It also must be “tender, elastic, and easily foldable into four.” As if that weren’t enough, Ward located a non-profit called the Associazione Verace Pizza Napoletana that aims to protect the integrity of “true Neapolitan pizza” that published an 11-page manuscript full of regulations a pizza must fulfill in order to earn their “true Neapolitan pizza” badge of honor. The pizza must be made with San Marzano tomatoes, fresh mozzarella cheese made with buffalo milk, and the depth of the pizza must be 2-3cm at the edge and. This means that there are intense restrictions for what can and cannot be considered Neapolitan pizza. This is pretty much a trademark for the food and drink industry, and sets standards for how certain traditional foods and drinks can be made - like a more intense version of the restrictions that bar wineries from calling a sparkling wine Champagne if the wine wasn’t made from grapes from the Champagne region. Ward notes that back in 2010, the European Union gave Neapolitan pizza a “Traditional Specialty Guaranteed” legal status. Deep dish is guilty, and it is, legally, not pizza.īut the story doesn’t end there. Since deep dish pizza isn’t Neapolitan, it’s not real pizza. For Scalia, pizza began and ended at Neapolitan-style pizza. This is the final nail in the coffin for the prosecution. In Scalia’s mind, pizza is immutable, and any American bastardization of its true form (which, again, for Scalia, is Neapolitan), is inherently not pizza. Ward notes that this interpretation of pizza, again, makes sense given Scalia’s tradition-rooted views. “But it should not be called ‘pizza.’ It should be called ‘a tomato pie.’ Real pizza is Neapolitan. “I do indeed like so-called ‘deep dish pizza’. Luckily enough, Scalia made an appearance at Chicago-Kent College of Law in October of 2011 to expound upon his originalist pizza views. The question then becomes, what did Scalia view as the Constitutional ideal of pizza? What is its platonic ideal, against which everything claiming to be pizza can be judged? His legal opinions, therefore, came from a very narrowly and clearly defined interpretation of Constitutional law. Scalia was known for being a Constitutional Originalist, a man who viewed the meaning of the constitution as immutable and fixed in time at the moment it was written, even as the world changed around it. I'm a traditionalist, what can I tell you?'"Īccording to Ward, anybody familiar with Scalia’s previous Supreme Court opinions should not be surprised to hear this. You know these deep-dish pizzas-it's not pizza. Justice Antonin Scalia rocked pizza jurisprudence to its core in January 2011, when he told California Lawyer magazine: 'I think is. "We can't talk about pizza law without addressing the elephant in the room: there is only one prior ruling on the topic, and it doesn't look good for Chicago. Since law is necessarily beholden to authority, deep dish has an uphill battle in court, since we will first need to challenge this precedent if we are to even bring this case before a jury. Deep Dish is that, unfortunately, there is a bit of legal precedent for claiming that deep dish is, in fact, not pizza. The first point to make in favor of the prosecution in Skeptics v. But can it be considered pizza in a legal sense? Court is now in session. While she doesn’t specialize in pizza law, she did graduate magna cum laude from Chicago-Kent College of Law, will be joining the law offices of Romanucci & Blandin very soon, and perhaps most importantly, she agreed to give her legal counsel to us pro bono. Regardless of how good Chicago deep dish is, does it have enough in common with the platonic ideal of “pizza” to be classified under that umbrella? To find out, we’re putting it on trial, with the help of local lawyer Nicolette Ward. But are they, really?Įveryone's entitled to their opinion, but only one opinion ultimately matters and that belongs to Lady Liberty. Us Chicagoans - in our Sisyphean duty to explain why deep dish deserves to exist - are quick to brush these claims off as simply untrue, exaggerations of the unenlightened masses that simply do not understand. They call it casserole, or pie, or as Stewart famously put it, a tauntaun carcass. And one of their favorite arguments to trot out every time this debate comes up, is the same claim that “deep dish isn’t pizza.” The talking point is rampant, echoed by thin-crust lovers everywhere, including Jon Stewart. There is a huge group of people - mostly from New York - that claim that deep dish is objectively bad, and that the East Coast thin crust pizza style is inherently superior. The debate of “Which is better, Chicago-style or New York-style pizza?” will probably never properly be settled, at least not before mankind's mutually assured destruction.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |