or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › which is a better city: Chicago or New York?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

which is a better city: Chicago or New York? - Page 10

post #136 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter View Post
most indian families have at least somebody who will get up at dawn to start making dinner, so you are looking at basic food that might take 15-18 hours to cook a meal.
This is certainly not true anymore, and may never have been true. Even when families have a cook, the preparation of the meal takes far less time than you describe. Most regional cuisine in India is substantially simpler than the Muglai food which constitutes the bulk of Indian food in the states, and even Muglai food... sure some things are super labor intensive, but I don't think the proportion is substantially more than Western food.
post #137 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter View Post
like he said^ sure, descent, but not that good.


if people are going to eat crap, why go to the problem of really cooking food well? that's the issue. most indian families have at least somebody who will get up at dawn to start making dinner, so you are looking at basic food that might take 15-18 hours to cook a meal. who wants to do taht kind of labor for 7.95 a dish, when the market will pay the same for crappy food?

Exactly. A good quality home cooked meal, when it takes a long time to prepare the food, will be better because when it is ready, it is consumed. Lots of restaurants have to prepare that kind of thing in advance and reheat before serving. As a result, it just isn't as good.

I have a substantial number of Indian friends, and they were all always complaining about US Indian food. So I asked about it, and they invited me over one time for a traditional meal that they prepared themselves. Night and day.
post #138 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaxixi View Post
This is certainly not true anymore, and may never have been true. Even when families have a cook, the preparation of the meal takes far less time than you describe. Most regional cuisine in India is substantially simpler than the Muglai food which constitutes the bulk of Indian food in the states, and even Muglai food... sure some things are super labor intensive, but I don't think the proportion is substantially more than Western food.

ok, I admit that most of my friends are north indians, but they all, down to basic service engineers, have somebody in the house who is up at dawn cooking, either a family member or a servant.

I'm not sure that I am wrong here - the biggest problem I have with american indian food is that the protiens aren't slow cooked in sauce - they poach meat without sauce (usually boneless) and then toss it into the sauce as its ordered. simmering goat or chicken with bones (or even paneer) for 8 hours in a sauce is going to produce an intirely different taste. ditto roasting and grinding your own spices, and patting our and baking your own breads. all of which pretty much every indian household does.
post #139 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter View Post
ok, I admit that most of my friends are north indians, but they all, down to basic service engineers, have somebody in the house who is up at dawn cooking, either a family member or a servant.

Hmm. I wonder why our experiences are so different. I guess there's a mix of both going on, and I am happy to hear that traditional Muglai preparation is carried forth in some homes even today.
post #140 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter View Post
ok, I admit that most of my friends are north indians, but they all, down to basic service engineers, have somebody in the house who is up at dawn cooking, either a family member or a servant.
Not at dawn, but lets say 10am? I have aunts that probably spend majority of their time in the kitchen while they are in the house. They work 8-9 hrs per day, and spend another 6-8 hrs in the kitchen. Some dishes need to prepared well in advance. For example, if one wants some good homemade dosa, the batter has to be prepared at least a day or two in advance.
post #141 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaxixi View Post
Hmm. I wonder why our experiences are so different. I guess there's a mix of both going on, and I am happy to hear that traditional Muglai preparation is carried forth in some homes even today.

hey, people couldn't been shitting me, too, I don't know. I was always amazed at how much my friends were "into" food - and really took pride on what they brought to work or served at home.
post #142 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milhouse View Post
Exactly. A good quality home cooked meal, when it takes a long time to prepare the food, will be better because when it is ready, it is consumed. Lots of restaurants have to prepare that kind of thing in advance and reheat before serving. As a result, it just isn't as good.

I have a substantial number of Indian friends, and they were all always complaining about US Indian food. So I asked about it, and they invited me over one time for a traditional meal that they prepared themselves. Night and day.

I am pretty sure restaurants in India do the same thing: Prepare food in advance, and then heat it up as necessary. But the food is f'in delicious regardless. I don't know for sure what it is, but one of the points to consider is the cooks here in the US just aren't that good either.
post #143 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by feynmix View Post
I am pretty sure restaurants in India do the same thing: Prepare food in advance, and then heat it up as necessary. But the food is f'in delicious regardless. I don't know for sure what it is, but one of the points to consider is the cooks here in the US just aren't that good either.

