Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are wasting your time, because I don't understand your point here. At no point did I say cumin was a result of American influences, and I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. There was some serious miscommunication there. Tex-Mex is a distinct cuisine created in the United States. In the early 1800s perhaps the cuisine in Texas was pretty much indistinguishable from that in parts of Coahuila or Chihuahua, but in the almost two centuries spent apart and the very different migration patterns, policies, and economies, they've differed quite a bit at least in regards to what's generally considered Tex-Mex.
Good luck. In today's world people get stuck on talking points and just run with it and everything, no matter how well reasoned, is dumb. Combined with the big-headed nature of some Texans, you just seem to be just running into a brick-wall. Reason just can't get passed that Texas ego. (And I consider myself a Texan so I can say that).
The talking point lately is that President Polk grabbed a hold of that border and tossed it into Mexico, and then Texas was its own country and its so unique, Yada Yada (ignore the dozen other republics, and forget Hawaii was its own freaking kingdom).
His theory is that Texas being part of Mexico for like 12 minutes, and Mexico didn't really want anything to do with it so barely populated it, and because of those strong ties from waaaaay back then, it is somehow can be considered a region of Mexico, and TexMex, although created in Texas long after it became a state, can be unquestionably called authentic fir no other reason than 200 years ago Texas was Mexico for 12 minutes.
There is no denying that Creole food is American, and a ton of those styles were created from the early 1700s. A century before Louisiana became a state.
It is even worse looking at Cajun Country. That part of the state of Louisiana was not part of the Louisiana Purchase, so I guess Cajun food, by his standards isn't American, it is Mexican.
I don't think what country a part of the US was in long long ago matters much. It is what influence it is under nowadays. TexMex is still Mexican food just as Chinese American food is still Chinese food. Both are just not AUTHENTIC Mexican or Chinese in most uses of the word.
Good luck. In today's world people get stuck on talking points and just run with it and everything, no matter how well reasoned, is dumb. Combined with the big-headed nature of some Texans, you just seem to be just running into a brick-wall. Reason just can't get passed that Texas ego. (And I consider myself a Texan so I can say that).
The talking point lately is that President Polk grabbed a hold of that border and tossed it into Mexico, and then Texas was its own country and its so unique, Yada Yada (ignore the dozen other republics, and forget Hawaii was its own freaking kingdom).
His theory is that Texas being part of Mexico for like 12 minutes, and Mexico didn't really want anything to do with it so barely populated it, and because of those strong ties from waaaaay back then, it is somehow can be considered a region of Mexico, and TexMex, although created in Texas long after it became a state, can be unquestionably called authentic fir no other reason than 200 years ago Texas was Mexico for 12 minutes.
There is no denying that Creole food is American, and a ton of those styles were created from the early 1700s. A century before Louisiana became a state.
It is even worse looking at Cajun Country. That part of the state of Louisiana was not part of the Louisiana Purchase, so I guess Cajun food, by his standards isn't American, it is Mexican.
I don't think what country a part of the US was in long long ago matters much. It is what influence it is under nowadays. TexMex is still Mexican food just as Chinese American food is still Chinese food. Both are just not AUTHENTIC Mexican or Chinese in most uses of the word.
Maybe--I think there's a lot of grey area here, so I'm fine with debating things, though I don't understand some of the jumps being made to argue against things that I don't think I've actually said.
I think for Tex Mex and American Chinese food, I myself wouldn't use the word authentic or inauthentic to describe them and my first attribution to where they're from wouldn't be Mexico or China, but rather American. The interesting thing about both of these to me is that continuing immigration often puts these in an odd push and pull of taking additional influences as well as new arrivals sometimes placing a bit of scorn on these as not authentic though I think there's a good argument for them being simply different and cuisines of their own rather than a (lesser) bowdlerization of something else.
The only proper ones are served of plastic bags in certain parts of Mexico City.
