4 ms·

'Labor intensive cuisine'? No more labor intensive than any other cuisine. Most of the time it's: stir things to brown them a bit, add the liquid part, and let

'Labor intensive cuisine'? No more labor intensive than any other cuisine. Most of the time it's: stir things to brown them a bit, add the liquid part, and let it simmer unattendend for a while. EDIT: Milk, butter, bread, and rice, meanwhile—all of which are hallmarks of Western cuisine I'm wondering if the author has ever even been to an Indian restaurant.

scott_s 12y ago
Regarding your edit, I think you are misinterpreting the author. The point of the article is that Indian food tends to pair flavors which are not alike, unlike Western food, which tends to pair flavors which are alike. However, in Indian food with milk, butter, bread and rice, they tend to be pairing flavors that are alike - similar to what Western food does in general, and the author pointed out that those are staples in Western food.
- michael_h 12y ago
  The way it is worded, it sounds like he trying to imply that 'milk, butter, bread, and rice' are not staples in Indian food. The main thesis is that Indian food is tasty because it uses flavors that do not overlap. Adding a caveat for milk, butter, bread, and rice of: "When any of those ingredients appeared in an Indian dish, there was a good chance there would be a lot of flavor overlap." kind of obliterates the main thesis. Am I misreading? SubEDIT: Awwww, looking at the source paper, they count 'ghee' as completely separate from 'butter'. Rice still seems pretty staple-y though. EDIT EDIT: Wait, Table S3 lists 'rice basmati' with a frequency of occurrence of 69, but Table S4 lists 'rice' with a frequency of occurrence of 256. This smells of improperly sanitized data.
  - scott_s 12y ago
    I can understand how one would interpret it that way - implying that milk, butter and bread are not staples in Indian food - but I don't think that's the case. The wording is confusing, but I think we get the most consistent meaning interpreted my way. Whether or not that interpretation actually represents reality, however, is a different matter.
  - vram22 12y ago
    >EDIT EDIT: Wait, Table S3 lists 'rice basmati' with a frequency of occurrence of 69, but Table S4 lists 'rice' with a frequency of occurrence of 256. This smells of improperly sanitized data. I haven't read the article yet, but replying to your comment, it may not imply improperly sanitized data (if by sanitized you mean something like normalized, in this context); because basmati rice is different from "general" rice - it is a more expensive kind, typically used in biryanis and pulaos, and not so commonly eaten, except that nowadays it is starting to get more common. And BTW, it smells good - basmati I mean, and that's why it is called that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basmati#History_and_etymology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basmati#History_and_etymology
bradford 12y ago
Indian restaurants probably follow a somewhat industrialized method which cuts down on labor. Following a recipe from a cookbook is really quite laborious: grinding spices and mixing them in the correct proportions took me a long time to complete. It's certainly a lot harder than what you suggest.
- hga 12y ago
  These books purport to relate exactly what the restaurants do: http://www.amazon.com/The-Curry-Secret-Indian-Restaurant/dp/0716021919/ http://www.amazon.com/The-Curry-Secret-Indian-Restaurant/dp/... http://www.amazon.com/New-Curry-Secret-Mouthwatering-Restaurant/dp/1554075610/ http://www.amazon.com/New-Curry-Secret-Mouthwatering-Restaur...
piyush_soni 12y ago
Indian cuisines are quite labor (and time) intensive as compared to the other cuisines I've seen, and that's why hard to prepare. For example, going by this link (http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/malai-kofta/ http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/malai-kofta/ ) , the curry based dish 'Malai Kofta' (very popular in India) is said to take 1 hr 30 minutes in total. Even if it's 1 hour, it's too much time just for a part of food (It's eaten with a 'naan' or flat bread, which needs to be prepared separately). Certainly more time consuming than stacking raw meat slices and veggies inside a bread and topping it with mayonnaise.
- _delirium 12y ago
  That doesn't sound particularly out of line for western cuisine, at least if you look at traditional food, rather than hamburgers. A typical "classic" French dish takes about 4-8 hours in total to prepare all the sauces and meats and such. Even just properly browning onions takes 30-45 minutes, and that's a pre-cooking phase in many French dishes. I've been learning Greek cuisine lately and it's similar, e.g. melitzanosalata (a common side dish / spread) takes 60-90 minutes or so, and has to be done before preparing the main meal unless you have multiple ovens.
- freehunter 12y ago
  What sandwiches are you eating that call for raw meat slices? Cold yes, but raw... I haven't had any.
magic_beans 12y ago
LOL. You've obviously never made tadka daal before. It's not stir-fry, my friend.
- huhtenberg 12y ago
  You weren't kidding I see - http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/restaurant-style-dal-tadka/ http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/restaurant-style-dal-tadka/
- michael_h 12y ago
  Sure, one example. Every type of cuisine has labor intensive recipes - the exception, not the rule.

