[umanwizard]

Burritos are not really Mexican food in general — they’re the regional cuisine of a region that includes the American southwest and the extreme north of Mexico. You’re basically saying you like regional LA cuisine better than regional SF cuisine, not that one region is particularly more faithfully reproducing “Mexican food” than the other.

[simonw]

Someone pointed out to me the other day that the Bay Area was part of Mexico from 1821 until 1848 (it was under Spanish control prior to that) - so one way to think about Bay Area Mexican food (and Californian Mexican food in general) is that it is it's own regional variety, and has been for a couple of hundred years at least.

[travisjungroth]

This is a legitimate way of viewing things. I wonder how “true” it is in the sense that explains Mexican food in California today. Specifically, I don’t think the Mexican population in Alta California was really all that high in 1848. I think it just wasn’t all that high in general.

So there are families that can trace themselves to Mexican California, but I believe their numbers and culinary influence was overshadowed by the significantly bigger population that came later. But maybe that’s just as authentic. They were bringing and making dishes, not copying them.

[umanwizard]

Btw, 1821 is when New Spain (now called Mexico) became independent. So all of Mexico was under Spanish control before that, not just California. You probably already know this, but your post sort of makes it sound like California was transferred from one country to another in that year.

[umanwizard]

Exactly, although I’m not sure whether rice in burritos was around back then or if it’s a more recent invention.

[xtiansimon]

We love “Food Log”. Living in NY area now and I miss Food Log.