Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the joke of the article that gene Weingarten is a total fusspot about food?

This! That is the whole point--that he had thought of himself as being sophisticated but is actually immature, misinformed, and whiny. It's satire.

Satire punctures someone else's pretensions. If you think Weingarten is actually aware of what an ass he is -- seriously, not as a joking defense mechanism -- you are not familiar with his work.

"I'm going to say something racist, but it's a joke so you can't get mad or I'll accuse you of being thin-skinned and humorless" is not the impenetrable defense he thinks it is.

Satire can also be used against oneself, which is what Weingarten routinely does, and what he did in the article in question.

However, the world in which we live is becoming a world of people are quick to take offense to anything and everything. It's a world in which witty humor and satire is rapidly becoming less understood.

Anonymous wrote:
I've been reading his stuff for 30+ years, and he is absolutely aware of what an ass he is!

He's not, though. He does this tired old "golly aren't men awful" and "gee I'm such an uncool schlub," but he uses his own experience and feelings as the determinant of what is right.

His father worked for the IRS, and tax fraud is the worst imaginable crime. Gene has driven while impaired, and sure that's bad, but not as bad as tax fraud. (Intent does not outweigh effect, dude.)

Gene is a journalist, and thus journalists are the bravest, most ethical people in all the land. (I mean, ideally, yes, journalists are brave and heroic. But plenty of them are shits, too.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I spent enough time eating in India as well as in Dubai, which probably has the best Indian dining scene outside India and in many ways, possibly even better than India itself, and there's truth to that so much of Indian cooking is essentially overcooked brown mush tasting of the same handful of spices (hi cumin!). Can it be more complex than that? Sure, but there's also a kernel of truth to it. The prevalence of certain spices seems to be so dominant and it's not to everyone's taste.

On the whole, I liked South Indian better than North Indian despite being spicier as there seemed to be more variety in flavors involved.

Nor is it racist to say one doesn't like Indian food. How many of you would argue it's racist to say you don't like Russian or Polish food? Neither are award winning cuisines and both, especially Russian, can have very unpleasant but common flavors. Pickled herring isn't for everyone.

You might have a global experience of Indian food, but it hasn't stopped you from being completely ignorant of the diversity of Indian food. I'm really curious about where you've dined in India and Dubai, since I'm shocked that you walked away with this impression. As an Indian American who grew up eating Indian food, I'm can't think of a single dish of "brown mush". Okay, well, maybe certain varieties of daal. So, there's actually no "kernel of truth" to this statement, unless of course you've only ever sampled a very narrow variety of foods from a small region of India. Please name to me one South Indian dish that is overcooked brown mush. Or one Goan dish. Do you know how many Indians' cuisine you've blithely argued doesn't even count?

Your statement is no more accurate or informed than my saying that Italian food mostly consists of a red tomato sauce with pasta. The only scenario in which this has a "kernel of truth" is one in which my entire understanding of Italian food is limited to the offerings of Chef Boyardee.

Anyway, surprised Padma Lakshmi's response didn't make it to this thread, so I'll share it now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/08/25/padma-gene-weingarten-indian-food/

Take a long look at Indian restaurant menus, both in India and the US. Look at the colors of curries and other dishes. Many are variant shades of brown and beige. Even you admitted it to some degree.

A lot of Indian cooking does involve very long cooking times, with meat cooked to the point of falling off the bone in thick sauces, whether wet or dry fry. A lot of it is mushy (hi daal!).

I stand by what I said. I can occasionally enjoy Indian and I've eaten widely among the various regions of India but so much of it really is overcooked, overspiced brown mush in one form or another. Personally, I liked the Indian influenced curries of Malaysia and Thailand better as they're more developed and flavorful and the various ingredients, especially vegetables, are crisper rather than mushy. But that's all right. Not every cuisine is for everyone. Just like Russian or Polish isn't for everyone (heavy, stodgy, some weird flavors, beet!).

The real question is whether a thread on how terrible Russian food is would be called out as racist? Or the dull stodginess of much of Northern European food? I doubt it. But a thread on Indian cooking, with strongly dominant flavors and spices that not everyone likes, is racist. Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the joke of the article that gene Weingarten is a total fusspot about food?

This! That is the whole point--that he had thought of himself as being sophisticated but is actually immature, misinformed, and whiny. It's satire.

Satire punctures someone else's pretensions. If you think Weingarten is actually aware of what an ass he is -- seriously, not as a joking defense mechanism -- you are not familiar with his work.

"I'm going to say something racist, but it's a joke so you can't get mad or I'll accuse you of being thin-skinned and humorless" is not the impenetrable defense he thinks it is.

I've been reading his stuff for 30+ years, and he is absolutely aware of what an ass he is!

Anonymous wrote:I'll bet the people hating on Weingarten on this thread were also the loudest participants in the "why do Americans eat like crap" thread, hating on all American food. Seriously, lighten up. It's better for your health and for getting along here.

Take your own advice loser

Really enjoyed the pp’s above linked article from Padma Laxmi.

The part about the word curry being linked to the use of racial slurs against Indians for centuries really resonates.

Thanks for sharing it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the joke of the article that gene Weingarten is a total fusspot about food?

This! That is the whole point--that he had thought of himself as being sophisticated but is actually immature, misinformed, and whiny. It's satire.

