Ok for 8 year old to have chicken vindaloo?

FTM said:
just order something else and tell them its vindaloo

kids should eat what their parents eat though..its a good way of broadening their horizons instead of flippin micro chips and turkey twizzlers

friends kids are more than happy to tuck into thai green curry when we are all eating together
Click to expand...

what happens if their parents eat microchips and turkey twizzlers though ???
 
Mr Oblong said:
Is authentic always better?
Click to expand...

It depends on the individual.

I had a work colleague. Blonde bimbo. She went to Italy and said the pizza there was crap and dominoes was better.

Basically if all you eat is crap your whole life you end up liking crap and when you taste authentic some people don't realise it's not meant to be the exact same as the crap you had before.

I've also been to Italy and their pizza was 100 times better than the crap you get in dominoes.

So there is no correct answer to your question. But what I would say is if you want Indian food then you have to eat authentic.

Otherwise it's not really Indian food you are eating. It's commercialised crap for Britain.

So in that respect yes authentic is better because it's really Indian. Anyone who eats tikka masala or korma, etc isn't eating Indian food.
 
Psycho Sonny said:
It depends on the individual.

I had a work colleague. Blonde bimbo. She went to Italy and said the pizza there was crap and dominoes was better.

Basically if all you eat is crap your whole life you end up liking crap and when you taste authentic some people don't realise it's not meant to be the exact same as the crap you had before.

I've also been to Italy and their pizza was 100 times better than the crap you get in dominoes.

So there is no correct answer to your question. But what I would say is if you want Indian food then you have to eat authentic.

Otherwise it's not really Indian food you are eating. It's commercialised crap for Britain.

So in that respect yes authentic is better because it's really Indian. Anyone who eats tikka masala or korma, etc isn't eating Indian food.
Click to expand...

Did they have the garlic and herb dip though? Because that really makes it.
 
Theophany said:
Did they have the garlic and herb dip though? Because that really makes it.
Click to expand...

Pizza express or local independent with wood fired oven for me like paesano otherwise all the big franchise takeaways are very inconsistent however if I had to pick one Papa John's but your local one could be terrible. Pizza hut I've had okay meals and then next time terrible. Dominoes for me is the worst. I can't quite put my finger on it but unless I'm drunk it tastes awful.

Taste is extremely subjective but usually depends a lot on your upbringing and what you have been exposed to.

I have had an ooni now for several years and a G3 Ferrari. So I never really buy from takeaways.
 
I like Dominoes, I also like traditional Italian pizza. Despite being both called pizza they taste completely different. I could see how someone might like one but not the other.
 
MikeTheNative said:
I like Dominoes, I also like traditional Italian pizza. Despite being both called pizza they taste completely different. I could see how someone might like one but not the other.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said in my above post there is no right answer when talking about authentic Indian being better.

Obviously it depends a lot on your own views and tastes.

However if you have never tastes authentic Indian then you are missing out on so much.

Again you could try an authentic Indian dish and hate it. There is a lot I don't like or have grown to like over time. So you cannot just taste one and say they are crap there are literally hundreds possibly thousands to choose from.

I don't like kerela known as bitter gourd. I don't like lady fingers either.

Top dishes for me

Keema mutter (mince and peas)
Aloo Shimla mirch (potato and pepper)
Saag (spinach)
Handi (chicken on the bone)
Daal (yellow lentils preferably but I like makhni too which is brown if it's a top chef who can do it right)

There's so many more too like goat dishes which we use lamb here instead. Mixed vegetables, cauliflower, methi, parathas, a lot of the stuff you cannot buy here unless you go to an Asian supermarket as well. There's a white long hard carrot type vegetable but much larger called mooli which can be used in parathas and salads which is hard to get for example.
 
Psycho Sonny said:
It depends on the individual.

I had a work colleague. Blonde bimbo. She went to Italy and said the pizza there was crap and dominoes was better.

Basically if all you eat is crap your whole life you end up liking crap and when you taste authentic some people don't realise it's not meant to be the exact same as the crap you had before.

I've also been to Italy and their pizza was 100 times better than the crap you get in dominoes.

So there is no correct answer to your question. But what I would say is if you want Indian food then you have to eat authentic.

Otherwise it's not really Indian food you are eating. It's commercialised crap for Britain.

So in that respect yes authentic is better because it's really Indian. Anyone who eats tikka masala or korma, etc isn't eating Indian food.
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying, but I'm a bit more generous and would say the 'inauthentic' dishes are a new thing all on their own, and are inventions worth having.

I love a hand-stretched Neapolitan pizza with perfect cornicione charring, but I also like a Domino's sometimes :D
 
Mr Oblong said:
I get what you're saying, but I'm a bit more generous and would say the 'inauthentic' dishes are a new thing all on their own, and are inventions worth having.

I love a hand-stretched Neapolitan pizza with perfect cornicione charring, but I also like a Domino's sometimes :D
Click to expand...

But they aren't Indian they should be called indo British cuisine.

That way you could have Indian restaurants which only do authentic. And identify as authentic traditional Indian Vs Indo British.

Naans aren't even Indian either for example. Neither is chicken tikka. They are Indo Persian cuisine.

The traditional North Indian Punjabi breads are

Makki di roti (yellow chapati) normally only ever consumed with saag
Roti (chapati)
Paratha (various types)
Poori
Bhattura normally consumed with chickpeas only or chickpeas and potatoes.

Nobody makes naans or chicken tikka at home in India. Not in a normal home anyway.
 
Psycho Sonny said:
But they aren't Indian they should be called indo British cuisine.

That way you could have Indian restaurants which only do authentic. And identify as authentic traditional Indian Vs Indo British.

Naans aren't even Indian either for example. Neither is chicken tikka. They are Indo Persian cuisine.

The traditional North Indian Punjabi breads are

Makki di roti (yellow chapati) normally only ever consumed with saag
Roti (chapati)
Paratha (various types)
Poori
Bhattura normally consumed with chickpeas only or chickpeas and potatoes.

Nobody makes naans or chicken tikka at home in India. Not in a normal home anyway.
Click to expand...
It's only a style of cuisine though, not a paternity test. In Britain you'd expect cuisines to be somewhat reflective of the tastes of their market.

You won't find Sicilian headcheese in a UK 'Italian' either, I think it's just restaurants offering what people will buy.
 
MikeTheNative said:
I like Dominoes, I also like traditional Italian pizza. Despite being both called pizza they taste completely different. I could see how someone might like one but not the other.
Click to expand...

Psycho Sonny said:
Which is why I said in my above post there is no right answer when talking about authentic Indian being better.
Click to expand...

Isn't India like a really big country? And what we consider 'curry' can be as far removed as Afghanistan (or even Persia as you point out with the origin of naan) to bhurma, nepal to sri lanka.

It's like saying only Naples style pizza is the only real pizza - there are many very similar dishes all over the Mediterranean from spain to turkey and you can't start knocking a new york or chicago style pizza just because it's not a Neapolitan.

Lots of food styles can be done badly or very well - even a traditional english sunday roast (you know in the middle ages the french court sent chefs to England to learn techniques for roasting joints).

I think curry in England must bear some relation to our history of roasting meat - concentrate on the gravy!
 
Mr Oblong said:
It's only a style of cuisine though, not a paternity test. In Britain you'd expect cuisines to be somewhat reflective of the tastes of their market.

You won't find Sicilian headcheese in a UK 'Italian' either, I think it's just restaurants offering what people will buy.
Click to expand...

No it's sold in restaurants because it's easier to prepare in large quantities and easier to heat up for orders.

My family owns an Indian restaurant and has done so for 17 years I even ran the place for 5 years whilst at university.

It's done this way for speed. A proper curry from scratch takes a long time. A restaurant curry takes 3-5 minutes.
 
Dave M said:
Isn't India like a really big country? And what we consider 'curry' can be as far removed as Afghanistan (or even Persia as you point out with the origin of naan) to bhurma, nepal to sri lanka.

It's like saying only Naples style pizza is the only real pizza - there are many very similar dishes all over the Mediterranean from spain to turkey and you can't start knocking a new york or chicago style pizza just because it's not a Neapolitan.

Lots of food styles can be done badly or very well - even a traditional english sunday roast (you know in the middle ages the french court sent chefs to England to learn techniques for roasting joints).

I think curry in England must bear some relation to our history of roasting meat - concentrate on the gravy!
Click to expand...

I think Indian curries are unique to the spices used and found in India as well as the ingredients.

The real ones.

In fact traditionally curries aren't even consumed in large amounts in India instead sabji's are. Curries are cooked less frequently or on special occasions.

Like the list I made above. There's only one curry there iirc

Like I said before most won't even know what real Indian food is.

I've travelled all over India and yes it is big and the cuisine is different but the majority of Indian restaurants are based on Punjabi cooking from the north.

You do get south Indian places that do stuff like dosas. They have completely different breads to what Punjabis use too. They are watery and very thin.

Also the rest don't really eat chapattis like Hindus the majority eat mainly rice.

But your comparing very small differences in like people in Scotland eat haggis, black pudding, etc. But British cuisine as a whole can be defined.

Steak pies
Sausages and mash
Fish and chips
Gammon steak and chips
Beef stew
The list goes on as you know

There will then also be more localised dishes ate more in certain areas or unique to them.

Like South Indians eat a lot of seafood.
 
^^complains people are making generalisations about Indian cuisine by making generalisations about British :D:D:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom