7 ms·

I spent quite a few years growing up in Japan back several decades ago, and my experience is that Japan is about efficiency. Most common foods were served in a

I spent quite a few years growing up in Japan back several decades ago, and my experience is that Japan is about efficiency. Most common foods were served in a bowl, not in smaller, highly decorate plates, and more of them. Food was always served prepared, meaning one did not need a knife or fork. One had to learn to use chopsticks, and for rice as well. There were establishments that look close to the pictures if one searches the usual search engines, but I observed most food was eaten in the home, or packed in lunch boxes.

gkanai 9y ago
> Most common foods were served in a bowl, not in smaller, highly decorate plates Kaiseki ryori is not 'common food' (a good kaiseki meal in a major city is easily 30-50,000 JPY or more) so what the article is writing about and what the average Japanese meal is are two very different things.
- nihonde 9y ago
  定食 is usually served in five or six small dishes, and that’s definitely everyday food in Japan. The tableware is not often special, though. This article is backward to me. I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. NYC is stuck on a weird old-fashioned idea that French cuisine is the pinnacle of dining out. I’ll take any 4+ Tabelog rated kaiseki restaurant in Kyoto over Le Bernardin or any other Michelin-rated celebrity chef vanity room every single time.
  - malnourish 9y ago
    It's almost certainly personal taste, but I found kaiseki to be rather unappetizing when I visited. The presentation was absolutely wonderful, most of the food didn't align with my palette. It turns out some simple, wholesome curry really does the trick.
    - vram22 9y ago
      >It turns out some simple, wholesome curry really does the trick. Japanese or Indian curry? :) I was reading about Japanese cuisine recently, and saw that they have some dishes they call curry. But IIRC it was somewhat different from Indian "curries" [1], which are again very different from what passes for "curry" in the West (generally, though I'm sure there are places that do not use that term generically like that). [1] There is no such thing as an Indian "curry", though many Westerners seem to think so (being misinformed by whoever, from West or East). It is an umbrella term that means a variety of dishes that are usually somewhat wet or with gravy, that is the only common point. Other than that, a curry can contain anything, be hot or not, veg or non-veg, etc. Update: Checked the Wikipedia entry for curry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry That article says something a bit different from what I said above, i.e. that "Curry was adopted and anglicised from the Tamil word kari meaning "sauce", which is usually understood to mean vegetables and/or meat cooked with spices with or without a gravy." So the article emphasizes the spices, rather than the gravy, as I did. Could be. But the biggest thing to understand about India is that a lot of words / terms (not just in the area of food) are used quite loosely and with sometimes widely different meanings.
      - eadmund 9y ago
        And then you get into differing meanings of 'gravy.' When I was on the Subcontinent, it meant what we in America would call a sauce; we use 'gravy' to mean a particular kind of sauce made from meat drippings. Very weird at first for a Westerner to see vegetarian food described as having a gravy!
        vram22 9y ago
        Ha ha, good one. And it emphasizes the point in my last paragraph, about the meaning of words. Yes, though curries are basically dishes in some sort of sauce, the word gravy is used here for that instead of sauce. It's probably only in a few high-end restaurants that they will call it a dish in a sauce (of some kind), on the menu, and when explaining it to customers. But another difference between Western sauces and gravy in India (the kind I said, used in curries), is that (as I understand it - not familiar with the details of Western cooking) the Western sauce is poured on the dish, or used from a saucer on the side, but in curries, the dish is cooked in the gravy - so the gravy is an integral part of the dish, not an add-on or pour-on.
  - blhack 9y ago
    >NYC is stuck on a weird old-fashioned idea that French cuisine is the pinnacle of dining out. How is this weird or old fashioned? French food is by far my favorite.
    - jamesjyu 9y ago
      I'd agree it's not weird, but it definitely is old fashioned. The French invented haute cuisine (which is French for 'high cuisine') in the 17th century. In the west (and many places in the east) French food is considered fancy. I believe that's changing now, with the proliferation of well known chefs that come from all over the world. But, it's hard to shake tradition.
    - ghaff 9y ago
      As someone who likes good French food a lot, I'd agree with the other comment that holding classic French cuisine as the ultimate dining experience feels a bit old fashioned. If someone handed me a wad of money in NYC and told me to go out and have a good meal, I might pick a more classically French restaurant but I'd probably be more likely to pick some more modern style of "farm to table" or whatever. When I have French eating out, it's more likely to be a bistro-style restaurant. (Of course, that's partly because I rarely have really high-end meals in restaurants.
      - nihonde 9y ago
        My original comment wasn’t very well written but spawned a lot of responses. I meant old fashioned in the Julia Child, two-sticks-of-butter-to-taste sense of French cuisine. Of course, real French food is as varied and worthy as any other food!
        ghaff 9y ago
        That's true--although I'd argue that there's still more of a set of specific rules, recipes, and techniques associated with most French cooking than with modern high-end cooking overall. In fact, I've heard it argued that one of the reasons that it's hard to replicate the best of French food outside of France is that such a specific supply chain exists for that particular cuisine. We're probably splitting hairs at this point though. Once you go beyond classic French and bistro food (which do tend to have a fairly specific repertoire), the lines between where French ends and modern European or American begins gets pretty blurry.
  - krapp 9y ago
    >I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. It seems odd to deem the entire culinary culture of an international metropolis as being worth less than the mediocre fare of a country that puts corn and mayonnaise on pizza. I'm not saying the best food in Japan isn't the best food in the world, but Japan's average is in no way better than the best in NYC. That's just silly.
    - nitrogen 9y ago
      ...corn and mayonnaise on pizza. That sounds amazing, and very vaguely like Mexican food. There's no reason to believe that we in America have the final word on what pizza ought to be.
      - Udik 9y ago
        > There's no reason to believe that we in America have the final word on what pizza ought to be. You might have forgotten an /s there at the end. Regards from Italy.
      - nitrogen 9y ago
        I'm amazed that at least three people bothered to downvote this. Pizza prejudice.
    - RealityNow 9y ago
      As someone who's also lived in NYC and been to Japan extensively, Japan's fast food and mid-level cuisine is a hell of a lot tastier and healthier than America's. Wrote a bit about Japanese fast food in another comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15209105 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15209105 That's a pretty bold and inaccurate brush you painted on Japanese cuisine. Yes western cuisine in Japan isn't that great, but who's eating western food in Japan? Funny you mention mayonnaise also because white Americans are stereotyped with eating mayonnaise sandwiches.
      - krapp 9y ago
        I'd agree with you comparing junk food to junk food, but the claim being contested here is that Japan's average is better than the best available food in New York, which is just an insult. >Funny you mention mayonnaise also because white Americans are stereotyped with eating mayonnaise sandwiches. I'm not even going to pretend that I didn't grow up eating fried spam sandwiches with mayonnaise and government cheese, on white bread no less. But that's neither here nor there.
  - gumby 9y ago
    > This article is backward to me. I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. Not sure what you mean (as a former Tokyo, Paris and New York denizen myself). If you mean midrange and daily meals are better in Tokyo I'd tend to agree, though lukewarmly. Fast food? No way, a greasy katsu is as bad as a crummy slice of pizza, But for the high end experiences described in this article (typically €1200/$1500/¥20,000 per person -- though Manresa is cheaper!) I'd say country has little to do with it. Though I find those experiences excessively fussy. If I'm going to spend five hours on a meal I'd rather the food and environment fade into the background so I can enjoy the company.
    - RealityNow 9y ago
      I much prefer Japanese fast food as it's significantly more delicious and healthier. Go into any convenience store and you can get a tasty and healthy onigiri for $1, or a little bento box style meal for maybe $3-4. Of course there's also ramen/udon/soba/yakisoba, curry, okonomiyaki, etc, and all can be had for $3-10 (no tip). Also Tokyo is more of a true 24/7 city, whereas in NYC your options after 11pm are generally limited to cheap pizza, hot dogs, and halal (unless of course you hit up some Japanese restaurants on St. Marks or go to Korea Town). The thing NYC has going for it is variety. But overall, I still prefer Japanese food.
