CURRENT EVENTS — NOVEMBER

BoonetheAiredale said:
It really is an interesting inflection point, as the term "curry favor" is a term I consider neutral in relation to ethnic groups. But, if the neutral term is used in relation to an ethnic group where some part of the word group has connotations AND the receiver of said words interprets that statement as less than necessary IS the statement less than some other term? Again, we can and do talk about his looks with seemingly less discomfort, but when an interpretated ethnic connotation is applied then things get "messy"? I don't have clear answers, but am curious about exploring what the "rules" are about such language use.
Click to expand...
My maternal grandfather was in the Army before, during, and after WWI. Except for a period when he was in far western Siberia during WWI ("AEF Siberia") he was stationed in the Philippines. My mother was born in the Philippines and lived there until her early to mid-teens. When I was growing up, "curry" was a treat that I and all my siblings loved. It wasn't until I was an adult and was trying to figure out that even when I was in East Asia and I couldn't find a restaurant that served "curry" the way my mother fixed it, that I realized what a broad term curry is. The curry my mother fixed was a type of curry that originated in Indonesia and had many Dutch culinary influences. So, attempting to read racial overtones into a pan-Asian dish with strong European influences strikes me as a fool's errand. As far as I am concerned, "curry" has about the same specificity as nourishment, chow, or eats.

The area where curry is used to describe food represents about 60% of the world's population. Given how many people regularly eat something called "curry" and the enormous variety of dishes that care called "curry," I just don't see how "curry" can be seen as a pejorative. It can mean almost anything you can imagine.
 
Just for what it's worth, here's the history of the idiom I used here in the west and not the word everybody is focused on. Continue the culinary conversations if you must. I still insist there's some overreaction.

The idiom "curry favor" originates from the 14th-century French romance, Roman de Fauvel, where Fauvel was a deceitful, cunning, and ambitious horse. The original phrase was "curry favel," which literally meant "to groom the horse Fauvel" but came to mean "to act with hypocrisy or deceit". The phrase was later altered in the 16th century to the modern "curry favor," as the name "Fauvel" was forgotten and people reinterpreted "favel" to the more familiar-sounding word "favor"
 
BoonetheAiredale said:
It really is an interesting inflection point, as the term "curry favor" is a term I consider neutral in relation to ethnic groups. But, if the neutral term is used in relation to an ethnic group where some part of the word group has connotations AND the receiver of said words interprets that statement as less than necessary IS the statement less than some other term?
Click to expand...
Curry favor is an ancient phrase that has nothing to do with India. It is not derogatory in any sense. For instance, my ex-wife from India, not particularly warm toward Brits, has no issue with the phrase and she spent time in the UK too. In addition, there's no secondary meaning that might be invoked. If there was a stereotype of Indians as bootlickers, maybe curry favor could have a double entendre with racist connotations. But the reality is that, if anything, the British view of its desi population is the opposite -- that they don't integrate well and are too independent of British culture.

If it's used as a pun, it's the same pun that is used toward all sorts of cuisine. Generally speaking, I think joking about food is innocuous. Most people can recognize that their food has some recognizable idiosyncratic features. The fried chicken and watermelon is an exception, because that's really not about food at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top