I appreciate your thoughtful exploration of Korean fried chicken's cultural significance in "Drumstick Diplomacy." Your insights into Korean-American identity and food diplomacy are valuable. However, I must address some historical inaccuracies in your piece that perpetuate the erasure of Black Americans' foundational contributions to fried chicken.
The Scottish Origin Myth
You write that fried chicken was "carried into Appalachia by Scottish immigrants" and describe it as "a dish that's older than the United States." This is simply incorrect. As food historian Adrian Miller documents in Soul Food: The Surprising Story of an American Cuisine, fried chicken as we know it—with its distinctive seasoning, battering, and deep-frying techniques—was developed by enslaved West Africans and perfected by their descendants in America.
The Scottish connection is a persistent myth that needs to stop being repeated. While Scots had some pan-frying methods, the specific techniques that define American fried chicken come directly from West African culinary traditions. Michael Twitty's The Cooking Gene and Jessica Harris's High on the Hog thoroughly document how enslaved Africans brought sophisticated frying techniques from their homeland and adapted them in the American South.
Treating Documented History as Speculation
More concerning is how you frame the role of Black American soldiers in Korea as mere speculation, writing that "another origin story credits Black American GIs" and that "primary sources are scant."
This isn't speculation—it's well-documented history. Food historians widely agree that African American soldiers stationed in Korea taught Korean soldiers how to make fried chicken. Food critic Alton Brown has stated definitively that Korean fried chicken became exceptional "because it was taught to Korean cooks by African American GIs." The Smithsonian Institution and multiple culinary historians confirm this connection.
The Pattern of Erasure
Your article, unfortunately, exemplifies a common pattern in food writing:
Attributing Black innovations to white Europeans
Treating documented Black contributions as uncertain
Using vague terms like "American soldiers" that obscure specific Black contributions. This is particularly ironic in a piece celebrating cultural exchange and diaspora identity while simultaneously erasing the African American heritage embedded in the dish itself.
Why This Matters
Food history isn't just about recipes—it's about recognizing whose knowledge and innovation built American cuisine. Korean fried chicken's excellence builds on techniques perfected by enslaved Africans and shared by Black American soldiers. Acknowledging this doesn't diminish Korean contributions; it honors the full chain of cultural exchange.
Your exploration of Korean-American identity through food is important work. I hope future pieces will also recognize the Black Americans whose culinary innovations made dishes like Korean fried chicken possible.
TLDR: The origins of fried chicken is a mysterious rabbithole, and Black American soldiers didn't create the Korean fried chicken that we know of today. The notion that Southern fried chicken is entirely of West African origin is likely revisionist history that completely disregards other possible cultural influences.
What you have written is mostly half-truths and nonsense. Some people white-wash history to fit their narrative, while others brown-wash history. You are doing the latter. Both actions just inflame ethnic tensions and are counterproductive for an organized society. Black Americans have a deep culinary influence as well as being a major player in the creation of what we know today as southern fried chicken-there’s no disputing this. However, the article is about the history of Korean fried chicken, not southern fried chicken…plus you also dismiss the contributions of the Scottish in the creation of southern fried chicken-more on this later.
While it’s entirely possible that black cooks could’ve taught Koreans how to cook Southern fried chicken, (keyword Southern) this whole thing is just speculation-as there is no concrete evidence (so far) of this happening, and also no proof of the cooks even being black-that’s just an assumption…white people cooked fried chicken too you know. A food critic saying this event happened is not sufficient evidence. The story is that during Thanksgiving, American GIs stationed in South Korea wanted to prepare a meal that reminded them of home, but they had no access to turkey. So they used chicken as a substitute and decided to fry it, and then shared the meal with their fellow Korean soldiers. Even food historians all seem to admit this as a “story” and provide no concrete evidence of this even happening. I’ll even admit that I wouldn’t be surprised if this event did indeed happen...but, so far, I see no concrete documented evidence of this happening. Even if this did happen, it means nothing cause there's no evidence that they cooked anything that would remotely resemble the Korean fried chicken that we know of today. What they cooked most likely would’ve been more like KFC, NOT Korean fried chicken! Korean fried chicken isn’t even made the same way as traditional Southern fried chicken, so this whole notion that Americans taught them how to fry chicken makes no sense and just sounds like revisionist history. Could this hearsay event have caused Koreans to ignite or reignite their taste for fried chicken down the line? Sure, it could’ve, I guess, but American GIs didn’t create Korean Fried chicken; that’s their own unique creation. The first fried chicken franchise in South Korea didn’t start until 1977 (Lim’s Chicken). Modern Korean fried chicken dates back to the early 80s (long after the war) when an owner of a fried chicken restaurant named Yun Jonggye noticed some customers struggling to chew the hard batter…so he added a sweet and spicy marinade, and the rest is history. Also, there are old Korean fried chicken recipes dating back to the 15th century (long before America was even a thing), but fried chicken was mostly for royalty back then and not commonly eaten by commoners.
