Brits: Curry is your birthright!

G

Guest

Guest
I love articles (and books) like this. I had no idea. Brits, did you? Hungry now, Perdita

How Curry, Stirred in India, Became a World Conqueror - WILLIAM GRIMES, NY Times, Feb. 1, 2006

A couple of years ago, as a spoof, a London newspaper designed the cover for an ultranationalist magazine. It showed a lout in a leather jacket and Union Jack T-shirt sitting down to an Indian meal, surrounded by the slogans "Keep Curry British!" and "Bhuna! Nan! Pilau! Curry is your birthright!"

The lout may be right, as Lizzie Collingham tells it in "Curry: A Tale of Cooks and Conquerors," her fascinating if digressive inquiry into curry and how it grew. Curry, which originated in India, has become one of the most internationalized foods on the planet, right up there with pizza. Karee raisu (curry rice) is one of Japan's most popular foods. Samoans make a Polynesian curry using canned fish and corned beef. In New York, several restaurants on the stretch of Lexington Avenue known jokingly as Curry Hill do a brisk business selling kosher curries. The British, having mastered the art of curry and chips, have moved along to culinary innovations like chicken Kiev filled with curry sauce.

Lots of diners would balk at curried chicken Kiev, but not Ms. Collingham. She is a good postmodernist who scoffs at the idea of authenticity when it comes to food. One of her goals, in tracing the evolution of curry and the global spread of Indian cuisine, is to pull the rug out from under the idea that India, or any other nation, ever had a cuisine that was not constantly in the process of assimilation and revision. The very dishes, flavors and food practices that we think of as timelessly, quintessentially Indian turn out to be, as often as not, foreign imports or newfangled inventions. That includes chili peppers and tea.

What could be more Indian than chilies? Yet before the Portuguese arrived at the beginning of the 15th century, Indians had never seen or tasted a chili, a New World spice that Columbus called "pepper of the Indies." The heat in Indian dishes came from a red pepper known as long pepper or from the black pepper familiar in the West.

In addition to chilies, the Portuguese brought carne de vinho e alhos, or pork cooked slowly in wine vinegar and garlic. Local cooks in Goa, Portugal's trading headquarters, reinterpreted the dish. They fashioned an ersatz vinegar from tamarind, and threw in lots of spices, especially chilis. Thus vindaloo, a corruption of vinho e alhos, was born, and with it a new traditional Indian food.

Ms. Collingham, the author of "Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj," ranges far and wide. Her subject is much larger, in fact, than curry. She traces the evolution of Indian cuisine, its often bizarre cultural exchanges with the invading British and its eventual export to the world outside. She roams geographically from the northwest frontier to the shores of Sri Lanka, and historically from the culinary innovations of the Mughals in the 15th century to the triumph of chicken tikka masala, which Robin Cook, the British foreign minister, hailed as the new British national dish in 2001. Along the way, she sometimes loses the narrative thread, but the byways and even the dead ends tend to be intriguing.

Curry is not, strictly speaking, Indian at all. It is a British invention. From the Portuguese, the early British traders learned to apply the word "caril," or "carree," incorrectly, to sauces made from butter, crushed nuts, spices and fruits that were then poured over rice. (In various South Indian languages, "karil" or "kari" referred to spices for seasoning or to dishes of sautéed vegetables or meat.) Eventually, the word evolved into a catchall. "Curry became not just a term that the British used to describe an unfamiliar set of Indian stews and ragouts," Ms. Collingham writes, "but a dish in its own right, created for the British in India."

With the Raj, "Curry" really hits its stride. Ms. Collingham skillfully weaves her way through the complex cultural transactions that yielded a specialized Anglo-Indian cuisine based, in large part, on mutual misunderstanding. The English were used to starting a meal with soup. The Indians do not divide meals into courses, and have no soup. Liquids are poured over rice. Nevertheless, eager to please, Indian cooks in Madras used the most souplike dish ready to hand, a peppery tamarind broth called molo tunny, and jazzed it up with rice, vegetable and meat. This cultural mishmash became an Anglo-Indian classic, mulligatawny soup. Many others followed.

The British rarely stayed put in India, and as they moved from city to city they carried their hybrid foods with them. Authentic or not, the Anglo-Indian repertory was "the first truly pan-Indian cuisine, in that it absorbed techniques and ingredients from every Indian region and was eaten throughout the entire length and breadth of the subcontinent," Ms. Collingham writes. In their clueless search for palatable food, the British managed to invent curry powder, Worcestershire sauce and ketchup (made from mushrooms until tomatoes became popular in the 19th century). Most impressively, they also turned India, where scarcely a cup of tea was drunk before 1900, into a nation of avid tea drinkers.

As Indians and their curries made their way from the West Indies to South Africa to the Pacific Islands, the culinary give-and-take continued. Ms. Collingham turns up all sorts of cultural odds and ends, like the "Mexican-Hindu" cuisine that appeared in California in the early 20th century when Punjabi laborers integrated jalapeño peppers and tortillas into their native dishes. She also explains how Indian carry-out and curry and chips became working-class British, and why almost all Indian restaurants in Britain and the United States are Bangladeshi. Are they authentic? Don't ask.
 
silverwhisper said:
perdidta, thank you for posting that!

hungrily,

ed
You're welcome, Sil. Crap, you're on the wrong coast, otherwise we could go for a curry down my block.

