> > Perhaps the reason I reacted so fiercely is because it seemed to
> > continue a popular fallacy. Of course tomatoes are popular in
> > Italy, and very common in parts of Italy. There's a big difference
> > between that and saying that they're "virtually omnipresent" in
> > Italy.
>
> I will concede that it was a bit overstated.

I don't really think we're disagreeing about much. That's really all I
was saying.

> > Big qualifications here. "Southern Italy" is not "Italy". And
> > summer isn't all year round. If you go to Bavaria around now,
> > everyone will be eating asparagus. (this may be true all over
> > Germany - I don't know).
>
> And canned San Marzano (and others) are readily available. Tomato
> paste in little squeeze tubes are everywhere available. Fresh
> tomatoes, locally grown or not are available everywhere, all the time.
You'll probably find the same with asparagus in Germany.


>
> > I've spent a lot of time working with the food in Basilicata,
> > traditionally a poor area, with a wonderful simple cuisine. But
> > have a look at this site on the food of this area - right down in
> > the south
> >
> > <http://www.basilicata.bancadati.it/b-gastronomia.html>
>
> This site talks about "la cucina Lucana" to distinguish it from other
> regional cuisines.
Sure. I agree. It's just one example which I like and use that's
available on the net.
> And this is fine, but look at a broader picture
> than one web site. The books of the Hazans, Ada Boni's books (for a
> more historical picture of the regional cuisines in the last century),
> Bugialli, Middione, Lorenza de'Medici...
>
> Look at the books of Carol Field, Anna Tasca Lanza, Mark Strausman,
> Patricia Wells, Susan Herrmann Loomis, Wanda and Giovanna Tornabene.
> Look at the translation of Artusi by Kyle Phillips.
I've been looking through some of these and others. They seem to
suggest that heavily tomatoe-based food sort of begins in Camapnia, and
gets heavier as you go down through Calabria towards Sicily - but
that's only a brief glance, and I certainly wouldn't stand over it.
>
> > You'll find tomatoes in a number of the recipes, but it's far from
> > ubiquitous - probably less common than parsley or chillies. and
> > remember, in southern Italian cooking the tomato is often used
> > just like parsley, in quite small quantities.
>
> Why does this concept of being integral to a cuisine seem to be being
> described as "in everything" rather than as a very common component of
> the cooking of a region?

> It's almost as though the argument is that
> since it's not in every meal in every dish, it's not "significant" in
> the cuisine.

I agree that it's a very significant element. But that's not what
"ubiquitous" means. It means precisely "everywhere" or "in everything.
>
> > And the fact that it's popular in some parts of the south can't be
> > made to apply to the whole country. I spend a lot of time in
> > Tuscany, and there you'd hardly notice tomatoes. ..
>
> There is no "Italian cuisine." There are Italian cuisines.

I agree
>
> There is no national cuisine in France. One can hardly talk about the
> Alsace and Provence in the same breath. Burgundy and the Loire.

I think you can, just about, but again I don't really think we're
disagreeing here. You could argue that certain shared notions - such
as the order of of a standard meal - constitute a national cuisine. But
it's an arugment I'd be happy to argue on either side.
>
> > Lettuce is eaten at virtually every meal in France - a far
> > higher proportion of meals than tomatoes are eaten with in Italy -
> > but again, that doesn't really make it a staple of French cuisine.
>
> Of course it does. If it's eaten at virtually every meal, it is
> exactly a staple. Like bread.
That's not how I understand a staple. For me bread is, lettuce isn't.
My dictionary's unsatisafactory on this.


(rest snipped because I agree with most of it!)

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address