Of the Taste of Regions CulinaryPractice,European PolicyandSpatial CultureaResearchOutline1

BERNhaRdTSChOfEN
AbstrAct

Regional culinary specialities are usually considered as indicative of the culture of specific areas, of their traditions and ways of life. Only recently has research begun to focus on the processes that constitute regional food cultures. This article traces the use of culinary heritage as a concept in regional practices and European politics, developing an analysis of how everyday food practices are transformed first into cultural heritage, and then into cultural property. It then presents a comparative ethnographic project aiming at a cultural analysis of procedures involved in the EU food quality assurance system. In conclusion, the article proposes perspectives that may help fill the gaps in research identified in this context.
Keywords

Cultural property, European regulations, food cultures, regional development, terroir

While writing a presentation or for publication in the field of cultural research you occasionally find pieces of literature that make you doubt whether you have chosen the appropriate format. Perhaps, non-academic empirical experiences and forms of representation could depict cultural facts more accurately and accurately than theory-led explications of every day life. For that reason, two somewhat extensive amuse gueules drawn from the more-or-less belles lettres have been consciously chosen to open the sequence of dishes served up in this article.
Anthropological Journal of European Cultures  doi:10.3167/ajec.2008.01701003 Volume17,2008:2453BerghahnJournals ISSN0960-0604(Print)

Of the taste Of RegiOns

A First Appetizer:
ClashofCulinaryCivilizations The first is a reference to the novel Kochen mit Fernet-Branca [Cooking with Fernet Branca] by James Hamilton-Paterson a book that may also be read as a culinary metaphor for the new Europe. Significantly situated in Tuscany, and central to its narrative, is the encounter between Gerald and Marta. Gerald is a cultivated English ghostwriter for second-degree celebrities. Marta, hailing from the imaginary eastern European region of Voynovia, remains for a time unrecognized by her neighbours in the Tuscan hill idyll as a composer of soundtracks for Mediterranean art-house films. The conflict between the two antagonists, ostensibly about tranquility and an unspoilt view, takes the form of a culinary petty war. The competition (and incongruity) of the different culinary systems represented by the two characters becomes a symbol of European contradictions: on the one hand is the knowledgeable foodie Gerald with his exalted connoisseurship and cheerful experimentation; on the other hand there is the downto-earth Marta, lacking culinary ambitions, who delights in the authentic Voynovian soul foods that her tradition-conscious clan send her from time to time a clan that, by the way, has a nomenclatura past while now engaging in big business. As Gerald and Marta self-consciously begin to eat together, their meals turn into a contest of flavours and European systems. Marta seeks to defeat Gerald with the fat sausage traditional in her home region: Mit schwungvoller Gebrde setzte sie mir eine dicke Wurst vor, beige wie ein Kondom und von Klumpen so voll wie eine Gefngnismatratze. Sie war ein wenig grer als die bayerischen Exemplare, die knapp in nachttopfgroe Schsseln passen. [With a flourish she put before me a gross sausage, beige as a condom and lumpy as a prison mattress. It was a little larger than those Bavarian specimens that just fit into bowls the size of chamber pots.] (Hamilton-Paterson 2005: 17). Thus, while Marta is offering him her regional delicacies, which he perceives as furuncles, a lesson in anatomy, Geralds lessons for her are painstakingly composed crossover-events of stylised regional cuisines. The differences between the two, in terms of alimentary habitus, may be exemplified by two quotes. After the first joint meal, Marta writes to her sister, Marja, who lives at home with the family in Voynovia: Wie dem auch sei, was sollte ich meinem Gast zu essen vorsetzen als eure Schonka und Pawlu? Ein echt woidisches Mahl, eine kleine europische Gastronomielektion. Aber ach,
25

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

ich fhlte mich so an zu Hause erinnert, dass mir die Trnen kamen liebe Mari, ich htte die Schonka berall auf der Welt erkannt, so unverwechselbar stammte sie von unserem Landgut. [Anyway, what could I give my visitor to eat but your shonka and pavlu? An authentically Voydean meal, a little lesson in European gastronomy. But oh, it so reminded me of home I had tears in my eyes dear Mari, Id have known that shonka anywhere in the world, it was so unmistakably from our estate.] (Hamilton-Paterson 2005: 32) The Englishman Gerald is characterised as geschmcklerischer Auskenner [pretentious faddish know-it-all] (Corti 2005) who has been known to try mussels in chocolate, otter ragout, or a pie of smoked cat and hawksbill turtle: Die beste im Handel erhltliche gerucherte Katze kommt vom uersten Rand Italiens, nahe Solda (oder Sulden, wenn Sie germanisch aufgelegt sind) an der Schweizer Grenze. Sie wird verkauft von der Familie Ammering in dem Drfchen Migg [The best commercially available smoked cat comes from just inside Italy, up by the Swiss border near Solda (or Sulden, if you are Germanically inclined). It is purveyed by the Ammering family in the little village of Migg] (HamiltonPaterson 2005: 167). What unites the two characters is the shared passion for Fernet Branca that gives the book its title. Gerald would use it to cook with at every opportunity, and both enjoy drinking it (and suspect each other of being addicted) although Gerald should actually despise the liquor for reasons of distinction, whereas for Marta it must, naturally, fall short of the Voydean schnapps, being a rather insipid version of that Galasiya, our hunters drink (Hamilton-Paterson 2005: 30).

A Second Appetizer:
ThreehoursaloneintheCar One can learn many things from the book Gestndnisse eines Kchenchefs [Kitchen Confidential] by the American cook and writer, Anthony Bourdain (2001), which caused quite a stir in the media (and a certain disappointment in the world of gourmets) some of them surprising, others less so. For instance, one learns about the rise of gastro trends and their integration into the international haute cuisine; about economic pressures in the highly differentiated system of Konzeptgastronomie [conceptual restaurants] with all the risks and barely surprising wheeling and dealing involved; and about the tough working conditions that range between de26

Of the taste Of RegiOns

pendence, addiction and (self-) destruction. While reading the book, written mainly in the brash style of the initiate revealing it all, I became stuck on a relatively unspectacular point. Right at the beginning of the book, there is a passage in which Bourdain composes key culinary experiences into the plausible arch of his life story. We all know what role such themes play in autobiographical texts they retrospectively actualise experiences, to give meaning and purpose to ones own life. For young Anthony, the child of a Franco-American family, a summer holiday in France becomes an experience that shapes his future thinking and behaviour. It is not so much the gustatory arousal scenes that Bourdain shares with his readers; rather, it is the idea of culinary spaces, which will be rendered plausible by locating and describing such experiences. The Bourdain family, obviously belonging to a well-to-do milieu and operating in the transatlantic sphere, are travelling through France in a Rover they acquired in Europe. The children, two boys, are with their parents and gather their own experiences cold soups, oysters. At one point the family visits Vienne. Once the car is parked, the two boys have to sit there waiting for three hours while their parents wine and dine in a restaurant called La Pyramide. Bourdain describes his feeling of gradually realising that in this region, at this place, and behind these walls something very special must be happening (Bourdain 2001: 12f.). Not just something that kids are denied, and for which one accepts the need to travel long distances, but also something that inscribes itself into space, invests it with meaning, and conditions how space is experienced. The literary representation of an experience during the summer of 1966 has an air of mystery, which, four decades later, we might not perceive in the same way if confronted with contemporary impressions: Take the budget airline, which, in co-operation with the federal state of BadenWrttemberg, commissions an Airbus with the Slogan Mhhh BadenWrttemberg painted on it, to travel as a culinary ambassador for the state. Take the Deutsche Bahn (German federal railways), which, during the FIFA championship, designs the menu in its dining cars as a reference system of regional and global culinary spaces, so that diners have the choice between dishes representative of the German venues and the regional landscapes in which the high-speed trains traverse, or specialities typical of the competing nations, prepared according to a similar logic. Newspapers report that the EU plans to expand measures to protect re-

27

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

gional foods, and these should be understood as a contribution to culinary variety. In dealing with typical and representative dishes it is perhaps best not to resort to the use of quotation marks at all. Nor do I want to establish a dichotomy of imagined and real culinary travels that would be only misleading. Suffice it for now to note the dual observation that two distinct patterns of thought and action are inevitable in the everyday of our late modernity: First, the idea that culinary practices are predominantly spatially configured; second, the promise that the cultural variety and difference of spaces and regions can be experienced with particular immediacy in the encounter with their culinary systems. I need quote no further examples to support either hypothesis indicated in the title of a new meaning of the connection between region and taste, or the linked proposition of a new spatial reordering of culinary practice. In our everyday lives, we are well used to representations and practices in this regard an article on the austere taste of Sardinia in the in-flight magazine; the leisure map of the Swabian Mountains with symbols indicating the culinary hot spots of the region; the regional cookery course for students of an international language school; our subtly spacerelated practices of consumption at home as well as on the road all this combined with a fridge full of European ingredients, specialised cookbooks, the availability of ethno- and regional cuisines, with the reading of eloquent menus and discussions of our own experiences of taste here as there. The questions I want to explore are concerned with further defining the field outlined here, and trying to fathom the spatial conditions of culinary practice in late modern constellations. Towards this goal, I will first of all locate the problem in ethnological food research in order to shed some light on the transformation processes of food and of taste, taking culinary heritage as an example. Using concrete examples, such as an on-going research project on regional specialities as cultural property, it will be possible to qualify this dimension, and to develop the foundations for an analysis. The focus will be on identifying key questions rather than formulating answers. By way of conclusion I will examine techniques and practices of knowledge relating to culinary issues, and try to develop perspectives for ethnographic food research under complex conditions that are centred on the social actors.

28

Of the taste Of RegiOns

The overall aim is not simply to translate the paradigms of the so-called spatial turn (Schroer 2006; Soja 2003) for the purposes of a particular research area of our discipline. Rather, the aim is to develop, by using a relational concept of space, approaches that allow us to explain the formation and function of regional gustatory systems and space-related culinary practices in the precise context of European protection schemes for the so-called culinary heritage. Instead of any general theoretical disposition, my central concern will therefore be with illuminating the domains that emerge.

Starter
CulturalanalysisoftheCulinaryProblemsandTraditionsof foodResearch The literary examples cited earlier clarify that food habits are a complex field where discourses and policies of cultural heritage reach deeply into our everyday practices. Under the label of culinary heritage a collective term for traditional and regional foods including specific ways of preparation (cuisines and culinary systems) these habits have attracted unprecedented attention in recent years. This is in spite of the fact that the culinary complex does not readily fit into the dichotomic model of cultural heritage: food is, on the one hand, very concrete and body-related but, on the other hand, a highly abstract good due to its transience and to its consumption predicated on sensual experience beyond reliable taxonomies (Barlsius 1999). Culinary practice is thus qualified by the synchronicity of material and immaterial aspects and therefore it cannot be exclusively classified as either a material or intangible cultural heritage (Weigelt 2006; Brown 2005). Although hard to grasp, culinary traditions have, in recent times, increasingly become a point of departure for metacultural processes (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004) in many parts of the world. Regional culinary traditions, and culinary systems in particular, have attracted new attention, not so much as reactions to globalisation, but as an aspect of the global transformation processes. A particular concept of culture informs not only the countless regional initiatives and national foundations that have emerged in many countries, but also non-governmental organisations acting globally such as the popular Slow Food movement (Petrini 2001) or the European Unions agricultural policy measures ( Johler
29

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

2001; 2002). This concept permeates the discourses of world heritage and, in addition to the category space (as the primary organising principle of local or regional traditions), foregrounds the community base of culinary knowledge and practices. Ethnological and other cultural knowledge invariably provides the foundation for criteria and justifications whether for the compilation of national inventories of cultural heritage, the development of regional specialities that inject added value of produce and expertise into the regional product (Pfriem et al. 2006), or the principles of terroir ( Josling 2006) and of generic specialities (Thiedig and Sylvander 2000), controversially debated in European agricultural policy as well as in world trade negotiations. Conversely, this knowledge also reflects everyday conceptions and experiences, and turns them consciously or otherwise into the basis for culinary systems (Tschofen 2005). There is as yet no major cultural analysis concerned with either the processes in which explicit culinary heritages emerge, or the problems of cultural property relating to the transformations of food traditions, particular dishes or cuisines. Initial forays into this field have been made by Scandinavian ethnologists (e.g., Salomonsson 2002) and, more recently, studies by Welz and Andilios (2007) on the Europeanisation of the food market as exemplified by the Cypriot cheese, Halloumi. The research field as such, however, is by no means neglected: both the practical documentation though often conducted from an essentialising perspective and the (agro-) economic analysis (Profeta et al. 2005) demonstrate its importance in everyday life and economy, and point to the historical and socio-cultural gaps in the subject (Thiedig 1996). The study of food habits even though not pursued very systematically certainly belongs among the classic concerns of ethnological research. This is not the place to speculate about the various reasons for this, other than to surmise that in most cases it is due to a conjunction of a range of motives. Despite its perennially static concept of culture, German Volkskunde has long been open for everyday cultural expressions. Another important role has been played by the idea that pre-modern societies and their relics and survivals, on which ethnological research was focused for a long time, project themselves essentially in their food habits that their natural conditions and cultural systems would become automatically evident in eating and drinking (Tschofen 2000b). Perhaps the affinity to-

30

Of the taste Of RegiOns

wards immediate bodily experience, arising from the vitalistic disposition of older Volkskunde approaches may have come into this, lending its own sense of culinarity to the topic. The discipline as we know it has had a curiously close relationship with its subjects, not only describing and explaining them but, in many cases, also living them and re-translating them into an asynchronous practice. The tradition of ethnological food research (Tolksdorf 2001; Heimerdinger 2005) is nevertheless the right framework to analyse the formation, mediation and transformation of spatially connoted food traditions. In Europe the interest in these issues dates back to before the establishment of a Volkskunde as an academic subject. It is reflected following the paradigms of nation and culture in auto-ethnographic and hetero-ethnographic sources of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The sources range from travelogues concentrating on the moreor-less symbolic representations and differentiation of distinct cultures to the relatively systematic censuses of the statistical-topographic enterprises initiated by the new administrative states and their demographic and economic policies, motivated by the goal of comprehensively modernising all aspects of life. The two traditions, sketched here as ideal types, converge in some measure in the styles of thinking prevalent in a Volkskunde that became institutionalised in the late nineteenth century. In this process, in line with its nostalgic retrospective vision, the interest for relics and stereotypical fixation became inscribed in the disciplinary canon while the aspects of the everyday which, from this perspective, appear non-specific and changeable, were disregarded. This orientation still determines, to a large extent, the surveys for the ethnographic atlas projects, which, by virtue of their methods and results, would exert a lasting influence on the development of a historico-cultural food research (Schmoll 2005). However, the primary interest has shifted for example, in Gnter Wiegelmanns analyses of the atlas materials over many decades towards the historical determination of characteristic spatial layers in the reconstruction of processes of innovation and diffusion, their reasons and their causes. Through its attention to structures and processes, ethnological food research, guided initially by antiquarian motives, has since the 1960s become increasingly linked to international and interdisciplinary developments (Wiegelmann 2006). The establishment of a commission for ethnological food research

31

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

within the Socit Internationale dEthnologie et de Folklore is important in this context. To this day the composition of this commission reflects the emphasis on food culture in the Scandinavian ethnologies and in the disciplinary contexts of Eastern and Central European countries with their traditions of national ethnographies. On the margins of dealing with historical landscape cuisines, European Ethnology paid increasing attention to what Kstlin (1975; 1991) first described as the Revitalisierung regionaler Kost [revitalisation of regional fare] in modernity. In German-speaking areas and in Scandinavia in particular, we thus find, from an early stage, intensive engagement with the discursive construction of regional and national cuisines. Following the development, since the 1960s, of an awareness of second-hand folk culture (combined with the everyday availability of scientific knowledge), a series of articles initially still in the tradition of analysing a food folklorism depicted and interpreted the revitalisation of regional fare with regard to identity-confirming strategies of an invention of tradition. In recent years, thanks to a conjunction of praxeological and cultural-semiotic concepts that have focused attention on the symbolic dimension of culinary systems (Matthiesen 2005), the production of cultural systems through food habits has been considered anew. This involves depicting and analysing the relevant representations and concentrates notably on social practices at different levels of action/actors, including consumers, producers and researchers (Burstedt 2002). Commonly connected with this is the spatiotemporal location of the phenomena concerned within the tensions of an imagined dichotomy of regionalism and globalism (Heimerdinger 2005). The frame of reference for international and interdisciplinary food studies or culinary studies is similarly defined by global developments. An important perspective for anthropological research is therefore the analytical connection between issues of governance and everyday local practice (Phillips 2006). Questions about food research thus no longer concentrate on a field narrowly defined by its subject. Rather, they draw stimuli from an engagement with regionality fuelled by the new attention to the spatial dimension of the social world (Lw 2001; Schroer 2006). Accordingly, questions about how spatio-cultural systems are experienced and created are being augmented as central themes by analyses of how identities are managed, both regionally and under conditions of Europeanisation and so-called

32

Of the taste Of RegiOns

globalisation (e.g., Frykman and Niedermller 2003). The theoretical concepts of relational systems and situational orientations (Featherstone and Lash 1999) developed in this context are the basis for a further investigation of European identities in the nexus of region/culture and superordinated processes of simultaneous homogenisation and differentiation (Frykman 1999). However, these concepts largely remain to be verified through a combination of micro- and macro-level ethnographies of everyday experience and the creation of its corresponding regimes. Food research has acquired in this context a clearly reflective element, which helps reconsider the ethnological contribution (founded not least in the disciplines history) to contemporary discourses and practices (Tschofen 2000a), and on the whole suggests a concept of food culture as a social domain defined by knowledge and action (Welz and Andilios 2004). Against this background, the complex defined in politics and practice as culinary heritage can be understood as a system of relationships. Whenever the study of culture concentrates on the formation of cultural heritages, the issue of the transformation of spatially and culturally limited commodities, traditions and bodies of knowledge into boundless and universalising orders a passage normally not without ruptures or conflicts (Nadel-Klein 2003) is unavoidable. The focus thus inevitably shifts towards conflict over the practical embedding of global cultural processes in local frameworks of action, the practical formation of European or global systems and the systems and networks facilitating these transfers (Csky and Sommer 2005). The protection and proprietary creation of culinary heritage highlight problems with the concept of cultural heritage in general. The key paradox lies in the elevation of a holistic concept of culture at the normative level at the same time as action is conditioned by a concept of hybridity. This paradox reflects the fundamental placelessness of global processes as at once homogenising and heterogenising tendencies. To understand this paradox, fresh approaches are required, aiming their focuses, for example, on the pragmatics of globalisation to identify differences beyond cultural essentialism on the one hand, and the outdated concepts of progress or modernisation on the other. With regard to the domain of culinary traditions as cultural property, adaptations and creative spaces should be compared not against an implicit background of highly actual cultural differences, but by considering cultural heritage

33

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

as a relationship. Thus we leave behind us the potent images of a container theory, and hence the crux of methodological nationalism. Obviously, we are dealing primarily with concepts that can do justice to the (not least cultural theoretical) paradoxes and synchronicities of this complex. Mere attention to the arrival of global politics at a local level is no more satisfactory here than concentration on the policies and systems possibly derived from different, conflicting practices. The long history of academic interest in vernacular food habits cannot be discussed here. It might, however, be worth pointing out a certain paradox connected with the history of ethnological knowledge and research in relation to food, and that could be outlined in a similar manner for other subject domains. The evident paradox lies in the ambivalent relationship to the category of space that is peculiar to the Volkskunde approach. In a nutshell, Volkskunde has from its very beginning conceptualised the complex of human nutrition in terms of spaces and borders subsequently, migrations as well without theoretically and systematically examining the spatial dimension. This might be due not least to the fact that the approach has been shaped by the tradition of Kulturraumforschung [the study of cultural spaces] in the 1920s an outcrop of the surveys for the German ethnographic atlas and similar national atlas projects which, to a great extent, determined the post-war decades and included the spatial perspective as a method a priori. In a thought-provoking review article, Heimerdinger (2005: 206) has highlighted the fundamental role for ethnological food research of theoretical studies on cultural fixation and economic circumstances, associated mainly with Wiegelmann and Teuteberg, from the 1960s onwards. Central to these studies was the analysis of the social but above all spatial distribution and diffusion of various dishes and types of foods. Belatedly and reluctantly, ethnologic food research seems to have discovered space, while its domain appears more than ever defined by complex and intertwined spatial processes. The idea of regional cuisines and culinary regions provides a telling example of the way in which culture acquires space, and spaces are constituted and practised. Significantly, as mentioned earlier, ethnologic food research has so far been orientated mostly in the opposite direction it has taken the spatial dimension of food traditions as largely essential, depicting and historically tracing certain dishes or ways of preparation as typical for certain regions. Even

34

Of the taste Of RegiOns

where the regional (or ethnic) aspects of eating and drinking have been questioned from a constructivist angle, the analysis has been confined to communicative aspects of such attribution, to the role of intercultural communication, and to ideas of identity and alterity carried, for instance, by national food stereotypes. Broadly speaking, there has been little room for a systematic analysis of the spatial dimension in the key interpretive patterns of the cultural complex around eating and drinking. This is true not only for Volkskunde, but also for food research in social science and cultural research generally. Sociology, for example, recognised the inclusive and exclusive functions of culinary systems at an early stage, but has only recently learnt to depict the invention of national and regional cuisines as a discursive and practical correlate of social and territorial processes of differentiation rather than as an inevitable process (Barlsius 1999: 146). Of particular interest, apart from the existential social connection of food and dishes what Tanner (1996) describes as culinary materialism are historical questions of process, and questions that, with a view to social structures, throw light on the communicative-socialising functions of commensuality and convivium, that is, forms of eating together, and on the distinguishing functions of alimentation and taste as instruments of differentiation in social space. In a Volkskunde modernised empirically and along culture-analytical lines, Utz Jeggle (1986; 1988), for instance, has shown early on that eating is more than just taking in food, and how particularly every day cuisine and the related practices and rituals mediate and implement social systems and value orientations. Obviously, the social meaning of what is eaten is not exhausted within these coordinates, and the success of new regional cuisines and the corresponding restructuring and reinterpretation of the markets for agricultural produce and culinary experiences surely point beyond them. In an engaging essay on dining culture and regional development, Matthiesen (2005) has argued that in recent years a new interpretive pattern has crossed the culinary landscape, one that emphasises the correspondence of regional territories and gustatory obstinacy. Looking at the contemporary rediscovery of regional cuisines since the 1980s, there is, irrespective of a progressive levelling of tastes in some ways, much that points towards a development that might be as fundamental as far-reaching for European everyday lives.

35

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

In other words: Never before has there been so much space in food, so much territoriality added to representations around eating and drinking as well as to the elementary experiences of tasting and smelling. We have to ask, therefore, how this connection, in turn, affects places and spaces, makes them and provides them with contour and meaning. As Cook and Crang (1996: 140), writing from the perspective of British material culture studies, have diagnosed: Foods do not simply come from places, organically growing out of them, but also make places as symbolic constructs, being deployed in the discursive construction of various imaginative geographies. Clearly, this is not valid for the rhetoric of everyday food contexts. Both industrial food production and the various initiatives to protect culinary heritage operate with a different concept, one that is related to the old conception of food research of ethnology and Volkskunde culturally static, and focusing on ideas of naturalness and authenticity. In the current campaign for Parmigiano Reggiano, for example, it is claimed that this cheese is not produced it evolves (Anon. 2006a: 67). This is just one example illustrating the fact that the concept of culture we need to study the complex of space/taste/practice cannot be the same as the concept currently used in European everyday lives, and especially in the EUs agricultural and regional policy. To understand its provenance and significance it is necessary to contextualise the politics and practice of culinary heritages with reference to what has been operating for some decades under the label of cultural and natural heritage.

Main Course I
Culinaryheritage:MetaculturalProcessesaboutalimentationandTaste Related to the notion of world heritage is the extension of a concept that was initially designated for spatially and temporally sharply defined cultures, to imply a global community of heirs. In late modernity, world heritage seems to have taken the place tradition had in modernity. The consequences and effects of this process have so far been not so much analysed as criticised. With its world heritage convention of 1972, UNESCO created a global system, based on the idea of humanitys common cultural and natural heritage, for the protection of cultural and natural monuments of outstanding universal value. In recent years, due to criticism of the predominance of a western topological-material concept
36

Of the taste Of RegiOns

of heritage, UNESCO has amended its programme. At the instigation of Japan and Korea, it launched a programme to protect intangible heritage, complemented by a programme to protect cultural diversity. Through the formation of an unbounded community of heirs, but more importantly through the creation of a uniform global monument culture, world heritage is placed in the context of cultural globalisation. It is not the monuments themselves that become homogenised in consequence they testify, on the contrary, increasingly to the diversity of cultures but rather the monument cultures, that is, the ways of dealing with sites, lieux des memoirs and listed traditions. This has a lot to do with the appreciation the European-western concepts of monument and tradition have experienced as a result of being sanctioned by UNESCOs criteria and the creation of uniform rituals of acceptance and nomination developed in accordance with these concepts. Just like the techniques of knowledge brought to bear in the field of representation, these criteria and rituals shape perceptions of our global memory space and define how we practically deal with, experience and organise the complexes of heritage. The interpretive patterns and lines of reasoning of all three UNESCO World Heritage programmes can be traced in the concept of culinary heritage as promoted by regional initiatives and non-governmental organisations. Being a profoundly concrete and tangible good, food also points deeply into the realm of the immaterial and intangible. It also absorbs ideas from the programme for natural heritage, which emphasises the systemic context and refers to natural and living entities. While the convention of 1972 is couched in terms of territoriality, the convention of 2003 defines safeguarding in terms of communities as bearers of collective knowledge, including all forms of traditional and popular or folk culture, that is, collective works originating in a given community and based on tradition (UNESCO 2003). Both criteria the regionally confined one and that of the collective are found analogously in the guidelines on culinary heritage and, in mediated form, provide a basis for a range of EU measures to promote and protect food products, such as PDO (Protected Designation of Origin), PGI (Protected Geographical Indication), and TSG (Traditional Speciality Guaranteed). The procedures for recognition under these schemes play an important role in the encounters between the regions and the Union, which is

37

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

usually perceived as a rather abstract entity. They are handled very differently by different nation states (Thiedig and Profeta 2006) and trigger conflicts between pressure groups, regions and indeed member states. For an impression of these procedures, reference to the implementation provisions may suffice. These make up a document of about fifty pages. An association of producers wishing to market its cheeses or its sausages with the status conveyed by a certified indication has to furnish detailed statements and reasons. It has to provide the product with a narrative based not only on nutritionally knowledge but also on the mobilisation of considerable ethnographic knowledge. Thus, the document recommends that special care be dedicated to the regional link of the product, since only they can justify the unique selling position (European Commission 2004: 13):
The explanation of the link is the most important element of the product specification with regard to registration. The link must provide an explanation of why a product is linked to one area, and not another, i.e. how far the final product is affected by the characteristics of the region in which it is produced. For both PDOs and PGIs, demonstrating that a geographical area is specialised in a certain production is not enough in order to justify the link. In all cases, the effect of geographical environmental or other local conditions on the quality of the product should be emphasised.

Activities depending on EU recognition are often connected and at times also in conflict with the activities of semi-state bodies for the protection of the culinary heritage, as they have been created in several European countries. Here as elsewhere, European politics takes on different local shades the patterns of action and interpretation (Salomonsson 2002) reaching from folklore through culture and tradition, sustainable ecological and social development, regional quality of life, and regional tourist marketing, to the strengthening of competition, innovative potentials of functional regions, and hidden protectionist subventions for agriculture. Characteristic is, in any case, an intertwining of different intentions and interpretations. In the late 1990s (Barlsius 1997; Streinz 1997) the cultural dimension of food law became the subject for a debate that brought together legal, economic and politico-cultural discourses. These discourses are currently
38

Of the taste Of RegiOns

gaining a new audience in the context of regional planning and in the steering of the European and international agricultural markets ( Josling 2006), and offer an avenue for analysing the relationships between legal concepts and concepts of culture with regard to the formulation of goods and property rights (Brard and Marchenay 2004). The high expectations of regional producer lobbies in particular, on the one hand, and of region marketing and identity management on the other, make the policies and practices of designations of origin paradigmatic for the analysis of cultural property rights (Gibson 2005: 127ff.) in relation to cultural location and commodified concepts of region, tradition and identity. This is the point of departure for a current research project at the Ludwig-Uhland-Institut,2 which we hope to take forward in conjunction with the Gttingen-based research group on Cultural Property.3 Within a comparative framework and using an ethnographic approach that accompanies the products and processes, we will examine specific cases of recognition of regional specialities in two European countries. The following paragraphs offer a brief outline of this project. Copyright law has been concerned with the protection of geographic designations for a long time. Nowadays the protection and promotion of intellectual property are primary duties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which is administrating a set of international agreements that regulate the protection of this special kind of cultural property (Hafstein 2004; Rikoon 2004). With the oldest of these agreements dating back to 1883, the protection of geographic designations of origin has historically been one of the most controversial components of international intellectual property law (Hpperger 2005). Geographic indications are judicially defined as marks that, in commercial transactions, refer to the characteristic provenance of a certain product. They are based on the idea that such products are characterised by features that are conditioned by their spatial origin. In the case of agricultural products, such attribution can be traced back directly to specific natural aspects of the place of origin without being necessarily confined to them. According to this legal concept, specific knowledge may contribute to the special properties of a product. One can thus understand the characteristics of a product as the sum of local influences. This gives rise to the idea that a particular product can be produced authentically only in its proper place of origin. The product therefore acquires a status comparable to that of non-material

39

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

commodities. Consequently, geographic indications are dealt with under the 1994 TRIPIS-agreement (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) of the WTO (World Trade Organization). Geographic indications signal quality and profile, which, in turn, promise a competitive advantage due to the added value they imply. This is sometimes referred to as the CO effect (country-of-origin effect), or in the regional context, as a region-of-origin effect (Profeta et al. 2005). Proceeding from a notion of region as a set of discourses and practices that connect different actors with each other (within and outside the respective region), our project places the emphasis on the problem of groups and individuals actively involved in processes of establishing, valorising and commodifying specialities with European certification. In this, we direct our special attention to conflicts in the process of transforming culinary heritage, and examine the divergent power relationships and conflicts of interest, and the mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion that are implicit in the protection of regional specialities. With regard to the transnational processes that are both the effect of and the background to the politics of culinary heritages, such a research project has to be set up from the start as multi-sited and comparative. It looks at different levels of decision-making, mediation and appropriative practices, and demands institutional field research at the interface between politics and practice. Thus, the two studies that make up this sub-project both include the analysis of the role of consultancy and certification agencies that increasingly appear on the stage of regional marketing and the establishment and commercialisation of regional specialities in recent years. The work of the relevant boards and non-governmental organisations that have established themselves as nodes of the social network generating heritage and property in the culinary field, will also be considered in that context.

Main Course II
TerroirasaPractice:SpatialandSpatialisedExperience Using the example of two European regions and their products, the formation of rules and the space for manoeuvre in reclaiming food as cultural property will be analysed from a comparative perspective concentrating on the actors. The two regions one in Germany and one in Poland have been carefully chosen to allow for meaningful comparison,
40

Of the taste Of RegiOns

as both have enough in common to justify the approach while displaying considerable differences. The product cultures concerned in both cases cheese are conventionally closely associated with the natural and cultural-spatial conditions of the regions. They are, in some measure, elements of the cultural memory of these regions, Allgu and Podhale, and play an important role in their self-perception and the perceptions of outsiders. Here as there, pastoral traditions are a central point of reference for the representation of the region. Their actualisation in the process of modernisation, and reference to related symbols in the course of positioning the region in supra-regional and national spaces of memory, have assured the added value of a cultural heritage formulated in this a way. The regions also share an upland position in the mountains and their foreland, the Alps and the Upper Tatra, respectively. Related to this is their marginality historically on the borders of territorial states, and then on the borders of nation states. Moreover, the historical links of both regions to nearby centres should be mentioned to the cities of Southern Germany on the one hand, and to Krakow as the metropolis of Lesser Poland and capital of Galicia on the other. For the regions this brought not only an early discovery by tourists, but also situated them in particular centre-periphery relations that turned them, in the bourgeois view, into definitive folk cultural landscapes and determined the way in which they became inscribed in state and national horizons (cf. Moravanszky 2002) as reference spaces with suitable connotations (vernacular architecture, music, traditional costumes, and so on). The reconnection to the historical cultures of production as argued in the applications for the registration of Allguer Emmentaler and Oscypek shows commonalities between the two regions but, at the same time, indicates important differences in the practices of transformation in the respective regional and national context. The German Allgu is, by European standards, a fairly prosperous region. Dairy farming plays a key part in this regard, and at the supraregional level, has the reputation of a traditional economic system with quasi-elementary structures and meanings. The main activity to be protected by geographical indication is the production of hard cheeses, and besides Allguer Emmentaler, Allguer Bergkse has also been inscribed as Protected Designation of Origin. De facto, however, the production of

41

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

hard cheeses constitutes an innovation of the modern mercantile state. In connection with this, the processes of Vereindung [desolation] and Vergrnlandung [conversion to pasture] need to be understood as measures conducted under central dirigism, just as the implementation of Swissstyle Emmentaler and Bergkse alpine dairies from the early nineteenth century onwards. That state-run academies and laboratories for cheese making were established around 1900 in both the Wrttemberg Allgu and the Bavarian Allgu (Wangen and Weiler, respectively) illustrates the importance of this sector for the national economy. Regardless of the ultra-modern structures (large dairies, control systems, cheese exchange), the traditional method of production of the raw milk cheese plays a central role in the presentation of the products today. Allguer Emmentaler achieves high prices in direct sales in the tourist area, and the cheese exchange records a positive tendency in proceeds (read: added value) due to the indication of the product as Protected Designation of Origin. The example of the Allgu primarily highlights, first, the importance of the image of a region (raising questions about the emotional component of regional specialities, and about connections with touristic practices and experiences); second, the problems surrounding generic terms and branding (aptly expressed in the way the paradoxical German Swiss cheese is tackled semantically in the representation and communication of the product); third, the debates about commonage, and collective good or individual good; and, finally, the drawing of boundaries vis--vis the historically related cheese cultures of neighbouring regions (e.g., Bregenzerwald, Appenzell) that use identical arguments for their products. The region of Podhale/High Tatra has been chosen as a comparatively differentiable counterpart to the Allgu. Podhale is situated in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship (Wojewdztwo Maopoldkie), consisting primarily of the Tatrznski district but including parts of the larger Nowotarski district. Despite significant tourism, the region emerged as a typical peripheral region in the transformation process after 1989. Traditionally characterised by considerable emigration and temporary migration, the region is also marked by a high unemployment rate and the crisis-driven return to subsistence types of production in its small-scale agriculture. Hence, the production of Oscypek takes place in the context of a partial return to agrarian structures of the regional economy on the one hand, and of the europeanisation of the Polish agricultural market on the other hand (Dunn

42

Of the taste Of RegiOns

2004). Oscypek is a small smoked cheese, made mainly from sheeps milk with some cows milk added, which was introduced by Vlach shepherds. In the village of Chocholow the region has a UNESCO World Heritage Site, and the mountain shepherd tradition plays an important role in its touristic representation (Roszkowskiego 1995), tourism opening up the key market and advertising medium for the cheese. Oscypek gained particular importance in the course of the negotiations between Poland and the European Union, and in 2004 was stylised as a door-opener for and symbol of Polands accession. That year, a three-meter high smoked cheese was pulled through the town of Zakopane by a convoy of farmers, shepherds and tourists, to mark the successful award of EU certification as a regional speciality. Registration was not without conflicts, and to this day remains marked by contradictory demands of the producers (Fonte and Grando 2006: 56f.). At the same time, conflicts emerged about the differentiation from a cheese of similar name and from the same mountain shepherd tradition, produced just across the border in Slovakia. With reference to the questions formulated for the Allgu, the following aspects are foregrounded for the Podhale region: first with regard to the importance of the image of the region the emotional component of regional specialities; second, the negotiation of EU agricultural governance in transformation regions and the role of the non-governmental organisations, such as the Slow Food programme for Oscypek, in the formation of politico-administrative measures; third, the problem of freezing, that is, the impediment of developments in production due to the fixation of recipes; and, finally, the formation of cultural heritage and cultural property in transitional economies the influence of (post-)communist concepts of property and processes of privatisation on discourses and practices as well as, again, the drawing up of boundaries with historically related cheese cultures of neighbouring regions using identical arguments. The project proceeds from an understanding of culinary heritage as global cultural transfer and as a relationship. It focuses, therefore, on processes of recording and systematising of food traditions, looking especially at the EU systems for the protection of regional specialities. As the next step, the transformations of goods, knowledge, actors and regions in the process of dealing with categories of culinary heritage will be looked at. Here, changes in semantics and structure of interpretation and action are the theme. The subsequent analysis concentrates on public interests and

