What do you think?
Rate this book
Why We Eat What We Eat: How Columbus Changed the Way the World Eats
Raymond Sokolov, the Leisure & Arts Editor of The Wall Street Journal describes how Christopher Columbus changed the way the world eats in Why We Eat What We Eat .
Sokolov says that Columbus greatly influenced our eating habits when such New World delights as tomatoes, chocolate, green beans, chili peppers, and maize were introduced into cuisine throughout the world and when the delicacies of the Old World found their way into the cooking pots of America.
Sokolov says that Columbus greatly influenced our eating habits when such New World delights as tomatoes, chocolate, green beans, chili peppers, and maize were introduced into cuisine throughout the world and when the delicacies of the Old World found their way into the cooking pots of America.
254 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1991
13 people are currently reading
337 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
November 4, 2019
Kinda hard to absorb but truly so eye opening to read about the travel of ingredients and “cuisine” around the world. If you’ve ever talked about authenticity I think you’ll really enjoy this. I would really love an update from the author 30 years later.
July 1, 2014
The central thesis of this book is fascinating, though ultimately kind of obvious: the encounter between the Old World and the New changed the way that every person on earth eats. Before Columbus, there were no tomatoes in Italian food, no chilies in Thai or Chinese food, no potatoes anywhere in Europe at all. Likewise, there were no pork or cheese in Mexican cuisine.
Beyond pointing these things out, though, Sokolov gives micro-histories of both regions and dishes. This is a difficult task because of the depth of the changes that occurred. Can a complete or, even thorough, account be given of the food-ways of Puerto Rico, given its status as colony that was also a central hub of trade between Span and the Americas and even Asia? Hardly. That is a book unto itself. So also with most of the topics that must be covered in a book on this subject. Potatoes have a chapter, as do tomatoes and several tubers, and all of these chapters are full of interesting information (mostly). But none of them answer all the questions I have about the history of that item. (That's not true. I had almost no questions about manioc.) A book about tomatoes, a book about potatoes, a book about apples...these would be more thorough. However, I understand that Sokolov didn't set out to write all those books, that he wanted a survey of the main topics. In this regard he does a good job.
Of course there are some elements of style with which I could quibble. Sokolov is a journalist/columnist/writer of articles, and the style with which he writes is sometimes more wending than direct and the narrative structure of some chapters sometimes gets a little lost (again, a hazard of the topic). While at other times, it is obvious he is very excited about what he has learned and wants to share, for instance, every known dish that was recorded as being eaten in (Mexico?) by the conquistadors, including both the original native and Spanish interpretive names. And though his in-text citations are great, I would nonetheless have appreciated a bibliography.
So, I know this doesn't sound like a 4-star review, and sort of nit-picky. But it was a very good book, but suffered from problems of programming. Its key failing was incompleteness, a fault that, if remedies, would make this book more than a thousand pages long.
Finally, among the best parts of this book was the extended discussion on authenticity. In food culture now, authenticity is often seen as the greatest good, though "authenticity" is a tenuous claim or to make or defend. What is an authentic apple pie? The one your mother made? Your grandmother? Do you make it the same as your cousin? Do you make it the same every time? How can we convey a cultural idea from one group to another when the second has no understanding of the first?
In fact, how do we define authenticity within a culture? Almost all the dishes eaten anywhere were all invented in the past 400 years, and most of them far more recently than that. They seem ancient and unchanging to use, but are in fact in a constant state of flux. All cuisines of the world are constantly encountering others and sharing with them, including our own personal cuisines. If that is the case, then what is authentic? What is a hybrid and what is a bastardization? This, ultimately, was the great thought-experiment of this book, rather than the main thesis. How do me create and maintain, and can we label an preserve a certain authenticity? What are the implications of that stance? Indeed, a more fluid understanding is ultimately best for all.
Beyond pointing these things out, though, Sokolov gives micro-histories of both regions and dishes. This is a difficult task because of the depth of the changes that occurred. Can a complete or, even thorough, account be given of the food-ways of Puerto Rico, given its status as colony that was also a central hub of trade between Span and the Americas and even Asia? Hardly. That is a book unto itself. So also with most of the topics that must be covered in a book on this subject. Potatoes have a chapter, as do tomatoes and several tubers, and all of these chapters are full of interesting information (mostly). But none of them answer all the questions I have about the history of that item. (That's not true. I had almost no questions about manioc.) A book about tomatoes, a book about potatoes, a book about apples...these would be more thorough. However, I understand that Sokolov didn't set out to write all those books, that he wanted a survey of the main topics. In this regard he does a good job.
