I don’t care for really “hot” curry, or any other dish that’s so spicy it burns your mouth. But the Japanese “curry” I sampled wasn’t spicy at all. I like my curry to have some bite, though an Indian would probably want to raise the heat a bit.
By analogy, I use a lot of paprika and cumin when I make chili, but it’s never of the “five-alarm” type. It’s savory, but you have to sprinkle on some Tabasco or Louisiana hot sauce if you want real heat.
My favorite Japanese restaurant in Tel Aviv serves an amazing red curry, which will burn the roof off your mouth. It’s probably my favorite take-out order.
Agreed. Done well, it can certainly be savory, flavor-filled, and delicious.
The bland comes in when somebody skims all the fat (AKA flavor) off the meat while it cooks and cooks it much too long. Then overcooks the potatoes in too much water, boiling out the flavor and BTW, the nutrients too. And of course removed all the peels. Then puts lots of milk in the potatoes to make them “creamy”, but mostly to remove any hint of flavor. Make the gravy thin and watery with no herbs. Boils the vegetables to unrecognizable mush. etc. Now that’s bland.
And more than that, it’s ugly & unappetizing. We taste with our minds, not just tongue and nose. If it looks like non-descript glop, it’ll be perceived as tasting that way too.
If you do not think those are “ethnic”, that may be a case of not seeing the forest for the trees.
When people think of “American” food, they probably picture things like burgers and (American-style) pizza, which you can get in any city anywhere in the world, but they probably do not mean lutefisk and pelmeni.
I thought you wanted “real heat.” With a Louisiana-style sauce?
-silenus, who thinks habs are “nicely fruity but could use some heat”
Which makes it surprising they didn’t import it into America. I never saw curry on a menu until I was well into adulthood. Not having India as a colony probably made a huge difference here, but curry was a British invention. Before you climb all over me for saying that, here.
Of course, there were spice mixtures in India, of a countless variety, but the idea that every stewed spiced dish would be well-suited to one flavor profile was a uniquely British innovation.
The number of British foods that never took off in America is legion and contributed to the reputation of Brits liking foods too weird for Americans. Still, curry would seem to have been completely adaptable to American tastes.
When it comes to skimming off the fat, I always say “But that’s the best part!” 
I want some heat, but not “five-alarm fire” heat. A few drops of hot sauce suit me just fine.
Several years ago, I tried making chili with some really, really hot peppers. The concoction burned my mouth, and the next two days were pure agony. 
Nope. That analogy doesn’t explain my POV. From that POV and in broad generalities, white people food cannot be ethnic. I don’t think it’s an incapacity to understand a larger picture.
You have not said it, but you seem to be implying that “American food” = “white people food”, and I disagree with that. If I’m putting words in your mouth incorrectly, I apologize.
I was just trying to think about what cuisine you can get in any world city. Chinese food? For sure. Mexican? Probably. What about America.. pizza? Cheeseburgers? That goes without saying. But the lutefisk? I am not so sure.
I could be wrong about that, but it has nothing to do with whether the American food in any particular instance is associated with white or non-white Americans. I just named a couple of things, and of course not all regional American specialities are popular worldwide. A super-uniquely American dish probably will not be, so I am suggesting you might think of it as “ethnic”, ethnically American if you want, or Norwegian.
sorry, you did say Walmart, right? I wouldn’t expect anything ‘authentic” from tthem
Ah, so! Those world-renown succulent Chinese tomatoes! The word “ketchup” is an Asian import.
“Bland” means “no hot sauces and the like.” American tastes have learned to accept spicier foods, but the traditional recipes didn’t use strong spices. Tabasco sauce was the hottest thing around; it’s only recently that hotter sauces became popular.
They were imported from Japan. Just because something can be found at Walmart doesn’t mean it was made in the USA.
The only place I’ve ever seen lutefisk offered diners was at the Viking Village smörgåsbord in Minneapolis, MN, back in the 1980s.
In fact, something being found at Walmart means it almost certainly wasn’t.
NB: Pierogi and pelmeni are not quite the same.
In my experience, pelmeni are small dumplings usually associated with Siberia. They’re normally filled with ground meat (beef, veal, or pork), though I’ve had some stuffed with salmon as well. Russians eat them with sour cream and may also sprinkle some paprika (hot or mild) on them.
Pierogi (such as you find in, e.g., Poland) are much larger and often filled with mashed potatoes, cheese, and other such concoctions. After boiling, they’re usually fried in butter and may be served with sour cream as well.
All of the pelmeni I’ve ever had were simply fished out of the broth they were boiled in and served in a bowl with a bit of the liquid.
Touché! 
We’ve gone around this bush several times over the years. Spicy is not equivalent to hot. The word “spicy” is not synonymous with the word “hot”. Yes, lots of Americans loosely use the word “spicy” when they mean “hot”. But in the next breath they’ll be able to talk about other sorts of strongly spiced foods that are not hot.
I suspect, but do not know, that the less any given person cares for hot food, the more likely they are to wrongly assume “spicy” and “hot” are identical ideas.
I submit that like “good nudity” and “bad nudity,” there is “hot spicy” and “spicy hot.” 