Chile con carne

[James Smith]

I am not a chili aficionado, but I understand that
putting beans in chili at a serious chili cook-off
will get one drawn and quartered.



--- "A. Maberry" <maberry at U.WASHINGTON.EDU> wrote:
> I agree with Larry that the 1820 quote is not
> related to what is
> usually meant by "chile con carne" but I don't think
> that beans are a
> required ingredient.
>
> allen
> maberry at u.washington.edu
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Laurence Horn wrote:
>
> > At 9:09 PM -0500 12/19/02, Bapopik at AOL.COM wrote:
> >
> > >---------------------------------------------
> > >CHILE CON CARNE
> > >
> > >    Supposedly, the first "chile con carne"
> citation is 1857.  Supposedly,
> > >it's an American dish.  John Mariani's
> encyclopedia includes that famous
> > >quotation that chile con carne is "a detestable
> food with a false Mexican
> > >title which is sold in the United States from
> Texas to New York."
> > >    So what do you make of this, which I came
> across today?...
> > >MEMOIRS OF THE MEXICAN REVOLUTION
> > >by William Davis Robinson
> > >Philadelphia: Lydia R. Bailey, printer
> > >1820
> > >
> > >Pg. 71:  ..."the end justifies the means."
> > >
> > >Pg. 84:  ..._rancho_*...
> > >*_Rancho_ signifies a farm...
> > >
> > >Pg. 150:  ..._chile_ (capsicum_)...
> > >Pg. 150:  For all culinary purposes, this
> vegetable is as essential to the
> > >Mexican, as salt is to the European, and indeed
> more so, because a Mexican
> > >would rather go without bread, than lack chile
> with his meat.
> > >
> > >(Yes, no "chile con carne," but "chile with his
> meat" is close--ed.)
> >
> >
> > I'd say no relation whatsoever.  Chile con carne,
> on which I tend to
> > agree with the famous quotation, is a specific
> dish--with many
> > variants--involving braised and/or stewed meat
> with beans and/or
> > tomatoes and some seasonings involving fresh chile
> peppers or more
> > likely chile/chili powder.  The context of the
> above quote is one in
> > which meat is served with chiles served as a
> condiment on the side or
> > involved in the preparation or both, either of
> which is far more
> > typical of Mexican food than "chile con carne" of
> the type found at
> > chile cookoffs in the U.S. or canned by Hormel.
> In the context, I
> > wouldn't agree that "chile con carne" in the
> modern sense is at all
> > close to "chile with meat".  (And, yes, I'm aware
> that I'm spelling
> > that second vowel in the keyword inconsistently.)
> >
> > larry
> >

=====
James D. SMITH                 |If history teaches anything
South SLC, UT                  |it is that we will be sued
jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com     |whether we act quickly and decisively
                               |or slowly and cautiously.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com