Of course there are some elements of style with which I could quibble. Sokolov is a journalist/columnist/writer of articles, and the style with which he writes is sometimes more wending than direct and the narrative structure of some chapters sometimes gets a little lost (again, a hazard of the topic). While at other times, it is obvious he is very excited about what he has learned and wants to share, for instance, every known dish that was recorded as being eaten in (Mexico?) by the conquistadors, including both the original native and Spanish interpretive names. And though his in-text citations are great, I would nonetheless have appreciated a bibliography.
So, I know this doesn't sound like a 4-star review, and sort of nit-picky. But it was a very good book, but suffered from problems of programming. Its key failing was incompleteness, a fault that, if remedies, would make this book more than a thousand pages long.
Finally, among the best parts of this book was the extended discussion on authenticity. In food culture now, authenticity is often seen as the greatest good, though "authenticity" is a tenuous claim or to make or defend. What is an authentic apple pie? The one your mother made? Your grandmother? Do you make it the same as your cousin? Do you make it the same every time? How can we convey a cultural idea from one group to another when the second has no understanding of the first?
In fact, how do we define authenticity within a culture? Almost all the dishes eaten anywhere were all invented in the past 400 years, and most of them far more recently than that. They seem ancient and unchanging to use, but are in fact in a constant state of flux. All cuisines of the world are constantly encountering others and sharing with them, including our own personal cuisines. If that is the case, then what is authentic? What is a hybrid and what is a bastardization? This, ultimately, was the great thought-experiment of this book, rather than the main thesis. How do me create and maintain, and can we label an preserve a certain authenticity? What are the implications of that stance? Indeed, a more fluid understanding is ultimately best for all.
September 28, 2018
Interesting amalgamation of select food related history.
The books consists of an introduction explaining the author's main thesis - that what we eat changed drastically after Columbus discovered the Americas - and then devolves into chapters focused on important food locales (mostly countries) followed by chapters focusing on specific foods relevant to his main argument. The introductory material was rather strong, but the remaining chapters were not all of equal merit and caused the book to feel disjointed and sometimes redundant. For example, the chapter on tomatoes I found fascinating while the chapter on strawberries provided little of interest.
However, for a book published in 1991, many of the points Sokolov makes are still extremely relevant, the chapter on Puerto Rico being particularly insightful in light of current events. I would recommend this book for history buffs, but also those involved in the business of food (chefs and the like). Sokolov's views on "authentic" cuisine are perhaps the most meaningful highlight of this gastronomic world tour.
The books consists of an introduction explaining the author's main thesis - that what we eat changed drastically after Columbus discovered the Americas - and then devolves into chapters focused on important food locales (mostly countries) followed by chapters focusing on specific foods relevant to his main argument. The introductory material was rather strong, but the remaining chapters were not all of equal merit and caused the book to feel disjointed and sometimes redundant. For example, the chapter on tomatoes I found fascinating while the chapter on strawberries provided little of interest.
However, for a book published in 1991, many of the points Sokolov makes are still extremely relevant, the chapter on Puerto Rico being particularly insightful in light of current events. I would recommend this book for history buffs, but also those involved in the business of food (chefs and the like). Sokolov's views on "authentic" cuisine are perhaps the most meaningful highlight of this gastronomic world tour.
June 12, 2018
The book starts off great--exploring the cuisines of the new and the old worlds around the time of spanish colonization, and how native cuisine influenced/adapted/survived colonization and influenced old-world cuisine. Near the middle, though, the book breaks apart into a collection of semi-related essays , unconnected to the initial premise. Not that they're bad reading, but it just feels like these pieces were written for a magazine and shoehorned in
September 13, 2011
Interesting. I'm glad I read this selection of food ethnography, but damned if it isn't an odd little book. Based on the title I thought it would be a tracing of commonplace American menus back through history; instead, it opens with chapters on a number of different Spanish countries and their culinary traditions. Okay, I thought, perhaps it's an examination of how Spanish-speaking countries' commonplace culinary habits were formed by los conquistadores - but no, then we start to veer to non-Spanish countries, even back to the Old World. All right then - it must be about how this particular exploratory era was a pivotal point in food history - nope! We veer abruptly back to modern times. Then the chapters change from focusing on a single country to focusing on a single food - many of which were already treated in the country chapters, as with Peru and potatoes. Along with his habit of name-dropping, the author's organizational skills are not quite my style.
But woven into this labyrinthine book (which felt much lengthier/information-rich than it looked) was a wealth of fascinating information and tidbits about all sorts of foods and places and times. The title is misleading: in many places, Sokolov focuses on why we DON'T eat what we don't eat, but these stories are just as fascinating if not more so (fruit too easily bruised to travel well; whims of geography, politics and economics; class-based food preferences; and so on.)
Reading a food narrative written twenty years ago is a fascinating window into the mindset of the late 1980s and early 90s: the author feels no need to condemn the largely meat-and-starch-based Puerto Rican diet the way I imagine a more contemporary author would, for example. Instead, he focuses his attention on examining why Puerto Rican food has not taken off as a cultural phenomenon in the way virtually-identical other Caribbean diets have. Really interesting and a valid question, which might be obscured by shrugging one's shoulders and assuming it's because it's not the healthiest diet for a Westerner.
I've come across a lot more critical than I intend to be, considering how much I enjoyed the historical gems uncovered here. I've glad I read this book and I would leaf through it again periodically. I also now want to try Peruvian food, mulberries, cherimoyas, and Utah scones. This is the danger of food writing... a danger which is very sweet.
But woven into this labyrinthine book (which felt much lengthier/information-rich than it looked) was a wealth of fascinating information and tidbits about all sorts of foods and places and times. The title is misleading: in many places, Sokolov focuses on why we DON'T eat what we don't eat, but these stories are just as fascinating if not more so (fruit too easily bruised to travel well; whims of geography, politics and economics; class-based food preferences; and so on.)
Reading a food narrative written twenty years ago is a fascinating window into the mindset of the late 1980s and early 90s: the author feels no need to condemn the largely meat-and-starch-based Puerto Rican diet the way I imagine a more contemporary author would, for example. Instead, he focuses his attention on examining why Puerto Rican food has not taken off as a cultural phenomenon in the way virtually-identical other Caribbean diets have. Really interesting and a valid question, which might be obscured by shrugging one's shoulders and assuming it's because it's not the healthiest diet for a Westerner.
I've come across a lot more critical than I intend to be, considering how much I enjoyed the historical gems uncovered here. I've glad I read this book and I would leaf through it again periodically. I also now want to try Peruvian food, mulberries, cherimoyas, and Utah scones. This is the danger of food writing... a danger which is very sweet.
May 14, 2021
My favorite self-appointed food-anthropologist of all time (#2? Probably Anthony Bourdain). This is sadly one of the few works Sokolov completed in book form that brings the pleasure of his regular Wall Street Journal and Natural History columns. His sense of the interconnectedness of ingredients, techniques, and cuisines that make up the world of food is astounding. I highly recommend this book if you are at all curious as to “why we eat what we eat.” Of course it could use some updating, as things have continued to change since 1991, but this remains a great read.
January 14, 2018
Not only do you learn about foods....but a lot about history as well.
August 19, 2025
i learned two, maybe three things from this book so it gets one star. otherwise this was a terrible book. very poorly organized and it was somehow a mix of a memoir and history but it seemed like the author was just spewing words. and most of the words were words i have never seen before back to back in majority of the sentences. at that point, just say you only want this book to reach the highest class of society. this book is inaccessible to people who haven't read every english dictionary that exists. and I am very against inaccessibility of knowledge from authors who either won't or dont know how to teach in a way that *most* people can understand. bye
April 30, 2021
I overall liked the book, but Raymond Sokolov covers a lot of topics. There are some chapters I wish he had gone into depth more and other he should have left out completely. This was a nice change of pace for me and I definitely want to read more foodie books. I perhaps wasn't the target audience which is why I lost interest towards the end.
June 16, 2023
If you’re interested in culinary history, this one takes the broad view. Regional European cuisines were founded on the eating habits of the dynasties, themselves funding and profiting from global exploration. This is a collection of Sokolov’s shorter essays and sometimes reads choppy. Still a joy.
November 28, 2017
I wish the author had stuck more closely to his stated purpose in writing this book. The book seemed to devolve inti a random jumble.
September 30, 2020
Interesting read but overly long. Writing style takes some getting used to also.
December 2, 2022
Meticulously researched with a scholarly presentation. If you thought you knew about the origin of foods, think again and read this book.
July 3, 2021
Very dated set of essays about how various foods started in one place and (because of colonialism and slavery and empire) were eventually eaten elsewhere. I would have found a less sweeping history much more compelling. The basic thesis is that there is no "authentic" cuisine. I did enjoy thinking, on a very self-centered basis, about what food traditions and recipes I am working to pass along to my daughters.
June 23, 2009
I would have given it 5 stars, except for the irritating tic of praising/exculpating Columbus every couple of chapters, as an intro to assessing the impact of his voyage (and the others it is standing in for) on what we eat. This is a book about how eating habits, and food sources, changed after the Columbian "exchange," which is to say, after new world and old world exchanged and fused grains, vegetables, animals, roots, and other edible matters ("exchange" is a euphemism also for slavery, disease, etc...). NS is most interested in Afro-Caribbean cuisines and foods, and is most rooted in NYC (he was a longtime reporter/editor for the Wall Street Journal, and wrote a monthly column on food for Natural History for years) such as Puerto Rico, Cartegena, Colombia, Bahia and the Philippines (the biggest 'Asian' entry in the bunch). He is pretty consistently interested in the directly Columbian/Spanish colonial legacy and the indigenous foods and cooking that mingle with it. Tho he has chapters on peppers, pumpkins and other specific foods, his main aim is to set this "revolution" on par with the nouvelle cuisine revolution of the 1970s, and even to dwarf that latter one.
I had just been thinking that it was a very early example of deconstructive writing, and a surprisingly popular/populist one, and he actually comes right out and says it. He even has a trip to talk to Claude Levi-Strauss and argues that his glimpse of L-S's archive of index cards showed the remoteness & limits of Structuralism, a philosophy ("") that saw patterns (esp in "raw" places and societies) that were rule-bound in their shaping of culture, and incapable of change. NS's tack is to instead show change (w/o necessarily analysing it in terms of political economy), and draw attention to the many subsequent lives of post-"exchange" fusions of the last 500+ years.
I had just been thinking that it was a very early example of deconstructive writing, and a surprisingly popular/populist one, and he actually comes right out and says it. He even has a trip to talk to Claude Levi-Strauss and argues that his glimpse of L-S's archive of index cards showed the remoteness & limits of Structuralism, a philosophy ("") that saw patterns (esp in "raw" places and societies) that were rule-bound in their shaping of culture, and incapable of change. NS's tack is to instead show change (w/o necessarily analysing it in terms of political economy), and draw attention to the many subsequent lives of post-"exchange" fusions of the last 500+ years.
April 24, 2013
A quick and very enjoyable read on global food patterns and how they came to be is Why We Eat What We Eat: How the Encounter Between the New World and the Old Chnaged the Way Everyone on the Planet Eats(published 1991) written by Raymond Sokolov, the former Travel and Culture writer for the Wall Street Journal. This is an easy, accessible entry point for those interested in food history as opposed to the more academic volume by historian Alfred Crosby entitled The Columbian Exchange, written in 1972.
The first part of the book covers six global hotspots of culinary melting pots where food worlds collided to create a new cuisine: Mexico, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Cartagena in Colombia, Bahia in Brazil, and Peru. Sokolov doesn't pretend that this is an exclusive list but rather is making the case in these cases the cuisine today is truly a coming together of different food traditions despite the underlying clash of civilizations.
The second part of the book is brief but follows a bibliographical overview of the development of two of the world's best known and most distinct food cultures, that of France and China. And the last part of the book looks at how certain fruits and vegetables spread around the world. There are few mistakes here and there such as suggesting the potato chip was invented in Saratoga Springs. The story is true but thinly fried potatoes were certainly eaten prior to a frazzled chef sending back a plate of fries to disgruntled diner who had complained that his fries were too thick.
Sokolov is a great writer, that alone should make you want to read this book. At numerous points, his wit and clever use of word actually had me laughing out loud on public transportation even.
The first part of the book covers six global hotspots of culinary melting pots where food worlds collided to create a new cuisine: Mexico, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Cartagena in Colombia, Bahia in Brazil, and Peru. Sokolov doesn't pretend that this is an exclusive list but rather is making the case in these cases the cuisine today is truly a coming together of different food traditions despite the underlying clash of civilizations.
The second part of the book is brief but follows a bibliographical overview of the development of two of the world's best known and most distinct food cultures, that of France and China. And the last part of the book looks at how certain fruits and vegetables spread around the world. There are few mistakes here and there such as suggesting the potato chip was invented in Saratoga Springs. The story is true but thinly fried potatoes were certainly eaten prior to a frazzled chef sending back a plate of fries to disgruntled diner who had complained that his fries were too thick.
Sokolov is a great writer, that alone should make you want to read this book. At numerous points, his wit and clever use of word actually had me laughing out loud on public transportation even.
March 30, 2011
The title was intriguing (arousing the curiosity or interest of).
On page 237 of my 1991 edition, the book is intended not "For most people
in the world this is of no direct importance, but to food-mad novelty seekers
in the industrial nations" is the presumed intended audience for the book,
and thus a motivation for the style of presentation (and hence the style
of this review).
There is a fair bit of useful information, though most of it is concentrated
in the later pages, where it became (for me) easier to read more than a
few pages at a time, wading through the diversions, as though being
conversationally entertained with asides, while the word cook piques
(stimulates (interest or curiosity)) the appetite, presents the "meat" of the
subject, wraps up with indirect references to explain his drawn out
(in "other" words, for stimulating contrast) creation, wrapping up the
discourse to a satisfying sense of repast, just before adjourning to the final
period of this tract.
The author is a professional writer establishing his knowledge, credentials,
and highly researched authority on the subject of food and food history and
philosophy, with prolific obscure references both ancient and modern,
and prose that is well peppered at close-spaced intervals with highbrow
vocabulary, and a modicum of lowbrow verbiage tossed in to show that he
can cover the bases, while residing at, if not heading, the table of elite food
aficionados and back-up food-o-files.
On page 237 of my 1991 edition, the book is intended not "For most people
in the world this is of no direct importance, but to food-mad novelty seekers
in the industrial nations" is the presumed intended audience for the book,
and thus a motivation for the style of presentation (and hence the style
of this review).
There is a fair bit of useful information, though most of it is concentrated
in the later pages, where it became (for me) easier to read more than a
few pages at a time, wading through the diversions, as though being
conversationally entertained with asides, while the word cook piques
(stimulates (interest or curiosity)) the appetite, presents the "meat" of the
subject, wraps up with indirect references to explain his drawn out
(in "other" words, for stimulating contrast) creation, wrapping up the
discourse to a satisfying sense of repast, just before adjourning to the final
period of this tract.
The author is a professional writer establishing his knowledge, credentials,
and highly researched authority on the subject of food and food history and
philosophy, with prolific obscure references both ancient and modern,
and prose that is well peppered at close-spaced intervals with highbrow
vocabulary, and a modicum of lowbrow verbiage tossed in to show that he
can cover the bases, while residing at, if not heading, the table of elite food
aficionados and back-up food-o-files.
September 24, 2012
Mouth-puckeringly dry humour... "Columbus may have been history's best example of someone who did great things without knowing what they were." Succinct and acerbic observations about the movement of food across nations, carried by explorers, and how the French tried to take credit for everything. A must-read if you love food and want to know the provenance and politics of what's on your plate.
February 22, 2008
Dapet di toko buku bekas juga, harganya cuma 10 rb perak. Oh no! hahahha... Tertarik ngeliat judulnya en pengen aja membaca sesuatu yang lain. Dan ternyata isinya gak mengecewakan, ternyata makanan pun punya banyak mata rantai..
April 21, 2009
Never again will I question the authenticity of food. The author explains how dramatically the world's cuisine changed in just 50 years after Columbus came to the New World. The world is an every-evolving place, even before global warming,airplanes, and the Internet.
September 9, 2009
A great, if somewhat verbose, look at how food cross borders and influences culture. Sokolov at one point wonders if the potato famine in Ireland hadn't occured, the course of history in America might have looked quite different.
March 13, 2010
Often quite speculational, this book was still richly informational. It was fun to read about a foodie's inspirations and investigations. I've looked at olives, corn, potatoes and newer (to me) foods in a new light. What could be more fun than food?!!
May 24, 2007
I've only just started this book and am about 2 chapters in. I'm loving his politics and his perspective on the convergence of "old world" and "new world" foods, language, and culture.
February 28, 2010
Journalist Raymond Sokolov sets out to examine the origins of commons foods and dishes. Fascinating mix of anthropology, linguistics, genetic research, and gastronomy.
July 28, 2015
all cooking is fusion
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews