Chili Made from Scratch: An investigation of the Texas chili cookoff

Heidi L. Bludau

ANTH E600 – Food and Culture Prof. Richard Wilk 2 May 2006

Bludau 2 "Chili--real chili--chili Texas-style, must have the strength to chin itself, even with a big rock in the bottom of the pot…Real chili will make a mystagogue challenge Einstein, or send a pole-vaulter out confident he can add another cubit to his record…It will make a poet sing of rhapsodious harmony in thunder, or inspire an umpire to toss coquettish kisses to the third-base wolves. It is an allpurpose invigorator, a reliable antibiotic for melancholy, and a prime mover when one's world seems to stand on dead center. It is a panacea to man in want or woe." --Joe E. Cooper (1952) Chili – Texas chili that is – has as rich and varied a history as it does variations i. It has millions of admirers and thousands of devotees. At first glance, chili appears to be a simple, frontier dish that stood the test of time and now serves as a warm, filling stew or a reason to gather some friends together. Over 500 sanctioned cookoffs take place annually in the Chili Appreciation Society International, Inc. (CASI) circuit alone. However, when we look more deeply into its history and contemporary use, we find a complex symbol of identity, focused on characteristics of nationalism, neocolonialism and gender. This paper investigates some of the complexities surrounding Texas chili and its cookoffs. I will focus primarily on CASI and its annual, world (in)famous cookoff in Terlingua, Texas. The first section of the paper will provide a brief history of chili in Texasii, including the variety of origin myths surrounding it and the symbolism that it invokes. I will also describe the ingredients, both universal and controversial, that are part of the chili domain. Section four will describe the Terlingua cookoff and the history of CASI. I will then place this cookoff event into the larger national cookoff scene, in which issues of originality and authenticity arise in conjunction with the gendered aspect of the “sport.” Section six concerns the festival aspect of chili cookoffs and how the history of Texas chili plays an important role in the atmosphere and environment of the cookoff. The last part of this paper concerns why the chili cookoff is such a

Bludau 3 phenomena in Texas, relating it to Texas identity, and exploring aspects of neocolonialism, hospitality, and “wild west” mentality.

All American Dish? One of the few things that most people agree on regarding chili is that it is not a Mexican invention; it is American. Mexico disowns it, including an entry in the Diccionario de Mejicanismos, which defined chili in 1959 as “a detestable dish sold from Texas to New York City and erroneously described as Mexcian” (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:1). However, the folklore says differently, unless that is, we use “American” in a broader term than meaning “of the United States.” According to DeWitt and Gerlach (2006:1), most historians agree that the first mention of chili in writing was in 1828 and described the poor families of San Antonio stretching their small amount of meat by adding peppers, “as many peppers as there are pieces of meat,” and stewing it all together. In 1828, San Antonio, Texas, was part of Mexico. There is no indication of whether or not the poor families were culturally Anglo or Mexican, however. Additionally, there is indication that the local Native Americans spawned the creation of chili through their use of pemmican, a proto-chili of sorts. Texans borrowed the technique, pounding together “dried beef, beef fat, Chiltepins, and salt” to create a trail food that could be carried in leather pouches for long distances. Called “chili bricks,” these concoctions could be soaked all day and ready for boiling at dinnertime (Day 2006b). From a practical viewpoint, the most reasonable explanation for chili’s development is that it uses what was available in the frontier environment (DeWitt and Gerlach 1990). Until at least the late 1880s, Texan cooks only had local crops, including oregano, chiltepin, and cumin, which was imported from the Canary Islands, and goat or deer for meat (Pilcher 2006:5). This list of ingredients will stem a controversy regarding “authentic” chili, as we will see in the next section.

Bludau 4 It is just as likely that most of the autochthonous inhabitants of the region currently known as the American Southwest used what was available to them and that a chili-type dish was popular in the pre-Columbian era (see previous reference to pemmican). Montezuma Tequila plays on this assumption in their add for the International Chili Society’s publication, Chili (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:10). In the ad, Montezuma presides over the first Quetzalcoatl Chili Cook-off for which the Aztecs “starved themselves for six weeks just to ‘sharpen their taste buds’.” The cookoff included a variety of games and entertainment, including a “Chiligula (god of chili) Look-Alike Contest that was won by Montezuma, Jr.” Additionally, a number of the origin myths that abound in chili lore are worth mentioning. In addition to simply being interesting, the tales include a broad range of inventors that cross class and gender boundaries, indicating chili’s far-reaching appeal, as well as the complexity of this dish. As a food item in a frontier land, chili was an “every person’s” food that was eaten by everyone due to the scarce resources in the region. As the following myths illustrate, chili inventors come from all walks of life, representing a number of motivations, as well as stake holders in its past. Origin tales “The lady in blue” was a Spanish nun, Sister Mary of Agreda, would take “incorporeal visits” to the New World in the 1600s. During her trances, the Native Americans whom she was trying to convert gave her a recipe for chili con carne: “chile peppers, venison, onions, and tomatoes” (DeWitt and Gerlach 1990:147). There is no explanation regarding how her recipe returned to Texas. In order to explain why cumin (or comino) is a common ingredient in chili, we find reference to a group of colonists from the Canary Islands who arrived in San Antonio in the early

Bludau 5 1700s (Lowe 2006). Recruited by the Spanish government to increase the population in its Texas colony and create the aristocracy of Texas, Canary Islanders brought a taste for cumin in their food. Although often credited with introducing the item to the region, shipping lists indicate that Franciscan monks had prior access to the spice (Walsh 2004:44). However, the Canary Island women are reported to have made stew with “cumin, chile peppers, wild onion, and the available herb,” which were cooked “outdoors in copper kettles in the village plaza” (Walsh 2004:44). This scenario will return at a later date. “Trail drive chili” derives from pemmican and was popular for cattle drive cuisine in the late 1880s. This story states that range cooks would plant their chosen spices, such as oregano, chiles and onions, among the mesquite trees (for protection from the cattle) and would gather the fruits of this labor on return trips. The cooks would simply add beef (DeWitt and Gerlach 1990:147). A personal favorite is the tale concerning how popular chili became in the Texas jail system during the 1890s. Floyd Cogan, a chili historian, explains that it was the best way to take bad or cheap cuts of meat and make them edible (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:2). Prison cooks would take “cleavers and knives to the meat to create little pieces that were boiled, along with chiles and spices to create a cheap and satisfying meal” (Lowe 2006). The myth continues that inmates like the chili so much that they would commit more crimes just get more chili! Bill Bridges, in DeWitt and Gerlach (2006:1), lists other inventors such as the Texas Rangers (the law officers not the baseball team), either a Chinese or an Irish chuckwagon cook, Czechs, Greeks, Magyars and “the mountain people of the Caucasus.” There is no argument that chili has been influenced by the local environment and the cuisine and tastes of generations of immigrants from a multitude of places. In this respect, we could say that chili is part of a

Bludau 6 globalized food system. It is easy to understand how adapting to the local environment will influence taste, but chili appeal spread outside the Southwest and Texas and has gained approval in a national arena. Popular appeal Through a variety of means, chili spread across the United States and gained popular appeal in the latter half of the 19th century. The United States Army has been eating chili since the Mexican-American War in 1846, which was fought in the southwest. Although the Army has been credited with the invention of chili, they most likely picked it up from the local people at this time. However, it quickly entered Army cuisine and was included in the Army manual for cooks in 1896 (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:1). Throughout the years, the Army added garlic, beans and tomatoes. (Note the conflicting dates with the latter two origin myths.) Additionally, in the late 1890’s (there is some dispute between oral and written tradition on the exact year), William Gebhardt began manufacturing chili powder which made it easy for women to make chili at home (Cooper 1952:45). At the 1893 World’s Fair in Chicago, however, an “authentic” chili booth exhibit brought the “flavor” of Texas culture to the national scene on multiple levels. It was here that people became enamored with the chili queens. The Chili Queens “The chili stand and the chili queens are peculiarities…of the Alamo City.” – Frank H. Bushwick (Walsh 2004:44) In the beginning, the chili stands were simply part of the vegetable vendors set up in Alamo plaza. The chili queens worked as laundresses by day and set up their stands

Illus. 1 Chili Queens Photo courtesy www.lafondaoakhills.com/images/chiliqueens.jpg

Bludau 7 at night. By the late 1800s, however, an elaborate system, like a portable restaurant had evolved (Walsh 2004:44). The chili vendors served a number of functions in San Antonio social life. First, they turned a makeshift meal into an identifiable dish (Jamison and Jamison 1993:108). The chili queens also brought women’s sociability, as well as cooking, into the public sphere. The plaza served a social function as a place where friends and family could meet, and courting could occur (Pilcher 2006:3). This practice of placing domestic practice in the public sphere, Pilcher states, helped identify the chili queens as sexual beings. Chili, then, became a symbol of their sexuality, “hot and alluring, yet also dangerous and potentially polluting” (Pilcher 2006:2). In an effort to clean up the city, San Antonio officials prohibited the chili queens from Alamo Square. In a fit of nostalgia, however, the local newspaper called for the return of the “bright, bewitching creatures” who fit the romanticized, exotic stereotype of “unclean” women (Pilcher 2006:12). Upon sexualizing the chili queens, chili itself has become sexualized. Following Edward Said’s use of exoticized sexualities as a metaphor for the neocolonial process of subjugating the Other (1979), I suggest that chili today stands as a symbol of a neocolonialist mentality found in contemporary Texas. The Official State Dish of Texas A bowl of red – pure, real, unadulterated Texas chili – is the official state dish of Texas. Obviously that would imply that it is either ubiquitous to the state or it means something. Or both. For Texans, a “bowl of red” is as meaningful as a bowl of “chowda” is to a Cape Codder (Wright 2002:49). After the chili queens left the public square, Anglos appropriated the dish as a symbol of Texas. It references the early days of the state, including the glory days of the cattle drives. The beef industry is still a large part of the Texas economy. As a tourist attraction during the chili queen days, chili has become an ascribed symbol of the state, as well. On a

Bludau 8 wider scale, Southwestern cuisine as a whole evokes a “romantic, sanitized version of the American Southwest and understanding of the West in general” (Bentley 2004:213).

Meat, chile, liquid, spices and maybe more Texans are purists when it comes to our chiliiii. However, that does not mean that chili is simple. The issue of “purity” is actually the cause for much controversy among chili lovers. According to John Thorne, “disputation is at the heart of chili” Illus. 2 Chili grind from a Texas butcher shop

(1990). Each ingredient is an issue for discussion. This section will

briefly describe the universal ingredients – meat, chile, liquid and spices – as well as the “more” controversial options. Meat “Cooking ground beef for more than three hours could turn it to mush” (Dorsch 1998). The typical cut of meat for chili is chili-grind, a coarse grind using three-eighths or half-inch holes in the grinder, and is not available in a wide part of the United States. Some cooks will use chunks of meat cut to ¼-inch cubes. Traditionally, only the poorest cuts of beef were used for chili because its long cooking time required a meat that could stand up to it (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:4). Of course, no one suggests that the long cooking time is due to the poor cut of meat. Chili does not have to be beef. Animals that have appeared in chili include: wild boar, goat, bear, rattlesnake, raccoon, armadillo, nutria (a large semi-aquatic rodent), porcupine, javelina, jackrabbit, shrimp, squirrel, venison, elk, moose, pork, and veal (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:4). Author’s note: The “white chili” or “chicken chili” that is common in American cuisine is not a chili but a stew.

Illus. 3 Nutria Photo courtesy of http://www.allcreatures.org/aw/nu tria-004.html

Bludau 9 Chile “Chile” is a pepper. “Chili,” with an “i,” is a dish as in chili con carne. Chili gets its name from the extensive use of chile in its recipes. What kind of chile, meaning what kind of red chile, and how much to use is completely at the cook’s discretion. The common grocerystore variety of chile powder, is a blend of chile pepper, cumin, oregano, salt, garlic and other spices (Stuart 2000:31). It is an easy and common way to include chile flavoring to a dish. Store-bought chile powders are predetermined and reliable; fresh or dried chiles can be unpredictable (Dorsch 1998). Cookoff cooks tend to use store-bought for consistency. Some cooks will choose to make their own chili powder. Each cook will experiment to find the right level of heat and combination of flavors. However, cooks who are not aware that chile powder contains other spices may over spice their pots. What a good chili cook must keep in mind is that while meat is the substance, chile is the soul of chili (Thorne 1990). Liquid The amount of liquid that a chili cook uses depends on the consistency that she desires. It needs to be water-based, but water is not the only option. Examples for liquid options are: water, beef, chicken, or bean broth, beer (light and/or pilsners), tequila, coffee, tomato sauce, or wine (indicating a gourmet aspect). Liquid is more important than an average chef may think. It is what binds the ingredients together into one body, making or breaking a chili. “Tight chili” is properly thickened so that when you place a small spoonful on a saucer, no liquid runs out (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:6). In conjunction with liquid are thickeners. Often, chili needs a thickener to help gel the ingredients into a smooth body. Flour is a common tool, but can clump. Masa harina is the corn flour used for tortillas and adds a corn flavor to the pot. Cornstarch is a general thickener but can

Bludau 10 also clump. Other less common thickeners include ground meat, cracked meal, and ground, cooked beans (Thorne 1990). Spices While in most cases, chile would be part of the “spice” section, it is such an integral part of the dish, and is, therefore, in a separate section. However, there are a variety of “back-up” spices that blend with the chile to give chili its unique flavor. Again, each cook will choose his or her own

Illus. 4 Spices for author's bowl of red from left: ground comino, garlic, salt, black pepper, fancy light chili pepper

bouquet of spices but there are three that are most commonly part of the mix. Cumin or comino. As previously discussed, cumin or comino (I will continue to use “cumin” for simplicity) is not indigenous to the American Southwest and was most likely brought by Spanish settlers in the early 18th century. Today it is a principal spice in chili. Cooks use either the seed or the powdered form. Cumin gives a unique flavor to the dish that is reminiscent of Indian food (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:5). Oregano. The oregano in the original chili recipes is Mexican oregano, which is popular in highly spiced dishes and is indigenous to the region (Herbst 1995:403). It is easy to grow and usually sold in its dried form. Garlic. Garlic allows the cook to deepen the flavor of the dish without adding unnecessary liquid, unlike onions (Thorne 1990). Other popular spices include black pepper, basil, coriander seed and/or cilantro, bay leaf, thyme, sage, anise seed, cloves, nutmeg, caraway, and of course, salt. At cookoffs, chefs typically create spice “dumps,” which are packages of pre-mixed spices that are numbered in the order they are supposed to be added to the pot (Sutherland 2003:168). In the heat of

Bludau 11 competition, and the effects of drinking, well-planned dumps can save a pot of chili from disaster. And maybe more… Beans. The biggest chili controversy, and what separates the Texans from the rest, is the use of beans in chili. Texans believe that beans do not belong in a pot of chili. A CASI motto states that “Anybody who knows beans about chili knows there ain’t no beans in chili” (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006). Other than individual taste, there does appear to be a practical reason for beanless chili. Beans breakdown after too long in the pot and they do not hold up to reheating (Dorsch 1998). CASI rules state that fillers, which include “beans, macaroni, rice, hominy, or other similar ingredients” are not allowed (Chili Appreciation Society International 2005). Irregardless the reason, the split between beans and no beans has entered Texas legend. One legend states that Texas law prohibits making chili with beans (Wright 2002:50), which supports another which claims that putting beans in chili has “replaced horse thievery as the number one hanging offense” (Duckworth 2006). Tomatoes and onions. Tomatoes and onions are almost as controversial as beans. At least when it comes to beans, “Texas” chili has rules. It is the (un)defining element. Texas chili has no “rule” for tomatoes or onions. Referring to the original recipe, and what was available in the region, tomatoes do not belong in chili. However, tomato sauce as the liquid is much more acceptable and provides the red color to cooks who do not know how, or want to, use red chiles. Wild onions, however, are indigenous to the region and could be an acceptable ingredient for purists. Other “adulterations” that have been known to show up in a pot of chili include green peppers, mushrooms, noodles, sugar, tomato paste, cheese (only acceptable as a garnish), and

Bludau 12 mole paste. The last ingredient caused quite a stir at a cookoff in 1995. At the 18th Annual Congressional Club Chili Cook-off, Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison won for her unorthodox ingredients, including mole sauce (Human Events 1995). Mole sauce is best known for its inclusion of Mexican chocolate (Herbst 1995:368). Hutchison was also the first woman to win the cookoff.

Chiliheads of the World Unite! “Terlingua – it gets pretty rough and there is a lot of nudity and carrying-on – like spring break only in the high desert” (Sutherland 2003:158)iv. Terlingua, Texas, is a small town about 90 miles from nowhere in southwest Texas. In the late 1800s to mid-1900s, Terlingua was an active mining town, and then the cinnabar ran out. Today, it has an official population of around 25 people. However, that number has swelled to well over 7000 on the first weekend in November each year since 1967. About 15 years prior, a group of people banded together to form the Chili Appreciation Society International (CASI) in order to “improve the quality of chili in restaurants and broadcast Texas-style recipes all over the Earth” (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:7). By this time, chili’s popularity had brought about a number of variations and Texas chili was getting lost in the variety. Frank X. Tolbert was a member. Therefore, when H. Allen Smith, a writer from New York City, wrote an article claiming that no one knows chili like he does, Tolbert and his friends decided that there should be a showdown. Wick Fowler, the inventor of Wick Fowler’s 4-Alarm Chili Mix would be the opponent, and defender of Texas pride. Terlingua was selected because,

Bludau 13 as the story goes, one of Tolbert’s friends wanted to get Terlingua back on the map so he could sell a piece of land in the area. The first cookoff was a tie; of the three judges, one voted for Fowler, one for Smith and one claimed his tongue was too damaged to vote. However, the event drew a crowd of a few hundred and Tolbert and company decided to hold another one the next year. The second annual cookoff, in 1968, has a tale that belongs in Texas legend. This time, the conclusion was a draw, as well. It seems that masked men with guns stole the ballot box and threw it in an outhouse over a mineshaft (DeWitt and Gerlach 1990:307). Again, the spectators numbered near 1000 and a new tradition was born. By 1970, the cookoff at Terlingua was hosting over 5000 spectators. This was also the same year that women were allowed to compete. When the main event is chili, however, you have to expect some heat. Frank X. Tolbert was a writer for the Dallas Morning News and somewhat of a self-proclaimed expert on Texas. As a founding member of the cookoff, he reigned supreme over the proceedings for the first few years. However, as the event grew, its enthusiasts became more organized. By 1972, after only five years of existence, the organization structure was in place and the first “great pepper” was elected. Local chapters of CASI are called “pods” and each is headed by a “great pepper.” Today there are sixty-nine pods in twenty-six states, plus the US Virgin Islands and British Columbia, and CASI is a non-profit organization with an eleven-member board of directors. In 1974, CASI split into CASI and the International Chili Society (ICS). There are two stories to this divide. When C.V. Woods and Carroll Shelby, members from California, brought a television crew to promote the Terlingua cookoff, they did not include Tolbert in the press coverage. He got angry and told them to hold their own cookoff in California (DeWitt and Gerlach 1990:308). The other part of the story states that Woods referred to Allegani Jani

Bludau 14 Schofield, the first women to win at Terlingua, as a “goddamned woman” over the loud speaker, and set Tolbert off (Sutherland 2003:163). The two stories are not mutually exclusive. By the next year, ICS had started its own cookoff and using celebrity judges. Today, it draws crowds of over 20,000 spectators annually (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:8). Incidentally, Woods and Shelby trademarked the “World’s Championship Chili Cookoff” and CASI had to find a new name for theirs. However, the Terlingua International Chili Championship has no problem drawing its audience. Tolbert ran into disagreement again, this time with the CASI board of directors. In 1982, he brought two foreign chiliheads with no points accumulated from sanctioned cookoffs and expected them to be allowed to cook. Event organizers did not like Tolbert’s “despotic ways” and the next year they rented the land before Tolbert had a chance. They offered him a place on the board but he declined and started his own cookoff, the Original Terlingua International Frank X. Tolbert - Wick Fowler Championship Chili Cookoff, or Viva Terlingua! for short (Sutherland 2003:163). This history of the Terlingua cookoffs illustrates a number of elements about the event and point to the symbolism of chili and chili cookoffs. Primarily, it shows the way in which rich Anglos have appropriated the ownership of chili. Terlingua is not connected to a Mexican community but it is known as the chili cookoff. Ron Duckworth states in his article describing his cookoff experience (2006) that “anyone and everyone comes to a Texas chili cookoff,” what he does not add is “as long as they are white.” The next section places the Terlingua cookoff into the cookoff phenomena as a whole.

Bludau 15

Contested Casseroles Cookoffs embody the American ideal of making something of ourselves through our own “talents, persistence, and know-how” (Sutherland 2003:26). They combine the drive of competition with the spirit of ingenuity. Cookoffs are a place where class or gender should not matter; the proof, so to speak, is in the pudding. However, while all cooks may be created equal, all cookoffs are not. Cookoffs sit at the intersection of a push for “respectable American cuisine” and the devotion to a casserole, one-dish, aesthetic (Sutherland 2003:8). Two main types of cookoffs, indoor and outdoor, epitomize these two factions. The Pillsbury Bake-offv, started in 1949, celebrates women’s skills in the kitchen (Shapiro 2004:82). Recipes are suitable for domestic preparation and consumption. These recipes are decidedly “American” and unique to the food culture in this country. Pillsbury, in order to promote their own mixes and products, looks for ingenuity and originality with pre-packaged foods. Although not all indoor cookoffs require pre-packaged food items, many do require the use of a specific type of food and judge on originality in use of that food. Outdoor cookoffs, however, focus more on technique than originality. They typically revolve around making one dish, in one dish, and making it in the best way. Outdoor cookoffs, those that include chili, barbecue, dutch oven, jambalaya, or chuck wagon, usually involve a wood fire, a large amount of “gear” and a complicated and long list of rules. For instance, the rules for the 2006 Pillsbury Bake-Off is five pages long; the CASI rulebook is thirty-one pages (CASI 2005; Pillsbury 2005). Additionally, outdoor cookoffs include more equipment and “hardware” (Cohen 1988:131). Outdoor contests, however, also require the cook to bring the “kitchen” with him. Contest organizers supply the kitchen and all supplies for indoor events.

Bludau 16 Another difference lies in the time span of the event. Although both cookouts can, and often do, take place over a two-to-three day period, the actual cooking time is vastly different. Chili takes a minimum of three hours to prepare. Barbecue, jambalaya, and stews for dutch oven and chuck wagon cooking are not quick dishes, either. However, Pillsbury requires their contestants to be able to prepare their recipes twice within a five-hour period and some have time constraints of 30 minutes (Pillsbury 2005). In conjunction with the time constraints, indoor and outdoor cookoffs differ in preparation style. Many indoor cookoffs not only encourage but even require the use of packaged foods and may limit the number of ingredients. Outdoor cookoffs require that the recipe be made from scratch, meaning starting with raw meat and no “just add meat” kits (CASI 2005:1) One commonality between cooks of both types of events is their practice of recipe research. Cookoff winning recipes are typically made public by some means, either by the participant or the event sponsor. Cookoff contestants will often spend time researching past winners to determine trends and successful ingredients for use in their own creations (Cohen 1988; Sutherland 2003). Additionally, both types of cookoff contestants share characteristics of competitiveness, desire for recognition, and camaraderie from competing at multiple events on the circuit. The most interesting aspect of these two types of cookoffs is the demographic breakdown of the cooks. Indoor contests draw more women and outdoor contests, at least until recently, draw more men. The gender dynamic, in turn, shapes the character and environment of the cookoff. “…then and there being a female person” There are two sides to the issue of gender in chili cookoffsvi. First, the outdoor cookoff arena is a “masculine” field. Second, Southwest cuisine has a “constructed masculine identity”

Bludau 17 (Bentley 2004:212). Combined, these two elements make the chili cookoff a hyper-masculine playing field. For example, Daniel Cohen describes a barbecue cookoff as similar to a football game. It is a “sport where endurance and toughness count” (Cohen 1988:130). Additionally, it seems that the “beer-drinking, party-hearty, chili-cooking mob in a forgotten corner of Texas wilderness appeals to men in a way it doesn’t to most women” (Sutherland 2003:159). The rewards are also different. Men enter cookoffs for the enjoyment of cooking their favorite dish with dreams of someday opening a restaurant where they could do this everyday (Cohen 1988:131). It is more about bragging rights, prestige and pride. Women, on the other hand, do not typically envision a restaurant where they can “do this everyday.” Women take their ability to win a cookoff, on the indoor circuit, as a validation of their domestic abilities. The ability to easily and creatively cook a dinner for her family helps a woman demonstrate her “feminine” skills and her worth. For women without paid employment, prize money is a way in which they can contribute to the family or special income. Women in outdoor cookoffs appear to have the same approach as men regarding rewards and mentality. Outdoor cooking is not everyday cooking and has a place separate. Bentley bases her description of the masculine identity of Southwest cuisine on its emphasis on meat. This emphasis allows for outdoor grilling options, and the potential for high fat and protein content. Additionally, the chile gives this cuisine a masculine edge. Chiles are “an urban cowboy idea of bravado” (Bentley 2004:212). Cooking chili fits into this framework perfectly. Some women, however, are happy to brave the male dominated world of outdoor cookoffs. Although chili cookoffs prohibited women from entry in the early days of the phenomena, today women make up approximately half of the field. Since 1989, nine of

Bludau 18 eighteen champions at Terlingua have been women. Women also won in 1974 and 1975. The only back-to-back winner is Cindy Reed. Women have come a long way since H. Allen Smith tried to have Janice Constantine arrested for "trying to cook chili while then and there being a female person" (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:7). Men are also moving into the Pillsbury field. According to the Pillsbury website, in 1996 14 of 100 finalists were men and a man was the first person to win the $1million prize (Pillsbury 2005).

Illus. 5 Margaret Nadeau, 2005 Terlingua Champion Photo courtesy of http://www.chiliphoto.com/

The questions that arise from the shift in cookoff demographics is whether or not the cookoffs themselves are changing in nature. Sutherland observes that cookoffs dominated by women are civilized to the point of almost being bland, and have a more supportive competitive spirit than the male dominated cookoffs that are rowdier, larger productions (2003:279). The only evidence of change at this point is that the chili cookoffs are becoming more “professional” in the nature of the competitors (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:7). Cooks know more about the competitions, about the ingredients, and about the internal and external factors that affect the final product. These changes, however, do not directly relate to the entry of more women into the field, only a development and maturing of the phenomena. You can make my recipe but not my chili Another main difference between indoor and outdoor cookoffs is the level of originality expected in the dish. Pillsbury, for instance, is looking for new ways to use its products and considers “creativity” in its winning recipes. Outdoor cookoffs that involve one dish which everyone cooks must have a baseline, an ideal, for comparison. Judging criteria for CASI cookoffs are aroma, consistency, red color (appearance), taste, and aftertaste (CASI 2005:3). By

Bludau 19 comparison, Pillsbury criteria are taste and appearance, as well, but also creativity and consumer appeal (Pillsbury 2005). Cookoffs are a very subjective judgment and leave much room for personal taste. Additionally, outdoor cookoffs generally do not have limits on the number of times an individual can win; good cooks are expected to defend their titles. Winners are “champions” at Terlingua. The goal in one-dish cookoffs is not to make it “new” but to make it “supremely.” Enter “authenticity.” Often thought of as troublesome in anthropological circles, “authenticity” can be difficult to define. However, Edward Bruner offers a framework in which we can distinguish different types of authenticities (Bruner 1994:399). Authenticity that is based on verisimilitude means that which is “credible and convincing” to the public. The authentic environments are supposed to recreate an historical past that is believable to the contemporary audience. A second type of authenticity, that based on genuineness, has as its audience the historical public. Chili tries to be authentic in both ways. In the chili world, this would mean using “traditional” ingredients – no beans, tomatoes or noodles – or a “traditional” recipe. Requiring that cooks prepare dishes from scratch and not include fillers also meets these criteria. However, authenticity in either way will rely on the historical truth that we chose to invoke. In the previously mentioned origin myths, we find a number of common elements of chili that we still find in the dish and especially in the cookoff atmosphere. First, the dish consists of meat, spices and liquid. Most of the tales include a component of cooking out of doors, or the implications of such. Therefore, remaining true to the “pure” recipe of Texas chile would theoretically produce a chili that a cowhand from 150 years ago, a Canary Islander from 300 years ago, or a Houston businessman today would recognize.

Bludau 20 One other important component to Bruner’s concept of authenticity is the notion of “authentic reproduction” (Bruner 1994:399). Cookoff participants, and spectators, recognize that the chili and the atmosphere of the cookoff are not “original” but reproductions. The nature of chili makes it easy to “reproduce.” No “authentic” recipe for chili exists. Even the chili queens, who more or less codified the dish into a recognizable food item, had their own recipes. Chili recipes are as individual as the cooks themselves. Ray Calhoun states that “anyone can cook your recipes, but no one else can cook your chili” (DeWitt and Gerlach 2006:10). Even the cooking style lends itself to variation. In addition to the “secret” ingredients that cooks do not put in the recipe, length and temperature of cooking, or the quality of spices and other ingredients, can alter the dish at each attempt. Additionally, while cookoffs produce reproductions of chili recipes, they embody authenticity through the outdoor atmosphere so entwined with chili throughout its history.

“Chilifests” Outdoor cooking echoes the old-time Texas community and ranch barbecues, trail rides, and more directly, the chili queens on the San Antonio plazas. In some ways, chili is meant to be cooked out of doors. Pilcher describes how the vending nature of the chili queens gave young women the opportunity to interact in a festival atmosphere (Pilcher 2006:20). Although part of chili’s history, outdoor cooking adds complexity to the cookoff event in multiple ways. First, cooking in the modern era is part of the private realm, part of the domestic spherevii. Chili cooks are required to cook in the open, not in closed motorhomes or tents (CASI 2005:23). The kitchen, normally a back room, moves to the foreground in cookoffs (MacCannell 1973:590). The availability of the kitchen is important to the performance of the cooks and spectators. The type of social performance that is supposed to take place in a space determines

Bludau 21 the space’s role. A back region allows for concealment that may discredit a performance and bringing the back region forward removes the mystification of the performance. Cooking is more of a spectator sport when it is in the open; it is a public event. Therefore, since outdoor cooking is not in the domestic sphere, men do not have to feel that they are breaking gender barriers in order to perform. However, the relationship between reality and performance is in confusion. The correlation between back and front versus real and show needs to be put back into balance. The “back” is where the “real” work takes place. If the kitchen is in the front, the real work cannot happen there. Cookoff showmanship enables the kitchen to move back to its “proper” place. Chili queens? Showmanship is a form of “competitive entertainment” that is a separate competition from the chili cookoff but part of it at the same time. All show teams must cook but all cooking teams do not have to enter the showmanship. Showmanship judging takes place during the cookoff ending at least 30 minutes before chili turn-in time or beginning at least 30 minutes after turn-in time. It cannot directly interfere with the cooking. Showmanship must be “in good taste” like the chili and uses the following criteria for scoring: theme, costume, booth set-up (set), action, and audience appeal. There is no nudity or lewdness, firearms, explosives, or pyrotechnics allowed in showmanship, or in chili cooking

Illus. 6 Chili Queen? Showmanship photo from Terlingua 2005 Photo courtesy http://www.chiliphoto.com/chili photos.htm

either (CASI 2005:6). Shows may travel and traveling shows will be judged as such. Showmanship is similar to mumming, which is a masked ritual of European origins that is a type of folk drama (Creed 2004:58). It is usually risqué and “socially transgressive,” similar

Bludau 22 to “carnival.” Mumming relies on role reversal and temporary violations of social parameters (Creed 2004:59). Although this is only a brief outline of mumming, the main point to be taken from the notion is that cookoffs use role reversal in a number of ways to balance the social atmosphere of the event. Possibly the easiest way for a guaranteed laugh, the most common costume for men is that of a woman, and for women that of a fallen woman, or sexual aggressor. In addition to the sexual nature of the reversed social roles, the heightened atmosphere of the chili cookoff adds to the sensuous nature of chili. The cookoff itself is a sensuous event, engaging all of a participant’s senses. Chiles, through the physical effect they have on the body, enhance the sensual experience of eating them. However, the discourse surrounding chili at the festivals and cookoffs takes the embodiment to another level. Names of chili reflect anal-erotic social postures or aphrodisiatic characteristics. Examples include Outhouse Chili, Hot Pants (Alligani Jani’s 1974 champion chili), and Balls of Fire Chili (Mishler 1983:29). Joe Cummings describes chili in a Texas guidebook as a “potent aphrodisiac” and a “popular excuse for shedding one’s inhibitions” (Cummings and Plank 2004:80). Other anecdotes allude to nudity and general debauchery. By now, we have essentially been through the history of chili and the contemporary major chili event, the chili cookoff. The question remains, what is the point? Why is chili such a popular dish that people will travel miles to the middle of the desert in West Texas just to cook it or watch it being cooked? The answer lies in the symbolism of this dish for Texans. Although there are chili and chili cookoff lovers who are not Texans, it is the Texan element that keeps the chili cookoff thriving in CASI.

Bludau 23

Chili Purists If you have not figured it out yet, I am a Texan, and yes, I am a chili purist. I do not put beans in my chili. I do not put tomatoes in my chili. I do use tomato sauce. By these three sentences alone, you could have determined my Texas “nationality” had I not told you in the previous one. Chili is a part of the Texan ethnic identity. When considering an ethnic group as a “reference group invoked by people who share a common historical style, based on overt features and values, and who, through the process of interaction with others, identify themselves as sharing that style,” (Royce 1982:18) Texans are an ethnic group. Texans judge themselves and are judged by others through their performance as Texans. Food tradition is part of that performance. However, anyone can cook a pot and eat a bowl of Texas chili, but that does not make them Texan. The social relationship that is identity depends on symbolic meaning attached to action and event. We see each other and present ourselves through symbols (Kalčik 1984:45). Food serves as a symbol in a variety of ways. It can identify social boundaries. For example, the use or avoidance of a particular food will identify whether or not an individual belongs in the group. Beans in chili is a good example. Considering the previous argument regarding beans and Texas chili – not an original ingredient versus not holding up to reheating – I propose another reason why Texans do not cook beans in their chili. It refers to the neocolonialist perspective of contemporary Texas. Much like “frog” and “kraut” for French and Germans, respectively, Texans use “beaneater” as a common derogatory name for Mexicans. beans are a common item in Mexican cooking. Texans are not opposed to beans on the side of their chili, just not in it. This subjugation of the beans, a high protein, non-meat food, symbolizes a subjugation and emasculation of the Mexican people. They are important to Texas, but only as a side dish.

Bludau 24 Chili also symbolizes the way in which Texans have conquered the land. Texas is a large and diverse area, both geographically and culturally. By continuing to eat a food that represents the early pioneer days of Texas colonialism, modern day Texans are invoking the independent spirit that allowed us to conquer the wilderness. Using authentic recipes that “reproduce” frontier cooking, Texans place ourselves in Texas history as active members of the community reproducing the “nation” on a regular basis. Chili cookoffs as events also serve as symbols of Texas identity. Chili cookoffs that prohibit beans in the dish communicate to the larger public that this is a “Texan” event. Other types of outdoor cookoffs have similar structures and guidelines. However, a chili cookoff in Texas plays a role in the reiteration of Anglo-Texan hegemony. Out of 176 qualified chili cooks in 2004, only 9 had obviously Hispanic namesviii. Chili cookoffs symbolize the appropriation of an indigenous food item for Anglo claims on the land. The myths most often recounted in the literature relate to the cowboys’ trail chili or Sister Agreda who served as a mediator between the European colonizing people and the indigenous Native Americans. The public displays of cooking and the festival atmosphere invoke the chili queens public display of culinary skills and festive market environment. Chili cookoffs are not only harbingers of colonialist mentality and hegemonic enforcement. A positive trait that chili cookoffs symbolize is the hospitality and good neighborliness that Texans pride ourselves on. Chili cookoffs juxtapose festivity as an ends in itself (Mishler 1983:28) by annually raising millions of dollars for charity. Texans do not participate in cookoffs simply to eat and drink

Illus. 7 Drive Friendly road sign in Texas Photo courtesy of www.vagabender.com

Bludau 25 and win trophies, but also to celebrate what makes them Texan. Hospitality is a tradition in the American Old West and Texans continue that tradition today. Jim West of ICS estimates that together with CASI, they have raised over $100 million for charity over the past 30 years (Dorsch 1998). CASI prominently displays their charitable mission on their front webpage; they claim to raise over $1,000,000 annually (CASI 2006). Additionally, CASI has started a national scholarship program that grants $1000 a year for four years to a graduating high school senior. Criteria include academic work, extracurricular and service activities, and an essay about the student’s future goals. There are no apparent eligibility requirements tied to CASI or chili.

Conclusion Chili – real chili – chili Texas-style, is as complex as the spice mixture that a championship cook will put in her dumps. When you begin to explore the subtleties that bubble beneath the surface of a bowl of red, you find class and gender issues, pride and hospitality. The origin myths, history and popular culture surrounding chili call upon a wide range of stakeholders in Texas history. Those stakeholders are evident in the controversies over what ingredients are appropriate for chili; onions are okay, beans are not. How those ingredients are put together, however, fuel a competitive circuit that annually raises millions of dollars for charity. Chili cookoffs are a large part of the American cookoff phenomena, juxtaposing the classic Pillsbury Bake-Off in more than just form and function. The differences between indoor and outdoor cookoffs demonstrate issues of the larger society, as well as trends for the future. In more than just originality versus supremacy, cookoffs represent the mentality about food and gender that is present in American society today. Chili cookoffs also use classic festival social inversions to balance the need between performance and work in the cookoff event.

Bludau 26 Chili, however, as a symbol of Texas invokes different meanings for different people. For some, it may reference the independent, spirit of pioneers and cattle drives. For others, the subjugation of a people who have a longer history with the land. A chili cookoff may represent the hospitality that Texans share with others and the special way in which we do it. In any reading of the pot, we can get a fuller understanding of what it means to be Texan. However, just like that bowl of red, is as individual as the person stirring the pot.

Recipe for a Bowl of Red Brown a pound of chili-grind (beef) in an iron skillet. Remove majority of grease. Add half a chopped onion and a chopped green bell pepper. Sauté for 2-3 minutes. Add 1 small can of tomato sauce and 2 cans of water. Add salt, black pepper, garlic power, chile powder and cumin to taste. Stir. Bring pot to a gentle boil and reduce heat to simmer. Check every half hour or so and skim grease off the top and discard. After about 1 ½ - 2 hours the chili is done. Serve with Spanish rice and tamales.

ii

The photo on the cover is of the author’s “bowl of red.” See recipe at the end of the paper. Unless otherwise cited, photos in this paper are courtesy of the author. ii Unless otherwise stated, in the remaining portion of this paper, the reader can assume that “chili” means Texas chili, or Texas-style chili, which I will define in section three. iii The title of this section is taken from Jamison and Jamison’s Texas Home Cooking (1993:110). iv Chiliheads are chili enthusiasts. More than simply liking chili, they know about it and will easily argue that theirs is the best. v I will be using the Pillsbury Bake-Off as the standard for indoor cookoffs in this paper. I do recognize that although each cookoff is unique, Pillsbury is a comparable competition in size and scope for this study. vi The title of this section is taken from Dave DeWitt and Nancy Gerlach (2006:10), and is attributed to H. Allen Smith regarding the prohibition of women competitors in the Terlingua chili cookoff. vii Although recently, the kitchen has regained popularity as a domestic gathering space and even restaurants have open kitchens. viii Not having ethnicity demographics, names of participants is the only way to gauge the breakdown.

Bludau 27 Bibliography Bentley, Amy 2004 From Culinary Other to Mainstream America: Meanings and Uses of Southwestern Cuisine. In Culinary Tourism. L.M. Long, ed. Pp. 209-225. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Bruner, Edward M. 1994 Abraham Lincoln as Authentic Reproduction: A Critique of Postmodernism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397. CASI, Inc. 2005 Official Casi Rules. Electronic document, http://www.chili.org/documents/CASI%20Official%20Rule%20Book.pdf, accessed April 30, 2006. — 2006 Chili Appreciation Society International, Inc. Electronic document, http://www.chili.org/documents/CASI%20Official%20Rule%20Book.pdf, accessed April 30, 2006. Chili Appreciation Society International, Inc. 2005 Official Casi Rules. Electronic document, http://www.chili.org/documents/CASI%20Official%20Rule%20Book.pdf, accessed April 30, 2006. Cohen, Daniel 1988 On the Competitive Cook-Off Circuit, They Go for Gold. Smithsonian 19(6):124. Cooper, Joe E. 1952 With or without Beans; Being a Compendium to Perpetuate the InternationallyFamous Bowl of Chili (Texas Style) Which Occupies Such an Important Place in Modern Civilization. Dallas: W.S. Henson. Creed, Gerald W. 2004 Constituted through Conflict: Images of Community (and Nation) in Bulgarian Rural Ritual. American Anthropologist 106(1):56-70. Cummings, Joe, and Suzanne Plank 2004 Moon Handbooks. Texas. Avalon Travel. Day, Sandra 2006b The Chili Trail. Electronic document, http://www.tabasco.com/taste_tent/menu_planning/chili_trail.cfm, accessed April 26, 2006. DeWitt, Dave, and Nancy Gerlach 1990 The Whole Chile Pepper Book. Boston: Little Brown. — 2006 The Great Chili Con Carne Project. Electronic document, http://www.fieryfoods.com/Dave/ndx_chili.asp, accessed April 25, 2006. Dorsch, Jim 1998 Chili Cookoff Confidential: What Makes a Winner. The Washington Post. Wednesday, February 4, 1998: E01. Duckworth, Ron

Bludau 28 2006 Deep in the Heart of Texas: A Chili Cookoff. Electronic document, http://www.inmamaskitchen.com/FOOD_IS_ART_II/southern_cooking/texas_chili_cook off.html, accessed April 26, 2006. Herbst, Sharon Tyler 1995 The New Food Lover's Companion. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Barron's. Human Events 1995 Political Heat. Human Events 51(16):24. Jamison, Cheryl Alters, and Bill Jamison 1993 Texas Home Cooking. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Common Press. Kalčik, Susan 1984 Ethnic Foodways in America: Symbol and the Performance of Identity. In Ethnic and Regional Foodways in the United States: The Performance of Group Identity. L.K. Brown and K. Mussell, eds. Pp. 37-65. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. Lowe, Cliff 2006 The Life and Times of Chili -Part One. Electronic document, http://www.inmamaskitchen.com/FOOD_IS_ART/cliff/chiliart.html, accessed April 25, 2006. MacCannell, Dean 1973 Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings. American Journal of Sociology 79(3):589-603. Mishler, Craig 1983 The Texas Chili Cookoff: An Emergent Foodway Festival. Journal of Popular Culture 17(3):22-31. Pilcher, Jeffrey M 2006 Who Chased out the "Chili Queens"? Ethnicity and Urban Reform in San Antonio, Texas, 1880-1943. University of Minnesota. Pillsbury 2005 Pillsbury Bake-Off® Contest. Electronic document, http://www.pillsbury.com/bakeoff/, accessed April 30, 2006. Royce, Anya Peterson 1982 Ethnic Identity: Strategies of Diversity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Said, Edward W. 1979 Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books. Shapiro, Laura 2004 Something from the Oven: Reinventing Dinner in 1950's America. New York, N.Y.: Viking. Stuart, Caroline 2000 The Food of Texas: Authentic Recipes from the Lone Star State. Boston: Periplus Editions (HK), Ltd. Sutherland, Amy 2003 Cookoff: Recipe Fever in America. New York: Viking. Thorne, John 1990 Just Another Bowl of Texas Red Part 2: The Makings. Electronic document, http://chile.netrelief.com/makings_of_texas_red_chili.shtml, accessed April 25, 2006. Walsh, Robb

Bludau 29 2004 The Tex-Mex Cookbook: A History in Recipes and Photos. New York: Broadway Books. Wright, Clifford A. 2002 Real Stew: 300 Recipes for Authentic Home-Cooked Cassoulet, Gumbo, Chili, Curry, Minestrone, Bouillabaisse, Stroganoff, Goulash, Chowder, and Much More. Boston: Harvard Common Press.