43

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

conflicting expectations deduced from that transformation. Policies of protected specialities are examined in terms of regional value added and identity management, with regard to both the economic and the symbolic valorisation of the declared products. Finally, the sub-project integrates the various levels in the problem of the spatial constitution of cultural property. It analyses the culinary representations and practices with regard to commodification processes of region and of identity and asks about the related constitution of regional taste cultures, and how they are experienced and communicated. In the case of culinary heritage as property, intertwining mechanisms at various levels are regulating the usage of and access to culinary heritage.4 A vital aspect here is the transfer between cultural (and indeed disciplinary) knowledge and institutionalised regulations. This brings into being a social network that reaches well beyond primary social relations; for instance, between producers and consumers or between EU-Europe and the regions. We therefore need to ask, first and foremost, about the processes that constitute culinary heritage: What are the interests of the actors in different spheres of activity? Which orders and orientations are reflected in the correlate practices? One has to ask, furthermore, about the concepts of culture, heritage and region: What are the criteria according to which the institutions dealing with culinary heritage operate at the European, national and regional level? Which concepts of culture and identity are conveyed in their operations? Questions also arise about conflicts in the process of transforming culinary heritage: What power divergences and conflicts of interests, and what mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion are related to the protection of regional specialities? What attempts have been made to resolve these issues? With our research project, we want to find out what happens when food becomes cultural heritage, and taken-for-granted products and practices are labelled and listed as regional specialities. Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett has characterised such processes as metacultural operations, meaning the conversion of selected aspects of localised origin in supra-local contexts. She points out that all heritage interventions just as the pressure of globalisation they try to resist change the relation of humans to their actions: They change how people understand their culture and them-

44

Of the taste Of RegiOns

selves. They change the fundamental conditions for cultural production and reproduction. (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004: 58). Two paradoxical moments emerge from our explorations in the field described here as characteristic of the transformation process: On the one hand there is the emphasis on the tie that exists due to collective trusteeship and tradition, but which is wrested from the presumed actors by the declaration of a universal value, and transferred into a transitional status where it is buffeted by property rights and other effects; with the acquisition of heritage status the subject as reflexive actor disappears from view in favour of a fictive, a-historical collective. A second contradictory perhaps dialectical? moment refers directly to the spatial dimension of the transformation process. It is due to the simultaneity of de-localisation and local processes of inscribing. We must not imagine the determination and commercialisation of regional food traditions simply as a one-dimensional transfer from the local to the global level, but as a network of various geographies, which constitutes new spaces. Besides local practices and global structures, we need to take into special account the knowledge that accompanies the goods on their way through distribution systems. Cook and Crang (1996: 138) therefore talk about knowledges [] which for consumers form part of the discursive complexes within which they are increasingly asked reflexively to manage their food consumption habits and their selves. This context poses further questions, particularly the question of how culinary knowledge of space is generated and dealt with. The de-localisation of goods on the way from the world of production to the world of consumption causes a vacuum of meaning that has to be filled with new narratives and promises for experiences (Bell and Valentine 1997). We still know little about the historical and regional variations of this knowledge, about its textual construction and position with regard to culturally manifested power relationships for example, between centres and peripheries, and between producers, agrarian regimes and the distribution systems of consumer goods and experience industry. What we can assume after our initial studies, at least for the present time and probably also for the era of the discovery and formation of regional cuisines is that this knowledge has been made popular neither by top down commodification processes alone, nor by a structure of meaning organised solely on a bottom up basis. Rather, one has to conceptualise the

45

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

dynamic of space-related culinary knowledge as a circulating reference (Latour 1999) between common images and individual interpretations by the consumers. Spatial knowledge thus mediates between diversified spaces as manifold intertwined, overlapping orders of variable range and extent (Schroer 2006: 226). At this point it is worth recalling the techniques and media of culinary knowledge. Anyone concerned with culinary regions and culinary heritage will soon notice that these are significantly linked with two forms of representation. These are lists on the one hand, and maps on the other forms of narration and visualisation have the power of definition precisely in their frequent combination. While the lists and inventories of culinary heritage agents (not to forget the Slow Food movements Ark of Taste, which virtually biologises and sacralises the principle) attempt to define through enumerating, thus following techniques of knowledge tried and tested in the protection of built heritage since the nineteenth century, culinary maps translate cultural matters immediately into space (Pitte 1991). A map thus creates imaginary topographies that may serve as guidance for the utilisation of landscapes. Maps not only transfer knowledge into objectifiable forms; they also generate knowledge, orientational knowledge that is held available in what Gerhard Schulze (2000) calls an Archiv der Ereignismuster [archive of patterns of events]. Maps overlay landscapes with user interfaces for every day life. Karl Schlgel, one of the proponents of a spatial turn in history, has made the power of maps to create space one of his key themes, analysing the capacity of maps to transmit the historical world into a territorial dimension. With reference to tourist maps, a case of harmlessly apolitical maps whose primary purpose is to provide instructions for the use of landscape, he argues that even the simplest maps have considerable power because they implant in our heads images of centre and periphery, thus establishing hierarchies albeit mostly harmless ones (Schlgel 2003: 106). Cartography itself has, if I am not mistaken, only recently become aware of the power of its instruments, and has begun to interrogate popular cartography as cultural practice, as an imaging technique in the fabric of knowledge, power and space (Scharfe 1997: 133; Schneider 2004; Tzschachel, Wild and Lenz 2007). However, these practices of explication, ostensibly unspectacular and perhaps indeed harmless, should be the

46

Of the taste Of RegiOns

starting point for an examination of connections between sensory experience, the taken-for-granted life-world with regard to region, eating and drinking, and the new regions as spaces of knowledge and practice. After all, the popular imagery of regional cultures, in its definition of landscapes through symbols of the cultures, ultimately uses a principle that points back towards the spatio-cultural thinking of ethnological and cultural studies and the knowledge they manipulate.

Dessert
Taste,SpaceandEmotionSomePerspectives I have sought to show how labels and attributes for regional foods change, not only the products, practices and their meaning, but also our geographies. The indication of origin of the products their link, as it is called in EU application jargon creates spaces inscribed with knowledge a knowledge which, in turn, feeds back to places and things (as well as in encounters with places and things). For cultural researchers to learn about meta-cultural processes in the heritage complex, it is important to comprehend the grammar of things and places, their narratives, and their epistemes intended for use by different actors. The different actors do not represent separate worlds of producers and consumers, but rather complex negotiation processes that increasingly erode that separation. Transformed regional cuisines do not live on the simple dichotomy of local actors (Allguer mountain farmers) and global systems (EU). They need to be conceptualised as communicatively constructed (Knoblauch 1995) cultural contexts, and hence less as results than as relationships of cultural correspondence. The power of the local in globalising systems is not confined to concrete acquisition and adaptation (down to the stubborn or recalcitrant interpretation of the rules). It needs to be taken seriously in the sense of the (however mediated) potential of places, the senses of places as Doreen Massey (1994) has interpreted them. Here a further aspect would need to be introduced, one about which we know far less than about the multi-local negotiation processes and the transcultural dynamics that have started to change radically our perception of, and our dealings with, cultural legacy in recent years. To learn more about this aspect, it is necessary to develop attention and methodological instruments for experiencing places that reach be47

BeRnhaRd tschOfen

yond estimations based on visual perception. Clearly, over the past few decades the visual has received most of our attention, not least due to the accessibility and clearness of the sources. As the title of John Urrys (1990) influential book The Tourist Gaze indicates, much intellectual effort has been devoted to understanding the tourist ways of seeing and the medial construction of tourist places. We need to hone our awareness toward the fact that other senses are also involved in this. The nonarticulated and non-articulable has its meaning, especially for human knowledge of space. Moreover, the sense of smell, the sense of taste, and the experience of bodies in space produce a knowledge that allows the production of order and its translation into practice. The discursive sense of vision and its actual visualisations may sometimes obstruct, so to speak, the view of this. This concluding plea for a new understanding of the effect of presence of things and places also highlights the important and concrete current postulate of an anthropology of emotion, and the call for a history of sensory experiences and emotions. What matters here is the development of attention towards the affect of places and for affective sites. Nigel Thrift (2006), who put forward an elaborated theory of a spatial policy of affect, argued that emotions offer a wide moral palette through which we can think the world and feel various things, even if not everything can be named. Taste and emotion are not an accident. They are connectors between actors and social structures. Because they contain the experience of social figurations and cultural interpretations, they can serve as translators of social orders into the subjective experiences of individual actors, and may help internalise experiences of what unites and what separates. If one separates the questions raised by ethnological food research and regional research from their essentialising attributions, one quickly reaches relatively uncharted yet promising terrain. An important step apart from the investigation of the politics and practice of systems of culinary heritage should be to make gustatory experiences increasingly a subject of discussion in various spatial, and spatially connoted, contexts. They should not be seen as an elementary counter-model to the structural dimensions of the complex, but as the crucial connector in the entangled transformation processes between systems of knowledge and everyday practice.

48

Of the taste Of RegiOns

Bernhard Tschofen is Professor of Empirical Cultural Studies [Empirische Kulturwissenschaften], with particular emphasis on regional ethnography, at the Ludwig-UhlandInstitute of the University of Tbingen. His research interests include regional identities and tourism.

Notes
1. This is a revised version of my inaugural lecture as Professor of Empirical Cultural Studies at Eberhard-Karls-Universitt Tbingen, delivered on 24 July 2006. 2. For hints and comments I am indebted to Felicitas Hartmann M.A. and Esther Hoffmann M.A., both at Tbingen. 3. Die Konstituierung von Cultural Property: Akteure, Diskurse, Kontexte, Regeln (Speaker: Regina Bendix, Gttingen), submitted in 2007 as a DFG Research Group following an outline proposal in spring 2006. 4. Valuable inspiration came from the Gttingen-based Cultural Property research group.

References
Anon (2006), Advertisement in Slow Food-Magazine, Genieen mit Verstand 14 no. 1: 67. Barlsius, E. (1997), Bedroht das europische Lebensmittelrecht die Vielfalt der Esskulturen?, in H. Teuteberg (ed.), Essen und kulturelle Identitt. Europische Perspektiven (Berlin: Akademie), 113127. Barlsius, E. (1999), Soziologie des Essens. Eine sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Einfhrung in die Ernhrungsforschung (Weinheim and Mnchen: Juventa). Bell, D. and Valentine, G. (1997), Consuming Geographies. We Are Where We Eat (London: Routledge). Brard, L. and Marchenay, P. (2004), Les produits de terroir. Entre cultures et rglements (Paris: CNRS). Bourdain, A. (2001), Gestndnisse eines Kchenchefs. Was Sie ber Restaurants nie wissen wollten (Mnchen: Blessing). Brown, M. (2005), Heritage Trouble Recent Work on the Protection of Intangible Cultural Property, International Journal of Cultural Property 12: 4061. Burstedt, A. (2002), The Place on the Plate!, Ethnologia Europaea 32: 145158.

49

BeRnhaRd tschOfen
Cook, I. and Crang, P. (1996), The World on a Plate: Culinary Culture, Displacement and Geographical Knowledges, Journal of Material Culture 1: 131153. Corti, S. (2005), Geschmcklerische Auskenner. Interview with James Hamilton-Paterson, Der Standard, Beilage Rondo 29 July 2005. Csky, M. and Sommer, M. (2005) (eds.), Kulturerbe als soziokulturelle Praxis (Innsbruck and Wien: Studienverlag). Dunn, E. (2004), Privatizing Poland: Baby Food, Big Business, and the Remaking of Labor (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press). European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture. (2004) (ed.), Food Quality Policy in the European Union. Guide to Community Regulations (Brussels: European Commission). Featherstone, M. and Lash, S. (1999) (eds) Spaces of Culture (London: Sage). Fonte, M. and Grando, S. (2006), A Local Habitation and a Name. Local Food and Knowledge Dynamics in Sustainable Rural Development, http://www.rimisp.org/getdoc. php?docid=6351 (accessed 7 July 2007). Frykman, J. (1999), Belonging to Europe. Modern Identities in Minds and Places, Ethnologia Europaea 29: 1324. Frykman, J. and Niedermller, P. (2003) (eds.), Articulating Europe Local Perspectives (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum). Gibson, J. (2005), Community Resources. Intellectual Property, International Trade and Protection of Traditional Knowledge (Aldershot/Burlington: Ashgate). Hafstein, V. (2004), The Politics of Origin: Collective Creation Revisited, Journal of American Folklore 117: 300315. Hamilton-Paterson, J. (2005), Kochen mit Fernet-Branca (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta). Heimerdinger, T. (2005), Schmackhafte Symbole und alltgliche Notwendigkeit. Zu Stand und Perspektiven der volkskundlichen Nahrungsforschung, Zeitschrift fr Volkskunde 101: 205218. Hpperger, M. (2005), Der Schutz geografischer Herkunftsangaben aus der Sicht der Weltorganisation fr geistiges Eigentum (WIPO) unter Bercksichtigung der Verordnung (EWG) 2081/92, http://www.geo-schutz.de/service/vortraege/_download/praesentation_hoepperger.pdf (accessed 20 March 2008). Jeggle, U. (1986), Essen in Sdwestdeutschland. Kostproben aus der schwbischen Kche, Schweizerisches Archiv fr Volkskunde 82: 167186. Jeggle, U. (1988), Egewohnheiten und Familienordnung. Was beim Essen alles mitgegessen wird, Zeitschrift fr Volkskunde 84: 189205. Johler, R. (2001), Wir mssen Landschaften produzieren: Die Europische Union und ihre politics of landscapes and nature, in: R. Brednich, A. Schneider and U. Werner (eds), Natur Kultur. Volkskundliche Perspektiven auf Mensch und Umwelt (Mnster: Waxmann), 7790.

50

Of the taste Of RegiOns

Johler, R. (2002), Local Europe. The Production of Cultural Heritage and the Europeanisation of Places, Ethnologia Europaea 32: 718. Josling, T. (2006), The War on Terroir: Geographical Indications as a Transatlantic Trade Conflict, Journal of Agricultural Economics 57 no. 3: 337363. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (2004), Intangible Heritage as Metacultural Production, Museum International 56: 5265. Knoblauch, H. (1995), Kommunikationskultur. Die kommunikative Konstruktion kultureller Kontexte (Berlin and New York: de Gruyter). Kstlin, K. (1975), Die Revitalisierung regionaler Kost, Ethnologische Nahrungsforschung. Vortrge des zweiten Internationalen Symposiums fr ethnologische Nahrungsforschung (Helsinki: Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistys), 159166. Kstlin, K. (1991), Heimat geht durch den Magen oder: Das Maultaschensyndrom in der Moderne, Beitrge zur Volkskunde in Baden-Wrttemberg 4: 147164. Latour, B. (1999), Zirkulierende Referenz. Bodenstichproben aus dem Urwald am Amazonas, in B. Latour, (ed), Die Hoffnung der Pandora. Untersuchungen zur Wirklichkeit der Wissenschaft (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp), 3695. Lw, M. (2001), Raumsoziologie (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp). Massey, D. (1994), Space, Place and Gender (Oxford: Polity Press). Matthiesen, U. (2005), Esskultur und Regionale Entwicklung unter besonderer Bercksichtigung von Mark und Metropole: Strukturskizzen zu einem Forschungsfeld, Antrittsvorlesung 27. Mai 2003, Berliner Bltter. Ethnographische und Ethnologische Beitrge 34: 111145. Moravanszky, A. (2002), Die Entdeckung des Nahen. Das Bauernhaus und die Architekten der frhen Moderne, in: Akos Moravanszky (ed.), Das entfernte Dorf. Moderne Kunst und ethnischer Artefakt (Wien/Kln/Weimar: Bhlau), 105124. Nadel-Klein, J. (2003), Fishing for Heritage. Modernity and Loss along the Scottish Coast (Oxford: Berg). Petrini, C. (2001), Slow Food. La ragioni del gusto (Rom: Laterza). Pfriem, R., Raabe, T. and Spiller, A. (2006) (eds) Ossena Das Unternehmen nachhaltige Ernhrungskultur (Marburg: Metropolis). Phillips, L. (2006), Food and Globalization, Annual Review of Anthropology 35: 3757. Pitte, J. (1991), Gastronomie Franaise. Histoire et gographie dune passion (Paris: Fayard). Profeta, A., Enneking, U. and Balling, R. (2005), Die Bedeutung von geschtzten geographischen Angaben in der Produktmarkierung, GEWISOLA - Schriften der Gesellschaft fr Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaus 40: 195202. Rikoon, S. (2004), On the Politics of the Politics of Origin. Social (In)Justice and the International Agenda on Intellectual Property, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore, Journal of American Folklore 117: 325336.

51

BeRnhaRd tschOfen
Roszkowskiego, J. (1995) (ed.), Regionalizm Regiony Podhale: materialy z sesji naukowej (Zakopane: n.p.). Salomonsson, K. (2002), The E-economy and the Culinary Heritage, Ethnologia Europaea 32: 125145. Scharfe, W. (1997) (ed.), International Conference on Mass Media Maps (Berlin: Fachbereich Geowissenschaften der Freien Universitt). Schlgel, K. (2003), Im Raume lesen wir die Zeit. ber Zivilisationsgeschichte und Geopolitik (Mnchen: Carl Hanser). Schmoll, F. (2005), Wie kommt das Volk in die Karte? Zur Visualisierung volkskundlichen Wissens im Atlas der deutschen Volkskunde, in H. Gerndt and M. Haibl (eds), Der Bilderalltag. Perspektiven einer volkskundlichen Bildwissenschaft (Mnster: Waxmann), 233250. Schneider, U. (2004), Die Macht der Karten. Eine Geschichte der Kartographie vom Mittelalter bis heute (Darmstadt: Primus). Schroer, M. (2006), Rume, Orte, Grenzen. Auf dem Weg zu einer Soziologie des Raums (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp). Schulze, G. (2000), Kulissen des Glcks. Streifzge durch die Eventkultur (Frankfurt/Main: Campus). Soja, E. (2003), Thirdspace Die Erweiterung des Geographischen Blicks, in H. Gebhardt, P. Reuber and G. Wolkersdorfer (eds), Kulturgeographie. Aktuelle Anstze und Entwicklungen (Heidelberg: Spektrum). Streinz, R. (1997), Das deutsche und europische Lebensmittelrecht als Ausdruck kultureller Identitt, in Hans Jrgen Teuteberg (ed.), Essen und kulturelle Identitt. Europische Perspektiven (Berlin: Akademie), 103112. Tanner, J. (1996), Der Mensch ist, was er isst. Ernhrungsmythen und Wandel der Esskultur, Historische Anthropologie. Kultur, Gesellschaft, Alltag 4: 399418. Thiedig, F. (1996), Regionaltypische traditionelle Lebensmittel und Agrarerzeugnisse. Kulturelle und konomische Betrachtungen zu einer ersten Bestandsaufnahme deutscher Spezialitten (Weihenstephan: Professur fr Marktlehre der Agrar- und Ernhrungswirtschaft). Thiedig, F. and Sylvander, B. (2000), Welcome to the Club? An Economical Approach to Geographical Indications in the European Union, Agrarwirtschaft 49 no. 12: 428437. Thiedig, F. and Profeta, A. (2006), Leitfaden zur Anmeldung von Herkunftsangaben bei Lebensmitteln und Agrarprodukten nach Verordnung (EG) Nr. 510/06 (Mnchen/ Bonn: DUV). Thrift, N. (2006), Intensitten des Fhlens: Fr eine rumliche Politik der Affekte, in H. Berking (ed.), Die Macht des Lokalen in einer Welt ohne Grenzen (Frankfurt/Main/New York: Campus), 216251.

52

Of the taste Of RegiOns

Tolksdorf, U. (2001), Nahrungsforschung, in Rolf W. Brednich (ed.), Grundriss der Volkskunde (Berlin: Reimer), 239254. Tschofen, B. (2000a), Herkunft als Ereignis: Local food and global knowledge. Notizen zu den Mglichkeiten einer Nahrungsforschung im Zeitalter des Internet, sterreichische Zeitschrift fr Volkskunde NF 54/GS 103: 309324. Tschofen, B. (2000b), Restudying the Nature of Food Culture: How European Ethnologies have made the Most of Nature,, in P. Lysaght (ed.), Food from Nature: Attitudes, Strategies and Culinary Practices. Proceedings of the twelfth conference of the International Commission for Ethnological Food Research, Sweden, 1998 (Uppsala: Royal Gustavus Adolphus Academy for Swedish Folk Culture), 3342. Tschofen, B. (2005), Listen, Archen, Inventare. Oder: Was gehrt zum kulinarischen Erbe,, in G. Muri, C. Renggli and G. Unterweger (eds.), Die Alltagskche. Bausteine fr alltgliche und festliche Essen (Zrich: Volkskundliches Seminar der Universitt Zrich), 2429. Tzschachel, S., Wild, H. and Lenz, S. (2007) (eds) Visualisierung des Raumes, Karten machen - die Macht der Karten (Leipzig: Leibniz-Institut fr Lnderkunde). UNESCO. (2003), Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?pg=00022 (accessed 19 March 2008). Urry, J. (1990), The Tourist Gaze. Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies (London/New York: Sage). Weigelt, F. (2006), Cultural Property and Cultural Heritage. Eine ethnologische Analyse internationaler Konzeptionen im Vergleich (Thesis for the Magister Artium at Universitt Gttingen). Welz, G. and Andilios, N. (2004), Modern Methods for Producing the Traditional: The Case of Making Halloumi Cheese in Cyprus, in P. Lysaght and C. BurckhardtSeebass (eds) Changing Tastes. Food Culture and the Processes of Industrialization (Basel: Schweizerische Gesellschaft fr Volkskunde), 217230. Welz, G. and Andilios, N. (2007), Europische Produkte: Nahrungskulturelles Erbe und das qualkulative Regime der EU. Anmerkungen am Beispiel eines zypriotischen Kses, in D. Hemme, M. Tauschek and R. Bendix (eds) Prdikat Heritage. Wertschpfungen aus kulturellen Ressourcen (Mnster: LIT). Wiegelmann, G. (2006), Alltags- und Festspeisen in Mitteleuropa. Innovationen, Strukturen und Regionen vom spten Mittelalter bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Mnster: Waxmann).

53