Tonyfinch

Actually, there is a small Indian wine industry. The most famous brand is Omar Khayyam-a very acceptable Methode Champenoise, I think partly owned by Moet. Several Muslim countries produce wine-Morroco, Algeria, Tunisia, Turkey, Lebanon. Quality's not great(apart from Chateau Musar) and much was used in the past to "beef up" insipid Burgundy and Claret from poor, thin years. Now that's not done the amount of land under vine in those countries has diminished. Lots of wines go very well with spicy foods. You can either go for contrast-as with Steve's Ausleses-or you can go for spicy reds such as Australian Shiraz, or Riojas and Ribeiras. I find French reds don't work too well-although a chilled Beaujolais Cru can wash down a spicy meal most acceptably-but decent Alsace is always a safe bet if you're stuck.

I was going to say.....Martin forgot to mention the Braised Squirrel and Wild Garlic- it's a dish like that which really makes St J. different. Personally I passed in favour of the Pigeon with Chicory but Robin seemed a mite keen to offload some of his, so I tasted some of the meat and the pureed guts on toast-not to my taste I'm afraid, really pungent and gamey-I'm just not man enough for that kind of thing. I also love St John but the last couple of times I've been I've noticed that some of the dishes come atop very thin watery juices-not rich enough to be called a sauce or a gravy, not constructed enough for a jus. Both my dishes had this last night and I'm not too keen. I'm sure this never used to be the case and next time I go I think I'll ask the charming servers to hold the liquor. The flavour of the pigeon was lovely, however-great company good booze but I'd had a heavy birthday weekend thanks ,in part, to the Majumdar boys cooking up a porchetta and pork fest. for me on Saturday night and I was KNACKERED- so apologies for falling asleep head down in me Eccles Cake.

No you're right. But then along came the French Revolution and those aristocrats' mouths were no longer attached to their bodies so their cooks had to go and find other work and some opened up restaurants. The core problem on the sub-continent is that those who have the money to spend in the equivalent of "haute cuisine" restaurants are the very people who can afford to employ personal chefs and belong to private clubs. It is the presence of a substantial middle income group who do not employ their own cooks but who have disposable income to spend in restaurants that ensures a thriving restaurant scene. India is basically a very poor country with a small number of fabulously wealthy people-not really conducive to high end restaurant development. This is why you see more upmarket Indian restaurants outside of India-in Thailand, Maylaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore etc. and also in the Middle East in places like Dubai and Bahrain. You have a large Indian/Pakistani middle class in those countries and they have a developed a more thriving restaurant culture as a result.

Saute the morels in butter or EVOO. Take a few and slice and then loosen the skin of a free range chicken and press the morels in between the skin and the flesh, mostly around the breast. Roast the chicken, basting with any escaped juices. To the rest of the morels add some vermouth or white port, reduce quickly, add salt and black pepper, a touch of nutmeg and double cream. Reduce and thicken, sprinkle over some finely chopped parsley and pour over carved chicken having incorporated any chicken juices which may have escaped when the chicken was resting.

Well I think there's a problem. Highly skilled domestic cooks employed by private families do not have the financial wherewithal or the business acumen to start sophisticated restaurants. They're servants,basically. And highly skilled wealthy cooks do not need or want to do it. So most of the restaurants at the level I described are in big hotels in the major cities or in private and exclusive clubs where there is a concentration of moneyed clientele and where they can afford to employ and train up chefs and cooks and losses can be absorbed in a downturn-as currently in Pakistan and Kashmir. So, although there are lots of good restaurants on the sub-continent its my perception from the limited amount of time that I have spent there that generally the best of Indian cuisine is still to be found on private premises. For example whereas here we may celebrate a special occasion by going out to a restaurant, if you can employ your own cooks who can do a better job why bother? Even if you don't directly employ one you can hire someone else's or an outside catering company. Many peoples' homes are far more luxurious than any nearby restaurant premises. You've also got to remember that many poor people don't have the facilities to cook in their homes. Many don't actually have homes. As a result many restaurants are not so much luxury temples of gastronomy as basic fuelling stations for people who cannot physically cook for themselves. The ultimate expression of this is the Bombay street food scene where an amazing and delicious array of foods basically feeds the teeming masses for next to nothing. So restaurants reflect the different social and cultural structures which characterise that particular society. A highly sophisticated "haute cuisine" restaurant culture will never fully develop as long as the wealthier classes can afford to employ servants to cook for them or they have the unlimited leisure time to do it for themselves. The middle classes emerging over the last 20 years in Delhi do so less and the restaurant scene there is now reflecting that.

My wife has a relative from an extremely wealthy Pakistani background. She happens to be the finest home cook of Indian/Pakistani food that I know. Ironically she lives in Paris, which is why whenever we go there we don't usually eat in all those restaurants because she insists in cooking all these wonderful meals for us. To pass the time she gives informal lessons to and cooks private meals for wealthy Parisienne friends. She does it purely for enjoyment and has never taken a penny for cooking in her life. Last time we were there I actually wrote down one of the dinners she served up. First Courses: Sweet and Sour Prawns in Grapefruit. Sweet Potato and Almond Salad. Black Eyed Beans with Mushrooms. Main Course: Honey and Lemon Glazed Leg of Lamb Stuffed with Spicy Mint and Pomegranate Seed Chutney. Ajowan Rice. Cauliflower Stuffed with Coconut. Crisp Ginger in Yogurt. Turnips cooked in Aniseed. Desserts: Grilled Bananas Sauteed in Butter, Jaggery and Cognac. Avocado Cream with Pistachio Nuts. THAT is what I'm talking about. And that's just ONE MEAL. You just cannot get food like that in Indian restaurants, not even at your Cinammon Clubs and Zaikas and although Bombay Brasserie, Chutney Mary and Cafe Spice Namaste have made a start, it needs a new generation to kick it on. I've implored her to start a restaurant. Even in Paris I think it would be a revelation. In London I KNOW it would. But she's never been interested and now she's probably too old. But she's not alone. There are people who can an do cook like that all over the Sub-continent and the East. The trouble is in London they are convinced that unless you serve up Tandoori Chicken and Rogan Josh you don't stand a chance. And also the people who COULD become top chefs, like her, have no interest or ambition in doing it-too much like slave labour. But I'm optimistic it'll happen. Meanwhile if you're ever in Paris.........

Steve,but your envisaging a future world in which Dover Sole is eaten in every restaurant and that the only difference between the restaurants is some are better at spicing and saucing than others. Not too exciting a world IMO. I personally do not wish to see Indian restaurants serving Dover Sole. To me that would not be a development. Why would anyone go to an Indian restaurant to eat a Dover Sole? No, I see the future as involving better quality examples of foods already indigenous to the cuisine, so yes free range corn fed chickens, top quality seafood and vegetables, the best pulses and rice and flour and yogurt, excellent goat mutton and lamb, and fresh spices and herbs--and processes that may not be traditional but are now available applied by chefs committed to maintaining regional authenticity at the roots of their cuisine while refining and adapting it to meet modern needs and tastes-much less oil and ghee for example,new and exciting marinades and masala mixtures for example. That's what people will want to go and eat in Indian restaurants FOR, not to eat a "mildly spiced " Dover Sole.

No, now let's get this straight. I will not have words put in my mouth. What I've been arguing is that that Indian food can be complex, elegant, subtle, exotic, rich, fragrant etc. etc. as any cuisine in the world at its best. I've been bemoaning the fact that too often "its best " is not to be found in the West. We have not gone too deeply into why, although we've touched on some of the reasons.I've been saying that those qualities exist already in the cuisine and that my hope is that we will increasingly see those qualities on restaurant menus in London and New York. I've been trying to tell you that a better version of the cuisine exists than perhaps you've had. I DO believe that Indian restaurant cuisine in the West needs developing. I do not neccessarily conceptualise that development in terms of "toning things down". More in terms of sharpening, freshening, redefining as per the book I quoted above. I have not been arguing with you French technique v. Indian technique. I am not interested in that discussion. It is you who keeps wanting to shift the discussion towards a technique competition. Those of us who love Indian AND French food do not see a competition. It is you who expresses everything in competitive terms and needs to have winners and losers whenever cuisine is discussed. But hey it's my birthday today. I'm in a good mood after the Majumdar boys cooked up a wonderful Porchetta fest at my flat last night. If it makes you happy: "FRENCH CULINARY TECHNIQUES ARE BETTER THAN INDIAN CULINARY TECHNIQUES" Happy now? Right, pass me me curry and roti.

You still don't get it do you. The bunch of people who love the cuisine DON'T GIVE A MONKEY'S TOSS that it doesn't include the level of technique that you are describing. It is ONLY YOU who is obsessed with measuring all cuisines against French "techniques". And against it of course all other cuisines will be found wanting because you've rigged the terms of the comparison. Everytime someone says "so and so cuisine is good" youre knee jerk response is to argue: "well, it may taste nice and all .......BUT THE TECHNIQUES IT USES AREN'T AS EVOLVED AS 3 STAR MICHELIN RESTAURANTS" Stevelah, you may be right but NOBODY CARES BUT YOU.None of us are interested in your game. It's boring because there's only one possible winner. All we're trying to say is that the scope ,range variety, depth and exoticism of Indian food goes beyond anything that you've experienced to date and that the reason you may not have experienced it is because you have not gone to the places where the cuisine is to be had at its best, which is the sub continent itself,other Eastern countries and Eastern and South Africa. Why is this so hard for you to acknowledge? It's ridiculous. If I say to you "I reckon that St. Veran is no better than Montrachet" and you say "Well have you tried Montrachet?". And I say"No, I don't really have to because I've got a feeling in my gut that it won't be any better" what sort of a twit does that make me? Not every discussion about food is a competition. There is nothing intinsically "good" or "bad" about food which utilises spices. It is the skill and wisdom with which they are prepared and deployed that counts and the "new" Indian cuisine will find a path in the West without having to become like the abysmal The Cinammon Club, which, as I've said before, is an Indian restaurant for people who want Indian restaurants to be French restautrants. Maybe , Steve, your ideal culinary world is one where ALL restaurants are French restaurants regardless of the origins of their cuisine. If that's the case say so and then maybe we can avoid these tortuous arguments in the future.

I have a book in front of me called "New Indian Cookery" by one Meera Taneja. It ain't so new because it was published in 1983. The intro says the book "builds on the classical traditional cookery by challenging many of its orthodoxies, its limited or non use of some materials. ingredients and cookery processes. It proposes new recipes based on ....experimenting with spices and herbs........it does not contain well-tried favourites such as tandoori or mughlai, nor any traditional Kashmiri,Bengali or Hyderabadi dishes......the recipes described are the result of experiments with the processes, ingredients and structures of dishes. The emphasis is on dishes where the flavour of the main ingredient, whether it be meat, poultry ,fish or vegetables, is enhanced by using appropriate herbs and spices.....used selectively to add a subtle distinct flavour,rather than adding a large array of spices for every recipe............I emphasise the use of maybe just one highly aromatic spice in any one dish, so that when the full meal consisting of a number of dishes is created each has a totally taste, texture, colour and aroma to complement the others......." India has been developing and modernising its classic cuisine to adapt to modern lifestyles and urban eating patterns and the availability of modern processes and a wider range of materials since 1983 at least,as this book shows. The idea that the cuisine is stuck in a timewarp or that subtle and elegant seasoning is somehow new is FALSE. I will concede,however, and have said throughout this thread, that the perceived demands and preconceptions of most Indian restaurant goers in the UK and the West plus the apathy of many of the cooks and restaurants themselves, mean that many of the new and developmental ideas are taking their time to filter on to restaurant menus up and down the land. But exist they do and one can only hope that some culinarily talented youngsters can begin to see chefdom as aspirational and will commit themselves in the style of European chefs to driving Indian cuisine on to a new creative level in the West. It's all there just waiting to happen.

