Best and worst non-French foods in France

[Fat Guy]

The Mexican food in France topic got me thinking generally about non-French cuisines in France.

Which non-French cuisines have flourished in France? Which are generally done well? Fundamentally, is there something about French culinary culture that inhibits non-French cuisines?

For the specifics of how to get good Mexican, Chinese, etc., food in France, I'd suggest separate discussion topics, but in general what's going on here?

[phaelon56]

Not sure if this counts but on my trip to Paris this past January we ate a a small neighborhood creperie on our first night. It was called le Quimper - a classic neighborhood joint on a side street and only one waitress spoek a smattergin of English (good complement to my paucity of French). I can read just enough French to recognize a banana split when i see on and indeed - that dish was on the menu. I don't knwo the origin of the banan split but wouldn't think it to be French.

By the way - it was the best banana split I've ever had.

[Carrot Top]

I've heard that Paris currently can offer some decent regional African food, and do remember having had excellent Indian food while living there, as my neighborhood had a good sized Indian population.

I wonder whether the Arabic or Moroccan food is decent. . .and also wonder about Vietnamese. . .

[marlena spieler]

North African food often wonderful, and so ubiquitous! (though sometimes bog-standard joints, a bit like mexican food in california, texas, etc). with the large pieds noirs community (north africans) in the lands that were once French, you have a large group of people who fled to france, and brought with them their cuisines. there is some good lebanese food around, much of it on the street. the same story: former french rule. i love the rose drink, ward. and the roll up flatbreads stuffed with herbs, cheese, etc.

similar deal with vietnamese food, ie vietnam and french rule, but i find french vietnamese food sometimes wonderful, sometimes over refined until its soul is gone.

i find indian food in paris much inferior to most of the indian food i find in london or the uk. but turkish food can be very nice, even kebabs.

stay away from mexican food in france! but i've had some very nice greek food, with excellent feta, served as dessert, with onions and cucumbers. Ever since then, that is my favourite dessert. well, sometimes!

marlena

Edited July 9, 2005 by marlena spieler (log)

[pierre45]

This is an interesting topic that gets discussed once in a while with my friends who are into food.

My comments are based on my residence in Paris and having travelled extensively in most of the countries discussed.The list starts with the best .

-Lebanese food.Paris abounds with Lebanese restaurants ,groceries and bakeries.

Sometimes the food is better than what one finds in lebanon,except perhaps the sweets.The high quality of ingredients are the reason

-Vietnamese food.The food is not 100% authentic,because the spice level is lower .

However the ingredients are better than in vietnam .

-Maroccan.Quite good because of ingredients but spices toned down.still quite good.

- Chinese.High end chinese is respectable and quite refined and better than in China but not honk kong.I have been disapointed in most of the food in china.poor ingredients and also lack of communication.

-Thai.Some delectable cuisine meant for the french palate.Toned way down & not authentic.

I am not mentionning Korean,Armenian,African,Iranian & russian cuisines since they are not as numerous as the ones listed above.

[n8ellingson]

After the better part of year in the Paris area, I have a few thoughts on non-french food here.

First off and following up the post on Mexican food, I had a terrible meal recently at a supposedly mexian place at la Defense and can affirm the conclusion that Paris is not a great place for Mexican food.

It's probably a little trite, but I think the French are pretty insular and for the most part are not that interested in fine cuisines beyond their own (this is clearly a generalization - I know many French people who are interested in other cuisines, but when looking at a 'culture' as a whole generalizations are assumed). To this point, in from "Paris to the Moon", Adam Gopnik has a quote from Peter Hoffman (Savoy) about a visit to L'Ambrose in Paris where Mr. Hoffman was talked into ordering the chef's mille-feuille with langoustines and curry. The quote continues with Mr. Hoffman expressing exasperation because of the chef's improper use of curry and that is was evident that the chef had not taken the time to learn the way spices are used in other cuisines (pp 159). I think this quote is worth noting because it reaffirms this idea that exists here that French cuisine is the best in the world and that maybe we'll take a few things from the rest of the world, but in no way will those things (spices, different ingredients, etc) change the identity of French cuisine.

Hardly scientific, but taking a quick look at the restaurants Zagats lists as the 50 most popular in Paris, only one of the ones I recognized was non-french. I'm sure a significant number of the people submitting the reviews for Zagats are American, so the popularity list is probably somewhat skewed, but the fact that most of Paris' most popular restaurants are French, points to either a lack of non-French restaurants or a lack of interest in non-french restaurants (or both).

