Interesting and informative article. But I would say that the word does convey some useful information: that a dish is generally true to how it's prepared in a region (now or in recent times). Taco Bell authentic? Doubtful. Taco/sushi fusion? Maybe good but not really.
Taco Bell stole their recipes from a Mexican owned restaurant called Mitla Cafe in San Bernardino, CA. Even the parts of Mexican food (Tex Mex or whatever you want to call it) that appeal to U.S. palettes were created by Mexican chefs/cooks. So Jose is correct.
Like Oaxaca or Veracruz have their own cuisine, etc. San Antonio is different from El Paso that’s different from the RGV. Then different from Colorado, California, etc.
Or for example, nachos were invented in Eagle Pass, TX by a Mexican restaurant owner named Ignacio. Are nachos not Mexican food?
The U.S. southwest was and is populated by folks with Mexican heritage. And each region has their own way of cooking food. I think it’s better to think of that food as part of regional Mexican food.
It’s fast food. Is any fast food authentic? But I think that’s the point Jose is making. “Authentic” is subjective.
Mexican food is fusion food to begin with. A mix of indigenous food with European, African, Asian, Middle Eastern, you name it. It’s an ever evolving cuisine.
Comments
Again, good article, though!
My def: the food being served at this place is similar to the food in the faraway place it claims to represent.
Do you think TB is authentic? My wife (from Mexico) hates crisp-shell tacos with ground beef, for example.
Or for example, nachos were invented in Eagle Pass, TX by a Mexican restaurant owner named Ignacio. Are nachos not Mexican food?
Mexican food is fusion food to begin with. A mix of indigenous food with European, African, Asian, Middle Eastern, you name it. It’s an ever evolving cuisine.