      - evgen 9y ago
        24/7? Name me a single place in Tokyo with a Michelin star that is open after one a.m please.

gkanai 9y ago

> Most common foods were served in a bowl, not in smaller, highly decorate plates Kaiseki ryori is not 'common food' (a good kaiseki meal in a major city is easily 30-50,000 JPY or more) so what the article is writing about and what the average Japanese meal is are two very different things.

nihonde 9y ago
定食 is usually served in five or six small dishes, and that’s definitely everyday food in Japan. The tableware is not often special, though. This article is backward to me. I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. NYC is stuck on a weird old-fashioned idea that French cuisine is the pinnacle of dining out. I’ll take any 4+ Tabelog rated kaiseki restaurant in Kyoto over Le Bernardin or any other Michelin-rated celebrity chef vanity room every single time.
- malnourish 9y ago
  It's almost certainly personal taste, but I found kaiseki to be rather unappetizing when I visited. The presentation was absolutely wonderful, most of the food didn't align with my palette. It turns out some simple, wholesome curry really does the trick.
  - vram22 9y ago
    >It turns out some simple, wholesome curry really does the trick. Japanese or Indian curry? :) I was reading about Japanese cuisine recently, and saw that they have some dishes they call curry. But IIRC it was somewhat different from Indian "curries" [1], which are again very different from what passes for "curry" in the West (generally, though I'm sure there are places that do not use that term generically like that). [1] There is no such thing as an Indian "curry", though many Westerners seem to think so (being misinformed by whoever, from West or East). It is an umbrella term that means a variety of dishes that are usually somewhat wet or with gravy, that is the only common point. Other than that, a curry can contain anything, be hot or not, veg or non-veg, etc. Update: Checked the Wikipedia entry for curry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry That article says something a bit different from what I said above, i.e. that "Curry was adopted and anglicised from the Tamil word kari meaning "sauce", which is usually understood to mean vegetables and/or meat cooked with spices with or without a gravy." So the article emphasizes the spices, rather than the gravy, as I did. Could be. But the biggest thing to understand about India is that a lot of words / terms (not just in the area of food) are used quite loosely and with sometimes widely different meanings.
    - eadmund 9y ago
      And then you get into differing meanings of 'gravy.' When I was on the Subcontinent, it meant what we in America would call a sauce; we use 'gravy' to mean a particular kind of sauce made from meat drippings. Very weird at first for a Westerner to see vegetarian food described as having a gravy!
      - vram22 9y ago
        Ha ha, good one. And it emphasizes the point in my last paragraph, about the meaning of words. Yes, though curries are basically dishes in some sort of sauce, the word gravy is used here for that instead of sauce. It's probably only in a few high-end restaurants that they will call it a dish in a sauce (of some kind), on the menu, and when explaining it to customers. But another difference between Western sauces and gravy in India (the kind I said, used in curries), is that (as I understand it - not familiar with the details of Western cooking) the Western sauce is poured on the dish, or used from a saucer on the side, but in curries, the dish is cooked in the gravy - so the gravy is an integral part of the dish, not an add-on or pour-on.
- blhack 9y ago
  >NYC is stuck on a weird old-fashioned idea that French cuisine is the pinnacle of dining out. How is this weird or old fashioned? French food is by far my favorite.
  - jamesjyu 9y ago
    I'd agree it's not weird, but it definitely is old fashioned. The French invented haute cuisine (which is French for 'high cuisine') in the 17th century. In the west (and many places in the east) French food is considered fancy. I believe that's changing now, with the proliferation of well known chefs that come from all over the world. But, it's hard to shake tradition.
  - ghaff 9y ago
    As someone who likes good French food a lot, I'd agree with the other comment that holding classic French cuisine as the ultimate dining experience feels a bit old fashioned. If someone handed me a wad of money in NYC and told me to go out and have a good meal, I might pick a more classically French restaurant but I'd probably be more likely to pick some more modern style of "farm to table" or whatever. When I have French eating out, it's more likely to be a bistro-style restaurant. (Of course, that's partly because I rarely have really high-end meals in restaurants.
