Do you dislike the term "foodie"?

The folks at Gastronomica magazine apparently do. They have a survey to choose a replacement:

Image1.jpg

Not sure we're going to succeed on this go round.

I recognize the evolution of language, especially perhaps in cyberspace these days but there comes a point of absurdity. What in the world is wrong with the words gourmet and gourmand (the first of course more admirable as a descriptor than the second)?

[Robin Garr]

It doesn't bother me. Go with the flow.

On the other hand, the "Don't Call Me A Foodie" movement, which was big on Chowhound before Chowhound went corporate, strikes me as pretty much a form of reverse snobbery. "I'm so trendy that I don't need to be trendy." It's not a big deal, really.

I never liked the term 'foodie'. It's too cute and I'm not sure why the 'ie' diminutive is necessary.

Plus, it seems to be too big of a tent to have much meaning in distinguishing what is unique and special about Rahsaan's relationship to gastronomical pleasure.

But I never got too worked up about it and those alternatives certainly don't sound any better. I agree with Rogov that the gourmet vs. gourmand distinction is one simple and classic place to start.

I don't like the term when I hear it but I don't hear it much so it is not important enough to bother me.

Foodie is just fine, locovore is just fine. No big deal. As long as they don't combine the two words such as locofoodie!

I don't understand the need for a label at all. Most folks who tag themselves as foodies are people who just like to eat, and who know how to prepare a few things pretty well. Those who label others foodies seem to be people who appreciate the skill of others who know how to prepare a few things pretty well that they would like to eat -- neither group having a necessarily well honed palate or broad experience with food cultures. Thus, the wide following of "food celebrities" like The Neelys, Paula Deen, Rachel Ray and Guy Fieri (who, for some reason, people like to watch eat), IMO. If you need a label, have at it! Personally, I could care less.

Foodster? Foodgeek?

I had friends who called me a foodie before it became widespread in the vernacular, and it's never really bothered me. It doesn't explain my relationship with food, but no single term could. I like chowhound, but it's linked with a commercial endeavor.

As to foodie, I think its current usage is quite distinct from gourmet and gourmand. Gourmet is linked to haute cuisine, and implies a search for the "best." Gourmand can be used to describe overindulgers, or more charitably those who just really enjoy food consumption. I think foodie has the sense of intense interest in food and it's preparation, and a connotation of more widespread appreciation of styles/cuisines than has historically been associated with gourmet. Of course, foodie is used for everything from the Zagat-wielding yuppie through home cooking foodbloggers through those searching for the best goatstew in Brooklyn.

I don't love the term, but it's what is used, and until something better becomes used, I won't worry about it.

I'm not sure why the 'ie' diminutive is necessary.

What, you'd rather be called 'food'?

I don't understand the need for a label at all. Most folks who tag themselves as foodies are people who just like to eat, and who know how to prepare a few things pretty well. Those who label others foodies seem to be people who appreciate the skill of others who know how to prepare a few things pretty well that they would like to eat -- neither group having a necessarily well honed palate or broad experience with food cultures. Thus, the wide following of "food celebrities" like The Neelys, Paula Deen, Rachel Ray and Guy Fieri (who, for some reason, people like to watch eat), IMO. If you need a label, have at it! Personally, I could care less.

I hate labels too Jo Ann, especially all the political labels floating around now. I don't label myself as a foodie but my friends do, it is not a bad thing and I don't mind it. I do mind if someone labels me a conservative, liberal, or some such stupid and incorrect word. What bothers me more is when someone asks me for a recipe or sees a picture of something I've cooked. They read the recipe and declare, Oh, we prefer to cook our meats/veggies/whatever, a different way! Now that almost makes me crazy.

I'm with you on that label thing, Karen. I readily label myself politically, but I despise other people telling me what my labels mean in an attempt to box me in. However, my friends mostly call me a gourmet. I am nothing of the sort. But, being a colored girl, once you step outside of pork chops, collard greens and candied yams -- everything else is consiered gourmet food!? I just accept it and move on -- it's easier than trying to explain myself. As for recipes, I always just shove a written one into their hands or email box. However, I've never encountered a friend who has actually made one of those recipes. Go figure!

I'm with you on that label thing, Karen. I readily label myself politically, but I despise other people telling me what my labels mean in an attempt to box me in. However, my friends mostly call me a gourmet. I am nothing of the sort. But, being a colored girl, once you step outside of pork chops, collard greens and candied yams -- everything else is considered gourmet food!? I just accept it and move on -- it's easier than trying to explain myself. As for recipes, I always just shove a written one into their hands or email box. However, I've never encountered a friend who has actually made one of those recipes. Go figure!

Oh, I get that too Jo Ann. My foodie reputation in known around town. I am often introduced as "this is the lady I told you about who is a gourmet cook". I always say, "no I am not a gourmet cook, whatever that means, but I am very interested in food and like to work with the very freshest food I can find, to create healthy and beautiful food". It is my pat answer. A few times, they come back with, "well you always tell me about all that food you make with those sauces and things". Sauces and things? I suppose an au jus, or fruit salsa, or wine might be considered a sauce to some. Not sure about the "things". I've talked to a lot of good home cooks who get the same thing Jo Ann...I think it comes with the territory. Know what? I am proud of the fact that I can cook, that I know how and where to find good food. I love to drive those snippy little ladies ( one or two of them) who are a bit envious of the fact that I enjoy cooking and consider good food a gift of love I give to my friends,(some people don't feel that way at all) a bit batty with recipes that I enhance with such ingredients like:

Baby leeks from the Farmer's Market
Locally raised and organic New York Steak
3 organic eggs from free range chickens
celery hearts
Mesclun lettuces
What really cracks me up is when they call and want to know where I get all that stuff! Of course, I don't do that to everyone...the smart ones already know how to find it if they choose to.

