That only applies to capsaicin – chili peppers. There are dozens and dozens of spices and flavorings used in Indian cuisine that have nothing to do with this.
That is why I wrote “spicy foods”, and not “food cooked with spices”…
.
As mentioned above, that cite applies to chile pepper spice, what we call “hot” in English. Indian food is not necessarily chile pepper hot. A lot of it is quite mild, depends on where you go and who is serving you, and you can easily vary the heat level.
Here’s the thing: I, too, enjoy simple dishes that focus on the quality of individual ingredients. When tomato season comes, few things make me happier than a simple sandwich with garden fresh tomatoes and a little homemade mayonnaise. When I smoke a brisket, I’ve settled into a simple rub of salt and pepper after trying a bunch of other rub recipes. (Well, I still like to mix it up sometimes.) But, as they say, variety is the, ahem, spice of life. Other days, I want a complex Thai curry with the fresh green flavors of lemongrass, galangal, lime leaves, etc. Other times, I crave one of those crazy Oaxacan moles with an ingredient list over a page long.
It’s all good. There’s times for simple, clean flavors, and times for complex mixtures of spices and ingredients. I think it’s good to appreciate both.
It was a little unclear, as Indian food is not necessarily spicy in that way, and the sentence preceding it made it sound like you were using “spicy” to mean “well spiced.” “Spicy” is a weird word in English, as it does also mean “spiced with a lot of spices,” and I have heard it used that way.
It’s not as unambiguous as you seem to think it is.
My use of the word “spicy” was used the same as used in the Wikipedia article that I linked: spicy=spicy hot.
Of course I know that not all Indian food is “spicy hot”, but spicy hot food has been mentioned in several above comments.
I wonder if this is the food truck you’re talking about? I’m not in the habit of going to Wilcrest and W. Bellfort, though if I’m visiting the Viet Hoa supermarket at Bellfort and the Belt, I might as well give it a try too.
No idea on authenticity, and I’ve never been to Asia, but I’ve liked Shri Balaji Bhavan, Madras Pavilion, and Kiran’s, though the last isn’t what I think of when I think of Indian food. The first one had a mostly Indian clientele, the others were more mixed.
Among the most tasteless food I have eaten was at an Indian restaurant in Bowmore on the Isle of Islay in the Hebrides. The waiter told us afterwards that “I hear you are from Sweden. Many Swedes complain that our food doesn’t taste anything”.
Yes, Indian food is not nearly as good here in the United States as it is in India, in most cases. Sometimes, it’s really good, but you have to search the right restaurants for that, and that can be a little hard.
Some examples of imperfection that my family and I notice in a not so great Indian restaurant is that many times they are not spicy enough, or the really overdo the spice. Sometimes, the texture just isn’t good, while other times, it tastes tasteless (which is actually quite a common problem and goes hand in hand with not having enough spice). Some restaurants are just lazy. The bottom line is that you probably won’t notice imperfection in Indian restaurants in the US if you’re American, but if you’re Indian, it can take some effort to find a few that are at least pretty good and bookmark them.
Oh trust me. I’m a Whitey American and I can notice plenty of imperfection in Indian restaurants I eat at. Will I be able to detect the same exact problems? No. But it’s not like all Indian food tastes the same to me. I’ve had good, decent, and fairly bad Indian food. I have had some that was pretty damn good but nothing that really blew me out of the water.
Same thing with American Chinese food. It’s not all the same. Some is really quite good. Others are very bland and terrible. So while I may never eat “authentic” Indian food, there is still a lot of variable quality in “Americanized” Indian food.
It depends on how you define authenticity. Restaurant food in the US is close to the restaurant food in India - of course, the quality of individual restaurants may vary greatly.
But I rather dislike the tendency to overspice the food in restaurants (and in some homes as well). I prefer my own cooking. Most of it is because of the cuisine. My tastes run towards a fresher taste and eschewing really strong spices like cardamom and cinnamon and cloves. If that sounds like I hate garam masala - then you are right. They tend to overpower everything and yes, there is such a thing as subtly flavored Indian food. If there is interest, I can share some really simple recipes.
I noticed that the address of that restaurant is Spiceland IN – that might have something to do with the spiciness.
Incidentally, there is an Indiana Raj Restaurant near where I live. I haven’t eaten there, but I believe that it serves food from India, and not from the Hoosier state.
I personally have not noticed restaurant food to be particularly heavy on garam masala. What I have noticed is it being particularly rich. I mean, swimming in oil or ghee.
The weird thing I noticed from my trip (and, remember, this is just a quick three-week jaunt in India, so it’s hardly definitive, but just my impression) is that I found American and UK Indian to be spicier than what I encountered in India (especially UK Indian). And this is not just because I’m a white guy in India. We were there for an Indian wedding and were eating food intended for Indian guests; it’s not like we were served anything different because we were non-Indian or something.
I agree with them.
Restaurant food in the United States can be pretty close to authentic Indian restaurant food, but authentic Indian restaurant food is not really what I like. It is often overly greasy or filled with cream or butter. It comes from a rather limited slate of standard restaurant food. The bulk of the familiar dishes are from Mughlai cuisine. Even when you have a southern style restaurant, it doesn’t reflect the range of southern cuisine.
As another poster said it all depends on where in the US you are. Here in Seattle and the surrounding suburbs there is a very large Indian population and by extension a lot of very good Indian restaurants. Several of my Indian co-workers all agree on which are authentic to specific regions and are better than others but I would say not all of them are dumbed down. I usually use a good mark places where the patrons are mostly Indian.
I spent three months traveling in India, and I agree that your generic US Indian restaurant is going to be a fairly reasonable approximation of Indian restaurant food, but that Indian restaurants in India aren’t really particularly connected to anything but Indian restaurant food.
As mentioned, India is huge and has a lot of different regional cuisines. While there are US regional Indian restaurants, most serve a mix of Punjabi and Mughal cuisine. This food is from a fairly specific part of India, and features lots of thick creamy sauces, tandoori dishes (including naan, which otherwise isn’t served anywhere near as often as roti or rice) and rich ingredients. In India, Mughal food in particular seems to be “going out” food, and specifically somewhat formal going out food, rather than the food you find in homes, from street vendors, from snack shops or from small hole in the wall eateries. It’s the equivalent of Steak Diane or Chicken Kiev. Think of a Mughal restaurant as like a US steakhouse. So yeah, if you asked someone if Black Angus is authentic American food…well, it kind of is. But it’s just a tiny corner of American food, and doesn’t really represent how Americans normally eat.
On the street and in homes in India, you’ll get a much wider variety of flavors, often much lighter and snappier.
As for Chinese food, it’s a different story. American Chinese food is built on a completely different cooking philosophy than Chinese Chinese food. It barely resembles even the basic concepts of dishes you’d find in China. That said, there are good Chinese restaurants here and there (but they are rare enough that when I leave DC for San Francisco, I plan to eat Chinese for the entire week I’m there,) and often you can wrangle authentic dishes out of non-authentic restaurants if you know what to ask for. And yes, you will find Asian people at crappy inauthentic Chinese restaurants. Junk food is junk food. You will also find Americans in China filling up mediocre barely passable “Western Restaurants” in China, but that doesn’t mean it’s actually decent Western food.
Didn’t read the whole thread, just basing my experience on a few cities. Pittsburgh has great authentic food at probably half the restaurants; naturally I have my two favorites (one North, one South). Boston has great and authentic Indian food as well.
St. Louis, however, has mostly terrible Indian food. One restaurant has halfway decent stuff and it’s out of the way.
So YMMV, but it’s definitely not on par with Chinese food (FWIW there are a few true Sichuan restaurants popping up here too, but it’s a very new trend).
I think chicken tikka masala is some absolutely delicious shit the English made up, but the rest of that creamy “gonna spend the afternoon digesting” falls mostly under Mughal style cooking.
I also have never found things like vangibath (we call it the same thing in Marathi) in a restaurant. Also, they’ll very rarely use vegetables that are a given for a lot of South Indian cultures-like drumstick or karela or fresh (not canned) bamboo shoots and snake gourd and the like. Why? Because it’s expensive and cumbersome to obtain in bulk-I imagine getting a ton of chickpeas for chana masala is much easier.
Things like naan vs roti have been mentioned but there are plenty more regional flatbreads in India that are just way too difficult to make in a restaurant-the amount of time they take vs. the number of people who’d eat it isn’t worth the effort of putting it on the menu. As an example, in spite of the number of Gujarati restauranteurs out there in Edison NJ, I have never (sorry, anecdata) seen restaurants serving bhakri, though it is a significant source of nutrition for Gujaratis, Rajasthanis and Maharastrians. That’s because making bhakri is a HUGE PITA and a dying artform for most modern middle-class Indians. It is, however, absolutely delicious and widely eaten because the flour is cheaper than wheat and ridiculously nutritious.
That said, one great place to score authentic regional Indian food are Hindu temples and Gurudwars. My mom regularly rustles up vangibath and dhahibath and lemon rice for her temple-it’s not even for sale, it’s actually the same thing as langar for the one she goes to, they just give it away to everyone who comes. But the quality isn’t likely to be stable, it’s just whichever Indian mom is there volunteering that day and feeling full of bhakti and all that. That said, bhakti does not necessarily correspond with an understanding of salt.
Btw, Gestalt-I was born in Karnataka…in Belgaum!
You can find them out here in the Chicago area, but it is an exception. There’s two places I know of. (Here’s one for example.)
What’s particularly difficult about bhakri? It doesn’t appear to be anything more difficult than a roti.