Satire punctures someone else's pretensions. If you think Weingarten is actually aware of what an ass he is -- seriously, not as a joking defense mechanism -- you are not familiar with his work.

"I'm going to say something racist, but it's a joke so you can't get mad or I'll accuse you of being thin-skinned and humorless" is not the impenetrable defense he thinks it is.

He's past his prime.

I'll bet the people hating on Weingarten on this thread were also the loudest participants in the "why do Americans eat like crap" thread, hating on all American food. Seriously, lighten up. It's better for your health and for getting along here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He makes no apologies I find it interesting that he lumped an entire nation's cuisine alongside 'sweet pickles' but if the Indian posters aren't offended, who am I to be?

There are always some Indians that are somewhat self-loathing and keep a colonized mindset. Keep the peace and all, it’s okay, yes man types. There’s a whole Reddit for ‘am Indian, can confirm’ types.

People who are not Indian can see the ridiculousness and how offensive the commentary is. Especially in this day and age, it’s obviously wrong.

This is true of any minority group from gays to Jews to Blacks. A whole district banned CRT on the basis of one black man’s comments.

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the joke of the article that gene Weingarten is a total fusspot about food?

This! That is the whole point--that he had thought of himself as being sophisticated but is actually immature, misinformed, and whiny. It's satire.

Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I spent enough time eating in India as well as in Dubai, which probably has the best Indian dining scene outside India and in many ways, possibly even better than India itself, and there's truth to that so much of Indian cooking is essentially overcooked brown mush tasting of the same handful of spices (hi cumin!). Can it be more complex than that? Sure, but there's also a kernel of truth to it. The prevalence of certain spices seems to be so dominant and it's not to everyone's taste.

On the whole, I liked South Indian better than North Indian despite being spicier as there seemed to be more variety in flavors involved.

Nor is it racist to say one doesn't like Indian food. How many of you would argue it's racist to say you don't like Russian or Polish food? Neither are award winning cuisines and both, especially Russian, can have very unpleasant but common flavors. Pickled herring isn't for everyone.

You might have a global experience of Indian food, but it hasn't stopped you from being completely ignorant of the diversity of Indian food. I'm really curious about where you've dined in India and Dubai, since I'm shocked that you walked away with this impression. As an Indian American who grew up eating Indian food, I'm can't think of a single dish of "brown mush". Okay, well, maybe certain varieties of daal. So, there's actually no "kernel of truth" to this statement, unless of course you've only ever sampled a very narrow variety of foods from a small region of India. Please name to me one South Indian dish that is overcooked brown mush. Or one Goan dish. Do you know how many Indians' cuisine you've blithely argued doesn't even count?

Your statement is no more accurate or informed than my saying that Italian food mostly consists of a red tomato sauce with pasta. The only scenario in which this has a "kernel of truth" is one in which my entire understanding of Italian food is limited to the offerings of Chef Boyardee.

Anyway, surprised Padma Lakshmi's response didn't make it to this thread, so I'll share it now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/08/25/padma-gene-weingarten-indian-food/

I tried reading his column for awhile but found each one to be entirely pompous and smug. I do not understand how people enjoy his writing. To each his own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Indian and I am not offended by Weingarten’s article. The man is entitled to his taste preferences as we all are. Heck, even Indians from one part of the country will knock the cuisine of other states or complain that the food has meat, doesn’t have meat, too much spice, not enough spice…. and so on. Padma Lakshmi does not speak for me.

No one suggests he has to like Indian food. It is his breathtakingly ignorant claim that Indian food is entirely based on a single spice. The food of more than 1 billion people, from a sub-continent, and the very variety of spices that "Western" explorers and conquerors spent centuries seeking.

Well, the Indian food that most Americans have eaten is actually pretty one-dimensional. Case in point - Rasika . Order 5 different curries in Rasika and all the sauces taste the same. In fact, I would say that very few Indians (from India) have been exposed to regional home cooked meals. Unless you are an Indian who lived in a major metropolitan city and had a back-ground where you were in close contact with people from other regions (central govt, defense forces etc) you pretty much ate food cooked in your house or either a Tandoori restaurant (North Indian) or a Dosa place (South Indian).

But, as an Indian-American, I don't care if someone does not like Indian food. I do not like traditional thanksgiving food. It is just that I don't criticize it in front of anyone. Not because it is offensive and bad manners, but, mainly because taste in food is subjective and personal. I truly believe that you should dress for others (ie, ask others about if your dress sense is offensive or graceful) and eat for yourself (ie eat what tastes good to you). As long as Weingarten is dressed well, I don't care what he eats.

Why must white people call Indian dishes curries? I will never understand - are you referring to the various sauces the dishes are cooked in?

That is really more British. We don’t say “I went for a curry” in nearly the same way. Brits say it all the time.

True. I did a junior year in England and I was invited to have a “curry” and it just means going out for indian food. I was confused about why I could only choose curry from the menu, but it’s just a catch all.

Yes, I understand the Brits do that, but in America, people say "curry" to talk about ALL of the various sauces Punjabi food is cooked in. And guys? You've only ever eaten Americanized Punjabi food. There's a lot more to Indian food than that. Some of it isn't even cooked in sauces OMG!

And if you are going to have someone review a particular kind of cuisine, maybe it should be someone who doesn't hate it from the get-go?