This. I’ve tried multiple meats at various locations; one’s better at pork, the other at chicken, etc. I’ve noticed the spice level varies between meats as well, although after reading the article, I wonder why?
Sad that I just visited the Mission in SF, and opted for tacos instead of a burrito (we were only there for the afternoon and I wanted a sampling of various fillings). Still phenomenal, nonetheless.
I usually get the bowl, too. Who knows, maybe Chipotle’s success will inspire another entrepeneur to make a more authentic yet consistent burrito that has mass appeal…:dubious:
I’m sorry, but this is my soul food. This is the food my mother took me to when I got an A in my classes as a primary student. This is the food that kept me going in my hard work and hard play college days. This is the food that saw me through love and heartbreak, countless jobs, moves, and everything else that is the stuff of life. I’m not some crazy snob, I’d just like a decent burrito so I can remember home.
Now, I know Chipotle never claimed to offer that, and it’s fine. But don’t get mad at me when I look at that messy foil packet with a little tinge of disappointment.
The author of the article specifically says that by “authentic”, he means a Mission burrito, which originated in 1960’s San Francisco. It doesn’t have anything to do with centuries old traditions, or even that much to do with Mexico.
The guy that started Chipotle adapted the style to something that could be served out with less prep-time (as another poster notes, the time lag between ordering a Chipotle Burrito and eating that burrito is basically nil) in a fast-food setting. I like the end result, but it is different then what you’d get out of a Mexican place in CA or the Southwest (though its not like food-cart burritos are heavily standardized in anycase).
Yeah, the article in the OP completely missed the point of what the Slate article was trying to say - which had very little to do with if the burrito was any “good” but a whole lot to do with if the business was “successful.”
There is no way you can argue that Chipotle hasn’t been successful as a business - and been successful in a very challenging business climate.
Authentic burrito? I have lived in California for 15 years and been to hundreds of authentic Mexican restaurants, there is no authentic burrito any more than there its an authentic hamburger. Mexico is very diverse and so is there food.
CBEscapee, who is, I assume, Mexican and preserves Mexican culinary traditions and is not shy about correcting us on this board, says that is incorrect in this thread.
Now, he is just one data point, and Mexico is a big place, and culinary traditions may differ from region to region. The only places I’ve been to in Mexico do not have burrito traditions, so I personally cannot speak first-hand.
That said, I find rice in a burrito weird. They generally do not do that here in the Mexican places in Chicago. I honestly can’t remember ever seeing it. Then again, the topic is about Mission-style burritos, where rice is style appropriate. And, another “then again,” who cares, but the question of “Mexican-style” burritos came up, so I offer that little bit of info from CBEscapee.
So don’t eat there. Problem solved.
I grew up on authentic Polish perogies, but I don’t look down on people who like Mrs. T’s. (I’ve been known to eat them a time or two myself, even)
ETA: Speaking of which, there should be a pierogi eating contest occurring very soon at the South Side Polish Fest. (Third picture is of my cousin, who won last year, against some skinny-ass competitive eater looking sort of guy. Down to the wire, it was., with cousin Johnny only winning because the last guy hadn’t chewed and swallowed the last two or three pierogi he stuffed in his gullet.)
ETA2: That was supposed to be an addendum to the last post.
I am SO stealing this tonight when I hang out with my friends.
Yep, I’ll tell them that I made up that line and they’ll think I’m a genius (again) and … <gasp> YOU WON’T KNOW!
<insert evil laugh here>
Rice is put in a burrito as a form of cheap filler, and that’s all there is to it. (I know this full well because I grew up working in my step-mother’s Mexican restaurant and I heard exactly what she said to the cooks.) La Cumbre (in S.F.) started off putting rice in because they knew that the people in the Mission who had money wouldn’t know the difference, so they could charge more for what seemed like “more.”
The “-bertos” in San Diego County don’t do that because they started with a clientele who would think, “Now that I’ve got money to spend, why would I want to spend it on rice? That’s what I had to eat before I came here.” Burrito King in L.A. follows the same tradition.
As for what’s a “true, authentic” burrito, there’s no such thing, and it has nothing to do with Mexico, because it was in the Southwest U.S. where burritos really took on a status as a cuisine unto themselves. (In Mexico, a burrito is just a way of getting food into your mouth.) In the U.S., they’ve taken on a life of their own, and it all just depends on what you like.
I’ve never eaten at Chipotle, but if you must get a burrito at a chain place, I suggest Pollo Loco’s chipotle style burrito. The trendiness of the term “chipotle” has caused a “back-formation” that for once is actually good.
Right. A burrito is like a sandwich. It doesn’t make sense to proclaim what “should” or “should not” go into a sandwich. If you want to eat a rice sandwich, be my guest.
As long as none of them has heard Patton Oswalt’s routine about KFC, you might get away with claiming it as your own.
Live in Oakland, work in San Francisco, so there’s absolutely no reason for me o eat at Chipotle. I have eaten there when away from home, and found it kind of bland and not really worth seeking out.
