An interesting discussion the other evening provided a great deal of
support for a theory which I've not seen previously advanced in this
group....

Immigrants settling in areas of the US often represented small localized
segments of larger ethnic groups, with the "Norwegians" in a particular
county all originating in the same small community/area in Norway (or as in
my home town, with about 80% of the pre1960 Mexican American families
originating from a small area of a single Mexican state).

Therefore, many dishes which have been popularized as ethnic (in a broader
sense) are as much community, area or even family origined (and of course
subject to vastly altered results because of the need to substitute
different ingredients in search of traditional foods).

Comment....

TMO

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:48:33 -0500, Olivers >
wrote:

>An interesting discussion the other evening provided a great deal of
>support for a theory which I've not seen previously advanced in this
>group....

While, your theory has a bit of truth, it's pretty simplistic and
doesn't really take into account the real trends and patterns of
immigration here in the United States.

>Immigrants settling in areas of the US often represented small localized
>segments of larger ethnic groups, with the "Norwegians" in a particular
>county all originating in the same small community/area in Norway (or as in
>my home town, with about 80% of the pre1960 Mexican American families
>originating from a small area of a single Mexican state).

First, you have to consider where the immigrants to the U.S first
settled.
Did they first settle in New York City, like the Irish, Germans,
Jews, Italians, Dutch, and now the rest of the world?
I'll give you an example of an "ethnic" dish that isn't traditional,
but is accepted to be so.
On St. Patricks day--a US Irish Holiday--everyone tries to eat
corned beef and cabbage--a "traditionally" Irish dish. Wrong! Corned
Beef is Jewish. The Irish of the Lower East Side of NYC bought this
meat to replace their traditional salted bacon.
Now, if you take into account European immigrants, who moved into
the mid-western states, you have a little more "wiggle room"..
I am a descendant of Swiss and Alsatian Germans that settled, as
farmers, in Ohio in the nineteenth century. We always were fed
"traditional German" food but "ala the American farm". My people
assimilated and ate typical farm cooking.
I lived in Minneapolis, Minnesota for about ten years, and lived
among those of "Skandihoovian" (Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, and
Finnish--never trust a Finn!) ancestry. Gasrto-cultural heritage was
Lutefisk--or, whether or not you could eat this.



>
>Therefore, many dishes which have been popularized as ethnic (in a broader
>sense) are as much community, area or even family origined (and of course
>subject to vastly altered results because of the need to substitute
>different ingredients in search of traditional foods).
>
>Comment....
>
>TMO

> I'll give you an example of an "ethnic" dish that isn't traditional,
> but is accepted to be so.
> On St. Patricks day--a US Irish Holiday--everyone tries to eat
> corned beef and cabbage--a "traditionally" Irish dish. Wrong! Corned
> Beef is Jewish. The Irish of the Lower East Side of NYC bought this
> meat to replace their traditional salted bacon.

I don't believe you. That was one of the few meals my grandma could
cook without burning - she was second-generation Irish from Glasgow,
born in 1889. She would always use corned beef. There were Jews in
Glasgow but not in Maryhill (an Irish area) and not in such numbers
that they could affect what the Irish ate.

What may be American is the specific association with St Patrick's Day.
I doubt if my grandma often remembered when that was.

========> Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html> food intolerance data & recipes,
Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music.

In article >, bogus address
> wrote:

> > I'll give you an example of an "ethnic" dish that isn't traditional,
> > but is accepted to be so.
> > On St. Patricks day--a US Irish Holiday--everyone tries to eat
> > corned beef and cabbage--a "traditionally" Irish dish. Wrong! Corned
> > Beef is Jewish. The Irish of the Lower East Side of NYC bought this
> > meat to replace their traditional salted bacon.
>
> I don't believe you. That was one of the few meals my grandma could
> cook without burning - she was second-generation Irish from Glasgow,
> born in 1889. She would always use corned beef. There were Jews in
> Glasgow but not in Maryhill (an Irish area) and not in such numbers
> that they could affect what the Irish ate.

As an Irishman (from Ireland) I must say that I've never once come
across corned beef and cabbage. Yes, bacon is the usual thing, even
now.

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

G. G. Govindajaran muttered....

> On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:48:33 -0500, Olivers >
> wrote:
>
>>An interesting discussion the other evening provided a great deal of
>>support for a theory which I've not seen previously advanced in this
>>group....
>
> While, your theory has a bit of truth, it's pretty simplistic and
> doesn't really take into account the real trends and patterns of
> immigration here in the United States.

The real trends and patterns?

The real trends and patterns stretch all the way from your massive Irish
and Italian urban enclaves to the groups of Eastern and Northern Europeans
who scattered themselves across the Southwest. The Pope traveling down to
Panna Maria during a visit to San Antonio wasa pretty Polish sort of
things, but the "Polish" dishes of the town are a bit transmogrified from
their Polish correspondents.

