Talk:Carbonara

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Food Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Food and drink task list: Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Food, Bread, Beef, Curry, Drink, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yoghurt, Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom) Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: , Italian cuisine, Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies, Coffee, Milk, Pasta, French cuisine, Chocolate Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Burger King Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Get rid of Trivia sections in articles you are working on. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner to food and drink related articles to help bring them to members attention. It could encourage new members to the project too. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of food Review articles currently up for GA status: Burger King legal issues, Chocolate Review articles currently up for FA status: Butter

	Carbonara is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Please, no cream in the carbonara

I think I can settle this cream or no cream problem with regard to Spaghetti alla Carbonara. The Accademia Italiana della Cucina is the MOST respected authority on authentic Italian cuisine. Its recipe book never mentions the use of cream for this dish. Therefore: NO CREAM.

Feel free to verify this by visiting the Academy's website at accademiaitalianacucina.it (which I have included in the external links section of the article). You should know, however, the recipes are all written in Italian. Fortunately, my knowledge of Spanish, coupled with an Italian/English dictionary, allows me to accurately translate the recipes.

However, for the benefit of the lazy, I have pasted below the recipe as it appears in the recipe book in the original Italian with a translation afterwards:

TRANSLATION

I think I've made my point.

LuisGomez111 21:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

To borrow a linguistic phrase, Wikipedia is descriptivist, not prescriptivist. It is not our job to pick a "correct" recipe, but rather describe what actually exists, without passing judgment. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 04:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Carbonara, cream or no cream?

In the original Carbonara recipe there is no cream. Cream here is clearly a later addition. Carbonara originates from Latium (Rome and its region). In Rome, as in the whole central and southern Italy, the usage of cream in the pasta dishes is unknown. alex2006 05:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

That might be true in Italy, I would have to ask a chef where I work (the New England Culinary Institute), but in the English speaking world Carbonara means cream, egg, cheese, and bacon.

The two books I cited are core books used in the culinary program at NECI, and the Food Lover's Companion is a standard in the field.

—MJBurrage • TALK • 14:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Look Michael, here we talk about an italian dish (the beginning of the article says "Carbonara is a traditional Italian pasta sauce"), not an american one. Since we are talking about a traditional sauce, I would start with the traditional recipe. Then I would suggest that you revert your edit and write a paragraph or a sentence about "Carbonara in the English speaking world". What do you think about it? And, talking about standard books, if you need to know something about italian cooking, please read the work of Anna Gossetti Della Salda, which is THE book on the subject.

By the way, it is already the fourth time here on the english wikipedia that someone who is not italian is trying to explain to me - roman, with roman parents and grandparents - how the roman cooking should be... ;-) Ciao, alex2006 15:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not trying to tell you what Roman cooking should be, nor am I trying to tell you what this dish is like in Rome (I do not have knowledge in that area, and have not yet spoken to the chefs I know, who do have such knowledge)

But, this is the English language wikipedia, and much like other foods and recipes and pretty much anything else that American culture co opts for itself, this word (as used in English) does not necessarily mean what it might have in its source language.

In English cookbooks, carbonara is cream, eggs, cheese (preferably parmesan), and bacon (preferably Italian). Everything else is optional. Feel free to improve the paragraph on the original Roman recipe and how it varies from what one would expect in an Italian restaurant in an English speaking country (well the States, Canada, and Britain at least, I cannot speak for Australia and New Zealand)

—MJBurrage • TALK • 17:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, it's fine to me. It is important that the reader who wants to know how the original recipe is, is able to find it out. I added also a note citing the italian cooking bible. About your chefs, be careful! If they come from northern Italy, they also may well add cream to the sauce (in Milan they put it everywhere... ;-))...

alex2006 05:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe in rome they dont use cream but i use panna in carbonara. i have seen ITALIANS (me and my family) as well as all my ITALIAN flatmates in Bologna. i know people who do not use panna when they make carbonara... ma fa cagare. -Daniele —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.119.33 (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Traditional recipe please

I find it quite disgusting that in this article ingredients that are completely extraneous to the original recipe such as garlic are mentioned on par with a building block of this sauce, namely pepper. (black, by the way!) Can we first describe the original recipe and then spend some time explaining any other bastardised variants? Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.67.217.254 (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