It would be interesting to have a an anthropoligist's perspective, but it seems like one of two criteria must be met for a particicular type of food to flouirsh in an area: Either an interest in that type of food or a significant number of people from the region. Regarding the latter criteria, it seems like the non-French cuisines that are successful here are cuisines from the countries that France formerly occupied. The large number of people either from these countries or with roots to the countries seem to provide a built-in customer-base for the restaurants and help acclimate others to the cuisine. To this point, north-African food is quite popular here (at least in Paris) and is well represented in the grocery stores here (prepared cous cous dinners appear quite popular).

It seems as well that the sizable population from the Middle-East has fed an interest in the Kebabs that are ubiquitous in Paris (and I might add can be quite good).

All of that said, I think the conclusion is that other cuisines tend not to flourish here because the French are really not that interested in them and because there aren't significant enough populations of people from different regions to give the cuisines the critical-mass to break into the mainstream.

What do other people think?

I just took a look at some of the other posts that people made when I was writing this. Sorry if its'a little redundant.

[Ptipois]

If I were to list the best non-french cuisines in Paris, the ones from the countries that share a colonial past in France would come first, obviously. Other ethnic neighborhoods are related to the industry, for instance the Turkish population working in the leather district in the 10e. So I'd choose, in descending order:

- North African: Tunisian, Algerian, Moroccan. Best eaten at little joints, small couscous places and holes in the wall. Avoid expensive Moroccan restaurants, with a few exceptions.

Pied-Noir food can be very nice (area around rue Montmartre, rue Richer and porte de Champerret) but a bit heavy compared to cheap North African food.

- Vietnamese. I mean pure Vietnamese and not viet-chinese, which accounts for the majority of Asian restaurants in Paris. And yes, the spice level is allright, with no chili missing. All you have to do is go to the right places.

- African. The search for a good poulet braisé, thieb or yassa is a great pastime for people who have time to devote to it. However, you can come across truly miraculous food in small places all located in the Northern part of the city (18e, 17e mostly).

- Korean. There are good places, mostly in the 15e.

- Chinese. It is possible to find some really good Chinese food in Paris if you know your places (not many, really).

- Thai. It is also possible to find good family-style Thai and Lao food with the right amount of spice added to it. Whoever says (quite rightly regarding the most common cases) Thai food in Paris is edulcorated has never had a laap neua at the Lao Thai.

- Turkish: decent, simple Turkish food around rue du Faubourg-Saint-Denis, below the gare de l'Est.

- Indian: Indian food in Paris used to be downright terrible. It still is, except for the relatively recent places opened between the Gare du Nord and the La Chapelle area, most of them Sri Lankan and South Indian. They sure have improved the level. Simple curries, rotis, parathas, masala chai, idli and dosai, all well-spiced. Some help: look for undecorated places, plastic laminate tables, avoid the spun-sugar "Indian palace" interiors like the plague.

- Lebanese food is mostly okay in Paris. I only regret there are so few Syrian restaurants...

[Ptipois]

After the better part of year in the Paris area, I have a few thoughts on non-french food here.

First off and following up the post on Mexican food, I had a terrible meal recently at a supposedly mexian place at la Defense and can affirm the conclusion that Paris is not a great place for Mexican food.

The French have no colonial past with Mexico (which personally I regret, since I adore Mexican food) and therefore have no reason to be good at restaurants from such a faraway cuisine, mostly because there is no sizeable immigrant Mexican population in Paris.

I used to know of three very nice Mexican restaurants in Paris, now I know only two, and one of them isn't great every time. They are run by Mexicans who love their cuisine and love to make it known. But they are exceptions. There also is a confusion in France between Tex-Mex food and Mexican food.

To illustrate this theory, there are some good Japanese restaurants in Paris (Opéra - rue Sainte-Anne) though there's no colonial heritage: but there are many Japanese people living and working in Paris.

This is not a matter of "not being interested", but a matter of who is here to initiate us to good food from their native country, and how many of them live here. Moroccan food is fine in Paris because there are many Moroccans, furthermore the cooks know that their French customers are relatively knowledgeable. In the US, some years ago, when there were not many Moroccans there, Moroccan restaurants were positively terrible and everything but Moroccan. After ordering couscous in Brooklyn Heights and eyeing the dreadful mess of bloated semolina, huge carrot slices and tasteless red sauce in my plate, I complained to the waiter. He told me "this is couscous, this is the way you eat it." I said: "Sir, I come from France." His face became very serious, he said: "Oh, I am so sorry, Madam" and took my plate back to the kitchen.

Of course the French are interested in Mexican food, and they would be so much more interested if there were more Mexicans to show them the way. But there aren't.