Nor is corned beef "Jewish" (although on a scale of ten, maybe more Jewish
than Irish). Corned beef replaced the traditional pork (and not much of
it) in the Irish immigrant bill of fare because it was available and
affordable. New York had a large Jewish immigrant population just as it
had a large Irish immigrant population. Corned beef lent itself to
compliance with religious dictates in preparation, was available year
'round, easy to ship and during the 19th century must have been relatively
cheap in US markets where beef was as over-supplied as if we were on the
pampas of the Argentine. Corned beef is a vivid example of the theory I've
attempted to expound. Eastern European Jews had not been beef eaters
either, but washed up on the American shore, the "technology" was quickly
matched to the ingredient.

I suspect that another factor was the price and availability of salt in the
US, almost universally untaxed and uncontrolled by government. Corned beef
wasa culinary step forward from "salt horse", much more appealing to both
cooks and diners.

Raw herring disappeared from the diets of both urban and rural Dutch
immigrants becaue herring fishing was poor, menhaden and mullet just don't
lend themselves to raw consumption, and the US is a big wide place where
the Dutch could not all live close to the sea.

Fortunately for the Italians, they had landed in a land where growing
tomatoes was possible almost anywhere with water, although the principal
evidence of the points of origin of Italian immigrants was that polenta
sure did not arrive on US restaurant menus quickly (nor was it popular in
Italian immigrant homes). In past years, there was a modest Italian
community in the Central Brazos Valley of Texas, immigrating to become
"truck" farmers. Some names and even a produce house, "D'Onofrio's", still
survive. There on the edge of the Plains, corn growing all about them, you
couldn't have given away polenta except to the starving. Grits maybe...

>
>>Immigrants settling in areas of the US often represented small
>>localized segments of larger ethnic groups, with the "Norwegians" in a
>>particular county all originating in the same small community/area in
>>Norway (or as in my home town, with about 80% of the pre1960 Mexican
>>American families originating from a small area of a single Mexican
>>state).
>
> First, you have to consider where the immigrants to the U.S first
> settled.
> Did they first settle in New York City, like the Irish, Germans,
> Jews, Italians, Dutch, and now the rest of the world?

They settled all across the land, and entered ports no longer existing. If
you iamgine all the immigrants passed through Ellis Island and moved to
Brooklyn, I've got this bridge.....



> I'll give you an example of an "ethnic" dish that isn't traditional,
> but is accepted to be so.
> On St. Patricks day--a US Irish Holiday--everyone tries to eat
> corned beef and cabbage--a "traditionally" Irish dish. Wrong! Corned
> Beef is Jewish.

Rebutted above....


The Irish of the Lower East Side of NYC bought this
> meat to replace their traditional salted bacon.

The folks selling meat on the "Lower East Side" were predominately Jewish
as were many of the people slaughtering, cutting "preserving" meat in that
part of the City. They didn't sell pork. They sold corned beef,
especially in the Spring when no self respecting livestock raiser was going
to sell skinny underweight cattle.

> Now, if you take into account European immigrants, who moved into
> the mid-western states, you have a little more "wiggle room"..

About 60 lanes of wiggle room....


> I am a descendant of Swiss and Alsatian Germans that settled, as
> farmers, in Ohio in the nineteenth century. We always were fed
> "traditional German" food but "ala the American farm". My people
> assimilated and ate typical farm cooking.

Therefore forming a textbook example of my "theory", a veritable lab rat in
conformation and context.


> I lived in Minneapolis, Minnesota for about ten years, and lived
> among those of "Skandihoovian" (Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, and
> Finnish--never trust a Finn!) ancestry. Gasrto-cultural heritage was
> Lutefisk--or, whether or not you could eat this.
>

Chicago may only exist so Minnesotans are within a day's travel by rail of
a decent meal, good whisky and a bit of strange poontang.

>
>
>>
>>Therefore, many dishes which have been popularized as ethnic (in a
>>broader sense) are as much community, area or even family origined
>>(and of course subject to vastly altered results because of the need
>>to substitute different ingredients in search of traditional foods).
>>
>>Comment....
>>
>>TMO
>

Olivers > wrote in message >...

> Fortunately for the Italians, they had landed in a land where growing
> tomatoes was possible almost anywhere with water, although the principal
> evidence of the points of origin of Italian immigrants was that polenta
> sure did not arrive on US restaurant menus quickly (nor was it popular in
> Italian immigrant homes). In past years, there was a modest Italian
> community in the Central Brazos Valley of Texas, immigrating to become
> "truck" farmers. Some names and even a produce house, "D'Onofrio's", still
> survive. There on the edge of the Plains, corn growing all about them, you
> couldn't have given away polenta except to the starving. Grits maybe...

Which brings up ... since tomatos and corn first went to Europe during
the conquistador era, how long have tomato and polenta dishes actually
been "traditional" for Italians? 400 years? Less?

anyone know?

