Spices: For or against?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Please enlighten us, Steve. How do we identify a member of the Plotnickiist elite? How do we know whom to trust in the quest for good food?

Sorry I had to log off for a change of clothes as I am on my way tio La Broche for dinner.

It's like porno. I know it when I see it. I can't tell you who does have it, but I can tell you that you don't have it .

Seriously, I am the complete populist on this. Everyone who does it has a say. The key is to find people who do it a lot because they usually offer them most reliable opinions. It is like finding a cardiac surgeon. You want the guy who has done the most bypass surgeries.

The thing about dining is, and wine too, very few people who do not really understand it do it a lot. For example, if I had to evaluate my friends who have big wine collections, i.e., have made a rather large investment in their cellars, and this even goes for people who buy inexpensive wines, they are tremendously knowledgable bunch about the hobby they practice. Not everyone of course, there are a few dried out grapes in every bunch. But people who make the type of commitment of time and money that I am describing usually have a pretty good idea of what is good versus what is bad. For me, there is no better rationale on how to revaluate opinions then to do a time and motion study multiplied by some crazy mulitplicative for the amount of money people spend doing it.

The same principal works for evaluating the importance of a restaurant. I mean what does it mean in the scheme of things that people travel to Brooklyn for a Peter Luger's steak, pizza from DiFara's. And what do you make of the pizza in New Haven when people drive all the way from NYC just to have dinner, and then drive back. For pizza!

[indiagirl]

And I'm off to the India board where people love and respect spices!

Steve, my suggestion, perhaps a long trip to Japan or India or some place along those lines, is in order. We can come up with a list of restuarants where the average middle class Indian could easily spend his/her entire income for the month (thus meeting the cost criterion at least locally) and then ......... and then .............

[Tonyfinch]

I can demonstrate countless rock acts, let alone pop acts, who do not sell anymore, even though they were immensely popular in their time. Jefferson Airplane, Ten Years After, etc.

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....

Edited March 19, 2003 by Tonyfinch (log)

[Adam Balic]

The problem I have with the statement is that you would consider only one culinary tradition to have successfully worked our proper 'balance' and evidence of this is either the "free market" or the opinions of people that eat in the 'best' restaurants in the world. Neither of these groups is in a position to judge "prope[r]ly balanced spicing", outside a particular context.

Adam - Gee I didn't say this either. You are grabbing positions I've taken on other threads in different contexts and overlaying them on this thread.

Steve- Gee, I was just using my amazing powers of prescience .

Also, I'm not laughing at you, for all the times I have thought that you are deeply wrong on a particular topic, you have made me re-think my own opinion and that is a good thing. In this particular debate I agree with almost every thing Fatguy has said (he's really sharp that chap) and he says it better, so just re-read that stuff again.

BTW - if I did eat at restaurants as much as you and you were as much a scholar as me, just think how lively the debates would be!

New Topic: After 200 years at the top is the French culinary tradition becomming less relevant?

Edited March 19, 2003 by Adam Balic (log)

[Tonyfinch]

But he seems to have lots of time to go eat food where the amount of technique is oozing out of each individual plate

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.

Edited March 19, 2003 by Tonyfinch (log)

[Wilfrid]

Tony, if you really want me to post the link to Freddie Garrity's web-site again...

[Steve Plotnicki]

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.

Tony - Actually I ate at La Broche in Miami last night. It is the sister restaurant of the same name in Madrid and the chef is ex El Bulli. The first four courses were soups and foams. By the time they served the pork knuckle, I was desperate for something that had some chew to it.

But as for India Girl's advice, I'm afraid you guys keep missing what I am talking about. My comments are restricted to high cuisine. What the lower and middle classes eat in various countries is outside the scope of my comments. That is what we on eGullet term "ethnic cuisine." People will aways spice their local cuisines to be in accordance with past custom. What I am describing is how chefs in restaurants that prepare food for international diners, i.e., people who spend a lot of money to basically have the chefs apply fancy techniques when they prepare the food, will want in the future. It has no bearing on how everyday chefs prepare tacos, Hainanese soup chicken, pizza etc., and it has nothing to do with how much I like those cuisines because I like them all as well. But just because I like them doesn't mean I can't point out that while the tandoori lamb chops at New Tayyab are great, they aren't really the greatest quality meat and as such that limits what level meal it is. And also, if you were to improve the quality of the meat, they would have to tone down the marinade because what would the point be?