Perdita :)
 
Very interesting P'dita......and ketchup was originally made from mushrooms??? What the??
 
'Authentic' Curry

I have eaten two curries in Sri Lanka.

Neither were authentic in any way and both were bland mush. That is the closest in distance that I have been to an Indian curry.

In my home town there are two Indian restaurants and five Indian takeaway establishments. The two restaurants are markedly different although both offer the standard range of English versions of curry.

What is significant is the signature dishes of the chefs in the various establishments. If you ask for what they think they do best - then provided you are willing to experiment - the range of flavours is amazing even from the basic takeaway establishment. The recommendation varies with which chef is on duty and even if you don't experiment the variation in the taste of the standard dishes is still obvious.

I can eat a different 'Indian' meal seven days a week and find little in common between them.

Then we have the Thai, Chinese, French, Seafood, and Pasta restaurants, and last but not least at least eight pubs offering meals. It isn't a bad choice for a small town.

Og
 
oggbashan said:
Neither were authentic in any way and both were bland mush. That is the closest in distance that I have been to an Indian curry.
But, dear sir, given what's reported in the above article, what do you deem 'authentic' curry?

Perdita
 
Very cool, p.

Thanks.

I live in the middle of Little India here in T.O. I've rarely taken the opportunity to eat there. I believe I'll make more of an effort in the future.
 
ABSTRUSE said:
Very interesting P'dita......and ketchup was originally made from mushrooms??? What the??

You can thank us for tomatoes. They were considered poinsonous for years.
 
perdita said:
But, dear sir, given what's reported in the above article, what do you deem 'authentic' curry?

Perdita

A curry prepared at home that is eaten in India by an Indian family.

I suspect that it would be unlikely to contain any meat and certainly not beef. It would not be made with prepared sauce from a jar or packet, but probably from the raw spices, and whatever form the curry takes the ingredients are likely to be marianated for some hours.

If the article is correct and curry was unknown in India before the 15th century, even then 500 years is sufficient to establish it as a national dish. If not, what is traditional about US thanksgiving meals or UK turkey at Christmas? Or traditional Mexican food?

The Indians took what they were given and transformed it into something recognisable anywhere. Some of the 'curries' may be awful and unpalatable but a curry is distinctive.

I thought that one of the most common dishes in India served to the British was boiled chicken, boiled long enough to make the scrawniest bird edible.

Og
 
cloudy said:
You can thank us for tomatoes. They were considered poinsonous for years.
Ok, thanks. But who gets the credit for maize? :D :p
 
perdita: shame, that...ah, well...

i feel i should point out that sri lankans have a distinct culture and hence distinct cuisine from india, despite their proximity. after all, one doesn't find tamil tigers operating in india, as a rule.

cloudy: my understanding is that maize is originally central american in origin. ?

ed
 
perdita said:
I love articles (and books) like this. I had no idea. Brits, did you? Hungry now, Perdita

I did know that most curries were invented by the English, but the list of other things that came from Indo-English cooking surprised me. I always thought Mulligatawny soup was Scottish.

This thread made me think of this song:

Where on earth are you from?
We from Engerland.
Where you come from,
Do they put the kettle on?


The song 'Vindaloo' by Fat Les. The England kevball association released an 'official' song for the 1998 Football World Cup, but everyone ignored it and just listened to (and sung!) that one instead. Perfectly English in every single way and I'd recommend anyone (very legally of course) downloading it.

Mad as a box of frogs of course, but I wouldn't be claiming it as English if it wasn't.

The Earl
 
silverwhisper said:
cloudy: my understanding is that maize is originally central american in origin. ?
Shame, si. There's controversy about the origins of course. Here's some info: one / two

Perdita
 
Curry.

In my world it has always been a spice that you make dishes with. Not a dish in itself. "Let's go for a curry" sounds in my ears like "How about a cup of oregano?"
 
ABSTRUSE said:
For that we are greatful, but wasn't chocolate used by the early folks more of a spicy than sweet concoction?
Yes, it was the gringos that added sugar. For that I am particularly grateful :) . P.
 
perdita said:
Yes, it was the gringos that added sugar. For that I am particularly grateful :) . P.
Ditto.....though I shamefully admit, I have desired but not had Mexican hot chocolate. Bad gringo.
 
ABSTRUSE said:
Ditto.....though I shamefully admit, I have desired but not had Mexican hot chocolate. Bad gringo.
I was weaned on it, it's my comfort food. Get some. And use half whole and half evaporated milk to make it. As it heats up use a whisk to stir, as if making whipped cream. Cinnamon is the distinctive flavor in Mexican chocolate btw. Outside of home or a Mexican restaurant, when I've had it elsewhere it's always too diluted. P.
 
ABSTRUSE said:
That's great. Too many people, esp. in the states, don't know chocolate beyond Hershey bars. I had a marvellously tasting chocolate in Vienna that combined ginger and black pepper with the stuff. Explosive tiny orgasms all over my tongue... :)
 
perdita said:
What on earth, or in Engerland, is kevball?

Kevball is a derogatory term for football. A kev is the same as a chav or a gary - someone without class, manners, style and with a huge attitude problem to put it mildly. 99% of football hooligans fall into this category. So kevball would be the ball followed by kevs.

You're lucky I didn't call is 'kissball' (a rugby term, designed to highlight the fact that footballers fall over if someone comes anywhere near them and need someone to kiss their horrific injuries better before they can carry on playing).

The Earl
 
Back
Top