Fergus, you eschew them completely both on the menu and on the plate. Do you have some visceral dislike of them or is it more a marketing style to enable St. John to stand out as different to all other restaurants (which it certainly does)?

I'll join you. 7pm in the bar?

IG,no I know Balushai-flaky sweetmeats you can get in most Indian sweetshops. These were almost like mini parathas-flatter than Balushai, incredibly light and delicate, almost melting in your mouth when you eat them ,yet able to contain the stuffing and absorb the flavours of crunchy sugar, ginger,saffron and cream without falling apart-definitely one of the finest sweet dishes I've ever eaten but I'm buggered if I can remember what it's called-I'll have to go and do some research and get back to you-it might be Chiravate but it doesn't ring a bell.

India girl I have seen that dessert being made by cooks near Lahore,an incredibly skilfull and lengthy process to come up with just the right degree of flaky softness while ensuring the whole thing holds together and doesn't disintigrate. What do you call it? I've had similar pastry concoctions stuffed with coconut and pistachio and then suffused in thick cream (malai) which had been flavoured with ginger and saffron, with toasted coconut and pistachio,cinammon and cloves sprinkled over the top. Omigod food porn. Must rush out and get some Mathai NOW!

You closest bet is Leadenhall Market where a Billingsgate fishmonger has a retail outlet (can't recall the name).

To be honest Wilfred I'm rapidly losing interest in what Steve thinks. On this thread he's shown himself up as knowing nothing whatever about Indian food and WORSE, being totally unwilling (I now think unable) to listen to those who do know and learn anything from them. I've heard that as a rule Indian food "overspices", that it "overcooks" the meat, that spicing "masks" the taste of ingredients, that Indian food consists of meat cooked in "gravy", that all these wet meat and gravy dishes taste the same, that those who love Asian food only say they do to be "politically correct"........I mean I wouldn't expect this level of ignorance from people who don't take any interest in food at all let alone one who never misses an opportunity to tell us that he counts himself among the fine dining elite of the world. Sorry but after a while reasoned discussion fails and it all ends up sounding like nothing more than the kind of prejudiced bollocks you can hear every Saturday night down The Dog and Duck in Canning Town,and I for one don't have to listen to it there and I've finally realised that I don't need it here either.

My reading of Stone's post was that he was not saying the wines were indistinguishable. He was merely drawing a very apt analogyto Steve's absurd assertion that "Western diners" would not see any difference in the lamb dishes listed by Indiagirl. Do Indian people all look the same to those "Western diners" too, Steve?

I think that that is an absolutely fair point and I agree with it completely. What is ironic is that the standard in Indian restaurants in the East-Maylaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand-and in East and South Africa-is infinitely higher than those in the West. Of the three greatest Indian restaurant meals I've ever eaten one was in the Oberoi Hotel in Bombay, one was in the Holiday Inn in Johore Bahru, Malaysia, where a top Indian chef was "guesting", and the third was in the Minar restaurant in Nairobi. And I've had many others in Singapore, Pakistan and Thailand which knock any Indian meal that I've had in the UK into a corner. You just do not find food and cooking of that quality in Indian restaurants here, and I'm sure it must be the same in the US. Why? Well I could write an essay on this which would result in a very long post which would probably bore everyone. Some of the issues have already been touched upon and there are many others. But Steve, that sooooo goooood cuisine DOES exist outside of private homes and , unlike the PMs in your inbox,it is available for anyone prepard to make the effort to seek it out. You'll have to travel to the East or to Africa to eat it but that would be an exciting trip to make, would it not?