These simple culinary concepts of how to improve cuisine, transcend nationality. And I find the arguing about it on this thread and others to be sort of bogus. For anyone to say that it is preferrable to eat lesser quality lamb in order to experience the great spicing techniques is a bogus statement. Yes it might be preferable for a casual meal, because it's fun, but if you were to take a serious and objective look at what people want to eat in serious restaurants, if you were being honest you would be honest about the faults in that cuisine. I find most people here are unwilling to do that. And I'm not going to get into why that is, but let's just say being dreadfully honest about ethnic cuisine is unpopular. I mean when is someone going to be honest and say that the lamb in the lamb curry you order is dreadfully overcoooked 99.99999% of the time, including at a place like Diwan? If someone dares to speak that truth, they are met with all types of personal slurs about how they are ignorant about spice parsing. It's all rubbish.

Higher cuisines work on the principal of refinement. If you refuse to admit that, I believe you are making a personal and political statement about what you like and what you like to do, and are not taking an objective look at what serious diners, meaning what diners are willing to pay a lot of money for, happen to value. And that statement transcends nationality. Because if you look at any external evidence of what has historically been valued in high cuisine, it's all about levels of refinement. And as each cuisine becomes part of the globalized world of cuisines, including some being merged with other cuisines, it will revolve around refininement. To me that equates to less highly spiced food, meaning spice in proportion to the other ingredients. But of course if you want the conversation to revolve around ethnic cuisines, then they are static. And of course you can impose a different "balance" because those diners value something else.

I hope I've said this correctly because I mean to insult no one.

BTW - if I did eat at restaurants as much as you and you were as much a scholar as me, just think how lively the debates would be!

Adam - Well no then you would just be agreeing wth me because you would see it from my vantage point . Being an academic has no bearing on what tastes good does it?

[Adam Balic]

Adam - Well no then you would just be agreeing wth me because you would see it from my vantage point . Being an academic has no bearing on what tastes good does it?

Agree with you? Very doubtful that is Steve.

Been informed on something does very much alter how something tastes, with that added bonus that you know why. This is not a personal and political statement.

[Tonyfinch]

But just because I like them doesn't mean I can't point out that while the tandoori lamb chops at New Tayyab are great, they aren't really the greatest quality meat and as such that limits what level meal it is. And also, if you were to improve the quality of the meat, they would have to tone down the marinade because what would the point be?

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.

[Wilfrid]

It's not that there isn't any sense in what you say Steve, just that there are so many little inaccuracies or big assumptions wrapped up in the package, and I think that's why people won't buy it. You "equate" refined cooking with restrained spicing: I've given several examples on this thread of upscale restaurants which serve highly spiced dishes. You talk about lamb in lamb curry being "overcooked" - which "curry" are we talking about? If it's a dish which requires long-slow braising of the lamb, then the condition the meat ends up in is not well-described as "overcooked"; yes, rare, pink rack of lamb suits many French menus, but it's illicit to universalize your preference for it. You talk about poor quality meat, but again you're comparing apples and oranges; you're comparing inexpensive ethnic restaurants with restaurants serving "high cuisine" - of course the ingredients are cheaper.

For me, it all boils down to this question. Is it the case that, in principle, no national or regional cuisine other than that which originated in France can offer upscale dining experiences - complex ones if you will - of the highest quality?

My tentative answer is that it depends on the range of techniques and palette of ingredients available within the cuisine in question. I think there's no doubt that Japanese and Chinese cuisines can meet this challenge. I see absolutely no reason why Indian, Thai, Malaysian, Indonesian, and innumerable other cuisines are debarred from the upper echelon of gastronomy. To be honest, I think some are debarred - and now I don't want to offend anyone - because the range of dishes and ingredients has historically been so limited.

Is it really so hard to imagine, say, an Indian version of Nobu?

[Steve Plotnicki]

I've given several examples on this thread of upscale restaurants which serve highly spiced dishes. You talk about lamb in lamb curry being "overcooked" - which "curry" are we talking about? If it's a dish which requires long-slow braising of the lamb, then the condition the meat ends up in is not well-described as "overcooked";

Wilfrid - There are many cuisines which have dishes that are slowly braised and the meats are not overcooked. I hate to use the French as an example but the meat in a pot au feu is tender. But you know what, the meat in a Jewish Beef in the Pot is often overcooked. That is because the standard used in Jewish cuisine for what cooked properly means is overdone. And it seems it is the same standard in most Indian restaurants. It is an old fashioned standard. Overdone is not the contemporary standard for what is considered to be properly cooked meat. And as far as I'm concerned, cuisines either keep current on their standards or they fall behind. But to say that Indian cuisine uses a different standard of doneness, so we should accept dried out and tough meat, that is bogus.