It's probably a little trite, but I think the French are pretty insular and for the most part are not that interested in fine cuisines beyond their own (this is clearly a generalization - I know many French people who are interested in other cuisines, but when looking at a 'culture' as a whole generalizations are assumed).

Though what you're writing here is not completely untrue, it is exaggerated. The French are not that insular, but they are conditioned by the ancestral style of their cuisine, which, as you may easily agree if you study it a little bit, is based on as few spices as possible in order to bring out the true taste of things. So there you have it: opening up to spicy, strong tastes and flavors is very fine but it's not easy for the French in general. If they had been more "open", perhaps this definite style of French cooking would have disappeared long ago. I'm not saying this is good or bad, just that you cannot have it all at the same time.

To this point, in from "Paris to the Moon", Adam Gopnik has a quote from Peter Hoffman (Savoy) about a visit to L'Ambrose in Paris where Mr. Hoffman was talked into ordering the chef's mille-feuille with langoustines and curry.  The quote continues with Mr. Hoffman expressing exasperation because of the chef's improper use of curry and that is was evident that the chef had not taken the time to learn the way spices are used in other cuisines (pp 159).

I haven't read "Paris to the Moon" but I find this Mr. Hoffman quite rude in labeling this "improper use of curry". First of all what is a "proper use of curry" when curry powder itself is, most of the time, a dubious spice mix of English origin and very remote from the realities of Indian cooking? The truth is that there is a proper use of curry in England and a proper use of curry in France, where English curry powder was adopted in the 19th century in a very particular way which I would describe as quite French, mostly with seafood. Too bad Mr. Hoffman didn't know enough about French cuisine to be aware of that.

I think this quote is worth noting because it reaffirms this idea that exists here that French cuisine is the best in the world and that maybe we'll take a few things from the rest of the world, but in no way will those things (spices, different ingredients, etc) change the identity of French cuisine.

There is no doubt that there is an identity of French cuisine as far as spicing is concerned. However I know that the idea that "French cuisine is the best in the world" is almost universally shared in France (and dreadfully so, I should say, for I strongly disagree with it), but I don't think it is the reason why French cooks have always been so reluctant to include new tastes and spices. It is not chauvinism, it is because the taste of French cooking is a fragile equilibrium.

Hardly scientific, but taking a quick look at the restaurants Zagats lists as the 50 most popular in Paris, only one of the ones I recognized was non-french.  I'm sure a significant number of the people submitting the reviews for Zagats are American, so the popularity list is probably somewhat skewed, but the fact that most of Paris' most popular restaurants are French, points to either a lack of non-French restaurants or a lack of interest in non-french restaurants (or both).

There are two things to say here: first, it seems normal that a guidebook focuses on the native cuisines of the countries it is supposed to cover. Second, there are many great ethnic restaurants in Paris but, most of the time, you cannot guess their existence unless someone has acquainted you to them. It was perhaps too much of a job for Zagats, which, in Paris, probably chooses to focus on French cooking.

It would be interesting to have a an anthropoligist's perspective, but it seems like one of two criteria must be met for a particicular type of food to flouirsh in an area: Either an interest in that type of food or a significant number of people from the region.

No need to rely on an anthropologist for this. I think the main and only criteria is the significant number of people from the region. The interest in some type of food is by no means a guarantee that the food will be good and/or authentic. Look at all the terrible Indian restaurants in Paris before the Srilankan wave in the '90s. Also, I have never met anyone in Paris who knows a little about Mexican food and who didn't deplore that there were no decent Mexican restaurants here. That's for the interest. I believe that if, all of a sudden, good Mexican restaurants flourished in Paris, Parisians would be delighted.

Regarding the latter criteria, it seems like the non-French cuisines that are successful here are cuisines from the countries that France formerly occupied.

This is not only true of France but of every other country in the world with a colonial history, as well as of every country that has sizeable immigrant populations. It has nothing to do with France in particular.

All of that said, I think the conclusion is that other cuisines tend not to flourish here because the French are really not that interested in them and because there aren't significant enough populations of people from different regions to give the cuisines the critical-mass to break into the mainstream.

I agree with the second part of your conclusion, not with the first. The "not interested" is no more and no less true in France than anywhere else in the world.

[chefzadi]

I agree with Ptipois for the most part, probably entirely.

This is a repeat of what has been said in other threads. France has a stronger culinary tradition then America. Any number of threads here indicates this. Julia Child exploded onto the food scene in America with well, French food. As for 'ethnic' foods in America it's really in the last 30 years that all of this has been embraced with great gusto. Of course Italian-American and Chinese-American for example were popular long before. My wife recalls 30 years ago, alot of people in LA asking her what a Korean was? The French will soon be (if not already) be introduced to kimchi through a Le Cordon Bleu cookbook. We're not far behind the Americans in understanding other cuisines. For instance, French people know that Africans including North Africans don't just cook meat on a stick.

Another repeat, In France there is restaurant food and home cooking. Two different things. Sure the North African at the tiny mom and pop shops is tasty, sometimes fantastic, but it is not representative. Who would know from eating at one the intricacies and complexities of Algerian cusine? Berber sustenance cooking, Arabic, Ottoman Turk, returing Moorish/Moriscos (Hispano-Arba), Sephardic Jewish, Italian, French influences.

Just as it's not possible to understand French regional cooking by eating at a 'standard' bistro, it is impoosible to understand North African through restuarant food.

I think Pierre said that the spicing for Moroccan in Paris is toned down. The Algerians complain about restaurant food in France and Algeria that the spicing tends to be strong, some say even vulgar and not representative of the nuances we have with spices, which sometimes we don't even use at all.

It takes time, care and lots of eating to understand a cuisine or a culture. One must go inside as well and not judge by what you see in restaurants only.

[chefzadi]

To this point, north-African food is quite popular here (at least in Paris) and is well represented in the grocery stores here (prepared cous cous dinners appear quite popular).

Couscous was voted France's food a few years ago. "Conquest by couscous" quipped a conservative politician.

In Clifford Wright's The Mediterranean Feast he sites a French writer mentioning eating couscous in Toulouse (I think) a few hundred years ago. I can look up the exact date later if it's really important to anyone.

[Fat Guy]

I think it would be a mistake to say it's all about immigration and leave it at that. Counterexamples abound all over the world. There is, for example, no significant French population in New York City, where most of the top restaurants are French. The Japanese are brilliant at emulating cuisines from all over. Conversely, there are plenty of Germans in New York but virtually no good German restaurants. No, it's not all about immigration. Immigration is a factor, as are several other things.

The French palate's opposition to piquancy would seem to be an undeniable factor in limiting the development of all the wonderful cuisines that depend on capsicum for the character of so many of their dishes.

The existence of such an overwhelmingly dominant cuisine is also no doubt a factor. The population of France is increasingly multi-ethnic, but the restaurant scene reflects that only in part.

[chefzadi]

Not to get too off topic, but Steven did bring up New York.

A topic of conversation that comes up again and again when I get together with French friends in LA is the lack of good French restaurants in LA. There is a large enough French population here to support many good French restaurants. Easy to market to through numerous organizations and dying for some real French food.

[John Talbott]

-Lebanese food.Paris abounds with Lebanese restaurants ,groceries and bakeries.

Sometimes the food is better than what one finds in lebanon,except perhaps the sweets.The high quality of ingredients are the reason

-Vietnamese food.The food is not 100% authentic,because the spice level is lower .

However the  ingredients are better than in vietnam .

-Maroccan.Quite good because of ingredients but spices toned down.still quite good.

←

As usual, I find myself agreeing with Pierre; when it comes to "foreign" cuisine in Paris, it's the product that trumps all else. South-east Asian is the prime example; the first time I ate at my dumpy looking local Thai place twenty years ago, I expected nothing, but the product pushed it right up there. Of course, with, say, Japanese places, they need to move a lot of fresh fish through each day to make it hold up, but that's true anywhere. And, to get back to Lucy's thread, I think Mexican, Spanish and Italian food is less successful here; just compare eating Italian stuff in Menton with Ventimiglia, only a few klicks away. And as for pizza, when Le Figaro tested pizza joints in Paris head-to-head a few years ago, none of it stood up to the real thing and one of their top three (which is in my quartier) pales in comparison to a humble place my host took me to in Milano a few weeks ago. I think of Magrebian food as so French that I don't consider it foreign and as a student, having found Viet Namese food delicious and cheap, I take it as it is. There are also especially notable take-out places (and restos) such as Mavrommatis + Noura which are also terrific. Fat Guy, thanks for stimulating this discussion.

[Pan]

I agree with Ptipois for the most part, probably entirely.

This is a repeat of what has been said in other threads. France has a stronger culinary tradition then America. Any number of threads here indicates this. Julia Child exploded onto the food scene in America with well, French food. As for 'ethnic' foods in America it's really in the last 30 years that all of this has been embraced with great gusto. Of course Italian-American and Chinese-American for example were popular long before. My wife recalls 30 years ago, alot of people in LA asking her what a Korean was?[...]

←

Koreans started arriving in the US in large number about 30 years ago, so that's not surprising (except for the abject ignorance it shows about the Korean War, etc.), but I'd have to disagree, on the basis that there was plenty of Greek, Jewish, and Central/Eastern European food, at least in New York. I think that "ethnic" food has been popular in the US wherever "ethnics" have been.