South Korea was directly occupied by the US starting in 1945 after the US liberated them from Japanese occupation, and then Truman got us involved in the Korean War soon afterwards, and we have been there ever since. The Korean War technically never ended cause it concluded with an armistice rather than a peace treaty. The Korean War was the first war where black and white soldiers fought alongside each other due to Truman desegregating the military, and many of these soldiers were from the south...where fried chicken was most popular. Do to this constant American presence, there has been a cultural exchange of culinary traditions. We introduced them to Spam...like many other East Asian nations-for which they in turn used it to create dishes like army base stew. Southern fried chicken is another thing we have exchanged with them, and some Koreans liked it and developed a taste for it, which then led to Southern fried chicken joints like KFC being quite successful there down the line. Modern Korean fried chicken, however, is its own distinct thing with its own distinct ingredients and cooking techniques that were developed by Koreans for Koreans. Insinuating that Americans taught them how to make it in any way is rather insulting and off base. If you simply said that the American GIs helped make Southern fried chicken more popular in Korea, then you might be onto something. While American GIs from the War may have increased the popularity of fried chicken in Korea to some extent, I would say that its current popularity was more influenced by the following events:
1. The start of Lim’s Chicken in 1977
2. Yun Jonggye’s addition of the sweet & spicy marinade to the chicken in the early 80s
3. KFC being introduced to Korea in 1984, Korean war vets probably remembered this style of chicken from their youth, helping KFC to gain a foothold in that country.
4. The 1997 Asian financial crisis which caused laid-off workers to start up fried chicken joints.
The exact origins of Southern fried chicken is not (yet) set in stone as it is currently disputed. Some historians believe that Southern fried chicken is entirely a creation of West African Slaves who were sent to America against their will, while others believe Scottish immigrants created it. I believe the truth lies more toward the middle. I presently believe that Southern fried chicken was largely a multicultural culinary exchange largely a result of a combination of Scottish frying techniques and the addition of different seasonings added by West African slaves and their descendants. It’s a myth that the Scottish didn’t season their chicken; early recipes prove otherwise…they just used different seasonings. The most common consensus is that the Scottish plantation owners passed down their family recipes to their slaves, so they could obviously have someone else make it for them, and their slaves eventually modified these recipes using their own seasoning methods. This consensus makes more sense to me cause Southern fried chicken is traditionally battered and then deep fried in fat (usually lard), unlike West Africans who simply fry in palm oil. If it ain't battered, it ain't Southern fried chicken as far as I'm concerned. There’s no solid evidence of West Africans battering their chicken the Southern/Scottish way and deep frying in fat in pre-colonial Africa. You dismissed the Scottish as only having some “pan-frying methods” when in reality they were known more for DEEP FRYING in lard since at least the Middle Ages. The Scots have long been known to fry anything...including candy bars for Pete's sake, and people are saying they didn't fry chicken until more recently?...yeah, ok. I grew up in the deep South, and the old school cooks always insisted on also frying in lard like the Scottish, not frying in palm oil like what West Africans traditionally did. The Scots didn't just settle in the upland south; they were also in the lowland plantation areas and owned slaves, as evidenced by the common occurrence of Scottish surnames of African Americans in these regions, such as Stewart, Monroe, Montgomery, Wallace, Brown, etc.
The exact origins of fried chicken is hard to pin down and is disputed. Cultures across the globe have been frying chicken for centuries. Asia, for example, has a long history of doing this. The chicken itself originated from the jungles of SE Asia (Red Jungle Fowl), and the people in that region started domesticating them around 8000 years ago, and it's likely that these people also fried them at some point. So I guess you could say that without Asia gifting the world chicken and domesticating them, we wouldn't have fried chicken to begin with! Do to these factors, it's likely that the first people to fry a chicken were those people in Southeast Asia where chickens originated and were first domesticated. Personally, that's where I would place my bet on the origins of fried chicken.