Do you know how many Thai currys I've been served with overcooked meat? Or how many Chinese sautes I've gotten were the quality of the meat is poor or it isn't cooked particularly well? I see no reason for those cuisines to get a pass on how they perform, just because it is poiltically correct to like ethnic cuisine.

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.

Tony - Personally I think that the issue is the assertiveness in the spicing regimens. I think the days of the thick sauce that is flavored with curry are over when you talk about fine dining. I don't care how subtle the spicing is within itself. Just my prediction.

[Wilfrid]

Well, I agree with what you've said about overcooked meat now. But there's no reason a good Indian or Chinese restaurant would overcook their meat; the best ones don't. It's certainly not intrinsic to the dishes. And my goodness, I've been served some tough old carcasses in French restaurants over the years.

Edited March 19, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

[Tonyfinch]

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.

Edited March 19, 2003 by Tonyfinch (log)

[Gavin Jones]

It is an old fashioned standard. Overdone is not the contemporary standard for what is considered to be properly cooked meat. And as far as I'm concerned, cuisines either keep current on their standards or they fall behind.

This is one such strong assertion.

It appears to rest on a notion of universal progress which is difficult to assent to - for me, anyway.

(I will avoid repeating myself from ages ago on the trustworthiness of the judgement of connoisseurs, Duveen & BB spring repeatedly to mind).

[Steve Plotnicki]

Well, I agree with what you've said about overcooked meat now. But there's no reason a good Indian or Chinese restaurant would overcook their meat; the best ones don't.

Wilfrid - I disagree with this. Many of the best ones still do. That is because the standard for what is properly cooked in Indian and Chinese cuisine is different then what you will find in other restaurants. Look at the French standard for cooking fish. It is old fashioned in many ways because in certain instances they insist on cooking their fish too long. In fact the French still cook their tuna through. No matter how many people tell them not to do it they don't understand it.

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.

Tony - I enjoy them as well. But enjoying them and being honest about their faults seem to be two different things for people on the board.

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.

Well I have been clear that I am talking about the Indian cuisine that is available to me. To tell me that there is great cuisine at Salloos in Lahore, doesn't get us very far. In fact most people say great Indian cuisine is only avaliable in private homes. That doesn't get us very far either. Great Japanese cuisine, great French cuisine, is available in restaurants outside of those countries. Why isn't great Indian cuisine available?

[wingding]

And I've been served By some tough old carcasses in French restaurants over the years.I think that the best high end cooking in Asia has been served in the homes of the wealthy in those countries.Westerners who have been privileged to attend often recount incredible meals.We have experienced very little of that food in the west.A trip through India taught me that I only scratched the surface of a cuisine that varied greatly from region to region.I'm not interested in 'better than',only in experiencing more.everywhere.

[Steve Plotnicki]

The "best food is available in private homes" declaration is soon to be as forceful a pronouncement as the "my box is full of PM's that agree with me."

Comparing restaurant cuisine, available to everyone who can afford it, and cuisine served in private homes, truly elitest and revolving around class, are really the apples and oranges here. If there is an Indian cuisine that is sooooooo gooooood that isn't available to anyone, someone should make it available because they could make a bloody fortune. I'd be very happy to support it.

[wingding]

That's exactly what Madhur Jaffrey attempted to do,years ago,when Dawat first opened.And the food was good.Many of the recipes in two of her books, A Taste of India and Flavors of India,are culled from home cooks.I've cooked a lot of them They are wonderful,and you won't find them in any restaurants here.Why I don't know.

Edited March 20, 2003 by wingding (log)

[indiagirl]

Calm down, girl, calm down. You can do this. Okay, here goes.

But as for India Girl's advice, I'm afraid you guys keep missing what I am talking about. My comments are restricted to high cuisine. What the lower and middle classes eat in various countries is outside the scope of my comments.

Steve, would I ever suggest that you go to India and eat with the plebes? No, no, I know you better than that without ever having met you. My post said, restaurant where an average Indian could spend their ENTIRE paycheck for the month i.e. HIGH cuisine. Like the fou-fous with lots of money eat. That kind. You do get it in India, you know. Really, really expensive food that comes with a big fat check.