In terms of France, most of you have focused on Paris. I've spent much more time in Nice than Paris. Nice, perhaps because it used to be part of Savoia, has plenty of good (and, yes, sometimes authentic [truly Italian-tasting], if you want to use the word) Italian food (or did the last time I was there), mainly pasta. There is also a very heavy presence of Tunisians there, so there was good Tunisian couscous and pastries. There was also delicious Vietnamese food.

One cuisine I haven't seen mentioned yet is Cambodian. I ate a lovely Cambodian meal in the 1ieme the last time I was in Paris. The best Chinese restaurant I've been to in France, which was in Orleans, was run by Cambodian Chinese people, too.

[Ptipois]

In Clifford Wright's The Mediterranean Feast he sites a French writer mentioning eating couscous in Toulouse (I think) a few hundred years ago. I can look up the exact date later if it's really important to anyone.

←

Rabelais, in the 16th century, was mentioning the "coscoton à la mauresque" and, supposedly, described it pretty much as couscous as we know it.

In the mid-19th century, George Sand (who was known for her great cooking skills) loved to make kouss-kouss for her family and friends in Nohant. So you see couscous has been a "French" dish for some time now...

Edited July 9, 2005 by Ptipois (log)

[chefzadi]

but I'd have to disagree, on the basis that there was plenty of Greek, Jewish, and Central/Eastern European food, at least in New York. I think that "ethnic" food has been popular in the US wherever "ethnics" have been.

In rather smallish pockets though, no? And mostly other "ethnic" European. Mexican being a bug exception, but then of course parts of The States were once Mexico.

I don't think I'm disagreeing with you much, if at all. America is so big. There is Hawaii of course, but I don't want to get too off topic.

[vserna]

I have a better opinion than what I've read here about Italian cuisine in Paris (not elsewhere in France). Caffè Minotti, Paolo Petrini, Carpaccio are very good restaurants! Alain Ducasse's Il Cortile too, even if purists say it's only "Italian-inspired".

Otherwise - North African, French Caribbean, Lebanese, Vietnamese, yes! Almost anything else - no! Spain is the only country in Europe with some decent Mexican cuisine. BTW, Spanish cuisine is dreadful, dreadful in France. You find "paëllas" all over the place, but they're a disgrace. Among the few exceptions: the food shop + simple restaurant Byzance, in Boulogne-Billancourt. It's the place in greater Paris for Ibérico ham...

[Ptipois]

I think it would be a mistake to say it's all about immigration and leave it at that. Counterexamples abound all over the world.

Sure, but the topic was "non-french cuisines in France" so I replied about Paris because I frankly don't know enough about the situation of non-french cuisines in other parts of France. I only know that it is more difficult to get foreign produce in most provincial cities.

Someone had a theory about the "non-french" food situation in France, thinking it was specifically French by nature, but I went to object that it couldn't work that way because it was not identifying the causes properly, and that France was no different from any other place except for the fact that in any case the amount of spices and chilli had to be very much subdued. So I described the French situation as I know it and have studied it.

Think of this: France is described as "insular". I find this surprising indeed for a country that has seen most of the European world pass through its territory in every direction for centuries, leaving marks all over the place, and has adopted many foods and preparations from many cultures. However, this very country, which cannot honestly be described as "insular", has developed since the 17th century a very unique kind of cuisine, based on a very strict economy of spices. On the other hand, if there is one European country that can be described as "insular", it is Great Britain. And its food situation, now, is probably the most open and multicultural in all of Europe. So "insularity" doesn't make it as an explanation.

There is, for example, no significant French population in New York City, where most of the top restaurants are French.

I don't think French cooking served outside of France should count as "ethnic food", not because of any particular nature in se, but because of its past history as a "model" cuisine throughout the world, and its seminal nature.

The Japanese are brilliant at emulating cuisines from all over. Conversely, there are plenty of Germans in New York but virtually no good German restaurants.

The question to ask here is: do Germans usually open lots of restaurants abroad? From what I've noticed, not many over the world.

No, it's not all about immigration. Immigration is a factor, as are several other things.

Maybe not everywhere, of course. But we were talking about France. In France it's mostly about immigration and colonial history. That is very clear.

The French palate's opposition to piquancy would seem to be an undeniable factor in limiting the development of all the wonderful cuisines that depend on capsicum for the character of so many of their dishes.