scott_s 12y ago

Regarding your edit, I think you are misinterpreting the author. The point of the article is that Indian food tends to pair flavors which are not alike, unlike Western food, which tends to pair flavors which are alike. However, in Indian food with milk, butter, bread and rice, they tend to be pairing flavors that are alike - similar to what Western food does in general, and the author pointed out that those are staples in Western food.

michael_h 12y ago
The way it is worded, it sounds like he trying to imply that 'milk, butter, bread, and rice' are not staples in Indian food. The main thesis is that Indian food is tasty because it uses flavors that do not overlap. Adding a caveat for milk, butter, bread, and rice of: "When any of those ingredients appeared in an Indian dish, there was a good chance there would be a lot of flavor overlap." kind of obliterates the main thesis. Am I misreading? SubEDIT: Awwww, looking at the source paper, they count 'ghee' as completely separate from 'butter'. Rice still seems pretty staple-y though. EDIT EDIT: Wait, Table S3 lists 'rice basmati' with a frequency of occurrence of 69, but Table S4 lists 'rice' with a frequency of occurrence of 256. This smells of improperly sanitized data.
- scott_s 12y ago
  I can understand how one would interpret it that way - implying that milk, butter and bread are not staples in Indian food - but I don't think that's the case. The wording is confusing, but I think we get the most consistent meaning interpreted my way. Whether or not that interpretation actually represents reality, however, is a different matter.
- vram22 12y ago
  >EDIT EDIT: Wait, Table S3 lists 'rice basmati' with a frequency of occurrence of 69, but Table S4 lists 'rice' with a frequency of occurrence of 256. This smells of improperly sanitized data. I haven't read the article yet, but replying to your comment, it may not imply improperly sanitized data (if by sanitized you mean something like normalized, in this context); because basmati rice is different from "general" rice - it is a more expensive kind, typically used in biryanis and pulaos, and not so commonly eaten, except that nowadays it is starting to get more common. And BTW, it smells good - basmati I mean, and that's why it is called that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basmati#History_and_etymology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basmati#History_and_etymology

bradford 12y ago

Indian restaurants probably follow a somewhat industrialized method which cuts down on labor. Following a recipe from a cookbook is really quite laborious: grinding spices and mixing them in the correct proportions took me a long time to complete. It's certainly a lot harder than what you suggest.

hga 12y ago
These books purport to relate exactly what the restaurants do: http://www.amazon.com/The-Curry-Secret-Indian-Restaurant/dp/0716021919/ http://www.amazon.com/The-Curry-Secret-Indian-Restaurant/dp/... http://www.amazon.com/New-Curry-Secret-Mouthwatering-Restaurant/dp/1554075610/ http://www.amazon.com/New-Curry-Secret-Mouthwatering-Restaur...

piyush_soni 12y ago

Indian cuisines are quite labor (and time) intensive as compared to the other cuisines I've seen, and that's why hard to prepare. For example, going by this link (http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/malai-kofta/ http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/malai-kofta/ ) , the curry based dish 'Malai Kofta' (very popular in India) is said to take 1 hr 30 minutes in total. Even if it's 1 hour, it's too much time just for a part of food (It's eaten with a 'naan' or flat bread, which needs to be prepared separately). Certainly more time consuming than stacking raw meat slices and veggies inside a bread and topping it with mayonnaise.

_delirium 12y ago
That doesn't sound particularly out of line for western cuisine, at least if you look at traditional food, rather than hamburgers. A typical "classic" French dish takes about 4-8 hours in total to prepare all the sauces and meats and such. Even just properly browning onions takes 30-45 minutes, and that's a pre-cooking phase in many French dishes. I've been learning Greek cuisine lately and it's similar, e.g. melitzanosalata (a common side dish / spread) takes 60-90 minutes or so, and has to be done before preparing the main meal unless you have multiple ovens.
freehunter 12y ago
What sandwiches are you eating that call for raw meat slices? Cold yes, but raw... I haven't had any.

magic_beans 12y ago

LOL. You've obviously never made tadka daal before. It's not stir-fry, my friend.

huhtenberg 12y ago
You weren't kidding I see - http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/restaurant-style-dal-tadka/ http://www.vegrecipesofindia.com/restaurant-style-dal-tadka/
michael_h 12y ago
Sure, one example. Every type of cuisine has labor intensive recipes - the exception, not the rule.