Dear Carolyn Stewart,
I appreciate your thoughtful exploration of Korean fried chicken's cultural significance in "Drumstick Diplomacy." Your insights into Korean-American identity and food diplomacy are valuable. However, I must address some historical inaccuracies in your piece that perpetuate the erasure of Black Americans' foundational contributions to fried chicken.
The Scottish Origin Myth
You write that fried chicken was "carried into Appalachia by Scottish immigrants" and describe it as "a dish that's older than the United States." This is simply incorrect. As food historian Adrian Miller documents in Soul Food: The Surprising Story of an American Cuisine, fried chicken as we know it—with its distinctive seasoning, battering, and deep-frying techniques—was developed by enslaved West Africans and perfected by their descendants in America.
The Scottish connection is a persistent myth that needs to stop being repeated. While Scots had some pan-frying methods, the specific techniques that define American fried chicken come directly from West African culinary traditions. Michael Twitty's The Cooking Gene and Jessica Harris's High on the Hog thoroughly document how enslaved Africans brought sophisticated frying techniques from their homeland and adapted them in the American South.
Treating Documented History as Speculation
More concerning is how you frame the role of Black American soldiers in Korea as mere speculation, writing that "another origin story credits Black American GIs" and that "primary sources are scant."
This isn't speculation—it's well-documented history. Food historians widely agree that African American soldiers stationed in Korea taught Korean soldiers how to make fried chicken. Food critic Alton Brown has stated definitively that Korean fried chicken became exceptional "because it was taught to Korean cooks by African American GIs." The Smithsonian Institution and multiple culinary historians confirm this connection.
The Pattern of Erasure
Your article, unfortunately, exemplifies a common pattern in food writing:
Attributing Black innovations to white Europeans
Treating documented Black contributions as uncertain
Using vague terms like "American soldiers" that obscure specific Black contributions. This is particularly ironic in a piece celebrating cultural exchange and diaspora identity while simultaneously erasing the African American heritage embedded in the dish itself.
Why This Matters
Food history isn't just about recipes—it's about recognizing whose knowledge and innovation built American cuisine. Korean fried chicken's excellence builds on techniques perfected by enslaved Africans and shared by Black American soldiers. Acknowledging this doesn't diminish Korean contributions; it honors the full chain of cultural exchange.
Your exploration of Korean-American identity through food is important work. I hope future pieces will also recognize the Black Americans whose culinary innovations made dishes like Korean fried chicken possible.
Best regards,
Nicole
TLDR: The origins of fried chicken is a mysterious rabbithole, and Black American soldiers didn't create the Korean fried chicken that we know of today. The notion that Southern fried chicken is entirely of West African origin is likely revisionist history that completely disregards other possible cultural influences.
What you have written is mostly half-truths and nonsense. Some people white-wash history to fit their narrative, while others brown-wash history. You are doing the latter. Both actions just inflame ethnic tensions and are counterproductive for an organized society. Black Americans have a deep culinary influence as well as being a major player in the creation of what we know today as southern fried chicken-there’s no disputing this. However, the article is about the history of Korean fried chicken, not southern fried chicken…plus you also dismiss the contributions of the Scottish in the creation of southern fried chicken-more on this later.
While it’s entirely possible that black cooks could’ve taught Koreans how to cook Southern fried chicken, (keyword Southern) this whole thing is just speculation-as there is no concrete evidence (so far) of this happening, and also no proof of the cooks even being black-that’s just an assumption…white people cooked fried chicken too you know. A food critic saying this event happened is not sufficient evidence. The story is that during Thanksgiving, American GIs stationed in South Korea wanted to prepare a meal that reminded them of home, but they had no access to turkey. So they used chicken as a substitute and decided to fry it, and then shared the meal with their fellow Korean soldiers. Even food historians all seem to admit this as a “story” and provide no concrete evidence of this even happening. I’ll even admit that I wouldn’t be surprised if this event did indeed happen...but, so far, I see no concrete documented evidence of this happening. Even if this did happen, it means nothing cause there's no evidence that they cooked anything that would remotely resemble the Korean fried chicken that we know of today. What they cooked most likely would’ve been more like KFC, NOT Korean fried chicken! Korean fried chicken isn’t even made the same way as traditional Southern fried chicken, so this whole notion that Americans taught them how to fry chicken makes no sense and just sounds like revisionist history. Could this hearsay event have caused Koreans to ignite or reignite their taste for fried chicken down the line? Sure, it could’ve, I guess, but American GIs didn’t create Korean Fried chicken; that’s their own unique creation. The first fried chicken franchise in South Korea didn’t start until 1977 (Lim’s Chicken). Modern Korean fried chicken dates back to the early 80s (long after the war) when an owner of a fried chicken restaurant named Yun Jonggye noticed some customers struggling to chew the hard batter…so he added a sweet and spicy marinade, and the rest is history. Also, there are old Korean fried chicken recipes dating back to the 15th century (long before America was even a thing), but fried chicken was mostly for royalty back then and not commonly eaten by commoners.