Foodie is just fine, locovore is just fine. No big deal. As long as they don't combine the two words such as locofoodie!

Or "foodavore"!!!

Remember that the word "Christian" started out as a pejorative, FWIW.

I don't mind labels, back when I was crazy for birdwatching, telling someone "I'm a birder" conveyed a LOT more information than "I'm a birdwatcher" or "I like to watch birds." "I'm a birder" meant I am the kind of person who would get up at 4 AM, dress in boots and field gear, and drive 250 miles with $1000 worth of optical equipment to see one species that I didn't have on my life list. I am not as much of a birder as I used to be but I still have those instincts.

And I think "I'm a foodie" is a lot like "I'm a birder" used to be for me. I will do crazy things and spend stupid amounts of money to get all the right ingredients, and I will not flinch if I realize the recipe I want to make requires an entire week of cooking, like several of Thomas Keller's recipes do. "Gourmet" works too but I tend to associate that term with folks who splash money around at restaurants.

Remember that the word "Christian" started out as a pejorative, FWIW.

What do you mean, "started out?"

I like "foodie" better than a lot of things I'm usually called.

Just someone who enjoys food. Labels are for media types who like to pop people into neat little boxes...

Always thought it implied some level of knowledge about the food, or where to find it. A badge of honor as far as I'm concerned.

I guess I cringe a little when that label gets applied to me, but it does apply to at least some extent (or I probably wouldn't be here) and it's better than the alternatives.

I don't mind it. I think it's more about being a "catchy" word vs. foodophile (which actually sounds a little vile) or some of the others. It isn't insulting or belittleing to me. It's usually when someone introduces me to someone else at a party or I've made dinner reservations for a group and don't know everyone, a friend might say, "Carrie made the restraurant choice since she is the foodie of the group."

[Jenise]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I like the term foodie and think Frank's comparison to 'birder' is most apt. It implies (or so I've always thought) a rather way above average interest in making and obtaining a high quality of fare. It seems to roundly apply to sourcing, cooking and dining in a geeky, hands-on way that 'gourmet' does not. And besides, gourmet has been rendered virtually meaningless since since it became the adjective of choice by Packaged Food Inc to slap on everything from frozen vegetables to cat food. Btw, the word originally was something like "courtier-gourmet" and was not the connoisseur of good things so much as the staff taste-tester who made sure that the food and drink for someone higher up the food chain in wealth and/or station were safe and acceptable.

'Gourmand' has the problem, to my mind, of passivity. Though yes it implies, as per Brillat-Savarin, "a passionate, rational and habitual preference for all that flatters the palate", a gourmand need not be someone who sources or cooks, and in fact I am fairly sure that back in time when that term was coined it most emphatically did not. The gourmand was simply the discerning enjoyer of others' efforts.

So foodie? Fine. I'm not a fan of labels either but they're inescapable, and I think 'foodie' is the one that explains best why everyone in this thread is here talking about it.

A reminder perhaps. The term "foodie" entered into our vocabulary in more than a minor way with the publication of Paul Levy's and Anne Barr's The Official Foodie Handbook. A fun book in every way but one set out to make us chuckle as much as to take life seriously. The book most distinctly made it clear that the foodie need not be a cook, but was one who felt a major component of life to be fine dining. And fine dining was restricted primarily to the question of quality and interest - could be lobster Thermidor or could be a bratwurst, could be tournedo Rossini or a fine hamburger.

As to gourmands and gourmets, neither need have even the least desire to prepare food. A good chance for example that the world's best known and best beloved of gourmets/gourmands/foodies was Curnonsky (Maurice Sailland), the officially elected Prince of Gourmets of France and he refused to do anything more in the kitchen than boiling water for his evening teas or tissanes. The whole trick is seeing out what pleases us and what is of quality.

Best
Rogov

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I like the term foodie and think Frank's comparison to 'birder' is most apt.

Jenise, if you aren't a "foodie" nobody is!!!

Your Polpettone story -- loved it!!!

Have nothing against the term foodie. It's a word that is easy to understand and simple to use.

[Jenise]

A reminder perhaps. The term "foodie" entered into our vocabulary in more than a minor way with the publication of Paul Levy's and Anne Barr's The Official Foodie Handbook. A fun book in every way but one set out to make us chuckle as much as to take life seriously. The book most distinctly made it clear that the foodie need not be a cook, but was one who felt a major component of life to be fine dining. And fine dining was restricted primarily to the question of quality and interest - could be lobster Thermidor or could be a bratwurst, could be tournedo Rossini or a fine hamburger.

As to gourmands and gourmets, neither need have even the least desire to prepare food. A good chance for example that the world's best known and best beloved of gourmets/gourmands/foodies was Curnonsky (Maurice Sailland), the officially elected Prince of Gourmets of France and he refused to do anything more in the kitchen than boiling water for his evening teas or tissanes. The whole trick is seeing out what pleases us and what is of quality.

Best
Rogov

Great factoid, Daniel; I had been unaware of it's origins. It just seemed to come out of nowhere about the time 'gourmet' was becoming flatulent and meaningless.

Still, at least in the circles I run in, regardless of the intentions of Levy and Barr I do believe that common-use has taken it beyond and to a better place than its original use. And it's a good thing: it's a modern term for an evolved, modern version of gourmand, stripped of all the trappings and barriers related to social class as once existed. Anyone can be one. You just have to care.