I agree with the other reviewer. I am from South Texas, and the assesment of our food was cursory, and unresearched opinions.

I really didn't like the interview from the East Texans, which was an essay written by a woman who reminices about the food cooked for them by "the blacks that worked for Daddy."

I know historically African Americans have been in the position of being employed, rather than being the employer. However, I thought that if this book were published in 1989, the subject would have been presented more sensitively.

'Nuf sed.

I'll be honest with you. I only read the section which interviewed the lady from South Texas on Mexican American cooking. But I came across enough errors, to indicate that the journalism was pretty sloppy, at least in this section. Errors which should not have been made and which could have been avoided by checking a couple of sources and coincidentally would have made for a more interesting story.

Example 1: "Taco" is defined as a snack. The word taco comes from "wedge" or "wad", the wadding such as was used to stuff a cannon or rifle. Because tortilla tacos were originally soft and round, well, you can see how you'd get to the image of stuffing a wad of food into your mouth.

Example 2: A little research would have turned up that enchilada is a shortened form of tortilla enchilada, "chili'ed tortilla" in other words. They shouldn't have missed this one.

Example 3: The dicho for "como el agua para chocolate" is completely wrong.