On comprehending Indian cuisine

[John Whiting]

I'm happy to see this topic generating more light than heat. What led me into it was the seemingly irrelevent experience with which I opened. Having to balance the sounds coming from these great musicians was, in a sense, as if I were to be asked to guide the hands of a great chef. I had a degree of control over the music which would have allowed me to ruin it through insensitivity. I have never before or since been plunged into a very foreign culture with so little experience and so much power. I was on an accelerated learning curve which was both frightening and exhilarating. What it made me realize was how little we usually understand of exotic cultures which become superficially familiar. Of course I could have learned the same lesson by living in India, but I have never had that experience -- only the crash course in one limited aspect.

[Suvir Saran]

I'm happy to see this topic generating more light than heat. What led me into it was the seemingly irrelevent experience with which I opened. Having to balance the sounds coming from these great musicians was, in a sense, as if I were to be asked to guide the hands of a great chef. I had a degree of control over the music which would have allowed me to ruin it through insensitivity. I have never before or since been plunged into a very foreign culture with so little experience and so much power. I was on an accelerated learning curve which was both frightening and exhilarating. What it made me realize was how little we usually understand of exotic cultures which become superficially familiar. Of course I could have learned the same lesson by living in India, but I have never had that experience -- only the crash course in one limited aspect.

John I have been put in your similar shoes at certain times of my life. Friends and theirs have thought that just my being an Indian chef and caterer would mean I know everything about foods from all over the world.

While I have had to wear shoes that do not fit, and walk a distance doing so, I have been critically and keenly aware of how the fit is not right just for it exists. But my friends have been innocent in thinking as they did. And I would be a fool if I were not modest enough to know better. But modesty would be a weak word here. I like your choice of the word humble.

Many consider humility a weakness. But humility is one of the biggest and winning strengths that anyone can ever have when interacting with a stranger, a foreign culture or even that which they have experienced only as a spectator but have never delved in themselves. It is the only way to learn.

I see myself do that more often than many can understand. When I travel and am trying to learn from grandmothers, mothers, wives, chefs and the most poor of India, I would never be able to learn if I go into it looking cocky and confident. The ice is broken, doors are opened and hearts pour when the foreigner is humble and willing to learn. Learning can never happen when the student feels they know it all, and only want to absorb what they have never had in their grasp. That is not learning. That would be greed to own. But not everything one owns is understood. And one owns not everything one understands.

I will be accused again of being too wordy or being to eastern in my thoughts, but that is the only way I know to be John. And when I go to learn from those that find me "too eastern" or "too wordy", I still go with all humility. For if I did not want to learn from them, I would not go in the first place. My wanting to learn something immediately makes me humble. They go hand in hand. When I teach at NYU or at home, I am humble, not for I have nothing to share, but I am in the collective midst of a greater number of people that each have the power to teach me as well. I call only those classes successful, in which I myself have come back learning from each student.

[Robert Schonfeld]

My beliefs about the physical universe leave no room for any other conclusion, No. 302. Food is a physical substance composed of other physical substances and manipulated according to scientific processes. All the rest is cultural overlay -- while it can be moving and meaningful, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the physical nature of the food. Any dish that was formed by combining ingredients and cooking them a certain way should be recordable and susceptible to being reproduced. This is my Western positivistic view of all food, and I feel no humility about it.

This seems to me to be self-evident. Maybe it's just the case that I share your view of the physical universe.

There is this other thing called creativity, though, isn't there? Otherwise, we'd all be cooking Beetons, whatever they are. Is the nature of creativity different from one cuisine to another? Is there anything about its nature that is consistent from one to another?

[Fat Guy]

Sorry, you've exceeded the limit of my intellect with that question.

[Robert Schonfeld]

Sorry, you've exceeded the limit of my intellect with that question.

Your intellect has no limits, FG. It's just the other side of the brain...

[Suvir Saran]

Is the nature of creativity different from one cuisine to another? Is there anything about its nature that is consistent from one to another?

Creativity will change depending on who creates, where and what. That is true in any art form. If that were not reality, we would all be doing the same thing and in the same way. Also creativity is certainly dependent on ones immediate world.

Our muse can exist in our fantasy, but even our fantasies have only so much created of the abstract, after which they too are dependent on what they have learned from our immediate environs.

What remains constant from one cuisine to another, I fear is only the ability of food to sate hunger and feed and nourish bodies. Nothing more transfers from one to another. For each cuisine, at least those that the world has called upon as classics, has their own very unique body of knowledge from which they arrive at new dishes.

While two cuisines can certainly be married, like in the marriage of two humans, each side will keep their personal identities and take from each other that which suits them and is becoming of them without either party losing themselves. I am sure most of us know of married couples and how that works or not. For certainly even in marriages there are failures. And most often, these are failures borne from one or the other or both parties not being able to understand the individuality of each other. We each would want things and peoples and cuisines to change, but that always is not something feasible or even practical.

