What is Authentic Asian Food?

Binh and Robyn just brought up an important issue that plagues me -- keeps me worried and up at nights, frankly: What is authenticity in the realm of food?

For example, every once in a while, I get an email from a Vietnamese American asking me if my book, Into the Vietnamese Kitchen, offers authentic Vietnamese recipes or Americanized Vietnamese recipes. I don't know what "American Vietnamese" food is about. Are they wanting techniques and ingredients presented from the motherland? Am I inauthentic because I use a 4-burner gas stove instead of a single burner, propane fueled system or a charcoal brazier? Should I sit on a low stool on the floor to do all the prep work? What about the food processor -- one of my favorite appliances? Is that modern convenience inauthentic?

I know what is good and what is bad food to my palate. I wouldn't put forth a recipe that I wouldn't eat or wouldn't proudly present to family and friends.  As a food writer and recipe developer, I try to compromise as little as possible but I also balance that with the need to get people into the kitchen to cook.

In response to such queries, I often ask these folks to elaborate a bit, and one of the responses has been that Americanized Vietnamese food is the overly sweet crud that is dished up in Viet restaurants. Well, my friends, plenty of Vietnamese people prepare and patronize those establishments and they say that the food is cheap but "it's just okay." Why eat it then? Why not demand better? Why not make it yourself. You'll have no one else but yourself to praise or blame.

I'm a stickler for learning the foundations of cooking and of a cuisine before fiddling with it. I'm working on a new book project (not Vietnamese) and in a conversation with a renown Japanese food expert and author Elizabeth Andoh, she mentioned that she avoids the word classic because food is constantly changing.  She instead goes for 'typical' preparations -- what people in the main prepare, how they prepare it.  We didn't even touch on what authenticity is. However, at the end of the day, the food has to taste good and the techniques have to be solid.

Something else that Elizabeth said a few years back that always sticks with me is this (and I paraphrase): Mastering a cuisine is not a birthright. This means that just because you're of a certain ethnicity doesn't mean that you're genetically programed to prepare it well.

Saveur magazine, a food magazine that I write for and am a contributing editor of, has the tagline of "Savor a world of authentic cuisine." So what does that mean? How is authentic cuisine defined? We answer it all the time, for every story, and it changes because it has to do with the subject. At the end of the day, I always define authentic cuisine as one that captures the relationship between people and their food.

If any of you are philosophy types, Jean Paul Satre was a proponent of something called the authentic self -- meaning that you are a true, honest person. Though that authentic self includes the good, bad and ugly, I like to put a positive spin on things by defining authentic food as this: Good tasting food that's well-crafted from someone's heart and soul.

And now, it's your turn!

Some parting thoughts and I await your shots...

• What does authentic food mean to you?
• I just came back from Asia, where I did some serious eating with Robyn and her husband Dave in Kuala Lumpur, where the cuisine is a crazy combination of Asian cuisines that's evolved over centuries. How would you capture authenticity there?
• In Hong Kong, there is instant ramen noodles everywhere for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.  Is that authentic  Hong Kong fare or merely a trend?
• In our post-modern, reality-TV based world of the Food Network and Top Chef, how authentic is the stuff presented on air?

Comments

[Robyn]

Great - I love this! Thanks for devoting a whole post to it. You've opened a can of worms and I bet this will generate lots of good discussion.

I've been a fan of Saveur from the very first issue and when I saw that tagline including the words 'a world of authentic cuisine' I felt they'd really hit the nail on the head. I was living in China at the time and when I looked at the photos in the first few issues I thought, 'Finally - a magazine that shows how people around the world REALLY cook and eat and share food,' even if wasn't 'pretty' in the way that that had been defined in the food press up to that point.'

As for Malaysia - I'm working on a KL-related article, with recipes, and I'd vouch for the 'authenticity' of every one, simply because they've been given to, and demonstrated for, me by Malaysians who really cook and eat these dishes. True to self, true to what really is, that's 'authenticity' to me.

HK and instant ramen - a good question. I'd say 'trend' bec you find them all over the place in Malaysia and Thailand and the Philippines too. Very popular in American college dorms too! Can instant ramen be an authentic 'everywhere' food?

[Mike]

I get annoyed by people who think in terms of "authentic" food. Recipes are constantly evolving, as are cultures and traditions. To say something is authentic is to assume it is a timeless, untainted, and pure. But nothing really is. That's not to say there are huge gray areas- there are. I just prefer the term 'traditional' or 'cultural'. Authentic is too loaded.

Regarding Vietnamese food, I like to think about Pho. And I know you've touched on this before. Its origins are French but would anyone dare say that Pho is not one of the quintessential Vietnamese dishes? Yet, if you lived in Vietnam 150 years ago, you probably wouldn't recognize it. Likewise the Northern/Southern Pho debate. Almost no American knows anything but southern Pho- with the herbs, bean sprouts, etc. Yet Pho originated in the north, where they don't use herbs. Is the Pho in Saigon (or Little Saigon) inauthentic? Nah.

[Simon Bao]

Andrea, on an episode of Top Chef recently Rick Bayless quoted someone else who said, If a cuisine is not evolving, it's dead." It's an idea to bear in mind when people get carried away with anxieties over Authenticity.

I think the idea of "authentic cuisine" is kind of a paradox. It's both an important and useful idea, it's worthy of attention; and it's also an utterly bogus and useless idea because no two ever people mean the same thing when they talk about what's "authentic." And seldom ever think about or define what they themselves mean when they say "authentic."

I've heard people talk about "Authentic Vietnamese Cuisine" and what they really mean is the cuisine people eat over in Vietnam now, today. OK, but which people in Vietnam? In which region? In which socio-economic class? People with which ancestry or heritage? Urban elites with lots of cash, access to new and better products, and a rapidly changing diet and cuisine? Or the rural poor out in the paddies? Or mountain-folk? None of them share a single cuisine right now.

Others talk about "Authentic Vietnamese Cuisine" and the seem to mean whatever the cuisine was on April 30, 1975, or some earlier pre-VC era. Or, the cuisine before any signs of French products appear.

Talk of an "Authentic Vietnamese Cuisine" is almost useless unless someone specifies a time and place and the specific people involved.

And useless unless one brings some history into the conversation. There were countless dishes and ingredients and elements that surely distinguished the cuisine of Champa. Things that were not "Authentic Vietnamese." When Vietnam overran and conquered Champa, many of those were adopted and incorporated into Vietnam's cuisine and everyone today will swear they're authentic. Same with dishes and ingredients and elements of Khmer cuisine. When Vietnam overran and conquered the delta region, those too were transformed into "Authentic Vietnamese Cuisine."

So, as a label or buzzword, "Authentic" is utterly useless. If the term is very carefully defined upfront though, it can be a useful lens through which to look at foods and techniques.

[Simon Bao]

Andrea, let me add an anecdote. On a food list somewhere, I had posted a recipe for a soup. Possibly one of your own. Someone asked me if it would be OK to use canned chicken broth and I said yes, in that recipe it would be fine.

A self-styled expert on All Cuisines Southeast Asian got all worked up and into a hissy fit, declaring Oh My God No, that's not authentic. Authentic Vietnamese Cuisine never uses canned chicken broth.

I pondered what to do, as I visualized all those cans of chicken broths in all those Vietnamese kitchen cabinets across the land... small cans, large cans, cases of cans of chicken broth purchased in bulk from BJ's and Sam's Club and being loaded in Vietnamese-owned mini-vans...

[Simon Bao]

Andrea, to push this a bit further... One of the problems with using the word Authentic to describe a dish or a cuisine is that word carries with it an unstated premise.

There's a premise that somewhere out there exists an authoritative Original Bowl of Pho. Or an Original Goi Cuon. A premise that there is one Original Bowl of Bo Kho, against which all subsequent and future bowls of bo kho can be measured. Find the Original Dish and you'll be able to list its essential characteristics, and that gives you the all benchmarks against which you can measure future dishes. Go down the checklist and assess whether that's some authentic bo kho you're eating.

You seem to like philosophical garnishes, so let me phrase that another way. People use the word Authentic with the implication or premise that there is some Platonic Ideal out there. Individual goi cuon may vary but they can be measured against The Ideal Goi Cuon somehow. There exists in Vietnamese cuisine some abstract Goi Cuon-ness, and a paying customer can use that abstraction as a guide in determining whether their sad little fish roll is authentic.

I think that's why we get tripped up, that premise of The Original or The Ideal.

Most folks, if challenged to really think hard about dishes and cuisines, will recognize that the premise is utterly false. There's no Original. There's no Ideal. The premise has to go.

Foods and cuisines are "organic," just as cultures and societies are. They're interconnected with and interdependent on everything around them, they grow and evolve, they adapt, they acquire new traits and shed old ones, and the process is steady, constant, ever ongoing. And there's no Original. No Ideal.

There are other words in English that may be a *bit* more useful for talking about individual dishes and cuisines. "Common" and "customary" come to mind. Contemporary. Conventional. But I defy anyone to open a chic, up-scale "dining lounge" in TriBeCa, and advertise that he's serving "Conventional Vietnamese Cuisine."

[Binh]

I love Vietnamese food the same way I love the language, the culture. In a strange land, the authenticity of the Vietnamese dishes I prepare for friends and family is a reflection of myself and my roots. It is an attempt to share something I hold dear to my heart. A buillion cube, a can of broth for stock is survival -- a half-a-day pot of beef broth for pho is paying respect to the cuisine, to the guest, and to yourself.

Authenticity is time-honed, proven methods of how to best prepare a dish in the context of the culture it originated from, or made popular in - it is the foundation of cuisine. But cuisine itself is a living thing that grow. "Bun Bo Hue". "Hu Tieu Nam Vang", "Pasta alla Bolognese" are no doubt authentic recipes in their own right, but who is to say they didn't take their inspiration from somewhere else? To define authenticity is to limit the potential of the food.

When it comes to Vietnamese cookbooks, I only own two - one by Andrea and one by Corinne Trang (Authentic Vietnamese Cooking). All others to me are unworthy in the criteria of authenticity which is based on my own knowledge of Vietnamese cuisine. Is it a flawed logic? Definitely. What happen had I grew up not knowing how to cook and only learn recently from watching Emeril on FoodTV? You can be sure that my "pho" will have some "essence" and it'll be the most authentic thing you'll ever taste.

My point in all this is that authenticity is very much a personal thing. I love Andrea's book and blog because they stay faithful to the tried-and-true old ways while incorporating new ideas. They both teach the history while open new doors to possibilities. The reason we sometimes went to the extreme of criticizing certain recipes because we know they would take away the pleasure of a properly prepared dish, and lowering the standards of the cuisine we hold dear. That is why it is so satisfying watching Bourdain tore in to Rachel Ray and her EVOO ways. That being said, there is the difference of doing something right and explore new possibilities, and doing something for the sake of convenience and mediocrity and calling it authenticity.

[Dani]

* What does authentic food mean to you?
I'm not comfortable with food being described as authentic. There are just too many problems with that description. As a basic example, I made pho for tonight's dinner. But I am 5th generation caucsian Australian. I used a slow cooker to make the stock. So it can't possibly be authentic right? Despite the very Vietnamese origin of my recipe. Regions have distinctive flavours, but I'm not sure that we can go much further than that without getting ourselves into trouble. As another example, I made a steamed chicken meatloaf recently that was based on the flavours of Gai Pad Kaprao. So was it a Thai dish? Or is it excluded from being a Thai dish because gai Pad Kaprao should be a stir fry. Frankly I don't know. But I do know that the flavours are very Thai in origin. That's good enough for me. I figure that mentioning the ethnicity of food should be descriptive rather than prescriptive. Of course there are traditional dishes and modern dishes but that doesn't delineate whether something truly belongs to a specific cuisine either.

Great post BTW. Much food for thought. I'll have to ponder t his further and come back if I can come up with anything else relevant.

[Joel]

I think Robyn's take is interesting and does make sense in a was, that any evolution of food taken by natives keeps a dish authentic, but any changes made by foreigners is considered a departure from authenticity.