What I am describing is how chefs in restaurants that prepare food for international diners, i.e., people who spend a lot of money to basically have the chefs apply fancy techniques when they prepare the food, will want in the future.

Have those in India too. Fancy techniques, I mean. Like TonyFinch said, and I mentioned in the other thread, Raan, perfectly spiced and very slow cooked for eons is a wonderful dish, all about good lamb, all about good technique. But you don't buy that. Can't help you there, your loss. Really.

And also, if you were to improve the quality of the meat, they would have to tone down the marinade because what would the point be?

Sez who? Maybe it all just tastes like crap because it is. And maybe if the meat were better the spices would not be so overwhelming. How on earth can you tell if you've never eaten good Indian food? Which you obviously never have. Don't let your experiences in the past emotionally scar you in this manner!

These simple culinary concepts of how to improve cuisine, transcend nationality. And I find the arguing about it on this thread and others to be sort of bogus. For anyone to say that it is preferrable to eat lesser quality lamb in order to experience the great spicing techniques is a bogus statement.

Your putting words in our collective mouths here, darling. Bring on the quotes if you want to make these claims ....er... assertions.

To me that equates to less highly spiced food, meaning spice in proportion to the other ingredients.

Like I said, go to India. PLEASE.

Yes it might be preferable for a casual meal, because it's fun, but if you were to take a serious and objective look at what people want to eat in serious restaurants, if you were being honest you would be honest about the faults in that cuisine. I find most people here are unwilling to do that. And I'm not going to get into why that is, but let's just say being dreadfully honest about ethnic cuisine is unpopular.

Dreadfully honesty follows:

Most Indian restaurants in the US are crap. At least the ones I have eaten in. Unless I am stuck in some Indian food black hole, this will extrapolate.

Most US-Indian restaurant cooks (note, I did not call them chefs) work on the least expenditure of cash and effort principle. They are also not qualified by tradition or training, merely by circumstance.

I have never eaten at Diwan and so cannot comment. But just from a pure selection process - which Indians move here and why and some of the factors TonyFinch mentioned in his post should indicate that the smattering of higher quality Indian restaurants here do not represent Indian high cuisine.

I hope I've said this correctly because I mean to insult no one.

I'm not at all insulted. You are too passionate about food and far too sincere for me to find this insuting in any way. Baffled and dissapointed. BIG time. It breaks my heart, for someone who is obviously so incredibly passionate about food, you're just shutting all these doors without ever having looked inside.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Well let me throw out a provocative theory. Is it possible that Indian cuisine is really home cooking, and they can't make it fancy restaurant cooking no matter what they do? And I am trying to draw the distinction here between home and restaurant cooking which I think are two different animals. And maybe my criticism of the cuisine rests on the fact that it doesn't really get beyond home cooking no matter what you do.?

[Gavin Jones]

Is it possible that Indian cuisine is really home cooking, and they can't make it fancy restaurant cooking no matter what they do?

Why is restaurant cooking - a by-its-nature industrialised process self-evidently better than home-cooking.

Oh, damn, that's why British cooking is crap.

[indiagirl]

We were corss posting there - two questions:

Why does some retaurant in Paris count as an example of a demonstration of high cuisine but not one in Lahore? We all have frequent flyer miles, no?

The point about why aren't there more restaurants that serve Indian high cuisine in NY is a valid one - time and society, I think will change that. And it does make a valid point about the "standing" of Indian cuisine in global culture. Yes.

But it's quite a leap from there to the following conclusions you are making:

Indian cuisine overspices

Cusines which overspice (defined as more spices than the French because I'm a little shaky on the defintion of "over") are inferior

[Steve Plotnicki]

Why does some retaurant in Paris count as an example of a demonstration of high cuisine but not one in Lahore? We all have frequent flyer miles, no?

Well you are pointing to one restaurant. I can probably point to more then a hundred.

Have those in India too. Fancy techniques, I mean. Like TonyFinch said, and I mentioned in the other thread, Raan, perfectly spiced and very slow cooked for eons is a wonderful dish, all about good lamb, all about good technique

Actually I bought a cookbook, think it was a Madhur Jaffrey, and the recipe for Raan stuck out like a sore thimb as something I wanted to eat. I've had it somewhere, can't remember where. Not very good and obviosuly not a good version. But it's the same thing as above. You have mentioned one dish. I can list the recipes for fifteen or twenty different ways the French make a leg of lamb. And I'm not trying to compare them. But you can't escape the dichotomyof that stastistic.