South Korea was directly occupied by the US starting in 1945 after the US liberated them from Japanese occupation, and then Truman got us involved in the Korean War soon afterwards, and we have been there ever since. The Korean War technically never ended cause it concluded with an armistice rather than a peace treaty. The Korean War was the first war where black and white soldiers fought alongside each other due to Truman desegregating the military, and many of these soldiers were from the south...where fried chicken was most popular. Do to this constant American presence, there has been a cultural exchange of culinary traditions. We introduced them to Spam...like many other East Asian nations-for which they in turn used it to create dishes like army base stew. Southern fried chicken is another thing we have exchanged with them, and some Koreans liked it and developed a taste for it, which then led to Southern fried chicken joints like KFC being quite successful there down the line. Modern Korean fried chicken, however, is its own distinct thing with its own distinct ingredients and cooking techniques that were developed by Koreans for Koreans. Insinuating that Americans taught them how to make it in any way is rather insulting and off base. If you simply said that the American GIs helped make Southern fried chicken more popular in Korea, then you might be onto something. While American GIs from the War may have increased the popularity of fried chicken in Korea to some extent, I would say that its current popularity was more influenced by the following events:
1. The start of Lim’s Chicken in 1977
2. Yun Jonggye’s addition of the sweet & spicy marinade to the chicken in the early 80s
3. KFC being introduced to Korea in 1984, Korean war vets probably remembered this style of chicken from their youth, helping KFC to gain a foothold in that country.
4. The 1997 Asian financial crisis which caused laid-off workers to start up fried chicken joints.
The exact origins of Southern fried chicken is not (yet) set in stone as it is currently disputed. Some historians believe that Southern fried chicken is entirely a creation of West African Slaves who were sent to America against their will, while others believe Scottish immigrants created it. I believe the truth lies more toward the middle. I presently believe that Southern fried chicken was largely a multicultural culinary exchange largely a result of a combination of Scottish frying techniques and the addition of different seasonings added by West African slaves and their descendants. It’s a myth that the Scottish didn’t season their chicken; early recipes prove otherwise…they just used different seasonings. The most common consensus is that the Scottish plantation owners passed down their family recipes to their slaves, so they could obviously have someone else make it for them, and their slaves eventually modified these recipes using their own seasoning methods. This consensus makes more sense to me cause Southern fried chicken is traditionally battered and then deep fried in fat (usually lard), unlike West Africans who simply fry in palm oil. If it ain't battered, it ain't Southern fried chicken as far as I'm concerned. There’s no solid evidence of West Africans battering their chicken the Southern/Scottish way and deep frying in fat in pre-colonial Africa. You dismissed the Scottish as only having some “pan-frying methods” when in reality they were known more for DEEP FRYING in lard since at least the Middle Ages. The Scots have long been known to fry anything...including candy bars for Pete's sake, and people are saying they didn't fry chicken until more recently?...yeah, ok. I grew up in the deep South, and the old school cooks always insisted on also frying in lard like the Scottish, not frying in palm oil like what West Africans traditionally did. The Scots didn't just settle in the upland south; they were also in the lowland plantation areas and owned slaves, as evidenced by the common occurrence of Scottish surnames of African Americans in these regions, such as Stewart, Monroe, Montgomery, Wallace, Brown, etc.
The exact origins of fried chicken is hard to pin down and is disputed. Cultures across the globe have been frying chicken for centuries. Asia, for example, has a long history of doing this. The chicken itself originated from the jungles of SE Asia (Red Jungle Fowl), and the people in that region started domesticating them around 8000 years ago, and it's likely that these people also fried them at some point. So I guess you could say that without Asia gifting the world chicken and domesticating them, we wouldn't have fried chicken to begin with! Do to these factors, it's likely that the first people to fry a chicken were those people in Southeast Asia where chickens originated and were first domesticated. Personally, that's where I would place my bet on the origins of fried chicken.