    - nihonde 9y ago
      My original comment wasn’t very well written but spawned a lot of responses. I meant old fashioned in the Julia Child, two-sticks-of-butter-to-taste sense of French cuisine. Of course, real French food is as varied and worthy as any other food!
      - ghaff 9y ago
        That's true--although I'd argue that there's still more of a set of specific rules, recipes, and techniques associated with most French cooking than with modern high-end cooking overall. In fact, I've heard it argued that one of the reasons that it's hard to replicate the best of French food outside of France is that such a specific supply chain exists for that particular cuisine. We're probably splitting hairs at this point though. Once you go beyond classic French and bistro food (which do tend to have a fairly specific repertoire), the lines between where French ends and modern European or American begins gets pretty blurry.
- krapp 9y ago
  >I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. It seems odd to deem the entire culinary culture of an international metropolis as being worth less than the mediocre fare of a country that puts corn and mayonnaise on pizza. I'm not saying the best food in Japan isn't the best food in the world, but Japan's average is in no way better than the best in NYC. That's just silly.
  - nitrogen 9y ago
    ...corn and mayonnaise on pizza. That sounds amazing, and very vaguely like Mexican food. There's no reason to believe that we in America have the final word on what pizza ought to be.
    - Udik 9y ago
      > There's no reason to believe that we in America have the final word on what pizza ought to be. You might have forgotten an /s there at the end. Regards from Italy.
    - nitrogen 9y ago
      I'm amazed that at least three people bothered to downvote this. Pizza prejudice.
  - RealityNow 9y ago
    As someone who's also lived in NYC and been to Japan extensively, Japan's fast food and mid-level cuisine is a hell of a lot tastier and healthier than America's. Wrote a bit about Japanese fast food in another comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15209105 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15209105 That's a pretty bold and inaccurate brush you painted on Japanese cuisine. Yes western cuisine in Japan isn't that great, but who's eating western food in Japan? Funny you mention mayonnaise also because white Americans are stereotyped with eating mayonnaise sandwiches.
    - krapp 9y ago
      I'd agree with you comparing junk food to junk food, but the claim being contested here is that Japan's average is better than the best available food in New York, which is just an insult. >Funny you mention mayonnaise also because white Americans are stereotyped with eating mayonnaise sandwiches. I'm not even going to pretend that I didn't grow up eating fried spam sandwiches with mayonnaise and government cheese, on white bread no less. But that's neither here nor there.
- gumby 9y ago
  > This article is backward to me. I’ve lived in New York and Japan long enough to know that the best food in NYC is average in Japan. Not sure what you mean (as a former Tokyo, Paris and New York denizen myself). If you mean midrange and daily meals are better in Tokyo I'd tend to agree, though lukewarmly. Fast food? No way, a greasy katsu is as bad as a crummy slice of pizza, But for the high end experiences described in this article (typically €1200/$1500/¥20,000 per person -- though Manresa is cheaper!) I'd say country has little to do with it. Though I find those experiences excessively fussy. If I'm going to spend five hours on a meal I'd rather the food and environment fade into the background so I can enjoy the company.
  - RealityNow 9y ago
    I much prefer Japanese fast food as it's significantly more delicious and healthier. Go into any convenience store and you can get a tasty and healthy onigiri for $1, or a little bento box style meal for maybe $3-4. Of course there's also ramen/udon/soba/yakisoba, curry, okonomiyaki, etc, and all can be had for $3-10 (no tip). Also Tokyo is more of a true 24/7 city, whereas in NYC your options after 11pm are generally limited to cheap pizza, hot dogs, and halal (unless of course you hit up some Japanese restaurants on St. Marks or go to Korea Town). The thing NYC has going for it is variety. But overall, I still prefer Japanese food.
    - evgen 9y ago
      24/7? Name me a single place in Tokyo with a Michelin star that is open after one a.m please.