Jump to content

Talk:Chop suey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

What is in chop suey? I looked at recipes on the web that ranged from elbow noodles in tomato sauce to bok choy and soy sauce. What is this dish anyway? --rmhermen

I'm not sure. I know the name well enough though -- Tarquin

I think the point that is missing from the article is that "chop suey" as a dish never existed, as it doesn't actually imply any particular preparation. Something to keep in mind is that at the time that this phrase was popularized, refrigeration was not yet commonplace. So much like the other restaurants of the era, Chinese cooks made dishes mainly from whatever was fresh and available that day. With the language barrier, the Chinese likely found it convenient to simply describe dishes as "chop suey" which came to be recognized by their non-Chinese clientele. It is, essentially, an English synonym for "Chinese food", but non-Chinese at the time probably lacked that understanding. The reason it's so difficult to pin down what chop suey originally meant is because it never meant anything, but non-Chinese clients thought it meant whatever dish (or combined leftovers thereof) they ate that day. Even in modern times, among older people who still had dishes that were called "chop suey", they each have a different expectation for a chop suey dish, based on what they were served by their local Chinese restaurants.
To wit, chop suey is a blanket term for any dish that is typical of localized Chinese food, e.g. American Chinese cuisine. Broccoli beef, cashew chicken, etc. are all just different forms of chop suey that grew out of a tradition of combining local ingredients with Chinese styles of preparation. Ham Pastrami (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
what a load. NONE of what u say is true!
yes, chinese cooks made it up on the fly; the term means mixture or hash.
and yes, it gained popularity in the US. while it MAY have existed in some regions of china before that, it was not at all widespread. chinese dictionaries did not even list it until 100 years or so of western usage.
and yes, there is some variation as to which dishes it applies to. one celery heavy and one bean sprout heavy, with drastically different sauces. that does NOT mean it applies to beef and broccoli or cashew chicken or "chinese cuisine in general". where'd u come up with this nonsense?!
the one with elbows and red sauce is AMERICAN chop suey, a different beast. it has its own wiki. it resembles chop suey in name ONLY; it is not even chinese food. 66.30.47.138 (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Li HongZhang usage

[edit]

This person is referred to both as Li Hongzhang and Li Hung Chang. Can we be consistent? Given the putative American history of chop suey, the second would seem to be preferred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treethinker (talk • contribs) 00:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Gisling's contrib

[edit]

Lian Qichao story

[edit]

To Gisling:

Travel to the New Continent by Liang Qichao --- This might very well exist, could you please direct me to the website of the library catalog that carries it? I would love to read it. Right now, I do not doubt the book's existence, but I do doubt your summary of its contents.

1) There are a couple of things that make you additions specious. Here they are:

  • After that, "Li Hongzhang Chop Suey" restaurants sprung up all across America, there were three to four hundred Chop Suey restaurants alone in New York city

It seems unlikely that three to four hundred restaurants with the same name and the same cuisine would pop up in nyc all of a sudden. that would seem impossible - competition would be economically taxing on all of the restaurants.

You have no grounds in doubting Liang Qichao's account. Chinese restaraunts were mon and pop operation in those days, competion may be fierce, so what ? Equally fierce today. Lian Qichao's provided an important historical statistics about the status of Chop suey in America in the turn of 20th century. Unless you can provide counter document of same period. Liang's account stands as historical record. You cannot erase historical records. Gisling 15:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the precision of the account makes it suspicious. Also, the reference you provide is in Chinese, I can't cross check it to make sure you're not making this up, nor can any other English Wikipedian. Maybe your contributions are best fitted for zh.wiki. Moreover, you will see below that I've taken great care to go through your references to find that they contradict your Liang Qichao story. --Muchosucko 15:53, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


2) *"and there were three thousand people in America made a living by Chop suey, with business totaling several million dollars, "quite a remarkable industry" I don't know whom that quote is attributed to. Also, I question the accuracy of the numbers. America seems like a big place with many people, and economic numbers were hard to come by. please cite your source.

3) *Before that time, no American visited China town in NY

I doubt that -- somehow.

  • The origin of Chop Suey was well documented in the 《新大陆游记》 "Travel to the New Continent" written in 1903 by famous Chinese reformer, professor of literature of Tsing Hua Universty, Liang Qichao, who was also the author of the book "Biography of Li Hongzhang", hence Liang's account is authentic

In no way whatsoever does his fame make the account authentic.

You may argue what ever you like. You must provide turn of 20th century document to counter the account provided by Liang Qichao. Gisling 15:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, simply being 20th century, does not make it gospel truth. If you notice on the bottom of this page, I've listed the contradiction of Lian Qichao's story with one of the references you've provided. Moreover, your document is in chinese, making it hard for English readers to verfiy. Perhaps your contributions are best fitted for zh.wiki. Also, you haven't addressed my concerns about the Liang Qichao I've taken great care to list above. Thanks --Muchosucko 15:50, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source (see below), not whether we think it is true.", it is not what Muchosucko thinks it is true !!!!--Gisling (talk) 12:49, 1 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Alternative Armenian story

[edit]

The weakness of your facts puts your entire contribution in jeopardy. Hence I removed it. Until some other wiki votes in your favor, our you can produce more solid proof -- that is.

You also deleted the following section:

  • The cook that started the idea of chop suey (based on a local Armenian dish) was Father Armeni, a clever young sous chef from Armenia. The hoopla about the visit makes all such claims doubtful, but Li Hongzhang's visit gave a boost to Americanized—largely Cantonese—cuisine. A rival claim for the invention of chop suey places it in California, where Chinese and Armenian cooks ran cooktents for American miners. Though in reality, it is a just a rebadging of an old Armenian dish.

I can't see why this story is any less (or more) authentic than your story.

The most important point, don't forget, is Chop Suey was Chinese Restaurant invention, not Amenian as you suggested Gisling 02:51, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for coming to the talk page. I have not forgotten that, but you have not addressed any of the points I raised above. Please do so.--Muchosucko 02:55, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


The earlist restaurant serving Chop Suey was Hong Far Low(meaning Red Flower Restaurant) in Boston in 1880's. There is a Hong Far Low Chop Suey menu on display at the "Chinese restaurant in America" Exhibition in Museum of Chinese in the Americas in New York. This 125 years old Chop Suey menu clearly proves beyong any doubt that Chop Suey was Chinese restaurant invention. You have absolute no evidence whatsovever to prove otherwise. Gisling 02:53, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you've actually read what I wrote above, you'll find that I have addressed another issue entirely. I am concerned about your story of Li Hongzhang. It does not follow logic. Please see my contribs above. Regarding the Armenian origins, I can propose the converse argument that you have absolutely no proof that it is not an Armenian invention. The sources you cite are not more credible than the Armenian ones. Thanks for replying. --Muchosucko 03:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/progress/suey_1 This website lists Li Hung Chang's visit to be 1896. If he invented Chop Suey, how did Chop Suey exist in the "Red Flower Restaurant in Boston in 1880's" -- as you say?--Muchosucko 03:09, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: [1] Further discrepancies arise. There seem to be competing answers to the origin of the dish. 1)mid 19th century Chinese laborers 2)Li Hung Chang’s cooks 3) the Toisan region of China (E.N. Anderson) 4) A Japanese cook appeasing a visiting general, . According to your references, the Ambassador story is far from fact, Wikipedia should not represent it as such.--Muchosucko 05:57, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Can you reference any 19th century Armenian menu with Chop Suey ? Can you explain how " Chop Suey " was Armenian words ?
Again, that is not my argument I am concerned about your Li Hung Chang story and how it conflicts with the references you give. Please read my contributions above. Please stop ignoring them. --Muchosucko 15:06, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You can doubt or argue any thing you like, I want you provide proof that Chop Suey was not Chinese but Armenian American invention (That is really a shameless white lie) Gisling 09:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Again, you will notice that my concerns are not about the Armenian origins, please respond to my exhaustive reasons for deleting your contributions. Thanks for coming --Muchosucko 15:06, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]



We should link outbound to settle it all. the following should probably be kept on instead.:

Muchosucko 28 June 2005 12:48 (UTC)

Deleted User:Muchosucko's contributon

[edit]

Pure arguments, no facts. Chop Suey was clearly Chinese American invention. Gisling 09:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please see my position above. I am not aguring about whether Chop Suey was an Chinese invention or not. Please read my agrument above. You continue to ignore it. Please stop. I've written pages and pages explaining my reversions. --Muchosucko 15:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Continuous reverting

[edit]

Muchosucko and Gisling have reverted each other's edits at least eight times today. Surely this violates WP:3RR on both of their parts? — JIP | Talk 16:18, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chop Suey not originally from China?