I'm not at all insulted. You are too passionate about food and far too sincere for me to find this insuting in any way. Baffled and dissapointed. BIG time. It breaks my heart, for someone who is obviously so incredibly passionate about food, you're just shutting all these doors without ever having looked inside.

I actually haven't shut any doors. I would love to eat a great Indian meal, either here or there. Actually I had a terrific Pakistani feast prepared for me in Cairo by the parents of an employee of mine at their home. So it's not like I don't get it. But I think you are sort of missing my point which I possibly did a better job of articulating above. The French have fifty different ways to coat a rack of lamb. The diversity in those fifty methods is pretty amazing. But I do not buy the proffer that there can be fifty spicing routines to do the same in Indian cuisine. And I know I am exaggerating when I say fifty, but you know what I mean.

But it's quite a leap from there to the following conclusions you are making:

Indian cuisine overspices

Cusines which overspice (defined as more spices than the French because I'm a little shaky on the defintion of "over") are inferior

When I say overspicing, I mean what the food emphasizes. And when I say inferior, I just mean not as good as. I don't mean it to say the cuisine is bad. The problem seems to be that if I said that I wanted the best quality lamb chops spiced in an Indian manner, you would call that French food. But if you spiced them in a way that I know Indian restaurants to do it, which is more highly spiced, I might find that delicious, but an inferior approach because in my experience the spicing drowns out the taste of the lamb. Someone is going to have to show me that both can be done. But I will be honest with you and say that based on what I've seen, it can't be done.

Why is restaurant cooking - a by-its-nature industrialised process self-evidently better than home-cooking.

For the same reason real opera singers perform at Covent Garden instead of the people who sing opera in their bathtubs. Professionals versus amateurs.

[SobaAddict70]

Hey, as long as we're being honest here....heheheh.

Some of the restaurants I've been to in my experience that claim to serve Indian food are owned or operated by Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, and therefore do not have cooks or chefs from India cooking for the masses which pass through their doorsteps.

This is important because the standard for a basic dish like butter chicken will obviously be translated to a different outcome if someone without a certain level of experience produces it than if another person with a background in genuine Indian cuisine does. Make sense? Therefore, with that in mind, its no surprise that you've experienced something less than the potential for success.

Another reason why I think many people have experienced crappy Indian food is because we (I'm using we to mean most ppl, not ppl who frequent e-gullet) haven't trained our palates to be able to appreciate complexity of spicing. Good Indian food should be able to demonstrate mastery of spicing so that one layer of flavor is easily distinguishable from the next. A garam masala for example, should never contain so much pepper that it "catches the throat". The proportions of spice in a masala should be varied enough that the different flavor components of each of the ingredients should come through with a clarity of taste. This is a problem though, of course, when most people equate Indian food with curry powder. Just add a pinch of curry powder to anything to lend it an Indian flair. People have to be educated that there's a whole world out there, that Indian food is a lot more than that.

I also think a lot of the sameness that people find about Indian food in the United States has a lot to do with homogeneity (sp) which is almost necessary in order for such type of food to find a certain level of acceptance with mainstream America. An Indian restauranteur would be hard pressed to offer something approaching high Indian cuisine or even Vedic vegetarian or non-northern Indian focused cooking unless s/he had savvy marketing and PR skills at the tips of his or her fingers. I'd be interested to know the percentages of people ordering things like butter chicken as opposed to uppattham or sesame yogurt smothered potatoes.

I suspect we're about to see a renaissance of Indian food in America, if current trends continue. It happens all the time. As people become more experienced with what used to be unfamiliar, more things will begin to pop up such that eventually restaurants will begin to move away from the homogeneity that's heretofore plagued Indian restaurants where every entree is either chicken tikka masala, beef korma or lamb vindaloo (or any number of endless varieties), and hopefully evolve into something better. Look at Japanese restaurants. Twenty years ago, all you had was sushi and Benihana. Now you've got places like Jewel Bako, Honmura An, Omen, Sugiyama and the now-defunct Sono. It'll happen eventually, Steve. Just give it time.

Soba

[g.johnson]

Some of the restaurants I've been to in my experience that claim to serve Indian food are owned or operated by Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, and therefore do not have cooks or chefs from India cooking for the masses which pass through their doorsteps.

I think that for matters of this discussion, Pakistan and Bangladesh count as part of India. Or if not then we need to discuss Goan, Kashmiri, Kerala, Gujarati, etc., etc. separately. Which is not to say that your larger point - that we're not experiencing Indian food at its best is not valid.