|
July 12, 2003The Great BBQ War Goes OnHowever, tipping the scales is that pork now has three posts (including the original one here) dedicated to its rightful position as BBQ. Phillip draws on his Southern Heritage to blog for pork. Dax answers with his "Official Statement on the Art of Barbeque." The beef BBQ camp have no posts. Unless and until I hear any counter posts from the beef camp, I believe the porkers have won. I'll throw the Texans and their brisket a rib bone (yes, that would be a pork rib) and say that their beef cooked like BBQ is a fine tasting food. They have done a good job adapting the BBQ cooking techniques for use on cattle. They are pretty passionate about beef being BBQ. However, you can't make inaccurate claims in the blogosphere. Remember, a person will fact-check you faster than a Cajun will keep a carp. I have to admit Dax has the best reply of any in his post about the great BBQ War. I'm just going to borrow from some of his sources to fact check the brisket-eaters. Keep on reading to see if you've been fact-checked. Yeti--You are a long lost brother, but I have to check ya! "Barbecue it (beef) on the Grill." Wrong answer. Even a fellow Texan pointed out that you BBQ in a BBQ pit. "That crap they have in Kentucky that's basically pulled pork on white bread with hot sauce mixed in is what you get when you start making outrageous claims like this Adam. " And I quote from the one academic work I've seen on BBQ: "In western Kentucky, mutton was substituted for pork, and the cattle ranchers of Texas used barbecue techniques for slow-cooking beef (with these innovations, southwestern Texans and western Kentuckians put themselves irrevocably outside the "barbecue belt")." Courtney-- Well, sugah, I'll quote from the same source as above in a different section: "The most convincing explanation is that the method of roasting meat over powdery coals was picked up from indigenous peoples in the colonial period, and that "barbacoa" became "barbecue" in the lexicon of early settlers." Oh, and Courtney, thanks for the link and have a nice time in NYC--let us know how the 'BBQ, Brooklyn style' goes! Holly-- I believe S said it best with "If you invite people to a BBQ and you give 'em beef, they'll blink and wonder where their pork is." Special thanks to Rita for being the first reinforcent for the forces of pork. Kin's Kouch linked with BBQ'd goodness Wizbang linked with They Shoot, They Score Comments
Pig in a pit, my man...ain't nuttin' finer. Posted by: rita at July 13, 2003 06:57 AMhere is my last comment..... this is not like me to back down, but I found this article that sums it up well. http://bbq.about.com/library/weekly/aa110197.htm BBQ is an event... a social time to gather and enjoy everyone's company.... no matter what kind of meat you are talking about...... i will be a smart ass and add this - i have read that pigs were used due to the availability and ease of raising them. This just means that pork is used in BBQing because owners were too lazy to raise cattle......... LOL....... just like the pork BBQers are too lazy to dry rub the meat and take the oh so precious time and skill in BBQing BEEF and learning how to do it right!!! Posted by: holly at July 13, 2003 05:17 PMOh I know you didn't! The dry rubbed ribs at the Rendezvous in Memphis are to die for! And it wasn't that they were too lazy to raise cattle--Texas lands were already cleared--aka "see that bush over there?" "We call those shade trees in Texas" Posted by: Adam at July 13, 2003 05:26 PMyou liked that didn't you? LOL Posted by: holly at July 14, 2003 08:52 AMPork. The Other White Meat. The noble cattle will always have precedence over the lowly and disgusting pig. Pork is for sandwiches. Beef is for steaks. Dax was born a Yankee, and has to go to Kroger to do figure out the answer to his BBQ questions. Hardly an expert. A Pit? Where do you expect to find a pit in Suburbia? Using a report from Virginia to prove your point is like asking someone from Emory to tell you whether Coke or Pepsi is a better product. The argument I believe is over what is better. Trying to push this to the sauce is a sign of weakness. No sauce is going to make Pork taste better than Beef. And trying to claim originality is like saying Sasprilla is better than rootbeer because it's more authentic. And your contention that Kentucky is outside the BBQ belt is exactly my point. Paducah, KY doesn't use mutton. They use pork. And you call that BBQ? You'd never have that problem with Beef purists. Posted by: TheYeti at July 14, 2003 10:00 AMAnd the Yeti comes roaring back! As a native Arkansan, I have a unique position in this argument in that since we are in the border area of the BBQ belt, we have been exposed to a wide variety of sauces and beef and pork both as BBQ. However, as we've said before, we generally give the nod to pork being the real BBQ, but we do enjoy beef cooked like BBQ. Basically, us Arkies in The Natural State look at it this way: BBQ = pork Alright, let's counterpoint-- Pork. The Other White Meat. Cheap marketing slogans by the respective lobbies/councils. The noble cattle will always have precedence over the lowly and disgusting pig. Actually, pigs are known to be smarter than cattle, and wild hogs are a lot meaner. (Go Razorbacks!) Pork is for sandwiches. Beef is for steaks. Four words--roast beef and hamburgers. Dax was born a Yankee...Hardly an expert. I'll let Dax respond to that. A Pit? Where do you expect to find a pit in Suburbia? In a backyard, on a trailer, everywhere! There are more pits per capita in the suburbs than anywhere else in the country. Using a report from Virginia... Ouch. Low blow. The argument I believe is over what is better. Nope the argument is what is BBQ--a) pork, b)beef, c)anything cooked like BBQ, or d)beef and pork. Trying to push this to the sauce is a sign of weakness. I agree. Sauce is for a later battle--and that will be very bloody. And trying to claim originality... Good cop out when the facts don't back the brisket eaters. contention that Kentucky is outside the BBQ belt is exactly my point. Paducah, KY doesn't use mutton... Actually, the use of mutton in KY was more widespread in days past. Mutton BBQ'd is a hallmark of Owensboro. In any case, we already ruled them out because their refusal to join the Confederacy in the War for Southern Independence. You'd never have that problem with Beef purists. Of course you wouldn't--they're all from Texas. Posted by: Adam at July 14, 2003 11:19 AMOK, I am all worked up now...... I should have never mentioned the BEEF in my BBQ comment and none of this would have ever happened... LOL.... Tobasco makes anything taste good... so if I was held down and forced to eat Pork BBQ, PLEASE have the courtesy of putting some Tobasco on it for me. Drench it in Tobasco so I don't have to taste the pork. By the way, I have to bring that back from Texas too...... Posted by: holly at July 14, 2003 12:30 PMTo put in the view from the Western contigent (that'd be Reno, NV...where I was raised on dead cow) with South African influences (it's where I was born) it's beef all the way. Granted, I'm Jewish, so there's no real competition. All things stated...BBQ was always on a charcoal grill with beef. Posted by: Kin at July 15, 2003 11:56 AMi'll vote c Having been born and raised in eastern Oklahoma, and with grandparents and great-grandparents who were from Texas, Arkansas and Tennessee, my family always BBQ'ed both beef brisket and pork. My wife though, a new yorker, always wants me to BBQ a chicken. Even an Okie wouldn't smoke a chicken. I've got a Cajun neighbor who smokes 'gators. Now, chew on that for awhile. Posted by: David at January 1, 2005 10:05 AMPost a comment
 
|
