The article introduces the fact that barbecue is not inherently and southern Indian cultural word. It was not a cultural event prior to colonial establishment. The writer proves this by pointing out most of the items used –the hogs, cattle, and vinegar came with the Europeans. He also goes ahead to prove that the word barbecue is not an indigenous word.
In early 1500s, structures of “sticks to support meat over fires” were called “barbacao” by local in the Caribbean. The word later became a Spanish word which was introduced into English where it has held different meanings. One of the things I relate to in this article is the “the q factor” concept. Most people are pronouncing BBQ as barbecue. I have always wondered about this abbreviation, which the article has clearly demonstrated.
Reed uses a strong authorial voice on this article. He incorporates several rhetorical techniques that make the article compelling, believable and an interesting read. The use of allusion as a rhetorical technique is evident all over the article. The writer quotes writers in different chronological times proving the different types of usages and development of barbecue.
My best sentence in this essay is on page 145, where the writer indicates that, by mid-1700s, barbecue was equipment for style of cooking called barbecuing; it was an event, and it represented for the “subject of the undertaking.” This is the best sentence because it represents how the term “barbecue had evolved to mean every involved with putting “meat over fire.” The second best sentence is on page 139. The sentence, -“this apparatus was called something the Spanish heard as barbacoa” represents the origin of the word barbecue hence providing the writer with the basis of the narrative. What surprised the most is to learn that barbecue is not an indigenous southern term.
Reference
Reed, J. S. (2007). There’s a Word for It –The Origin of “Barbecue.” Southern Cultures, 13(4), 138-146.