I don't believe that's true at all. The opposition to piquancy only produces restaurants that serve food with all or most of the piquancy removed. It has never been an obstacle, in France, to opening restaurants. There are plenty of Vietnamese restaurants here, but few of them (the genuinely Vietnamese ones, that is) provide the normal amount of chili and spices. Same thing can be said about the incredibly bland Indian restaurants that flourished here in Paris during the 80's and 90's, outside of the ethnic neighborhood of La Chapelle. Now that there is a Tamil and Sri Lankan population in Paris, there are decent Indian restaurants. Before that, there weren't any. It's as simple as that. There are not many Mexican restaurants because there is not much of a Mexican population in Paris. And there are many Vietnamese restaurants because there are plenty of Vietnamese people. This too is simple. Just imagine that the Maximilian episode in Mexican history had been more successful and durable, giving way to a substantial population exchange between Mexico and France: we'd have many Mexican restaurants by now, most of them opened since the 1950's (when non-french-food restaurants started becoming popular in France), but I'm absolutely sure that all of them, right from the beginning, would have served an extremely tame food, chilli-wise. À la française.

The existence of such an overwhelmingly dominant cuisine is also no doubt a factor. The population of France is increasingly multi-ethnic, but the restaurant scene reflects that only in part.

←

Take a walk with me in Paris sometime, and I will show you that our restaurant scene reflects the multiethnicism of our society to the perfection. But by restaurants, I mean all restaurants.

Edited July 9, 2005 by Ptipois (log)

[Fat Guy]

Ptipois, I fail to see why you maintain such a steadfast commitment to the idea that all non-French restaurants in France are explained by immigration and nothing else, especially in light of your own statements, for example that "opening up to spicy, strong tastes and flavors is very fine but it's not easy for the French in general." Are you seriously contending that nothing affects the spread of non-French cuisine in France other than pure numbers of immigrants? French culinary culture: irrelevant? French flavor preferences: irrelevant? French national pride: irrelevant? Seems a bit extreme of a position to be taking.

[anzu]

To do justice to the topic as to WHY certain foods are good and others are bad in France would require at least a PhD length dissertation. In fact, the issue of why certain types of ethnic cuisine take off in certain ways in certain countries is indeed the subject of sociological and historical research.

Lacking both the time and the energy for an in-depth post, I'll confine myself to pointing out a few issues which do affect the way ethnic food develops, and which have not yet been mentioned here. These comments are in additon to the posts above. All of these are pointing away from the thesis that there is something 'in French culture' that is inhibiting the development or acceptance of non-French cuisine.

a) how developed is the restaurant scene in the originating country?

People have mentioned that Indian food in France is often lousy, and this is something I would agree with. One needs to bear in mind, though, that restaurant food in India itself is even now (frequently) pretty awful. Traditionally, orthodox Hindus did not eat out in restaurants, as they could not be sure about the caste of those preparing and handling the food. Restaurant-going is a very recent phenomenon in India, and a lot of what is served in those restaurants is mediocre and generic "Mughlai" North Indian food served in overly heavy sauces. It has very little relationship with the food eaten in peoples' homes, and gives no indication of the huge regional variations in culinary styles within India. The other foods commonly served in Indian restaurants in India are a generic 'southern' repertoire, such as idlis and dosa. Again, the food is hardly wide-ranging or representative.

In the thread on Mexican food in France (I think it was in this thread), one of the posters mentioned that the food was prepared almost as a caricature of itself. It's a good phrase, but it's also worth remembering that the food may actually be prepared as a caricature of itself in the originating country also, and that bad food in France (in this case) may actually have very little to do with the food habits of the French.

b) one should not look only at the role of immigrants in raising awareness of new tastes. Holiday destinations and thus the personal experiences of the diners also play a large part in this.

Sorry, I can't actually provide the references, but the correlation between travel and the furtherment of 'ethnic' food preferences has been researched. If, for some reason, more French people were to start travelling to Mexico, for example, you can be quite sure that the standard of Mexican food available in France would start improving drastically, as would demand for this cuisine.

So again, I wouldn't say that it is French culinary habits, or even a dislike of spiciness, that are influencing the issue.

c) EU regulations.

It is relatively easy for a person whose citizenship is from one EU country to go to another EU country and get a job. This means, for example, that an Italian can go to France and open a restaurant or an ice cream parlour, or work in such a place, with an AWFUL lot less hassle than a non EU citizen would face (who has to prove expertise in their skill, argue that there is no-one in the entire EU who could do the same job, etc.).

Now, this might mean that the Italian food (in this example) available will be better or worse than it otherwise would be. I really don't know enough to say. But it will certainly mean that authentic offerings of certain types of cuisine will be more difficult to come by, and will explain the increased likelihood of those cuisines being offered by someone whose ethnic background is far removed from that which they are offering.

d) because of c) the influence of the 'ethnic cuisine' in neighouring EU countries should not be overlooked, as this can also influence the way this cuisine develops in France.