Not all of the restaurants that show up in google searches have them, or have them consistently. The ones they serve in Hugo's tasted pretty bland to me. Haven't tried Xochi's.
Good luck. In today's world people get stuck on talking points and just run with it and everything, no matter how well reasoned, is dumb. Combined with the big-headed nature of some Texans, you just seem to be just running into a brick-wall. Reason just can't get passed that Texas ego. (And I consider myself a Texan so I can say that).
His theory is that Texas being part of Mexico for like 12 minutes, and Mexico didn't really want anything to do with it so barely populated it, and because of those strong ties from waaaaay back then, it is somehow can be considered a region of Mexico, and TexMex, although created in Texas long after it became a state, can be unquestionably called authentic fir no other reason than 200 years ago Texas was Mexico for 12 minutes.
Had to smile at the first paragraph.
My question is whether it is possible that Tex Mex food actually originated in Texas and then found it's way to northern Mexico over the years.
I'm going to assume that it was probably people of Mexican descent who first came up with Tex Mex dishes as opposed to a bunch of gringos sitting around a campfire in San Angelo. So it stands to reason that the dishes might have migrated back across the border. Just speculating though.
You called Tex Mex "comfort food" and in my experience with Mexican food in the places I've eaten it... if you just want to get full... I mean sprawled out on the couch nappin' after eatin' full... Tex Mex is the way to go.
I originally answered this thread in 2013. I still think LA has excellent Mexican food, but I’ve also had excellent Mexican food in El Centro, San Diego, Dallas, El Paso, Phoenix, Austin, San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, Watsonville, Albuquerque, etc.
I’ve tried every type of restaurant from small, unassuming taco stands to nice restaurants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccm123
Los Angeles, hands down. For flavor, variety and price.
My question is whether it is possible that Tex Mex food actually originated in Texas and then found it's way to northern Mexico over the years.
I'm going to assume that it was probably people of Mexican descent who first came up with Tex Mex dishes as opposed to a bunch of gringos sitting around a campfire in San Angelo. So it stands to reason that the dishes might have migrated back across the border. Just speculating though.
You called Tex Mex "comfort food" and in my experience with Mexican food in the places I've eaten it... if you just want to get full... I mean sprawled out on the couch nappin' after eatin' full... Tex Mex is the way to go.
There's definitely been a lot of back and forth border crossing, though Tex Mex to some degree was shaped by having a lot of non-Mexican audiences and their tastes. That being said, a lot of stuff from the US makes it across the border to become quite popular. Hamburgers are quite common as are chips and soda is everywhere. Chains like McDonald's, Burger King, Domino's, KFC, etc. do fairly well throughout Mexico.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Possible trip to Mexico City later this year. Anyone have any recommendations there?
Yea! Contramar is very good as is its sister restaurant Entremar. CDMX has some very fancy restaurants and of the two most commonly mentioned, I prefer Pujol to Quintonil. A different era of formal dining is Nicos which seems like it'd be an old guard French restaurant, which it is to some extent, but it has a lot of local cuisine and its ant eggs are really delicious and not just an odd novelty. I found a lot of random corner taquerias and the like that were good as well and especially like eating in stalls at local neighborhood markets like in Mercado Medellin.
Yea! Contramar is very good as is its sister restaurant Entremar. CDMX has some very fancy restaurants and of the two most commonly mentioned, I prefer Pujol to Quintonil. A different era of formal dining is Nicos which seems like it'd be an old guard French restaurant, which it is to some extent, but it has a lot of local cuisine and its ant eggs are really delicious and not just an odd novelty. I found a lot of random corner taquerias and the like that were good as well and especially like eating in stalls at local neighborhood markets like in Mercado Medellin.
Agreed that random street stalls often have good eats. Only pick ones with lines.
I always say 'sin cilantro y lechuga' just to be on the safe side.
Los Angeles, San Diego, Tucson, Houston, San Antonio, Chicago,
Dallas, Phoenix, Austin just below
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.