Talk:Elizabeth David

Bad food

" bad food served in the UK and the simple, excellent food" Doesn't seem NPOV to me. I suggest either removing the adjectives (" food served in the UK and the food") or rephrasing it to attribute the opinion to her. --Khajidha (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

As it's in the lead, it is an accurate reflection of what is in the body. - SchroCat (talk) 19:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I have read the 3 source books and it's not actually accurate as it says in the books she began writing for magazines due to the strained financial situation they found themselves in. Sharnadd (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

If you read the article more carefully you will see Mrs David's own words quoted on why she began writing. Tim riley talk 18:41, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

i have replied to you on my page where you posted. The lead is currently inaccurate as the quote you refer to, which I am assuming is reference 65, where she mentions food is why she started writing recipes which were later made into a book. However, her authorised biography states that she started writing for magazines due to her financial situation and not due to her opinions on the standard of British cuisine when she returned to the UK. Sharnadd (talk) 19:04, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I note your views. If you can assemble a consensus for your proposed alteration by all means do so and I, and I am sure others, will go along with it. Tim riley talk 19:17, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Post war aftermath

Rationing affected much of Europe not just a tiny area. Plus the exaggerations Of the distance travelled. Granted Going to Egypt is a bit far. But from Britain to France is literally a stone throws away they're bleeping neighbours for christ's sakes! Even going from London to southern France is a very short flight. It's like a Japanese Chef saying I travelked a great length of distance to go from Tokyo to Beijing. And I Doubt this book was published back then cuz nobody used the term "Mediterranean cooking way back then. but we're going to label everything "Mediterranean" now? What does baba ganoush & hummus have to do with the South of France? This is how the term "Mediterranean" came from: it was Persians, Palestinians, Iraqis Lebanese and syrians who were afraid to call it Middle Eastern food because of prejudice by westerners so they labeled their particular Cuisine like Falafel as "Mediterranean" to make it sound palatable to western ears. It never involved Southern French or even Sicilian food or Calabrian food. So stop reinventing. I tell you what, next time I'm going to do a cookbook based on Mexican food & instead of calling it "Mexican food" I'm going to call it "Flavours of the Caribbean" since technically Mexico has a Caribbean Coastline after all. "I love tacos and tostadas and burritos, they're the best Caribbean food I've ever had". Because that's what this stupid book is doing. Hell a small portion of the United States borders the Caribbean Sea and Miami's weather is just like Cuba's weather much more than Marseille is to "Egypt or Morocco' . So let's call American food 'Caribbean food too"! might as well. 76.167.193.57 (talk) 07:21, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

If you care to read the article − just the lead will suffice: no need for you to read the whole piece − you will see that the first of ED's books, published in 1950, is called "A Book of Mediterranean Food". I doubt if she will posthumously oblige you by retitling it. Tim riley talk 09:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Further to Tim Riley's apposite remark, I'll add that reasoning, with an uncollegiate tone and at great length, and on a large number of talk pages in similar style, from any principles other than Wikipedia policy - that articles use Reliable Sources - is inappropriate. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:58, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Magazine articles

the part about why she started to write magazine articles does not agree with what is stated in her biography. How do you get a consensus to reach a change so it can accurately reflect what is stated in the sources Sharnadd (talk) 05:07, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

What is it you believe the article should say instead, and what sources support that? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:32, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

her autobiography states that she started writing for magazines not due to the quality of food in the UK but due to financial hardship that she was experiencing at the time Sharnadd (talk) 04:36, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? What exactly does her autobiography say? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:24, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Page 139 cooper stated prompted by their financial situation Elizabeth started to write some articles on cookery Sharnadd (talk) 05:36, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

David wrote: "Hardly knowing what I was doing ... I sat down and started to work out an agonized craving for the sun and a furious revolt against that terrible cheerless, heartless food by writing down descriptions of Mediterranean and Middle Eastern cooking. Even to write words like apricot, olives and butter, rice and lemons, oil and almonds, produced assuagement." To me that reads that she began writing in revolt of the food at the time. This quote is already in the article. If you want to read the original, it's in a 1963 edition of The Spectator, but it's also reproduced in full in An Omelette and a Glass of Wine. There is no reference in that passage to her needing to write because of financial hardship. - SchroCat (talk) 06:20, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

as you say it doesn't say here that she started writing due to the food being bad. The reason for her to start writing magazines is in her biography by cooper. You are referring to what is Inthe post war article. The question is on the 1946 return Sharnadd (talk) 06:30, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Please don't decide that your version is 'correct' and force it in: we are supposed to come to a consensus through discussion. I'm struggling to see how the sentence you deleted is not supported by quote by David herself. Perhaps we should both step back and allow others to judge? Or would adding a couple of words about it being both bad food and financial reasons bring this to a satisfactory close? - SchroCat (talk) 07:14, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

i didn't decide my version was correct and put it on. It's not supported as it's shown in her biographies as not being the reason she started to write for magazines. That's why I have removed the statement until agreement can be reached. Sharnadd (talk) 07:17, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Read the Spectator article. She says why she started writing and gives the reason as poor food. She doesn't say she started writing magazine articles for money and books because of poor food, but says she started writing because of poor food (I suggest "writing" could in her piece cover both magazines and books). So what we have is entirely supported by the text. I've made an offer that you seem to have missed: that we add financial reasons to the sentence so that both points are covered. - SchroCat (talk) 07:31, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

that would be more suitable and reflect what actually happened than what is currently on Sharnadd (talk) 04:41, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

what wording would you find suitable Sharnadd (talk) 03:36, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Daily Worker

The reference to the Daily Worker suggests that her work appealed to people outside "the elite" - perhaps even to working-class people. The Daily Worker was not a working-class paper - it was a paper for intelligent people of all classes. As such, the wonderful prose of Elizabeth David was grist to their mill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yawdem origami (talk • contribs) 08:51, 3 August 2026 (UTC)