I think that indian food lends itself to be heated up. I think that the big sin is when they just throw some poached white meat chicken into a bottled sauce - and I am sure than most american places do that, and few indian places to.


take a piece of meat from an indian food dish - cut it in half. the sauce should permeate all the way through, not just on the surface. and it should have a bone.
post #144 of 198
I thought New York city was a lot better and more culturally diverse, but it depends on what kind of person you are.
post #145 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalier View Post
It's funny how you think owning an apartment qualifies you as a local?? Your neighborhood is full of people with a little $$ from other cities, and is the most gentrified/fake place in Chicago. You're that dense?

Do you really like hanging out like a creep at the hotel bars that much? Or just love all the tourists and great chain restaurants in your neighborhood??

Ok, let's get this straight. First of all, I never act like a local. What did I comment on RE: Chicago?

The food. You said the food is crap which I disagree with. I think my knowledge of food carries with it a little more credibility than yours does. I never spoke about anything else to do with Chicago.

Secondly, the place I live in and its surroundings have been there for a long time, and so have many of the people who live there. Maybe I only have a little bit of money but most of the people in my building have paid anywhere from few to many millions of dollars to live there. Most of the buildings around me are old and have been premiere residences for a long, long time. I don't get what is touristy or undesireable about living 10 steps away from Symphony Hall, the Fine Arts building, one of the best art museums in the world, and many other appealling things. Also, most of the low end eating around my place are mom and pop joints (even all the way out passed Jackson). As you do know if you've seen me write about food, I never go to chain restaurants or participate in any of the activities that you mention. You're clearly and angry person with student loans and a shitty studio apartment. You see what I did there? I made a assumptions.
post #146 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcaimen View Post
Hhhmmm. Its one of those very rare times when I agree with a gdl203 post. Questioning Brians intelligence or calling gdl203 a "whiny bitch" are both completely unnecessary.

Hopefully sfield will reflect on this during his timeout and no longer feel the need to say such things.

The system works, people!!!!!

I never said anything to Brian, and never insulted a Mod. I called Cavalier a moron, not anyone else.
post #147 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post
Name me places in the US with GREAT indian food (I'm genuinely curious, I'm ok with Brick Lane level anyway).

Al Noor in LA (Lawndale to be precise) OUT OF THIS WORLD!

Tikka massala, palak panner, and chicken tala gosht.
post #148 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by SField View Post
I never said anything to Brian, and never insulted a Mod. I called Cavalier a moron, not anyone else.

I think you have misunderstood the intent and spirit of my post. Although I share RJMans opinion of you, my comments here have nothing whatever to do with you. You were merely a convenient tool, a found object.
post #149 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcaimen View Post
Hhhmmm. Its one of those very rare times when I agree with a gdl203 post. Questioning Brians intelligence or calling gdl203 a "whiny bitch" are both completely unnecessary.

Hopefully sfield will reflect on this during his timeout and no longer feel the need to say such things.

The system works, people!!!!!

Do you not get it? I never questioned Brian's intelligence. I don't think I've even spoken with him recently on this forum. Where do you get this from?

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcaimen View Post
I think you have misunderstood the intent and spirit of my post. Although I share RJMans opinion of you, my comments here have nothing whatever to do with you. You were merely a convenient tool, a found object.

You're right, you certainly do have a lot in common with RJ.
post #150 of 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by SField View Post
Do you not get it? I never questioned Brian's intelligence. I don't think I've even spoken with him recently on this forum. Where do you get this from?



You're right, you certainly do have a lot in common with RJ.


Sigh....

It is you who does not get it but thats okay. As far as RJ, we really have little in common. Our politics are quite different. He is a francophile and I dont think that would be a good description of me. (hint: this is understatement) I dont mind cats but I prefer dogs. He has an advanced proffesional degree. I dont even have an AA degree. He prefers the dishonest gay egomaniac Gore Vidal and the solipsistic tantrums he throws, I would choose the more honest gaze of the gay egomaniac Truman Capote. But I do enjoy his snark (my current fav - Vox Santorum) and of course we will always have you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › which is a better city: Chicago or New York?