3 ms·
It mostly does, yes. Nation is political. National cuisine and the claim of certain dishes, if official, are driven by government. See gastronationalism. You w
by goosejuice 2mo ago
It mostly does, yes. Nation is political. National cuisine and the claim of certain dishes, if official, are driven by government. See gastronationalism.
You won't find Persian national cuisine. Iran however, yes, and it's mostly ethnically Persian. You'll find food traditions of other ethnic groups in Iran as well that aren't Persian. Iranian cuisine encompasses all of that within a political border.
- vector_spaces 2mo agoI think you are conflating senses of the word, or rather you are defaulting to a very specific usage. There's the usage "Iranian national cuisine" which as you say is inherently political in nature because we mean "nation" in a civic and territorial sense, subsuming e.g. Persian, Azeri, Kurd cuisines, among others. There may be objections to specific inclusions or exclusions as we are considering Iran as a civic and political entity with borders, as you say But it's perfectly fine to refer to "Kurdish national cuisine" or Persian national cuisine or Azeri national cuisine even in the absence of any nation state. So I'm using the term in an ethnocultural sense, not in the sense of something sanctioned by a nation state or a political entity. See also black nationalism or Kurdish nationalism -- no state is required here. You have political mobilisation around an ethnocultural designation rather than a government
- goosejuice 2mo agoSee gastronationalism. It's not "a very specific usage." Black and Kurdish nationalism are political movements. You're welcome to say Persian national cuisine, but that can be interpreted in a number of ways. I wouldn't advise it. Anyway. My point is that ethnic cuisine is not easily replaced by another term.