinia.

To be a cuisine there has to be a commonality, or at least strong similarity, in the choice of ingredients, the methods and techniques used to combine and cook them, and the choices of herbs, spices, and sauces. Taken individually, we can examine the various influences that led to that cuisine. But they are all but irrelevant to this conversation. What counts is the commonality.

Looked at from that point of view, there is no such thing as Italian food. Nor Spanish. Nor Greek. Nor…..well, you get the point.

This raises the question: Is there a better---or at least more meaningful way? Not always. But often enough we can look at binding forces that create the commonality we’re looking for that goes beyond political boundaries.

Andreas Viestad, in his wonderful book, “Where Flavor Was Born,” does this by using the Indian Ocean as the binding force. In it he demonstrates how the 16 countries bordered by the Indian Ocean share a commonality in the use of ingredients and culinary vision, even though the specific dishes may vary, country to country.

As we have seen, the political entity called Croatia is actually several different groups, divided geographically and ethnically. The foods of the Dalmatian coast are significantly different than those of the inland, mountainous districts. Dalmatian cuisine actually has more in common with that of the Italian Adriatic coast then it does with the rest of the country.

Could it be that we can look at the Adriatic as a binding force, just as Viestad did with the Indian Ocean? I believe so.

The Adriatic separates the Italian Peninsula from the Balkan Peninsula by as little as 70 miles. Touching it are parts of Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, Greece, and the east coast of Italy, from Venice to Otranto, where it debouches into the Ionian Sea, and then into the Mediterranean proper.

Along that entire 2,300 mile coastline they prepare a catch-of-the-day soup similar to Brodet. My plan is to research this region to uncover other similarities. But my contention is I’ll have little trouble identifying an Adriatic cuisine.

While water is the most common unifying feature it’s certainly not the only one. The foods of mountain tribes of Viet Nam (officially “the ethnic peoples”) have more in common with the mountaineers of Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand then they do with the people living in the lowlands. So, are they part of “Vietnamese” cuisine. Or are their culinary traditions such that we can establish a unique Mountain Cuisine in Southeast Asia?

And what about the various deserts of the world? Do the peoples who dwell in them have a commonality of cuisine, despite their ethnic and cultural differences? And, an interesting sidelight, due to the harshness of the environment, and availability of ingredients, how common are the intra-desert culinary traditions?

I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with establishing “regions” based on nationality. I’m merely suggesting that other methods, such as geography, might be more meaningful.

What say the rest of you?

In many cases I like to think of the "Season" as a region.
In any geographical region the food sources could vary month to month.

A widely celebrated defining aspect of a region may in fact only be available for a few weeks or days-In season

     Brook, I think Percebes is using season as a subset of region, not as an unbound category itself.

Beyond the seasonal impact that affects regional cuisine, we also have prevailing widespread and personal economic impacts that shape entire generations of cooks.

My Hungarian MIL was born in 1933 in a small Hungarian Village called Papa.
Her father was killed in a bombing of the brick factory where he worked.
This left her Mother to try to raise 5 children with no money and no husband.
They ran a small illegal pub in their home to make ends meet-my MIL became the head cook before 13 years of age.

My MIL fled Hungary in 56 with her husband and 2 kids.
Her Regional Hungarian cooking style was defined for her by the circumstances and situational truths that lay in her path.

Shame prevents her from cooking and eating the most enduring memories of her youth.

She still makes me laugh in a sad way when she sees a cat and in a heavy Hungarian accent says "Macska Papucs"
which means-Cat Slippers.

The cats knew they were on the menu and became scarce on the ground taking to the rooftops-she still refers to them as Roof Rabbits.

Does poverty define Regional cuisine?

Every dish she knows is some variation of a little bit of flour, some onion and some Paprika.


She could only dream of meat that did not meow.

Very very common in that time and place yet I have yet to find a recipe.
Why is that?

How much of what we know about Regional cuisine is a bold faced lie?
Do we only publish and celebrate what is acceptable to the moral compass?

I think that much of what we see and accept as Regional favorites that define a cuisine for us eg. Goulash- has been reworked and sanitized to give an impression of solidity and wealth and power that simply did not exist in my MIL's life experience in that region.

When she got on the ship to bring her to Canada in early 1957 she walked on board with the unwashed masses-laundry workers, brick factory workers-all very blue collar. Sometime during that voyage everyone became titled. Doctor-Lawyer-Mayors-

And I think that when they took the opportunity to improve their social position while in transit-they also modified the reality of their cuisine to shine more favorably.

Generally speaking, Percebes, foodways of a region divide into two types: palace and peasant. As a general rule, only the palace foods were recorded; in cookbooks, restaurant menus, etc. Peasant foods are sometimes referred to in traveler's journals and the like. But, as a rule, were not recorded. This was especially true during times of privation.

As a result, things like your story are kept alive as part of family lore. But they don't get recorded as part of the cuisine. Sometimes to our great lack.

Drinks, I wonder if they really like it, or are just saying that to show off. Carnivore meat is typically strong tasting and gamey. Most people don't find it palatable at all. Personally, I've tasted fox and bobcat. Interesting, the first time. But I'm not anxious for a second helping.

On the other hand, the Mountain Men of the American Fur Trade were said to prefer puma over all other meats.