One example of this here. The Chinatown area of London used to be (maybe still is?) almost entirely dominated by people from one small village in the rural hinterland of Hong Kong. (There is an academic paper on this, I'm not talking anecdotally here). This happened through a process of 'chain migration' (i.e. families who have already emigrated and have citizenship in the new country sponsor relatives to emigrate, so that more and more people from the same area arrive in the new country). Naturally enough, this means that the food available in London's Chinatown in not just Hong Kong dominated in flavor, but is also going to have a certain sameness of offering and presentation.

As the number of immigrants grew, people who originated from this village moved out from London into other parts of the UK, but continued to work in food and food-related indutries. They also began moving into the continent, and their destinations include Paris.

Therefore, the food offered in their restaurants to some extent reflects the food of a small village near Hong Kong, but also reflects the menu items that have become 'traditional' in UK Chinese restaurants.

There is a very similar scenario with the people opening and working in Indian restaurants, some of whom have gone to France via the UK, and are offering UK "Indian restaurant" food. So to discuss why this food is presented the way it is in France, one would have to look first at the entire 'curry' and 'curry house' issues of the UK.

The above list is far from exhaustive, and I don't disagree with what other posters have written. However, I think you've got my drift that, IMO, the popularity (or lack thereof) and quality (or lack thereof)) of non-French cuisines in France do not reside in something in French culinary culture, but instead have a lot more to do with historic and legal factors.

[Pan]

[...]People have mentioned that Indian food in France is often lousy, and this is something I would agree with. One needs to bear in mind, though, that restaurant food in India itself is even now (frequently) pretty awful.[...]

←

Wow! I think a lot of people would disagree strongly with the latter statement! It certainly wasn't my experience -- in 1977!

[chefzadi]

There have been several discussions in this forum about the points you bring up Steven.

French national pride: irrelevant? Seems a bit extreme of a position to be taking.

I've said some critical things about this before, I've also stated that France is changing fairly rapidly.

An article abou Zinedine Zidane.

Last year he was voted in a poll as "The most popular Frenchman of all time." He is a proud Algerian with family roots in the Kabylie and he is a self described "non-practicing muslim" (like a large number of muslims in France) and he is from "the hood" in Marseille. A very particular ghetto Anyway, there is more to ethnic France outside of Paris.

For many commentators, Zidane's wholly unexpected victory in this mainstream arena marked a new political maturity in France. French intellectuals are usually contemptuous of sport but the novelist Philippe Sollers was only half-joking when he called for Zidane to take over as French Prime Minister. In an equally provocative mood, the influential social critic Pascal Boniface hailed Zidane's popularity as no less than the beginning of 'a new Enlightenment'.

Multiculturalism and pluralism exists in different ways in France. Again, Ptipois and I especially have fairly detailed discussions about this as well on eg. I'll look for the threads. Cultural/culinary comparisons are tangled discussions with lots of threads.

(I apologize if the ZZ article is not on the topic of food enough, but it does address alot of point made in this topic, namely "ethnic" France. I couldn't find a better article that deals with many of the issues brought up in this thread.)

EDIT: It also says alot about French pluralism that such a fairly recent and painful relationship with North Africa is being quickly absorbed into more positive things.

Edited July 9, 2005 by chefzadi (log)

[Ptipois]

Ptipois, I fail to see why you maintain such a steadfast commitment to the idea that all non-French restaurants in France are explained by immigration and nothing else,

I don't believe you read my posts very carefully because it seems that you're mixing my words up.

It is not very fair to compare the "ethnic food" situation in the US, for instance in NY, and the equivalent in France. The whole world comes to the US and opens restaurants there. Not in France. France is not the US, Paris is not NYC. The situation of ethnic restaurants in France, precisely in Paris which happens to be the place where I live, is fairly easy to study. It reflects certain historical situations, some of them relatively ancient, some of them recent, all of them layered in a very interesting way. In fact it does reflect them to an almost blinding closeness. If the examples I have given in my previous posts are not enough to illustrate this, there is not much else I can do except give more examples of the same kind, but that would become overdemonstrative and boring. Immigration waves and the presence of more or less substantial foreign communities is what shapes the restaurant situation in France. There is another factor, dependent on the previous ones: who opens restaurants? Some immigrants are really "restaurant" people, i.e. the Vietnamese, the Africans, who like to reproduce the formula of the "restaurant de poussière" or the African "maquis". The Portuguese, for instance, seem to be more attached to cooking at home, which seems to explain the relatively small number of Portuguese restaurants (suburban cafés for the most part) and the importance of Portuguese produce stalls in suburban street and covered markets.

especially in light of your own statements, for example that "opening up to spicy, strong tastes and flavors is very fine but it's not easy for the French in general."

