The word 'authentic', when used in connection with food, is nothing more than a marketing trend. It means as much as 'all natural'...arsenic is all natural.
You raise tasty points about the history of various dishes, but there is no such thing as 'authentic'...unless it's me making you dinner and then it is authentically made by me. And I''l take some jollof rice when it's ready.
Tobi, this is so good. I already know you writing is excellent and this essay took it to the next level. I related to so many parts (obvs) and the question of "what is authentic" when ones culture is becoming a mix of what was and what is. So funny too, I was chuckling along with your little jokes. Such a wonderful read and perspective.
I agree with your take that a food is inherently authentic to a child when introduced by their parent, it's a good argument to point out the absurdity of accusing foods of inauthenticity.
However, I think the term authentic is always used in relation to something. The common cultural usage is authentic to a place, so it is a true representation of whatever place it is trying to represent. People critique restaurants as less authentic if they don't hit the center of mass of the general perception of this place it is said to represent, and this ruling is determined based off a large number of individual data points representing each patron, weighted more strongly for those who have a stronger affiliation with the original place.
It's silly, like you've said, and has been weaponized too much. But it also is like many parts of language where it depends so much on context and usage. Who really knows what's truly "correct".
The word 'authentic', when used in connection with food, is nothing more than a marketing trend. It means as much as 'all natural'...arsenic is all natural.
You raise tasty points about the history of various dishes, but there is no such thing as 'authentic'...unless it's me making you dinner and then it is authentically made by me. And I''l take some jollof rice when it's ready.
Tobi, this is so good. I already know you writing is excellent and this essay took it to the next level. I related to so many parts (obvs) and the question of "what is authentic" when ones culture is becoming a mix of what was and what is. So funny too, I was chuckling along with your little jokes. Such a wonderful read and perspective.
I agree with your take that a food is inherently authentic to a child when introduced by their parent, it's a good argument to point out the absurdity of accusing foods of inauthenticity.
However, I think the term authentic is always used in relation to something. The common cultural usage is authentic to a place, so it is a true representation of whatever place it is trying to represent. People critique restaurants as less authentic if they don't hit the center of mass of the general perception of this place it is said to represent, and this ruling is determined based off a large number of individual data points representing each patron, weighted more strongly for those who have a stronger affiliation with the original place.
It's silly, like you've said, and has been weaponized too much. But it also is like many parts of language where it depends so much on context and usage. Who really knows what's truly "correct".