Given that this is the English language Wikipedia, I started with the most common Anglo-American version of the recipe (with sources). Another editor did just as detailed a job adding the notes about the original Roman recipe. If the ingredients listed in Anglo cookbooks bother you then check out pre-made carbonara at a grocery store, I have come across mushrooms as an ingredient more than once. (talk about ruining a dish.) —MJBurrage • TALK • 03:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to be precise: you did not start with the Anglo-American version, you moved the original version - which was put first - down. ;-)

I agree with you, unnamed editor ;-), and I think too that the original recipe should always come first. Anyway, I think also that more important is that the reader can find the original recipe in the article, and understand the evolution (?) of the dish.

Alex2006 06:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not mean to imply that I started the article, rather that I started my edits with the English carbonara recipe, and that you then provided the proper background which I had been unaware of. Now if this was the Italian Wikipedia I would put the Roman recipe first and then a non-POV note about the foolish Anglophones dousing it in cream. :-)
But this is the English Wikipedia, and like-it-or-not the English recipe does have cream. It would be POV for us to "correct" the English cookbooks by implying they are wrong rather than different. Much like the pizza article this article should start with the common local definition and then expand and inform. —MJBurrage • TALK • 08:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Alex, is black pepper a standard ingredient according to Le Ricette regionali Italiane, or an optional one? —MJBurrage • TALK • 08:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think yes, but it's better to check at home, and I will confirm to you monday. Besides, I am on diet since 7th of January, Carbonara actually for me is just a future dream... ;-)

Alex2006 10:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I checked, and black pepper is one of the ingredients there . The others are: 400 gr. spaghetti, 3 eggs, 2 spoons of Parmigiano and 2 of Pecorino romano, some strutto (a kind of lard, which is the original fat of the roman cooking), and 100 gr. guanciale (NO pancetta, that is bacon ). She wrote too that lately (that is, in the fifties) strutto was more and more substituted by olive oil or butter.

Alex2006 06:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info; I just added it to the article, with some minor rearrangement of the existing text for emphasis. —MJBurrage • TALK • 15:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I lived in Rome for six months with real born and bred Romans. Traditional carbonara has olive oil (not extra virgin!), cubed guanciale/pancetta, eggs, cream (optional), pecorino-romano cheese, salt and black pepper. Yes, I have witnessed real Romans putting cream in their carbonara (just a dash), it's not a myth. They specifically told me that it's an optional ingredient. Peergynt323 (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)peergynt323

[edit] Original recipe first

I agree with Alex, please stop reverting. 83.67.217.254 19:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem with that is that if you look up Carbonara in an English cookbook it does include cream. It is not our job to correct that, rather to report it, and then explain that the original Roman recipe does not include cream. The first section of the article is the Introduction, not a history. In a history section I would agree with you that older version of the recipe should come first. What it boils down to is that there is Italian Carbonara and English Carbonara. Neither version is the "correct" recipe. Since this is the English Wikipedia the article should start with the English Carbonara. —MJBurrage • TALK • 02:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

We must have a neutral point of view, and the language in which this Wikipedia is written has absolutely nothing to do with it. Your reasoning is often cause of systemic bias in Wikipedia. 83.67.217.254 18:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The modern cookbooks I have refer to the addition of cream as a no-no and very retro. Regardless of language, "English Carbonara" is like saying "Greek Champagne" :).Segat1 18:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

im italian and sorry for you but in 30 year of my live i never eat carbonara with cream here in italy non of the many restaurant that i visited do carbonara with cream non of the chef put cream or smoked bacon in it! so if in english or if all the restaurant in inglad cook carbonara with cream or bacon they shoul go back to college and lern how to cook! thanks : an italian food eater

[edit] Carbonara Tasmaniana

Sometime late last century, Maestra Signora Costa, my High School Italian teacher, told us ("i miei studentimbini moltissim' carei") that the ingredients of "pasta carbonara" were what i carbonari could scrounge up to cook on their camp-fires in il Risorgimento, and hence the title... --Shirt58 14:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC) (mmm: 'allievo/a/i/e'? Meh. Not in our manuale italiano.)

