Comments on: Why Have We Forgotten The Servants? Part II: Cookbooks

By: Ji-Young

Ji-Young — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:56:36 +0000

Yes, the home meals are still simple. The main changes in the last couple of decades are more products of culinary modernism of the mass produced kind and increased interest in “ethnic” recipes.

But they’re still not cooking the kind of French chef food of the Julia Child’s kind, elaborate Madhur Jaffrey Indian or Paula Wolfert Moroccan.

Yes, cuisinarts in particular. But so much in America is about marketing. I’m in Los Angeles so I’m probably more acutely aware of it. I also work in public relations and media relations.

By: Rachel Laudan

Rachel Laudan — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:12:29 +0000

Hmm so those simple meals extended at least until the 1990s. And yes, I actually often had a cheese course too. Though this was not a huge selection but a small piece of the locally-made emmenthaler-gruyere style cheese.

Interesting idea about the denigration of home cooking skills as a way to sell kitchen equipment. Cuisinarts (food processors) particularly I assume.

By: Ji-Young

Ji-Young — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:37:15 +0000

Julia Child’s influence in America is so profound that I am still asked questions about French cuisine that clearly use her a meta-reference.

“vegetable soups, small pieces of meat with no or very simple sauces, boiled potatoes, salads, fruit, occasionally a bought pastry for a special occasion.”

This is pretty much my experience in France beginning in the mid 1990s, with a cheese course added which as far as I know tends be regional, much more common in Lyon.

“The skewing of pre-1950 cookbooks to those with servants is something I think we need to keep in mind when we hear laments about the decline of kitchen skills and the failure of women to provide tasty home-cooked meals. High quality home cooking can be pulled off without a staff, no doubt about it. But it’s worth remembering how often the good home cooking that is held up as a model is one that is damn difficult to emulate without a kitchen staff.”

I suspect these laments also had to do with marketing kitchen equipment.

By: Rachel Laudan

Rachel Laudan — Mon, 19 May 2008 23:09:32 +0000

Thanks all of you. Rajagopal, part of the answer to your question is in Adam’s comment. I don`t have a book or article I can send you to. My comments are based on factors such as work in social history about literacy rates, and prevalence of servants, the kinds of dishes described in cookbooks, experience (direct or indirect) of other countries such as Mexico and India. But I’ll be pursuing more of this in coming entries.

By: The Old Foodie

The Old Foodie — Sun, 18 May 2008 20:45:17 +0000

I knew there was a good reason why I dont actually get around to cooking a lot of historic recipes. You have given me my ‘excuse’ when people ask me if I do! Perhaps when I retire from my real job I’ll have to find another excuse. Good series Rachel, thanks.
Janet.

By: rajagopal sukumar

rajagopal sukumar — Sat, 17 May 2008 14:02:19 +0000

Brilliant post Rachel. It is very insightful. When you say most books in the 1900s were written for people with cooks on their staff, is there some research that you are relying upon?

By: Adam Balic

Adam Balic — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:34:24 +0000

Some of the earlier cookbooks were very open about who was doing the cooking, with “Servant” often being part of the book’s title.

The assumption is that the wife (or stand in) would read the book and use this to direct the servants. In some 17th century cookbooks there are large sections on how to run servants.

In British cookbooks of the 20th century, the assumption that there are servants in the house is lost by the 1920’s to a large extent. Will the exception of books written for those in the colonies.

It would be interesting to compare the raise of restaurant fine dining and decline of the household servant in the 20th century.