Food has one consistent nature across cultures and cuisines, which is its ability to nourish. That alone is one thing that we all share in common. On a more intellectual level, food can also play the role of being that cultural diplomat that can shrink the differences between peoples and cultures by providing succor to hungry bodies and minds. Food can help break the ice between strangers that are forced to meet by circumstance and have to now eat the same food. Food can bring strangers into understanding human nature and our need to survive and to accept. For when we are hungry and have no options, we will eat that which we need to for our survival. And in doing so in the midst of others we find strange, we will realize how each of us will react similarly to that one situation.

Food could also make different people nostalgic about cultures in the same way. Food also has the ability to divide people when ego comes into its midst. Food like any element of our lives and culture has as much consistency with other similar elements in other cultures as we are willing to grasp. For in the end, while music, art, food, poetry, clothing, furnishings etc are all unique across different cultures, they also serve similar ends in each of their own unique setting.

Like with any thing in life, food needs a sense of place, a setting that is its own, a culture that is from it and it is from. But in the end, food like all things else, will also lose easily lose these attributes when placed outside of its own birthplace. While it will certainly always have some aspects that are unique to it and have formed what it is, it will only survive as a form of today, if it can accept changes that are needed and necessary for its survival in these new settings.

The more I think about your question Robert, the more I am lost in a thought process that could keep spewing out of me and into words. I will lose myself if I let it just flow. I think the first few paragraphs should suffice in what I really mean. Those that find this too wordy, please forgive me.

[=Mark]

I think the true essence of creativity in any cuisine can only be evenly judged by the methods by which those immersed in the traditions of their culture prepare, cook and present their Beetons. Anything else is attempting to compare apples and oranges.

[Jaymes]

It appears that I am neither intelligent nor sophisticated enough to discern the hidden meaning that others have found in John's piece.

I simply read it to mean that when one approaches an unfamiliar cuisine, one should do so with respect and humility and the understanding that cuisine is only one part of a larger overall culture and history of a people.

And that however "odd" some aspects may initially seem, perhaps there are reasons of which a newcomer cannot possibly be aware.

To me it just boils down to one thing....

When Sandra and I go to India for a year in order to study cooking, we should say as rarely as possible: "But back in the USA we do it THIS way."

[jaybee]

Jaymes, I would say you have captured one of the messages of John's piece and summed it up with clarity.

In an era which attaches a monetary value to every aspect of our existence, the creative impulse behind the food we eat must be established as someone’s intellectual property and quantified in relation to the competition. Thus the celebrity chef at the top of his profession must approach every new cuisine, not as part of a culture to be respected, but as a treasure to be confiscated. Sophisticated diners will come to his restaurant equipped with score cards on which they will rate his success in displaying his trophies so as to massage, seduce, astound or ravish their eager palates.

How, pray tell, would you sum up the meaning (hidden or otherwise) of the above?

[John Whiting]

How, pray tell, would you sum up the meaning (hidden or otherwise) of the above?

It is not a popular opinion on this site, but there are those who believe that the incessant competitive grading of restaurants leads to the corruption of what can and should be a generously communal experience. I am aware that on a grand scale this is Utopian. Nevertheless I prize those chefs – and there are such people – who run their establishments as if such a world were possible. Alice Waters is one, and she is as resented for it by some as she is loved by others. I hope that those who disagree with me can accept this as a strongly and honestly held position and not as a personal attack. It is, of course logically indefensible, so I shall not attempt to do so. Call it, if you will, an irrational item of religious faith.

[cabrales]

John -- Thank-you for posting.

[Sandra Levine]

[There is this other thing called creativity, though, isn't there? Otherwise, we'd all be cooking Beetons, whatever they are. Is the nature of creativity different from one cuisine to another? Is there anything about its nature that is consistent from one to another?

I regret that I was at work all day and could not participate more in this interesting thread. What I was trying to say is that while I can improvise in French and Italian cooking, read a recipe and know beforehand that something is wrong, correct the seasonings if a dish I'm making does not taste right and make a decent approximation of something I've had in a restaurant, or just decide to cook a dish and wing it. When it comes to Indian cooking, as much as I love it, I cannot do any of these things.

All I can do is plan a menu and follow recipes. I suspect that if I had grown up in India or lived there as a child I would be able to really cook Indian food. I follow the recipes very well and can produce (she said modestly) a very acceptable Indian meal.

But, I can't be creative. It is like language. Even if I could spend a year in India studying cooking, I suspect I would still cook with an "accent."

When do you want to go, Jaymes?

[=Mark]

How, pray tell, would you sum up the meaning (hidden or otherwise) of the above?

It is not a popular opinion on this site, but there are those who believe that the incessant competitive grading of restaurants leads to the corruption of what can and should be a generously communal experience.

If I may, this is awfully close to comments made on one of my BBQ lists about competition BBQ (Yes, John, I can sense you shudder... ). There is a contingent that holds strong opinion on the regional variations in traditional local barbecue. They are concerned that these increasingly popular competitions using "Newfangled tin can and charcoal smokers" are misleading the public as to what "true" barbecue is. They worry that the rules and such that limit the final product to a standard, predictable result will tend to diminish the differences that make regional styles distinct.

I know this is only marginally on topic here, but the arguments as to the nuances of foreign cuisines being lost on the public at large seemed to echo a similar theme on another food related forum.

Anyone out there ever try smoking Beetons?

[Fat Guy]

John, I don't so much mind the competition, but I do think the obsession with grading and ranking is problematic. But I think I'm coming from a different direction when I object to those practices: What I don't like is their inherent reductionism/oversimplification. I don't like that they're a substitute for real discussion and criticism. As James Poniewozik put it in his excellent Salon piece on the subject:

A populace with widening entertainment choices needs opinions by the busload, and it gets them in the form of Zagat's and Wine Spectator's numbers, Rolling Stone's stars, Michelin's toques and Entertainment Weekly's grades. In other words, ratings are more in demand than ever; it's the reviews we can do without. And while for the few lucky, well-branded Eberts among us, a famous rating scale can be a gold mine, the great, indistinguishable horn-rimmed masses are in danger of becoming the elevator operators of media: vestiges of a bygone era, whose presence lets you know you're in a classy joint, but who do little more than push the numbers.

http://archive.salon.com/media/poni/1998/0.../09/02poni.html

(A full reading is strongly encouraged.)

[jaybee]

It is not a popular opinion on this site, but there are those who believe that the incessant competitive grading of restaurants leads to the corruption of what can and should be a generously communal experience. I am aware that on a grand scale this is Utopian. Nevertheless I prize those chefs – and there are such people – who run their establishments as if such a world were possible. Alice Waters is one, and she is as resented for it by some as she is loved by others. I hope that those who disagree with me can accept this as a strongly and honestly held position and not as a personal attack. It is, of course logically indefensible, so I shall not attempt to do so. Call it, if you will, an irrational item of religious faith.

I agree with your opinion on this one, John. We have devolved into a list making, ranking, "top ten" world, which the media find easy to sell and people find easy to digest. Part of the problem is increasingly fewer people want to (or feel they can) take the time to put serious thought and reflection in such things as evaluating restaurants (or plays, or art). And there are many who will feed this desire for predigested "bytes" for good and bad.

I add that there are many people who are insecure about their ability to judge what is good or not, so they feel more comfortable leaving that to "experts" and following their leads. As unfortunate as that tendency might be, it is a common failing, which "experts" are glad to cater to at great profit.

As mentioned elsewhere, I've been reading Leslie Brenner's book on Daniel Boulud. His esatablishment is certainly at the epicenter of the world of stars and ratings. It is impossible to come away from this remarkable record feeling that this man is not passionately consumed with the art of cooking, and also with the desire to be financially successful, and the unwillingness to compromise either goal. His dedication to creating food that delights and surprises seems no less strong than that of Alice Waters. It is hard to call his a communal experience if you define the commune broadly, but then, I'm sure there are those who can't afford to eat at Alice's restaurant.

For what it's worth, I felt your reply to my comment invited cordial response and in no way could be construed as a personal attack.

[cabrales]

It is not a popular opinion on this site, but there are those who believe that the incessant competitive grading of restaurants leads to the corruption of what can and should be a generously communal experience. I am aware that on a grand scale this is Utopian. Nevertheless I prize those chefs – and there are such people – who run their establishments as if such a world were possible.

John -- When you have a chance, could you consider describing in what sense(s) you utilized the words "generously communal" (e.g., accessibility to all segments of the dining population; the sharing of meals with friends, family members or other fellow diners; an environment in which a meal is appreciated for its own qualities and seen for its positive attributes; an environment in which the nurturing of shared societal, cultural or other norms is encouraged).

[Jaymes]

Jaymes, I would say you have captured one of the messages of John's piece and summed it up with clarity.

In an era which attaches a monetary value to every aspect of our existence, the creative impulse behind the food we eat must be established as someone’s intellectual property and quantified in relation to the competition. Thus the celebrity chef at the top of his profession must approach every new cuisine, not as part of a culture to be respected, but as a treasure to be confiscated. Sophisticated diners will come to his restaurant equipped with score cards on which they will rate his success in displaying his trophies so as to massage, seduce, astound or ravish their eager palates.

How, pray tell, would you sum up the meaning (hidden or otherwise) of the above?

Could be too much for my powers of interpretation, Jaybee, and I could have it all wrong, but I believe here he is lamenting the fact that unfortunately in celebrity chefdom, or in one who aspires to celebrity chefdom, as in most other areas of modern human endeavor, peer pressure, ego, and avarice all rear their ugly heads.... a three-headed monster.

That rather than being able to simply enjoy the skill of expert preparation of these dishes from another country, someone like, say, Rick Bayless, usurps credit for traditional Mexican dishes (and therefore a huge part of Mexican history and culture because that is what cooking is) because due to monetary, ego, peer pressure et al concerns, he must stay at the top of the celeb-chef heap.

At least I THINK that's what that paragraph means....

Could be wrong.

Could be right.

Never know.

[Jaymes]

When do you want to go, Jaymes?

When I sell my novel and I'm rich and famous and can treat us both, of course.

[Bux]

I add that there are many people who are insecure about their ability to judge what is good or not, so they feel more comfortable leaving that to "experts" and following their leads.  As unfortunate as that tendency might be, it is a common failing, which "experts" are glad to cater to at great profit.

Jaybee, I fear it's worse than that. The rise of the very popular and successful--in trms of sales--Zagat surveys, indicate a willingness to leave it up to fellow novices to judge what is good and bad by consensus.

[cabrales]

It's incumbent upon each diner to decide what methods for choosing restaurants are appropriate for her. Without addressing anybody on the board of course, if one is unwilling to commit the time and research required to learn about different restaurants, one can hardly complain about the pervasiveness of guides that rank or about the difficulty of identifying restaurants suitable for one's subjective preferences. It's like many things one may choose to "purchase" or forego -- caveat emptor (buyer beware). Note that certain guides, particularly the Michelin Guide Rouge, can be one of the helpful pieces of information used for restaurant selection.

[jaybee]

Jaybee, I fear it's worse than that. The rise of the very popular and successful--in trms of sales--Zagat surveys, indicate a willingness to leave it up to fellow novices to judge what is good and bad by consensus.

Wasn' there a saying that "50 million Frenchmen can't be wrong?" There has rarely been an era where one couldn't lament the lack of discernment among the population at large, but the only place where it really matters to me is on the highway, where my life is at stake.

[Bux]

Agreed. On the road I go with the local consensus. In Japan and the UK, I will drive on the left, with nary a complaint about it not being the right side of the road.

[John Whiting]

A quick read through the last few posts tells me there's much more essential agreement here than disagreement. Nothing here I wouldn't sign my name to, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. After all, relative to the multinational food industry we're all pretty much on the same side. And even with theoretical or philosophical differences, we'd probably accept each others' restaurant recommendations above any others.

[Miss J]

But,  I can't be creative.  It is like language.  Even if I could spend a year in India studying cooking, I suspect I would still cook with an "accent."

When do you want to go, Jaymes?

I also haven't been able to participate in this thread as much as I'd like, but I absolutely concure with what Sandra & Jaymes are saying. I also feel that my Indian cooking (and my Chinese cooking, for that matter) are curtailed by my patchy understanding of the cultures that the cuisines spring from. I'm not placing a value judgement on that - if I'd spent a reasonable amount of time in India, I would have seized the opportunity to immerse myself in the culture, language AND cooking - but it's just one of those things. I found the music analogy quite apt. You can appreciate the end product, and yet not be sure if your appreciation really takes in the the experience its creator intended.

Interesting how this thread is starting to tap into the whole, "how do you like your steak and do you have the right to judge something according to the way you like it instead of how the chef presents it" discussion going on elsewhere on the site. Takes me right back to English Literature 100, this does.

And I'm totally up for this egullet road trip to India, btw.

[John Whiting]

John -- When you have a chance, could you consider describing in what sense(s) you utilized the words "generously communal"

Within this context, I was referring to nothing beyond the atmosphere of the restaurant/bistro/dining establishment itself. No "feed the starving millions" here -- I was talking about the sort of dining experience that gives me the greatest pleasure. In another thread I described one of the most memorable meals I ever had, at the Restaurant Le Mas in Longuyon -- a menu degustation with musical accompaniment provided by a wind ensemble from the conservatory at Nancy. It consisted of ensemble pieces by Poulenc, Mozart and Beethoven, beautifully played and beautifully listened to -- that is, all the diners stopped talking during the music and paid attention. Very much *not* the historical treatment of Tafelmusic, which was designed, like any Musak, to make an agreeable noise and fill the silences.

This is one aspect of what I mean by "generously communal" -- a gathering of appreciative people who make a restaurateur feel that his diners are paying attention. In my experience it does happen once in a while. (On this occasion the chef, Monsieur Tisserant, got a round of applause at the end along with the musicians.)