[edit]

What's the evidence that there was no such thing as home-cooked Chop Suey in Taishan and perhaps other parts of Guangdong before different restaurants in the U.S. claimed to have invented it? Is there really any proof that it was invented in the U.S.?

Michael 05:26, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Chop Suey is invented in the United States (ref: History Channel documentary on American Fast Food), it is now known as Fried Rice (please confirm). I.M.H.O. You wouldn't find Chop Suey or Fried Rice restaurants in China. In Cantonese gourmet restaurants around the world you can find it but they are served as the final dish in banquets or dim sum lunches. It arrives in a big bowl and distributed in smaller servings. It is then followed by desert, sweet soup or fruits. It is not regarded as the main course but a "back up" for those who haven't had enough.

Calvin 17 Apr 2006

In Journey to the west, the word Chop Suey was used to refer to the internal organs, which means that the Chinese had used the word for some kind of assorted internal organs dish. The Chinese invented the name, but the cuisine is another story.

Have found the Journey to the West reference and added to article. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 12:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poon 28 Jun 2008

LOL, its just so funny to see people thinking this is invented in the US, believing in History Channel, please use authoritative sources, my family came from Toishan, and I know this, please stop this misleading nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.79.199.222 (talk) 08:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem in defining it is that the typical ingredients changed this is like tracing the definition and origin of ketchup. The word comes from Indonesia where it isone thing and from there spread to the United States. It has since reached the Azores where it is a third.RichardBond (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

System of a Down Song

[edit]

I've removed the reference to System of a Down's "Chop Suey!" from the art and literature section. Other than the title, it really has nothing to do with Chinese-American cuisine, plus it already has a disambiguation link at the top of the page. Also, the rest of that section is about early historical references. Perhaps the section should be retitled?

Missing info

[edit]

This article nowhere states what chop suey is, which seems like a rather large omission.

(It does describe American Chop Suey, but that is a separate dish.)

Ken Arromdee 07:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

WP has become my recipe directory/search engine. And you can't manage an external link to a good recipe? Disappointed.--Shtove 22:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content removed

[edit]

I removed the following content, as it was unsourced, and because even with a source, it does not belong in this article. It might belong in an article about inner city life, midwest restaurants, etc.

Small restaurants that serve only chop suey and have the word "chop suey" in their names are ubiquitous in low-income neighborhoods in parts of the American Midwest, particularly in the St. Louis, MO and Detroit, MI metropolitan areas. These neighborhood restaurants cater to the urban poor and have become an integral part of inner-city life.

Jerry 19:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the photo correct?

[edit]

I'm sorry, but the photo looks like another dish. All of chop suey I have eaten are brownish due to soy source. Besides, chili pepper is used in the dish of the box and the fried egg on top looks far way than an authentic one. Am I wrong or ? --Appletrees 00:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you should say this -- and today, no less... I was trying to explain to my chinese wife (and her mom) what "chop suey" is, and had the same thought when I saw the pictures on this page. They look nothing like chop suey -- the latter looks like fried rice with stirfry on top. 65.5.198.181 00:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does look very much like what I get when I ask for a chopsuey in india! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.229.170 (talk) 21:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>>Chop suey in the U.S. does not look like the current image (which looked like India's version of Chinese food). Authentic American chop suey looked like chopped vegetables in soy sauce color.SWP13 (talk) 14:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was taken aback by the photo also, but then noticed : "Chop suey has become a prominent part of American Chinese cuisine, Philippine Chinese cuisine, Canadian Chinese cuisine, German Chinese cuisine, Indian Chinese cuisine, and Polynesian cuisine"..Flight Risk (talk) 04:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rarity

[edit]

The article states the chop suey restaurants are rare. I beg to differ. Particularly in St. Louis, Missouri. There have even been recent photo essays about chop suey places done by the Riverfront Times.[2] If I recall when I lived in NYC for a while, they were abundant there as well. I can't imagine them being rare, as every place I've lived has had many of them. Should this be changed? --63.252.114.218 (talk) 20:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Chop Suey

[edit]

There is a "see also" reference to Japchae, described as "Korean chop suey". In what sense is it "chop suey"? The dish sounds very different. The first hanja 雜 appears to be a form of the simplified Chinese character 杂, but the second hanja 菜 appears unrelated to 碎. Or am I missing something here? --macrakis (talk) 04:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The first hanja 雜 appears to be a form of the simplified Chinese character 杂" This is an amusingly convoluted way to say that "杂 is the simplified form of the original Chinese character 雜". LOL Wkmrb (talk) 21:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Subgum or Chicago style?

