The Oxford Companion to Food

[Jenise]

Bob Ross and I may be the only two people here who own this compendium, but maybe not. I unearthed it the other day from a pile on my piano, searching for things to send out for charitable donations, and was sad to realize that it's been there for about two years and I'd never missed it. I had such hopes for this book, but in fact I've probably only consulted it twice--initially, I seemed to have found it rather unbalanced and possibly the work of someone with a cabbage fetish. Perhaps if I remembered that I own it I would actually have consulted it again by now, but if I'd found it a more interesting resource in the first place I probably wouldn't have forgotten that it's here.

It didn't go in the donation pile this time, but my criteria for the charitable donation pile did make it a candidate. Does anyone have a different opinion to share?

Boy, does that resonate, Jenise. I gave it away a month after reading it. Robin wrote a good review of it -- wonder how it's aged in his world. Best, Bob

Donate it here; I'll pay the postage.

On the other hand, here's a fun and interesting book.

It was on the "recommended reading" list when I took the Certified Culinary Professional test a couple of decades ago.

http://www.amazon.com/Food-History-Reay ... 635&sr=1-1

[Jenise]

On the other hand, here's a fun and interesting book.

It was on the "recommended reading" list when I took the Certified Culinary Professional test a couple of decades ago.

http://www.amazon.com/Food-History-Reay ... 635&sr=1-1

Haven't run into that, but it does sound fun and interesting. I notice that the book's author has also penned "Sex in History". One could buy both, and read one by day and the other at night.

This is an excellent resource, deligently researched to academic standards. Maybe it is rather dry to some tastes, but it is an important part of my food library.

Agreed. I won't sit around and read it by the fireplace, but it's nice to have when it's necessary to look something up.

[Robin Garr]

Boy, does that resonate, Jenise. I gave it away a month after reading it. Robin wrote a good review of it -- wonder how it's aged in his world. Best, Bob

I wasn't whelmed by it, Bob. I wrote that it's worth having just for its breadth, but that its omissions and gaps make it an iffy resource. Frankly, I was a little surprised at Bernie's praise.

From a 2006 review:

Perhaps Oxford's greatest strength is its breadth: You can look up almost any imaginable food reference, including some remarkably obscure terms. Balut, the Filipino delicacy that features an almost-hatched duck in the egg, gets a full column, as does konnyaku, "also known as devil's tongue jelly, a food extracted from the starchy root corm of amorphophallus rivieri." Right! Browsers will learn fascinating food trivia: The eland, for example, a large antelope with spiral horns, gives fine milk that can be stored particularly well, and its "flesh, especially the hump, is savoury and tender."

That being said, there are omissions, some of them surprising. We read about eland, but not about sabzeh, the Iranian mixed-herb salad that most American and British readers are much more likely to encounter than rice-fattened bobolinks (yes, it's in there) or hump of eland. The article on cheese gets two full pages, not an overly generous space considering that it must cover history, cheese making and cheese cookery; relatively few specific cheeses are mentioned, and the book's coverage of individual cheeses is spotty: You'll find Cheddar, of course, and Spanish Manchego; French Pont l'Évêque is listed, but Epoisses is not.

Pasta gets three full pages - 50 percent more space than cheese - and dozens of pasta shapes are enumerated in the general article, which also definitively disposes of the myth that Marco Polo brought pasta back from China to the amazement of his fellow Italians. However, don't try to look up even such common forms as linguine or fettuccine. They're not listed separately.

[Jenise]

This is an excellent resource, deligently researched to academic standards. Maybe it is rather dry to some tastes, but it is an important part of my food library.

Dry's fine--it's a reference book, and that's expected. It's the gaps that Robin mentions that annoy--I remember shortly after buying the book being delighted to read about the origins of yorkshire pudding, but not finding something else that was no less established though at this point I can't tell you what that was.

But your and John's responses are encouraging, I'll keep it on my desk from now on and see if I don't use it more.

[Robin Garr]

It's the gaps that Robin mentions that annoy--I remember shortly after buying the book being delighted to read about the origins of yorkshire pudding, but not finding something else that was no less established though at this point I can't tell you what that was.

I haven't opened the book again since I reviewed it, which sounds pretty much like your experience, Jenise.

I thought the review was balanced - the part I quoted above was only a portion of a generally positive review. Yet, when I provided links to buy from Amazon.com, I think I sold about 300 copies of Oxford Wine and about four of Oxford Food. Of course, I never hype book reviews with an idea of boosting sales. That would be vewwy, vewwy wrong ...

One factoid that stayed with me: Mexican vultures wouldn't eat French corpses during the Maxmillian battles; supposedly they tasted too much of garlic.

Of course the tome is incomplete. Unlike a real Encyclopedia, it is one man's work, not a team project with an editorial staff. Would you want to buy a comprehensive Encyclopedia, knowing it would be dozens of volumes and cost thousands of dollars? So I just don't accept the "gaps" criticism as valid. You could make the same criticism of Joy of Cooking, or any cook book. The alternative is to purchase an entire food library for the house if you really care to be comprehensive. Anyone who has ever done serious research knows that you never use just one resource.

The OCF is just an excellent resource to have in one's library, whatever the size. The fact that it has a bibliography with references at each entry shows that this is well beyond the usual cook's reference book. It points you along the research trail.

[Robin Garr]

I just don't accept the "gaps" criticism as valid.

Linguine? Fettuccine? Two to three pages on the worlds of cheese and pasta? Okay, Bernie. Whatever works for you ...

Haven't run into that, but it does sound fun and interesting. I notice that the book's author has also penned "Sex in History". One could buy both, and read one by day and the other at night.

Jenise, does tis mean that you don't do food at night?

I have them both. Like them both.

I just don't accept the "gaps" criticism as valid.

Linguine? Fettuccine? Two to three pages on the worlds of cheese and pasta? Okay, Bernie. Whatever works for you ...

I know plenty about pasta and cheese, Robin. And if I need to know a peculiar fact, I can look it up in an Italian reference or a cheese book.

[Robin Garr]

I know plenty about pasta and cheese, Robin. And if I need to know a peculiar fact, I can look it up in an Italian reference or a cheese book.

That's nice, Bernie, and I'm sure you do. But it's not really about you. I was addressing the value of Oxford Food as a reference book for the general public. The "gaps" and weak sections may not bother you, and that's fine. But when I reviewed the book for thousands of readers, I couldn't wholeheartedly recommend it.