[Sca-cooks] Larousse gastronomique?

[Philip & Susan Troy]

Gorgeous Muiredach wrote:

> I remember seeing on this list a while back some rather strong dislike
> expressed about the Larousse Gastronomique.  Now that I have finally put my
> hands on mine again, after 5 years in storage (the book, not me!), I'd be
> interested to know why you believe it is not such a good reference
> book.  Also, do your objections hold true for the French version as well as
> the English one?
> Thx

In general, the LG is flat, out-and-out WRONG about a lot of things as they veer further and further from the central, known theme of the development of French cuisine from about the eighteenth century to the present. In particular their repetitive and inaccurate generalizations regarding the cuisines of Asia are pretty laughable. I STR that somewhere, for example, there is a description of Peking Duck served with demiglaze, and apparently, everywhere else in Asia, regardless of whether it is anywhere in China, Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam North or South, the Philippines, etc., "lacquered duck" is a known and widely consumed product. Even their article on Taillevent seems to be full of errors when you compare it to what it actually says in the Viandier. I would trust it pretty implicitly on issues pertaining to recent French culinary practice, but in other subject matter, the inaccuracies seem almost to be based in some kind of patronizing dismissal of non-French cuisines. (By th
e way, the same thing is wrong with Toussaint-Samat's "History of Food".)


Of course, these subjects aren't dealt with as much in the early editions.




Adamantius
--
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com

"It was so blatant that Roger threw at him.  Clemens gets away with
things that get other people thrown out of games.  As long as they
let him get away with it, it's going  to continue." -- Joe Torre, 9/98