[edit]

At least in the New England region, you can order Chop Suey Subgum or Chicago style, for extra money. Is this just a local quirk or a common variant? 71.174.22.122 (talk) 15:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incidental mentions

[edit]

Several bullet points in the "In American art and literature" section mentioned incidental references to chop suey in novels by Sinclair Lewis, Raymond Chandler, and Jack Kerouac. Unless the chop suey was an important plot element, or part of the title, or otherwise substantively important to the works of art (as it is to the Hopper painting), I don't see that this article should mention these references, any more than the grouse or quiche lorraine articles mentions references to those foods in novels or their depictions in paintings. So I removed those bullets. User:Gisling has put them back in. Discussion, please? --macrakis (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose You have no right to massively deleted other people's contribution, as long as proper reference provided, those incidents met the requirement of wikipedia "verifiability" standard. Only contritution with copyright violation or with no references can be deleted. Even that if you need to delete a paragraph you you must submit a request for "vote to deletion", otherwise, the act of massvie deletion of other people's contrition will be considered as act of destruction, and ground for banning.
Further, imo, those incidents help to highlight the important point that chop suey is born in America,it is interwined into the fabric of American culture. The more such types of reference the better, it is not easy to find such material. --Gisling (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Gisling, you are mistaken about Wikipedia's policies. I am a pretty experienced Wikipedia editor (15,000 edits over 5 years), am rather familiar with Wikipedia policies, and have never been sanctioned for violating them.
It is not enough for content to be verifiable; it also has to be relevant to the article and notable; the relevant WP policy is "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information". Of course, copyright violations and unreferenced OR can be deleted, but so can many other things which are not appropriate. In this particular case, I removed references from the chop suey article to incidental mentions of chop suey in a various novels. I do not question that the novels do mention chop suey (even though some of the mentions are in fact unreferenced); I simply find that these references don't contribute useful content to an article on chop suey.
You argue that these references show that chop suey is 'inter[t]wined into the fabric of American culture'. In that case, you are using them as primary sources to prove a point; Wikipedia policy is that this is original research, and that you should find secondary sources supporting that point instead. You also argue "The more such types of reference the better" -- I disagree strenously; a large quantity of irrelevant or tangential material weakens an article, it doesn't strengthen it. Finally, you say "it is not easy to find such material"; actually, it is very easy with Google Book Search (769 mentions of chop suey by 1930!) and Amazon search (restricting to novels only), and again, see "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information". --macrakis (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with fully with Macrakis, the inclusion of random uses of chop suey in various media is nothing more than a glorified "In popular culture" section. Additionally, using the cited points to prove point is original research. It needs to go. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 09:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also agree with Macrakis. The ten or so mentions that are currently in the article seem more than enough. Generally, these sorts of things are limited to titles of works that contain the subject or works that are largely about the subject, not just a brief mention. PDCook (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Count me as one more agreeing with Macrakis. Only references that are highly important in the plot of the book (etc.) would be reasonable inclusions. Get the trivia out. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What newspaper sources and non-food journal sources say about origins of chop suey

[edit]
  • "Chop suey was born in the wake of the Chinese Exclusion Acts of the 1880's. In one account, it was concocted by a New York cook who served it to a Chinese ambassador. Another account traces its origins to San Francisco, where a resourceful cook whipped up a dish of leftover meat and vegetables for a group of drunken miners. Chow mein and egg foo yong were also American conceits, and if the standard interpretation of these dishes is any indication, each, like chop suey, was either an act of desperation on the part of an isolated and homesick Chinese cook or an act of malice on the part of an Occidental one."
  • "Chop Suey bamboo-shoots, bean-sprouts, mushrooms, and chopped meat,—
  • In one pan are fried together by many ingredients.
  • This is a dish by the Chinese cook—
  • For Americans only."
  • "Sir: I am sure the entry for 29 August in "This is the week that was", about the invention of chop suey in New York in 1897, is wrong. John F. Mariani, in The Dictionary of American Food and Drink (New Haven: Ticknor and Fields, 1983), says that "Chop suey first appeared in print in 1888, but must be older".
  • [...]and the term "chop suey" is a corruption of tsa sui, meaning "mixed bits"." (she is arguing that it was invented in the west coast, according to "Foods of the World", a Time-Life series)

