site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   3365 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for January 1, 2023

Happy New Year!

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

generally vindaloo

There might be a couple of funny things happening here.

1. They aren't ordering Vindaloo

I have never once seen an Indian order Vindaloo ever (in USA/India). It's actually incredible when I think about it. A lifetime of eating Indian food with Indians (me included), and not a single Vindaloo that was ordered. (and I grew up on the western coast on India where the dish originates from).

Most Indians are likely ordering other familiar dishes like Chicken Tikka Masala and Butter Chicken. The American preparations for these 2 dishes are orders of magnitude sweeter and milder.

For reference. I'd say an Indian style Tikka Masala should land at a 7/10 in spice. A butter chicken should land at a 5/10. American versions are usually lagging on both by 2 points.

So it is likely, that your friends order the milder Tikka Masala or Butter Chicken and continue complaining about it.....while the actually spicy Vindaloo remains underexplored by the Indians.

2. 'Spicy' doesn't mean what you think it means.

Spicy & Mild in an Indian context can mean 3 different things :

I can mean the dish lacks a punch to its smell (aroma, garlic, onions, Kashmiri chilies), lacks khada-masala-heat (think coriander seeds, Kauri methi, or even black pepper. You feel this heat in your heart, not on your tongue) and lacks chilli-heat (Think straight habaneros or cayenne pepper).

In the sense, mild means under-seasoned more so than not-enough-chilies. So you might just be misunderstanding your friends.

American restaurants simply do not use enough aromatics or fresh-khade masale. So even when the food is chili-spicy, it tastes imbalanced. It is just heat for the sake of heat, no proper spiciness as we perceive it.

I believe that Indian restaurants make food less spicy for non-Indian patrons

3. Yes, they do discriminate based on color and accent

When I order spicy food (usually in Hindi or an obvious 1st gen immigrant accent) at Indian restaurants, they always ask me if I want it 'spicy' or 'Indian spicy'. And even if a white person asks for Indian spicy, they will like to see you handle a 7/10 in front of them, before they send out a 9/10 or a 10/10 for you.

Honestly, most Indians don't like a 9/10 or a 10/10 spicy dish either. We simply want our medium-spicy dishes to have fresh ingredients & attain the expected 6/10, instead of the Americanized 4/10s.

My recommendation:

  1. Order common authentic Indian dishes that are supposed to be spicy - Kolhapuri, Solapuri, Saoji, Gongura, Andra etc. They probably aren't popular enough to have multiple spice options. Also, if you know these dishes, it is good sign for the owner to trust that you know what you want with spice. Be warned, these are above what I can take. It can be a lot. There is 1 tier above these too, but they are novelty dishes that exist as a meme, not actual staples.

  2. Speak in broken hindi and enunciate properly. Say "tiKKKAa" instead of "TEEkuh" masala. Order by saying : "Bha-ee-yah, ayyk Chicken tiKKAa masala aaydum spicy kerr kay day-nah". (brother, give me a chicken tikka masala made spicy). That's enough to convince them.

  3. Just tell them you visited India and had Tikka Masala there. And to make it at that spice level. They will buy it.

You know, as a Cajun I can totally buy this explanation of the freshness of spices being a factor; restaurant Cajun food that's been topped up with hot sauce to bring it to the usual spice level just isn't the same as home-cooked food that's been made to be that spicy.

I am always surprised at how similar Cajun traditions seem to western-Indian traditions. I made Gumbo yesterday, and it almost felt like I was making an Indian curry. (The dark roux was obviously a new thing. though)

just isn't the same as home-cooked

This is true about so many southern American dishes. A fresh homemade-made Biscuits and Gravy always lives up to it's hype, and restaurant B&G tastes like goop on a golf ball.

I’ve heard indians in the south tend to buy seasonings and the like from Cajun grocers.

Interestingly, the guy who apparently invented chicken tikka masala in Scotland in the 1970s died just the other day; its Western origin makes me wonder whether it is widely eaten in India.

Knowing the Indian culinary tradition, I would not be surprised if Tikka Masala was simultaneously invented in many different places. That seems to be the current opinion of historic sources too. [1] [2]

However, there is no question that Mr. Ali Ahmed Aslam improvised the dish & popularized his version of it around the world. Tikka Masala is not as insanely popular in India, and the preparation is generally spicier, smokier & less tomato-forward. You will still find it on menus around the country though. Part of it's struggle is that once you have ordered Butter Chicken, you don't want to order another incredibly similar dish.

There is no 'right' way to make an Indian dish. It is all about techniques, feel and adapting it to your region. Tikka Masala shares every ingredient & technique with India's biggest culinary invention of the 20th century : butter chicken. It is likely that some places made it sufficiently spicier and tomato-ier to become Tikka Masala. But, I don't want to split hairs over how much culinary innovation is needed for naming rights.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats