Everything around the world shows influence from everywhere else in the world. As people travel back and forth, they bring ideas back and forth, until eventual

Everything around the world shows influence from everywhere else in the world. As people travel back and forth, they bring ideas back and forth, until eventually a sort of equilibrium is reached. As for restaurants, I'm not sure I agree entirely. A few generations ago, every 'top' restaurant was a French restaurant. Serving the same classic dishes. Now you have places serving 'Nordic Cuisine' (Noma, Faviken), Spanish cuisine has had a resurgence in a major way (Arzak, Etxebarri), South American cuisine is becoming recognized at the highest levels (D.O.M., Central), as is Asian cuisine (too many to list), there's 'avant garde' (El Bulli and the Adria brothers' other ventures, Alinea), and then you've got the chefs who break all the rules and just create whatever they want at the time (Pierre Gagnaire comes to mind). Not to mention the trends of gastronomic bistros, brasseries and pubs, cheap tasting menus, haute fast food and street food, etc... While I think it's somewhat true that the 'style' of a restaurant is becoming less location specific, I think there's more variety and innovation than ever before, more restaurants in general than ever before, and I would argue that food itself is getting more interesting. As for the article, it seems more like the writer just doesn't like the fact that Buenos Aires isn't as they remember it (almost a colonialist attitude IMO, that Buenos Aires should stand still for them). However this attitude also ignores history - people have always migrated, adopted new ideas, cultures, cuisines, etc... 'Traditional' European ingredients like the Potato and Tomato, for instance, both came from the New World. Nothing stands still.