"i miei studentimbini moltissim' carei" ????? That's not Italian. At all. Gspinoza 13.32 6 mar 2007 CET

La Tasmania e l'Italia sono molto lontane... ;-) Alex2006 13:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silver Spoon

Whether or not this is the English language version of Wikipedia seems immaterial to me when describing a traditional Italian recipe. As Alex has properly reported the recipe includes no cream, nor has it ever. There is an English language version now available of 'The Silver Spoon' - the Italian cookery bible - and even though it's written in English the recipe for carbonara is still without cream. Perhaps all that is needed to clarify this issue is a distinction between the traditional recipe and the later (and foreign) evolutions of it.

Paolo Tullio

[edit] "Original", "traditional", "authentic", and other distracting terminology

There are a few recipes which can safely be said to have "original" versions. These are mostly the ones that were invented at a precise time and place by a precise person or in a precise restaurant. Oh, yes, and where there is accurate contemporary documentation (no secret ingredients or techniques). There are not many recipes like this outside of haute cuisine. Caesar salad might qualify except that the recipe was only recorded years after it was created, so it is possible it had changed by then.

Most recipes are like folktales, which have many variants, some of which have become canonical because they were collected and published (e.g. by the Grimm brothers). But even there, there may be more than one "canonical" version (in, say, French and English or for that matter in two different editions of Grimm). And funnily enough, some folktales' "original" version turns out not to have been a folktale at all, but a literary creation which later become popular in a popular form.

Most recipes change over time, and change depending on the region, the cook, the cook's whims, the cook's budget, the eater's tastes, and what is available in the market. Some change radically. The oldest known version of profiterole, for example, seems to have been some sort of baked dumpling served in soup. The economics and technology of food changes over time, too. Vegetable oil as we know it (corn oil, rapeseed (canola) oil, etc. -- olive oil is in a different category...) has replaced animal fat (lard, sheep fat, and cooking butter) and sesame oil in many areas around the Mediterranean only in the past century, partly because technology has made it much cheaper, partly because more recently the animal fats have become considered unhealthy. Recipes change along with the economics. And with taste -- American recipes became far far sweeter between 1880 and 1960.

In most cases, the history of foods is poorly documented. Until one knows the detailed history, it is unsafe to make inferences like "cream is not a typical Roman ingredient, therefore carbonara cannot/should not/does not contain cream". Perhaps it was invented in some aristocratic household which loved French cuisine and always had cream on hand. Perhaps it actually originally comes from a region where cream is typical, but it has been forgotten in that region and become popular in Rome. There are also sorts of nice stories one can invent from 'common sense' about foods (e.g. that pesto alla genovese was invented to preserve basil for sea voyages) but for which there is no good evidence (ships' manifests are actually quite detailed about the foods they bring on board, and pesto isn't mentioned).

It is also unsafe to assume that just because something is well-known in a given region, and considered by the inhabitants of that region and promoted by the local tourist board as a traditional regional specialty, that it comes from a tradition lost in the mists of time. "Everyone knows" that baguettes are "traditionally Parisian", but they were invented in the late 19th century. In the case of carbonara, actually, all the sources seem to agree that it is not a "traditional" recipe, but a rather recent one, so why is anyone talking about "tradition" at all?

And the recipes passed down by our parents and grandparents are not necessarily any more "authentic" or "traditional" than any others. (Not to mention that they are original research and have no standing as reliable sources.) A few years ago, a Francophone Belgian radio station asked its readers to submit their favorite regional recipes from their family traditions, which were to be collected into a cookbook of authentic regional tradition. But many of the recipes turned out to be identical: copied verbatim from some long-ago magazine article or cookbook. (In the US, they may have been copied from the back of the cornflakes box, but let's not get into that....)

True, there are food academies and food writers who codify particular recipes, and chefs who make one version or another of a dish famous, but that does not make the codified versions more "authentic", more "original", or more "traditional".

Instead of trying to establish what the most "authentic", most "original", or most "traditional" version of various recipes is, let's try to follow Wikipedia's wise neutral point of view policy, which asks us to report on all reputable positions. If the Academy of Roman Gastronomy forbids the use of cream in carbonara, report it. If the oldest known recipe uses garlic (whether it is common nowadays or not), report it. If 5 out of 15 Italian cookbooks with good reputations use cream, report that cream is used by some Italian cooks, and shunned by others (especially if you can find the suitable horrified language). If most American versions use Wisconsin cheddar (I say "yuck!", but that is a Talk page comment...), report on it. And so on.

So let's just avoid the words "authentic", "original", "traditional", etc. and stick to reporting things that we can actually determine from good sources. --Macrakis (talk) 05:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

With respect to – Spaghetti Carbonara alla Monferrina. Recipes and Cooking. Barilla Group.) – I would think that an Italian pasta multi-national would be a credible source. (as noted in their entry, they are half the Italian market, and {frac|4}} of the US market. They know what they are talking about.) —MJBurrage^(T•C) 12:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they are a major producer, and the quality of their pasta is good. However, I don't think their recipes are particularly interesting. After all, the recipe you cited involves a prepared "BARILLA Garden Vegetable Sauce". In the spirit of reporting reality as it is and not as we would like it to be, we could certainly mention packaged sauces (Knorr Carbonara, anyone?) as their own category if they are in wide use (the fact that Barilla is trying to flog their BARILLA Garden Vegetable Sauce doesn't prove that they are succeeding...). --Macrakis (talk) 14:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Given that the full recipe name is Spaghetti Carbonara Monferrina Style with Asparagus (Spaghetti Carbonara alla Monferrina con Asparagi), I thought that the Barilla Veg. Sauce and asparagus were being added to a carbonara dish (in this case one with cream) As noted by another editor, northern Italy adds cream to many recipes. The Montferrat area is also the source of panna cotta, and so "alla Monferrina" for a cream sauce made perfect sense. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 17:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Well said Macrakis, this is a topic that we have discussed at length in my grad. classes, specifically with concerns to authentic cuisine. The terms "authentic", "traditional", and "original" are highly subjective. As you stated chefs have "codified" certain aspects of cuisines, such as dishes with Escoffier with writing Le Guide Culinaire, but. for example there is a recipe for cassoulet in the book that most Frenchmen would argue is not "authentic" or "traditional", however it is a recipe worth note as it contributes something to the cuisine and when written into the article one should note the difference between his interpretation and that of a peasant cook. Again though as you stated, even the peasant version should not be stated as "original", "authentic" or "traditional" because much like carbonara, there are regional influences and interpretations by professional chefs, home cooks and history.

The most important part of identifying these recipes is finding a quality recipe from a reliable source, a recipe off the side of a pasta box is clearly a poor choice to state as a mainstream recipe, but it would be good to note of the dishes popularity in a culture as it appears on a commercial product's package. Philadelphia Cream Cheese also comes to mind with their cheesecake recipe. Sorry for the long rant. --Chef Tanner, CEC (talk) 23:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Barilla and the like have a 'R&D department' where new recipes are produced every day, in order to boost the consumption of pasta, and marketing experts who have the job to find a suitable name for them. I known it for sure, because more than fiftteen years ago I had to 'baptise' a couple of dishes for one of these companies (based in Umbria), since a friend of mine who got this task had not enough fantasy/culture to do it. So, just forget the 'reliability' of such recipes. By the way, in Monferrato people eat above all rice, not pasta. If we talk about regional cooking and you want to act 'philologically', you can either read the couple of reference books which existes about Italian cooking - for Rome Boni (1920 c.a) and Gossetti (middle of the sixties) (and forget the rest), or go on the field (in Rome Perilli, Da Felice, Piperno (for roman jewish cooking), and few others). Ciao a tutti, Alex2006 (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

First, a belated thanks to Macrakis, for his work on the page. With regards to the Barilla recipe, wouldn't the following be accurate and meet the Wikipedia citation standards:

Barilla has published a carbonara recipe using cream that they call "Carbonara alla Monferrina", implying that cream is an ingredient in the eastern Piedmont.^[1]

—MJBurrage^(T•C) 17:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it rises to the threshold of notability. If it becomes widely-known or iconic, like the Kraft cheesecake recipe that Chef Tanner mentions or Nestle's Toll-House chocolate chip cookies, that's another matter. Otherwise, as Alex2006 says, it's just marketing fluff. --Macrakis (talk) 18:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I do not think that this exact recipe is notable, but I do think it's notable that Barilla attributes Carbonara with cream to northern Italy. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 04:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Onion" non c'entra proprio niente

Please let's revert the lead to 11th February 2008. From this edit, things went downhill. No Italian would ever use onion for this recipe, and I strongly doubt even garlic. I liked the earlier lead much better: original recipe first, then all the various bastardisations. 83.67.217.254 (talk) 23:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Please read the above discussion about "original", "traditional", etc. and also Wikipedia policy about neutral point of view. You may believe that the "original" version doesn't use garlic, cream, etc., but where's the evidence? Some cookbooks published in Italy by Italians for Italians use them, some don't. I'd be happy to have more evidence about versions at different times and places, but just asserting based on personal experience or preference that one version is "original" doesn't advance our knowledge. --Macrakis (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry mate, you can't prove a negative. Rather, where's the evidence for onion? 170.148.198.156 (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, an editor had changed garlic to onion before onion was removed by another editor. One could also argue that not mentioning other ingredients in the opening is taking a POV opinion on the validity of other ingredients. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 04:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I would argue that removing unreferenced ingredients does not affect the "validity" of other (referenced) ingredients.

As for garlic, I would also like to point out that there is an enormous difference between using a clove of garlic in oil for the meat and then remove it and chopping garlic finely and putting it in the "sauce" - mind you I agree with whoever said that it is fundamentally wrong to call carbonara a sauce. 170.148.198.156 (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "It is a relatively recently invented dish."

What does this mean? Can we please qualify further or move it away from the opening paragraph, or both? Thanks. 210.131.167.98 (talk) 08:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The evidence presented in the article (Ada Boni cookbook), the footnoted source, and the various stories seem to point to the middle of the 20th century, perhaps after WWII. I have made the opening a bit more explicit. --Macrakis (talk) 13:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cross-reference to bolognese

User:Buspar has re-added a "related articles" section (normally called "see also") which lists Bolognese sauce; he justifies this re-addition with the comment "Bolognese is the other major type of spaghetti sauce, as mentioned in the spaghetti article, so it's relevant". Similarly, he has added Carbonara to the Bolognese article. There are innumerable recipes involving spaghetti, and linking from each of them to all the others isn't helpful. --Macrakis (talk) 19:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I actually agree that the link should be in the See also section, along with a link to alfredo etc. If the number of such links gets large enough than maybe a small "Pasta sauce" template should be created that could be added to the end of each such article. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 20:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe a template would quickly become unwieldy, as there are far too many pasta dishes -- even too many Italian pasta dishes. But how about a category, Category:Pasta dishes? Currently, some pasta dishes are mixed into the Category:Pasta category, but I think it would make more sense to have this as a separate category. Also, I'd much prefer "pasta dishes" to "pasta sauces", because "pasta sauce" excludes things like pasta e fagioli, oven-baked lasagna, etc. Besides, in Italy, one generally talks of the dish as a whole, not the sauce and dish separately. --Macrakis (talk) 22:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I agree with Macrakis. Link to pasta dishes only. Fettuccine alfredo is not even an Italian dish and linking it would be systemic bias. 222.148.6.28 (talk) 12:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I suggested alfredo, not because of its history, but because there are people who think that carbonara is just alfredo with bacon bits added. So whether it is justified or not culinarally speaking there is a connection. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 14:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

İ agree too 100% with Macrakis. Anyway, Fettuccine Alfredo IS an italian (roman) dish, invented by Alfredo (Restaurant Alfredo alla Scrofa in Rome (see Carnacina-Buonassisi 'Roma in Cucina', sub Vocem) Alex2006 (talk) 19:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the "Category:Pasta dish" idea. However, I don't understand the main objection. The spaghetti article clearly states that there are two major types of sauce for it, so why shouldn't they at least mention each other? It's in keeping with the overall style of good Wiki articles. Buspar (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The spaghetti article is wrong. There are many pasta dishes based on spaghetti, and I see no reason to consider bolognese and carbonara as the "two major types of sauce". --Macrakis (talk) 16:51, 8 June 2008 (UTC)