"R. Yang" wrote:
>
> Olivers > wrote in message >...
>
> > Fortunately for the Italians, they had landed in a land where growing
> > tomatoes was possible almost anywhere with water, although the principal
> > evidence of the points of origin of Italian immigrants was that polenta
> > sure did not arrive on US restaurant menus quickly (nor was it popular in
> > Italian immigrant homes). In past years, there was a modest Italian
> > community in the Central Brazos Valley of Texas, immigrating to become
> > "truck" farmers. Some names and even a produce house, "D'Onofrio's", still
> > survive. There on the edge of the Plains, corn growing all about them, you
> > couldn't have given away polenta except to the starving. Grits maybe...
>
> Which brings up ... since tomatos and corn first went to Europe during
> the conquistador era, how long have tomato and polenta dishes actually
> been "traditional" for Italians? 400 years? Less?

Tomato dishes are more common in the south rather than the north,
although tomato dishes are found up there too. This source gives some
info: http://www.siu.edu/~ebl/leaflets/tomato.htm

Polenta had been made in parts of Italy well before the introduction of
maize. It was made from other grains.

Arri London muttered....

>
>
> "R. Yang" wrote:
>>
>> Olivers > wrote in message
>> >...
>>
>> > Fortunately for the Italians, they had landed in a land where
>> > growing tomatoes was possible almost anywhere with water, although
>> > the principal evidence of the points of origin of Italian
>> > immigrants was that polenta sure did not arrive on US restaurant
>> > menus quickly (nor was it popular in Italian immigrant homes). In
>> > past years, there was a modest Italian community in the Central
>> > Brazos Valley of Texas, immigrating to become "truck" farmers.
>> > Some names and even a produce house, "D'Onofrio's", still survive.
>> > There on the edge of the Plains, corn growing all about them, you
>> > couldn't have given away polenta except to the starving. Grits
>> > maybe...
>>
>> Which brings up ... since tomatos and corn first went to Europe
>> during the conquistador era, how long have tomato and polenta dishes
>> actually been "traditional" for Italians? 400 years? Less?
>
> Tomato dishes are more common in the south rather than the north,
> although tomato dishes are found up there too. This source gives some
> info: http://www.siu.edu/~ebl/leaflets/tomato.htm
>
> Polenta had been made in parts of Italy well before the introduction
> of maize. It was made from other grains.
>

Apparently, for everyday "Romans", especially the Army, the porridge form
of polenta (in a multi-grain "cornless" version) was the principal food,
eaten far more than baked breads and almost universally popular. After
all, those indirect children of the old Romans (or of some outcast Dacian
legionaires) the Romanians (not much more Roman than the "Macedonians" are
the children of Phil and Alex) still wolf down their mammaglia.

TMO

What you refer to is known as "chain migration" and it is a real thing in
ethnic history, but not always in food history. I would say that it applies
more to countries of origin that are or were very regionalized -- Italy,
Mexico, India -- as opposed to countries that were more culturally uniform
at the time of immigration -- Ireland, Germany, or Korea. Also, some ethnic
cuisines are widely understood from a restaurant menu which may be more
nationally uniform than the home food -- as with Chinese, Japanese, and
Indian food.

Rural settlements have been notable centers, especially for smaller ethnic
groups like Belgians in Door County, Wisconsin, but cities also have their
advantages in that specific market areas and neighborhoods can develop.

Some cultural institutions with attached food, such as Italian festas, can
preserve regional foods and identity in large cities with regionally diverse
Italian communities, say.

However, the respondents aren't wrong: The narrowing of any immigrant
cuisine -- as only the best and most useful and most evocative ethnic dishes
survive assimilation and loss of language -- means that regional differences
tend to blur in the US, and ethnic groups tend to become more inclusive, if
only because outsiders view Sicilians and Lombards and Abruzzeze as all
"Italians." And Gujaratis, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, and Indo-Caribbeans as
all "Indians." After about three generations, with the home language or
dialect gone, immigrants themselves are apt to see themselves in broader
terms, even to take up "Pan-Italianism" or "Pan-South Asianism."


--
-Mark H. Zanger
author, The American History Cookbook, The American Ethnic Cookbook for
Students
www.ethnicook.com
www.historycook.com


"Olivers" > wrote in message
...
> An interesting discussion the other evening provided a great deal of
> support for a theory which I've not seen previously advanced in this
> group....
>
> Immigrants settling in areas of the US often represented small localized
> segments of larger ethnic groups, with the "Norwegians" in a particular
> county all originating in the same small community/area in Norway (or as
in
> my home town, with about 80% of the pre1960 Mexican American families
> originating from a small area of a single Mexican state).
>
> Therefore, many dishes which have been popularized as ethnic (in a broader
> sense) are as much community, area or even family origined (and of course
> subject to vastly altered results because of the need to substitute
> different ingredients in search of traditional foods).
>
> Comment....
>
> TMO