When discussing the “authenticity” of food, a precursor must be mentioned: that (at least for myself) will stymie all confusion and establish a clear and explicit line regarding “authentic food” and “not-authentic food” or “almost authentic food,” and that is Mintz’s statement about environment playing a crucial role : “I have stressed at the same time the enormous importance of place- of locality and its distinctive natural characteristics- in the shaping over time of culturally specific food systems.”

With that being said, pertaining to the discussion of Gladys, a Caribbean restaurant in Brooklyn founded by two white males, we have a perceived dilemma of “authenticity” and “cultural appropriation.” These men traveled to Jamaica, covering 80% of the island, and learned all the “authentic” techniques of creating jerk chicken. After acquiring the proper tools (both literally and figuratively), the men returned to Brooklyn and attempted to provide the Brooklyn Caribbean community with the “authentic” jerk chicken. So, the question of authenticity is one that came up numerous times during our Friday class, and my answer is: no, the jerk chicken is not authentic, but it is as authentic as jerk chicken being served in America can get. It does not matter to me whether it is made by someone who has had a family recipe for generations and generations; the fact that it is not being served in the environment that it was created, already makes it not authentic. Food, at least for myself, is the combination of ethnicity and locality, and it can only be deemed “authentic” if both are present. An ethnic group can come to America and make their traditional recipes, but without the original history, land, and environment effecting the food, it can never be “authentic” so to say, but it can come very close.

Gladys, though may not be authentic, is probably a really close manifestation of Jamaican jerk chicken (which I am sure is delicious), and probably a great Jamaican-American jerk chicken. Because it is now being served in America, like Mintz has made clear, the food has changed and adopted certain American qualities (whether it be just the place it is being served).  The question of cultural appropriation I think has more to do with the attitude the owners of Gladys had, rather than the actual food they are making. Food is not something that can really be appropriated; it can be changed, manipulated or misunderstood, but appropriated has many negative connotations which I don’t think apply to food. Food has been “appropriated” from the onset, it is just part of the narrative of a certain food or cuisine.

All that being said, I can understand how many see Gladys as not being authentic Caribbean and even a form of appropriation, but under my definition of authentic food: no food that is separated from its physical place/s and environment/s is authentic.