Is there a contradiction there? Read again: I wrote that the French don't as a rule like spicy flavors but that this never was an obstacle to the opening of non-french restaurants that serve a de-spiced version of the original cuisines. So if, for instance, there are so few Mexican restaurants in France, that is certainly not because of the chilli or because we're not interested, as was hinted here and there.

Are you seriously contending that nothing affects the spread of non-French cuisine in France other than pure numbers of immigrants?

I am seriously contending that this is, in France, the main factor for the spread of non-French restaurants, yes. Not the only one, but the main one, for sure. It is the factor that has shaped the non-French restaurant situation in France to a very large extent.

French culinary culture: irrelevant?

Certainly not irrelevant, but I never said so. If I knew exactly to what extent you really know French culinary culture, I'd find it easier to answer you here. But if French culinary culture is relevant in that respect, this concerns the way dishes are cooked (again: light on the spicing), not the number and extent of non-French restaurants.

Now if you believe that some culinary cultures like Mexican are not represented in France just because they are too spicy for the French and would clash with the French culinary culture, and you want me to confirm this, sorry, I cannot do that because it is just not so.

Writing about that subject implies that you take a good look at the "non-national" restaurant situation not just in France but in all other European countries. Look at Germany, England, Portugal, Holland. The origin, number and nature of immigrants, as well as the links left by the colonial history, are the key factor everywhere. You cannot compare with the US there.

French flavor preferences: irrelevant?

Not irrelevant at all, but again, it is a matter of how the dishes are prepared, not of what kind of restaurants are present.

French national pride: irrelevant?

What do you exactly mean by that?

I'll let you deal with this one because I have no idea of what part the "French national pride" (whatever this may be) may play in our ethnic restaurant situation. You seem to know more about this subject than I do, so I'm eager to be enlightened.

Seems a bit extreme of a position to be taking.

←

Sorry, but I don't think so. I am only describing the situation and answering your questions honestly. I happen to know this subject, and the recent history of my country, pretty well, and I deal with this in my everyday life.

[chefzadi]

At the risk of going off topic I want to add that "French National Pride" is different from "American National Pride." These things are complex and neither can be understood by imposing one's understanding of one side.

I'll add that you don't see French tourists going around expecting the world to be French or speak French.

As for culinary pride. The French chef's culinary pride is different from the average non-chef French person's culinary (national) pride which really doesn't exist.

EDIT: strange trying to explain one's culture(s) to others.

Edited July 9, 2005 by chefzadi (log)

[Ptipois]

one should not look only at the role of immigrants in raising awareness of new tastes. Holiday destinations and thus the personal experiences of the diners also play a large part in this.

Sorry, I can't actually provide the references, but the correlation between travel and the furtherment of 'ethnic' food preferences has been researched. If, for some reason, more French people were to start travelling to Mexico, for example, you can be quite sure that the standard of Mexican food available in France would start improving drastically, as would demand for this cuisine.

Very interesting post, Anzu.

And an interesting point too (the holiday destinations). But I'm going to Paris-proof it immediately. Where do Parisians go away on vacation, aside from staying in France?

Now I don't know exactly which is the n°1 vacationland for the French but the Mediterranean (Greece, Tunisia, Morocco) sure is successful. Now there are many North African restaurants but obviously there is a large North African population in France. Lots of French tourists go to Greece: of course there is Mavrommatis (which is fine) but apart from that, there are no good Greek restaurants in Paris. No comparison with Germany, where there are many Greek immigrants.

The recent appearance of chic or pseudo-chic Moroccan restaurants complete with wall carpets and riyad-like décor and outrageous prices is directly correlated to the recent status of Marrakech as the perfect Parisian jetsetter destination. But in the 70's and 80's the Number One destination for the rich and trendy was the Seychelles islands, and there never was more than one seychellois restaurant in Paris.

Judging from what I see around me and what a travel agent friend said to me recently, some of the preferred faraway destinations for the French are the French Carribean, Thailand and Mexico. There are some French Carribean restaurants in Paris, and many French Carribean people too. As for Thailand, there are many less Thai restaurants (the "Spécialités chinoises-vietnamiennes-thaïlandaises" places don't count as Thai) than the popularity of Thailand as a vacation destination should imply. Even less so for Mexico. Actually I don't believe there would be more and better Mexican restaurants in Paris if more Parisians went to Mexico. Demand is not always enough. There needs to be Mexicans to do the cooking.