But this raises the question of modifications by migrants: do early 20th century Italian migrants to the United States modified the dish in ways that make them no longer authentic? The increased amounts of meat, etc, Sunday gravy would ahhor Italians in the home country at the time. Yet, the post-WWII economic boom in Italy itself meat dishes have increased markably in popularity in the South. What makes dishes made by Girogio Locatelli (owner of the very exclusive Locatelli restaurant in London) more "authentic" over those by Frank Pellegrino (third generation co-owner of the Italian-American red sauce joint Rao's restaurant in New York)? Is it because Loctaelli makes dishes more faithful to contemporary Italian tastes than Pellegrino? But Pellegrino can pinpoint 19th century southern Italian tastes. Loctaelli a first generation expat (not even a migrant - he will return home one day, for speculations sake) but Pellegrino already 4th generation? What difference does a first and 4th generation make if the dishes made are considered good in taste?

Another issue is "authentic" to whose standards? I have eaten the Chinese Zhajiang mian ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhajiang_mian ) and the original one in Peking has very savoury (read: salty) minced prok gravy with yellow soy bean paste poured over cooked and cooled hand-made noodles. A Northeastern/Manchurian cook here in Christchurch makes it less salty. Does it make it inauthentic? The Cantonese variety uses fresh egg noodles mixed with lye water (the ones used for wonton noodle as well) and the gravy uses sweetened mild chilli sauce made by Cantonese cooks, and the meat is striped rather than minced pork. The whole dish tastes slightly hot/spicy and overwhelmingly quite sweet and a radical departure from the Pekingese version. Does it make the Zhajiang mian inauthentic? What about the Korean type?

At the end of the day it is easy to fall into the copout of "everything is relative, so why bother with authentic thing?" but I believe this does a vast disservice to the concept. I believe we can define authentic with more detailed means of classifications: a cooking that captures the underlying traditions, preferences, and ethos of a group of people. For example, Cantonese people ahhor extreme spicy food, so HK-style Thai beef salad is toned down. It probably doesn't make them authenticly Thai (the chilli is designed to stimulate your stomach in the extreme heat and humidity of Thailand), but authentic to HK-Thai food. Of course there are new questions following this definition, but I will let these as follow-on discussions.

[Joel]

BTW this may not be relevant to the discussion here, but there is a new Vietnamese cookbook in English published in this part of the world. "Secrets of the Red Lantern: Stories and Vietnamese Recipes from the Heart: Stories and Recipes from the Heart" (Murdoch Books, Oct 2007, ISBN 1740459040) from Pauline Nguyen, Luke Nguyen, Mark Jensen based in Sydney, co-owners of the Red Lantern Restaurant ( http://www.redlantern.com.au ), has written a cookbook with recipes from the restaurant. Do we just discount their work as inauthentic because they have made their own adjustments with respect to ingredient availability in Australia such as Ca Kho To made with salmon (which is not caught in Vietnam)? I believe this is an unfair question to ask.

PS: Andrea, you may want to check this book out. It is sold everywhere here in New Zealand at the usual bookstores since all Australian cookbooks are found on this side as well. It will be Vietnamese food adapted to Australian setting.

[Joel]

Found a review of "Secrets of the Red Lantern" by Melbourne's Duncan Markham here. Related to this discussion here, the reviewer also mentioned Andrea's "Into the Vietnamese Kitchen" and he mentioned a Vietnamese homecook in Australia told him that Andrea's work had been adopted a bit for Americans, but also entirely correct about ingredients:

http://www.syrupandtang.com/200710/review-secrets-of-the-red-lantern-by-pauline-nguyen/

And the "Secrets of the Red Lantern" book's publisher page is here:

http://www.murdochbooks.com.au/redlantern.htm

[Robyn]

I'm back after my definition of authentic cuisine as 'real' cuisine, ie the cuisine eaten in the country in question right now, inspired vociferous objections from my better half. He maintains that authenticity is about (1) technique and (2) ingredients. Of course he is entirely wrong about number (1) - sorry Dave - because using a blender to make a curry paste instead of pounding it in a mortar does not render a dish inauthentic. Goodness, I've seen cooks in northern Thailand soften/brown their garlic and shallots in the microwave (instead of grilling them, as per the 'old ways') - and I couldn't say the curry they prepared for me was any less authentic than if they'd bought grilled shallots/garlic in the market.

But I think ingredients are important. Not to the extent that one couldn't use canned broth (or Maggi cubes!) instead of making one's own stock, but just that certain dishes just must include certain ingredients (not a whole list of ingredients, but key ones, the ones that give the 'authentic' taste).

My example is mapo toufu - when I returned to the US after a year in Sichuan I found mapo tofu all over Chinese resto menus, but not a single included Sichuan peppercorns, which give the distinctive 'mala' tingly spiciness. That's unforgiveable, and please don't call that mapo dofu.

At the end though, I am still uncomfortable with the word 'authentic' when applied to food. Can't we come up with another term that describes what we're striving for when we cook the food of other countries and cultures? 'Traditional' doesn't work for me either, it evokes images of techniques and food preparation surroundings locked in time, something nostalgic and not-quite-real.

[Andrea Nguyen]

Ya know, after those months of duking it out over the San Jose Little Saigon naming controversy, I'm sure glad to be talking about the abstract, philosophical aspects of food again! You've all contributed such eloquent responses. I'm very touched.

So a couple of thoughts...Yep, a cuisine that doesn't evolve is a dead one but the evolutionary process of cooking is one that involves folding in new ideas, kneading it for a while, shaping it into some form, and then applying a cooking method to it to render something 'new.' But to go through that process, you have know how to prep and work your ingredients -- the foundations.

I liken cooking to becoming a good musician or painter. You have to master the masters before riffing on your own. Few of us are born with the talent to just jump right in.

A number of my friends who are avid Food Network watchers tell me that by tuning in to the various shows, they feel that when they go into the kitchen, they'll be able to cook well. My response is, "Just get in there and start cooking!"

In Vietnamese, there's a term -- khéo -- which describes a nurtured ability to connect with a process in a measured, considerate, but yet creative way. A cook, whether a home cook or resto chef, who is khéo is a master.

[Andrea Nguyen]

Joel, I got Pauline Nguyen's new book in Shanghai and paid dearly for it, then hauled it home along with the dozens of books I picked up in Singapore. Beautiful publication. I can't wait to dive into it.

Robyn, we didn't have the Sichuan peppercorns till last year in the U.S. and well, mapo dofu still stinks in most American restos.

[Joel]

Oh I'm sorry to hear that Andrea. Buying books published China in Chinese cities is bound to be horrendously expensive. Let us know if it is worth the price to add to our bookshelves :).

I glanced through the book at Whitcoulls and it is indeed a very beautiful publication. The human interest story is very heart-breaking. But cooking wise I feel much of the recipes are pretty much already covered in your book. And add to it Duncan Markham's pretty negative review I think I will save my $$$ for some other cookbooks.

[Joel]

Typos. Should be "Buying books published outside China in Chinese cities..."

One of my favorite restaurants of all time was a Vietnamese place just off the elevated tracks on the way to grandma's in Chicago. I stumbled in there one night and went back so many times after that I was invited to one of the daughter's wedding. After a few years of enjoying their food I asked why I didn't like other Vietnamese restaurants very much, even though many Vietnamese people did enjoy the restaurants. My friend replied that her mother made food she thought American's would like. Did that make it less authentic? Recently, we visited a Vietnamese restaurant near us in the suburbs. I had mixed emotions, that I kept to myself, when I saw the place was filled with Vietnamese people. Sorry, but the meal was so revolting my foodie friends couldn't finish their meals. The Vietnamese people around us seemed quite happy with their food though. Does that make it authentic?. The only thing I know for sure is I wish my friend's brother hadn't taken over and run their restaurant into the ground. I still miss the King Rolls and Spicy Shrimp with Pork.

One of my favorite restaurants of all time was a Vietnamese place just off the elevated tracks on the way to grandma's in Chicago. I stumbled in there one night and went back so many times after that I was invited to one of the daughter's wedding. After a few years of enjoying their food I asked why I didn't like other Vietnamese restaurants very much, even though many Vietnamese people did enjoy the restaurants. My friend replied that her mother made food she thought American's would like. Did that make it less authentic? Recently, we visited a Vietnamese restaurant near us in the suburbs. I had mixed emotions, that I kept to myself, when I saw the place was filled with Vietnamese people. Sorry, but the meal was so revolting my foodie friends couldn't finish their meals. The Vietnamese people around us seemed quite happy with their food though. Does that make it authentic?. The only thing I know for sure is I wish my friend's brother hadn't taken over and run their restaurant into the ground. I still miss the King Rolls and Spicy Shrimp with Pork.

[Toe]

McDonald's serves Authentic American Cheeseburgers.

You may not think they're *good* American cheeseburgers, and they may not be made the way your mom made them, but given that they're by far the most common cheeseburgers in America, it's hard to argue that they're not authentic.

I do like to know how close a dish comes to what I might be served at a foreign restaurant, or at the home of the Nguyen family, the Gonzalez family, the Rashid family, or the Smith family. But I never, ever let that stop me from enjoying an 'Americanized' or 'fusion' version of a dish.

[Al]

I once had a math instructor who claimed that we should never use the phrase "perfect circle." According to him, if it wasnt't perfect, it wasn't a circle.

Of course, that makes mathematical sense, but in everyday life it is not so useful.

[Nate 2.0]

My first thought was that authentic char kway teow MUST be cooked over a charcoal fire. Just like authentic barbecue MUST be smoked over a wood fire. The tools used definitely do have a say in what makes food authentic. (sorry, Dave).

That doesn't mean that food not cooked with certain implements is not good. Of course the modern conveniences make things better.

All that being said, though, I think food is authentic when it comes from a caring kitchen.

[Minh-Nhu Nguyen]

Joel I love that book and recommended it to lots of friends(I'm Perth btw). We've all cooked from it and it's great. You're right however that there's a few recipes that do cross over with Andreas book. But I still think it's worth the money.

[Neneh]

This discussion is interesting considering I'm finding myself in Vietnam after having lived the past 30 years in Canada, eating my mother's Vietnamese food. My instinct is to have my mom's food as a baseline. However, you could argue that the food here would be more "authentic". What I've realized is that while I'm thoroughly enjoying the food here, there are things that I like better back home, possibly the less "authentic" version:
1)my mom uses better cuts of meats in certain dishes. I don't like eating fat with a bit of meat;
2)having vegetarian friends, I've "vegetarianized" bo bia. No more shrimps and lap sung;
3)when given rice paper to roll your own, it's always dry. I like wetting mine so it's soft and not still crunchy;
4)finally, we make bun rieu out of a can because that's as close to "authentic" as you can get back home. I'm actually a little nervous trying the real thing now, afraid it won't measure up to the canned stuff...?

Also within one country, there are so many regional differences? How do you account for this? Is one less authentic than another? My mother makes ram bap, corn spring rolls. They're like no other spring rolls here, but are delicious! Are they not authentic because they're not like the typical cha gio?

[Simon Bao]

As long as the subject is Authenticity, and VNese cookbooks, are people familiar with "Lemongrass and Lime: New Vietnamese Cooking?"

If people have seen it, and can leave aside the issues of design, layout and editing... and focus just on the recipes, or on comments made about "modern Vietnamese cooking"... what reactions did others have?

[Andrea Nguyen]

Simon, that's the book from Australia, correct? Mark Read was the author and I wasn't very impressed with the work. I suppose my question is when someone presents "new" of any cuisine, what is the "old" about? As I vaguely recall (I don't have the book in front of me) there wasn't much explanation about the basis of the new. The recipes were very restauranty and don't translate into home kitchens well. So if you're unfamiliar with Vietnamese cooking, it's not a great learning tool.

[Simon Bao]

The author is from Australia or the UK, I can't recall which.

What struck me about the recipes was that there was no discussion of them, at all. No information about what the "old school version" of a dish may be like, or what the logic and intention where in the changes the author was making. In most cases, very substantial changes. For example, for the "new" Vietnamese beef pho, the author called for roasting some veal knuckle bones and then using those to make a brown veal stock. No explanation of why, or how that relates to the original versions of beef pho.

I didn't want to dismiss the possibility that his unusual approach to pho might be fine, I just wondered why one would make such changes without explanation or comment.

The recipes didn't look like "new Vietnamese cuisine" so much as a Western chef playing around with and altering Vietnamese dishes.