This is a troubling book is many ways.
Needless to say the subject of slavery itself is a difficult one. While Twitty frames his entire book in terms of himself and his family/ancestors, it's not hard to extrapolate to the larger picture. If you didn't already know how brutal/inhumane/unacceptable/etc. slavery was, there's enough here to drive it home for you.
But of course the focus is supposed to be African American culinary history and I have a hard time seeing how this book does justice to that. There are 15 scattered recipes, some family "round the table" types of stories, and tons of lists of what would have been grown, available, or prepared at any given time or place, but there is very little by way of explanation of how these items were prepared. With the exception of some discussion of Cajun/Creole, there is even less discussion on the specifics on the blending of the European, Caribbean, Hispanic, and African culinary traditions except to mention (repeatedly) that they did, indeed, blend. Perhaps this is on me - I had assumed this book would contain information on the HOW of cooking - what utensils were used? How did they deal with heat sources? Keeping items chilled? Were cooks creating product as well as actual cooking (like corn meal., for example. Or flour.) How many loaves of bread were cooked a day? What kind were they? You get the idea.
What this book does do is give a very detailed account of Twitty's genealogical searches - early on, there are 20 pages just detailing his various DNA reports, and a lot of connecting the dots throughout the book. We follow some of his leads to see where folks came from and how that matches Twitty's family stories, records, and how Twitty "feels" about it.
Which is the most troubling issue of all. There are several disclaimers that his experts did not provide his interpretation and in the author's note Twitty states, "The majority of the conclusions drawn from the data collected by her [his genealogist], my own searching, or my uncle's previous research, are mine. I'd like to preemptively state that this is much more an issue of checking feelings than facts." What?!? First of all, preemptively stating it would have been page 2, not page 418. Secondly, now I call into question whether any of the roads I've followed him down are even on the map, let alone in the right direction.
Now in Twitty's defense maybe he doesn't mean it the way it sounds (and I sure hope that's the case.) There are quite a few instances of convoluted writing, not to mention rather a lot of tangents. Of course this makes it difficult to read at times but it does also call into question how well-thought out the premise is (and how closely his editor was really reading.)
I also got pretty hot on p. 314 when after so many pages promoting the idea of sharing slave history, contributions, and cuisine Twitty dares to mention that he can't share a spice mix with us because it is proprietary. I don't begrudge anyone holding intellectual property or making money on it, but talk about the wrong place to mention it!
Honestly I should have trusted my wariness when one of the first stories Twitty tells us is about his Dad stopping by the side of the road and handing Twitty a jar so he can go pee. Obviously this is Twitty's story so I won't challenge it too much but who takes a jar into the woods to pee? You just pee in the woods, right? Like, what are you going to do with a jar of pee if the point is that you can't even stop at a bathroom? Turns out my difficulty believing that vignette might just as well relate to the entire book.
Long story short, this is another case of fascinating premise, unreliable reporting, and so-so follow-through.