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed

[edit]

I have added [citation needed] tags to several parts of the article.

It seems that the editor who added the "Taishan story" has taken that one reference and subjected all other references to it. This is not appropriate. The "Taishan story" claims that "chop suey comes from Taishan". Other ferences say "chop suey comes from the US". The appropriate way to deal with these inconsistent claims is to say "[X], [Y], and [Z] claim that chop suey comes from the US, while [A] says chop suey comes from Taishan". To say "Despite its Taishan (Toisan) background" and "Outside of Taishan (Toisan)" is to privilege that single source over all the other sources, which is not appropriate as it gives undue weight to that single source, especially considering that it is by no means clear exactly what the Taishan story is claiming, but that's another matter. My point with the [citation needed] tags is, either rephrase it to give due weight to sources, or remove these attempts to privilege one source over others.

More specifically, to say "[A] claims chop suey comes from Taishan" is supported by the source. To say "the various colourful stories" exist "despite" its Taishan origins, is weasel wording and is not supported by the sources claimed.

In the other instance, to say "chop suey" only means "innards" "Outside of Taishan (Toisan)" is completely unsupported from the sources. Even if a mixed vegetable stir fry is known in Taishan, that does not mean that "chop suey" does not mean "innards" there.

Finally, the editor who added the claim about Taishan may need to clarify exactly what they are claiming. We know that 1) "chop suey" is a dish in Chinese cuisine consisting of animal innards; 2) a mixed stir fry is, of course, a well know if not particularly notable form of dishes in Chinese cuisine. What exactly is the Taishan story claiming? Is it claiming that in Taishan (but apparently not elsewhere in China), "chop suey" refers to a vegetable stir fry rather than a dish consisting of innards? Or is it claiming that the particular kind of mixed stir fry we are talking about exists in Taishan? The two are very different claims and should be made clear.--PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article follows high-quality secondary sources, all cited in the article and including E.N. Anderson's article in K.C. Chang's Food in Chinese Culture, Andrew Coe's Chop Suey, Renqiu Yu's "Chop Suey: From Chinese Food to Chinese American Food", and the entry in Alan Davidson's Oxford Companion to Food. The one fairly serious source that disputes the Chinese origin is an interview in a newspaper [3] which nonetheless characterizes both the gold rush and the Chinese diplomat stories as myths. It is not 'undue weight' to adopt the version that is supported by all the best published sources.
I agree that the exact relationship between the Taishan origin and the US version is unclear; but it is unclear in our reliable sources. It would be original research to try to 'fill in the blanks'.
Naturally, if you have other reliable sources which support or dispute the current article, it would be great if you would incorporate them into the article. --Macrakis (talk) 18:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only one source is cited for the Taishan theory. It is an uncommon and unlikely theory, so it is sufficient to give it due weight by mentioning it as a theory. Most of the other sources attest to its prominence as a "Chinese dish" in the US. The edits to supplant the accepted American origins of the dish with this Taishan theory is indeed "filling in the gaps" by uancceptably connecting different dots. See my previous comments above. As my concerns above about the weasel wording and due weight issues have not been addressed, I have gone ahead and made the edits to address the issues. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 17:47, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PalaceGuard008, I don't know what you mean by "an uncommon theory". WP doesn't evaluate theories by how popular they are, but how solid the sources are. What reliable sources do you have for the "accepted American origins"? It is clear that chop suey is well-known in the US, but that doesn't tell us anything about its origins. As for the Taishan origin, this is clearly described by the best sources we have. There is no "filling in the blanks" on our part. What exactly are you referring to as "weasel wording" and "due weight"? --Macrakis (talk) 23:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chop suey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chop_suey&oldid=1216380932"