Exactly. Overcooked meat is BADLY cooked meat. If you're eating dried out shoe leather you're eating in a crap restaurant with a crap chef.Unfortunately, as I keep saying, there are a lot of crap Indian restaurants. But that's not the same thing as saying that dried out inedible meat is somehow intrinsic to the indigenous cuisine. Indian cooks who know how to cook don't dry out the meat-they cook it until it is done right-like the best cooks everywhere. As Wilfred said there's many a tough old Onglet and soggy frites to be had all over France. And I've had many a Coq Au Vin with tasteless scrawny chicken. Steve I can't understand why you perceive those of us who have discovered the joys of the best Asian cuisines to be such a THREAT. What else would prompt such a paranoid conclusion that we don't criticise these cuisines because of "political correctness"? a) we DO criticise them. I've now said at least four times that the majority of Indian restaurants in the UK are CRAP and b) If you think that a man of my age really gives a flying fuck what other people think of his food likes and dislikes then you have seriously misunderstood where I, at least, am coming from. I participate in these discussions because I find it fun and it keeps me from gazing mindlessly at the TV. But my hard earned money is too precious to me to allow "political correctness" to dictate where I spend it. I happen to LOVE Indian cuisine at its best. I contend that you've never had it and that's why you don't understand it. My attitude would be "that sounds great.Where can I get me some of that?" Why not do what you're always telling others to do and defer to those who may be more of an authority in this field than you and try to learn.Unless, of course you cannot stand the thought that there might be anything for you to learn when it comes to cuisine.

I agree. The quality of the meat isn't great. Its a cheapo cheapo restaurant after all. But in Sallos in Lahore I ate Raan-a whole leg of lamb that's been marinated in spices-and the spicing was much more subtle and elegant and the meat quality shone through. My point is that the best chefs and cooks in the sub continent DO use spices with subtlety, elegance and finesse. The problem is that such skill is hard to find in Indian restaurants in the West. There are many reasons for this. One biggie is that becoming a chef is not regarded as an ambitious or aspirational aim for Asian families who have moved to the West. Being a chef is a noble calling in France. Traditionally immigrant Indian and Pakistani families have pushed their better educated children towards the professions and towards commercial business. 99% of "Indian" restaurants in the UK are run by Bangladeshis who are a very poor immigrant group and often became cooks and waiters for lack of any other opportunuties, not because they're particularly good at it or interested in it. And there are other reasons We need more Cyrus Todiwallas, from Cafe Spice Namaste, a Goan chef who has introduced more Western ingredients into his repertoire while maintaining authentic spicing regimes which ARE refined and intriguing. The subtlety is already there in the cuisine. It's finding at its best that is the challenge. And at the moment, both there and here, the best is still to be found in people's homes NOT in restaurants, which I agree is unfortunate and which I hope will change over the next decade or so.

Isn't "oozing" the operative word for the food at El Bulli? (I haven't been). Lots of foams and gelees and purees and puddles. Everytime I read about it it comes across to me as food for people with no teeth- Suck Cuisine. Or maybe Lick Cuisine. I'd like to go there and I'm looking forward to the egullet Fat Duck event but the truth is that if someone told me that I'd won a prize but had to choose-A gastronomic tour of France eating in top restaurants, or a gastronomic tour of the sub-continent eating food prepared by the best chefs/ cooks I would choose the latter without a nanosecond's hesitation. The range, scope and variety-the sheer exoticism- that you would experience would make your French experience seem repetitive and one dimensional in comparison. My God their vegetarian cuisines alone have more dimensions than almost the whole of French cuisine put together and as for their range of breads.... I could go on. And before you say I lack experience I did spend most of the 80s and early 90s eating round France, including many Michelin restaurants, and thoroughly enjoying it. As I've repeated ad nauseam I'm not the one who believes in ranking cuisines. I love 'em all (well, mostly all) but I'm afraid that most comments made by Francophile gourmets about Indian food are based on a complete lack of knowledge and experience as to the depths and the subtleties that the cuisine has to offer at its best. Steve take Indiagirl's advice. Instead of yet another trip to France hie thee to a gastronomic tour of India-I'm sure Suvir and Monica can point you to where. You will very quickly realise that there are more things in heaven and earth than you have ever dreamed of in your culinary philosophy.

Er...'ang on a minute...excuse me. I bought a Jefferson Airplane CD only last week. I really did. Volunteers....anyone remember it? Brilliant record....to remind me of my student days. And you know what? There were loads of JA CD's on the racks of a relatively small CD shop. So they must be selling. Don't know about TYA but I'll never forget seeing them at the Refectory in Golders Green circa 1967. Anyone remember Freddie and the Dreamers..........? And I was under the impression that Steve's "elite" consisted not so much of the wealthy as those whose palates were "correctly calibrated".I recall a particularly poetic image on another thread regretting our inability to "crawl into peoples' mouths and see what's going on". Some of us might not regard that as a matter for too much regret but the notion was that it would be a definitive way of establishing who had "good taste" and who didn't....

Steve, again you are conceptualising the problem incorrectly. The issue is not about "overspicing" and "toned down spicing". It is about chefs and cooks who know and understand the role of spices and those who do not. Unfortunately many of those who cook in High St Indian curry houses are not good cooks. They do not use fresh spices , they do not understand the role of masalas and they don't care either. They ladle in prepackaged pre ground curry powders which are often stale and add chlli powder to make dishes hotter for those who think that if its not burning their mouths then it can't be Indian food. If you had eaten foods in the sub-continent prepared by dedicated and skilled cooks in you'd realise that they consider the appropriate spicing combinations for every dish and utilise spices in order to deepen and evoke the natural flavours of the food, to give the dishes "resonance" and depth, to add subtlety and "tints" to the dishes much as top European cooks use herbs and garlic and other seasonings. It is a myth that most "Indian" food is "hot" in the chilli sense, in some parts of the sub-comtinent spicing is definitely more pungent and lusty than in others (the Lahori/ Punjabi cuisine of New Tayyab, for example) If a French chef overdoes it with the black pepper it's down to the fact that he's a bad chef, not that French cuisine "overpeppers". What we need in Indian restaurants are more professional and dedicated chefs who care about the food they produce and who are interested in showcasing authentic sub continental food to a clientele that respects the cuisine and wishes to show interested diners like yourself that the world of spicing has dimensions and posssibilities that they've never experienced before. Whether your particular culinary mind is open to it is a question only you can ask and answer for yourself.

I don't know the resataurants you're talking about but on "over spicing" generally-assuming that the spices being used are fresh and freshly ground AND assuming that the chefs give a damn about the spicing at all (two assumptions you sadly cannot make about the vast majority of UK High St curry houses) then spicing patterns become as much a matter of the chef/client taste as of what is and isn't "correct". Relatively very little Indian cuisine is written down compared to French and so notions of what is and isn't correct are more variable and fluid. The analogy is not so much with salt as with herbs. I have had versions of Poulet L'Estragon in France which have been absolutely humming with tarragon and garlic. Other versions have only offered a subtle hint of the herb. We can all think of Italian dishes where the flavours of oregano and basil are singing out clearly above the other notes of the dish. Other dishes use them as undertones. Neither are "wrong" in the sense that oversalting is wrong (if the chef has overspiced in that sense then he clearly doesn't know what he's doing) but they do appeal to different palates and tastes. Most Indian restaurants in the UK serving to discrimnating Asian diners ensure that the spice programmes are pretty lusty, as well as complex and subtle. But the word "bland " is not one they wish to hear and any restaurant which toned down the spcing too much would soon be catering for Western diners only. Maybe NY is different.

It's been mentioned above but maybe not emphasised enough that between the 11 th and 19th centuries spices were regarded as much as medicines as food flavourings, as of course were herbs. There was a spice preparation for every everyday ailment and people saw them as having amazing health giving properties and also the ability to ward off illness and disesase. That, combined with their abiliity to make food palatable, was why they were so valuable and why they were used as currency and had wars fought over them. Their use as straight medicine declined with the rise of "conventional" medicine. Why use a preparation of cloves to ease a toothache when you could use laudunum, and later on aspirin? As painkillers and medicines became more widely available in Europe the need to import spices for medical purposes declined. Their use as food flavourings continued, but unlike herbs, they were not indigenous to Europe and so why pay the expense for a less valuable purpose? Herbs continued to be used because they grew all around and could just be picked for free. In countries where spices grew as commonly as herbs there was no reason not to use them as liberally as before.