Bitchin' Blog Posts
HaBO: Memorable Pot Roast is Memorable
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | February 25, 2010 | Thursday at 11:50 am | 67 CommentsFrom Faye, you have to read this one to believe it:
Can you help a bitch out? I’m trying to track down a book with a contender
for possibly the best internal dialogue of any hero I’ve read:“Sure, he loved pot roast, but he was careening completely out of control
here.”Even my husband remembers this line.
I believe it was published with another short book (maybe by HQN? I think?).
I’m pretty sure the hero is dating his secretary, and the above brilliance
occurs when he goes to her house for dinner (pot roast, of course) and
realizes he’s in love.I think the other story in the book also featured a similar very wealthy
hero falls in love with working class gal plot, but I’m not sure of that
either.Really, all I remember is the pot roast. The rest of the story was
distinctly lackluster. I’m sure if anyone else has read this book, they’ll
remember the pot roast too.
The pot roast! Remember the pot roast! Please - this is cracking me up so I hope SOMEONE remembers it!
Filed: General Bitching, Help a Bitch Out
Tagged: pot roast, hero, help a bitch out, habo, bitch
Darlene Marshall said on 02.25.10 at 04:06 PM • [link]
I can’t say for certain that it’s this novel, but Jude Devereaux’s written about Taggert and Montgomery super-rich hunks falling for their homey (that’s homey, not “homely”) secretaries/nurses/whatever.
Good luck!
Julia Spencer-Fleming said on 02.25.10 at 05:05 PM • [link]
No clue as to the book, but I’d like to say my husband resolved to marry me after tasting my excellent pot roast. Or at least, that’s what we tell the kids.
Ros said on 02.25.10 at 05:54 PM • [link]
I haven’t read this, but I would like to invite any billionaires who may be reading to come and try my truly awesome pot roast. Just for research purposes, of course.
Tzippurah said on 02.25.10 at 06:30 PM • [link]
Gah, I read this too or a book very similar. The hero gets an erection smelling the pot roast the heroine is cooking, and is all “I’ve got to get a hold of myself… I mean I love pot roast, but not this much.”
Beki said on 02.25.10 at 06:47 PM • [link]
I’m dying to know. My spectacular pot-roasting skills wasted on a wonderful but non-billionaire man. Sigh. As is always the way.
Linnae said on 02.25.10 at 07:34 PM • [link]
I don’t know which book the quote is from but I now have an incredible craving for pot roast….going to have to break out my slow cooker.
Tamara Hogan said on 02.25.10 at 07:39 PM • [link]
So that’s what the kids are calling it these days?
Cara McKenna / Meg Maguire said on 02.25.10 at 08:42 PM • [link]
The Ravenous Billionaire Carnivore’s Working-Class Virgin Meat Goddess
Noelle said on 02.25.10 at 09:02 PM • [link]
Sounds like Gail Dayton to me. Her Convenient Millionaire. I have a copy and this one was published with another story. Sherry meets Mike and they move in together for some convenient reason or other and then later Sherry meets Mike’s mom and the mom tells her she’s heard all about her fabulous pot roast. Not sure it’s the same book, but it sparked a pot roast memory for me. :)
Diana said on 02.25.10 at 09:38 PM • [link]
I know the menfolk were all in love with Nell’s pot roast in the Three Sisters Island Trilogy by Nora Roberts, but I don’t remember that line.
AgTigress said on 02.25.10 at 10:10 PM • [link]
I’d remember this if I had read it, if only for the weird American usage of the verb careen. I just cannot get used to that American definition, however many times I see it.
:-)
Faye Gallant said on 02.25.10 at 10:23 PM • [link]
Tzippurah, yes! That’s the scene! Her Convenient Millionaire isn’t ringing a bell- I don’t think they ever moved in together, but I might have forgotten that part (my mind stricken blank of anything but pot roast, my god how he loved her pot roast!) And it’s definitely not one of the Three Sisters- those are some of my favorites!
To add to the greatness of this book, it did inspire me (a former vegetarian, no experience cooking meat at the time) to make a pot roast for the man I was lusting after. Lo and behold, we’re now happily married, and every time I make pot roast, he quotes that li
Faye Gallant said on 02.25.10 at 10:29 PM • [link]
Cara, you’re brilliant. I wish this were the title! It does completely capture the spirit of the thing, and I’m sure it would make it easier to find.
Becca said on 02.25.10 at 11:33 PM • [link]
so could somebody post a good recipe for potroast?
Cara McKenna / Meg Maguire said on 02.25.10 at 11:39 PM • [link]
Well done, Bitchery.
@Becca, good idea! Faye should post her man-winning pot roast recipe so that all may exploit its proven Power of Lurrrve™.
ghn said on 02.25.10 at 11:53 PM • [link]
My brother is a meat cook to die for. He never uses any kind of written-down recipes, but I am certain that if he _were_ to write down any of his specialties, I am certain he would start every one of them with these words: First, you shoot a moose.
Fiamma said on 02.26.10 at 12:00 AM • [link]
“Sure, he loved pot roast, but he was careening completely out of control
here.”
I cannot stop laughing, tears streaming down my face. God I hope someone knows the name of this so I can read it.
foolserrant said on 02.26.10 at 02:19 AM • [link]
LOL is he from Vermont? When we lived up there the Moose Lottery was big digs and I could definitely see one of the guys we knew saying this.
Mooseburgers are actually quite good, at that.
Security word: why87. Why 87 flavors? Because he was too manly for the 57 Heinz flavors.
ghn said on 02.26.10 at 02:41 AM • [link]
@foolserrant
No, actually, we are Norwegian. :-) And when we “invite” the King of the Forest to dinner we know we are in for a treat!!
Patty H. said on 02.26.10 at 03:22 AM • [link]
Don’t know about pot roast but engagement chicken is a sure bet. I made it for my family and my 11 year old son walked in the kitchen asking what was in the oven because it smelled great. He and my husband raved about this chicken. It is simple and good and apparently has lurve magic.
http://www.glamour.com/magazine/2006/07/engagement-chicken
Sycorax said on 02.26.10 at 04:04 AM • [link]
Up until just now (when I googled it) I’d never been completely sure what pot roast was, other than some meat based dish in American books.
JamiSings said on 02.26.10 at 08:26 AM • [link]
True story -
My oldest brother’s girlfriend never really learned to cook. Her mom had cancer most of her childhood and eventually died of it. So all she really knows is things like Hamburger Helper, but has spent most of her life eating out. She feels at her age (46) she’s “too old” to change and learn how to cook and gets really angry when my brother suggests she should try. Anyway, he did convince her to try making a pot roast. He even got one with one of those timers that pop up when it’s ready and told her how to prepare it.
He didn’t, however, tell her to put it in the oven. When he came home from work he found she had put the pan ON TOP of the stove burners. Thinking because it was called a “pot roast” it was suppose to be boiled in a pan on the stove.
They eat out a lot.
Liz said on 02.26.10 at 09:07 AM • [link]
This sounds like something that happened to my aunt. Back in the 70’s, my aunt wanted to show her then-boyfriend’s parents that she could be domestic, so she planned to make a roast chicken for them. Having never made a chicken before, she asked my mom how to do it. My mom told her that she would have to clean the chicken before she cooked it, so my aunt decided that you cleaned a chicken the same way you clean the kitchen counter: with AJAX. Thankfully, my mom got there before she could actually use it on the bird.
Security word:death69 If anyone ever cleans a chicken with AJAX they would die 69 deaths.
Silver said on 02.26.10 at 10:52 AM • [link]
Just wanted to say I love the true story comments (the last two before mine). Hilarious!
*efforts36: If I put in more “efforts”, perhaps I could cook 36 pot roasts. LOL
Ros said on 02.26.10 at 11:29 AM • [link]
Coincidentally, the Pioneer Woman has her pot roast recipe on her blog today, if anyone wants to know how to capture a man’s heart with meat: http://thepioneerwoman.com/cooking/2010/02/perfect-pot-roast/
raj said on 02.26.10 at 04:49 PM • [link]
JamiSings, my mother cooks her pot roast on the stovetop, so that’s how I learned to do it. Others cook pot roast in slow cookers. At the very least you need to sear it on the stove before putting it in the oven (or slow cooker), so the meat doesn’t dry out during cooking.
Jane Lovering said on 02.26.10 at 05:14 PM • [link]
That’s how I cook stew, more or less. So, is pot roast what we Brits call stew? No mystery about stew, you just shove it in the oven and take it out when you remember to. Or when you smell burning, whichever comes first. Sigh. You can tell I’m a writer by the way I neglect my family’s stomachs…
FD said on 02.26.10 at 05:40 PM • [link]
@ Jane Lovering - the only difference between pot roast and stew, as far as I can see, (from eating & making both) is that you cut the meat into chunks first when making stew. And you might use a little more liquid.
I’d love to read this one too, if only for the funny. Would make a nice change from the hero smelling the heroine! Possibly I’ve been reading too many paranormal romances lately.
JamiSings said on 02.26.10 at 08:26 PM • [link]
?
–noun
a dish of meat, usually brisket of beef or chuck roast, stewed in one piece in a covered pot and served in its own gravy.
Use pot roast in a Sentence
See images of pot roast
Search pot roast on the Web
————————————————————————————————————————
Origin:
1880–85, Americanism
@Raj - I never heard of anyone cooking a pot roast on top of the stove. It’s always been cooked in the oven by everyone I know. Usually covered with foil and a sometimes also a lid.
Julie said on 02.26.10 at 08:55 PM • [link]
Go to the Pioneer Woman dot com and look for her pot roast recipe. She made it on GMA this week, but it’s in her cookbook, too. I’ve made it and it’s fabulous. Only add pepper. Otherwise, her recipe is spot-on.
AgTigress said on 02.26.10 at 11:17 PM • [link]
It’s more what we Brits call casserole, I reckon. (Stew when cooked on the top of the stove, casserole when done in the oven). :D I don’t see any significant technical difference between stewing or casseroling a single large piece of meat as opposed to cut-up chunks, except, of course, that the latter cooks faster.
One of the most delicious recipes of this type is the Greek dish called kleftikon, a ‘pot roast’ of shoulder of lamb.
AgTigress said on 02.26.10 at 11:31 PM • [link]
Here’s a good kleftikon recipe (it’s also called kleftiko, but our local Cypriot restaurant uses the final ‘n’, so that’s what I am used to):
http://uktv.co.uk/food/recipe/aid/601804
It’s good.
joykenn said on 02.27.10 at 12:02 AM • [link]
Ah, It is in food that we see our major differences and yet it is still the same! Is it flan or custard or galactobouriko or ... Is it beef stew or boeuf bourguignon? The magic of pot roast is that it is a classic dish that you do all the prep work for and then shove in the oven to cook slowly while you did something else. It has a nostalgia factor going since its an old homemade dish and everyone has their own special “secret” to making it. Do you or do you not add tomato sauce or paste or ketchup to the gravy, do you or do you not add wine to the gravy, how much garlic, cook it on a bed of vegetables like carrots and potatoes, add a bell pepper, or add this or that. Most women learn to look it by watching their mothers or mothers-in-law.
Also the reason it isn’t stew is that it is a big chunk of tough but favorful meat you throw in the pot but don’t cut up. If you cook it right it will be fork-tender with delicious gravy. Less prep that cutting meat into chunks, flouring them, browning them. There is just something about the mystery of taking a big hunk of meat out of the pot and being able to pull it apart it is so tender. For most American men pot roast = home cooking and Mama. Kind of an odd thing to get an erection over, in my opinion. Any idea yet what the book was?
JamiSings said on 02.27.10 at 12:51 AM • [link]
@Ag -
Casserole here involves noodles, bits of meat (like chicken), veggies like either brocoli or peas, and bread crumbs baked together in the oven.
Pot roast you take a big old hunk of beef, which you then season. Then you put it in a big pan with some water or beef broth, potatos, and carrots. (No bell peppers in my home, mom & I are HIGHLY allergic!) You cover it with foil so it can keep basting itself. Stick it in the oven and cook until it’s good and tender.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/pot-roast-recipe/index.html
http://www.idea-queen.com/roast-recipes.html
Ros said on 02.27.10 at 01:30 AM • [link]
Casserole was one of those American/English differences that I was really taken aback by. I think that what Americans call a casseroles, I would call a bake. I don’t make much of a distinction between stew and casserole, except that casserole sounds posher and might have red wine in it.
AgTigress said on 02.27.10 at 02:02 AM • [link]
Yes: that’s a totally American sort of dish, and I don’t think we have a standard name for it at all. Noodles—good grief! ‘Bake’ might cover it, as Ros says, but certainly not ‘casserole’. (Of course, the word casserole is originally just the name of the vessel you cook the food in, like tagine —which can be made either on the hob or in the oven, incidentally).
To me, the size of the piece of meat is immaterial—single large piece or cut up into chunks makes no difference: if it is cooked with veggies and liquid, producing its own gravy, in a closed container, it’s a stew if you make it on the hob, and a casserole in the oven. The addition of red wine is fine in both cases! ;-)
American English and British English diverge more widely in food terminology than in almost any other everyday area of speech.
MichelleR said on 02.27.10 at 02:32 AM • [link]
I cook pot roast on the stove. I mean, I’ve cooked roast in the oven too but then I don’t consider it pot roast.
JamiSings said on 02.27.10 at 02:34 AM • [link]
Not all casseroles have noodles, mind you. My mom makes a brocoli one with rice, cream of mushroom soup, brocoli, and cheese.
You know what threw me? Reading those Agatha Raisin books they were talking about something called “lasenge” and how it was served with chips. I finally asked my English boss whom informed me it was lasenga and yes, it’s served with chips there (here that would be seen as too many carbs since there’s noodles in lasenga). Real kicker for me is when a character put ketchup on it. Why put ketchup on something that already has tomato sauce in it?
AgTigress said on 02.27.10 at 02:53 AM • [link]
Do you mean lasagna? I don’t want to get into too much of a class-based discussion here, but I assure you that in many circles in the UK, the very idea of lasagna and chips (french fries) would cause utter horror. Really.
The AE and BE usage of the terms ‘noodles’ and ‘pasta’ is also rather different from ours.
AgTigress said on 02.27.10 at 03:00 AM • [link]
Incidentally, lasagna doesn’t necessarily contain tomato purée, though it often does. The layering between the pasta sheets can be of cheese and spinach, for instance, or of minced beef without tomato. Adding ketchup is— well, that’s another thing that would raise a plenty of eyebrows here.
Kate Pearce said on 02.27.10 at 03:51 AM • [link]
I still get confused with the usage of noodles for pasta over here in the U.S. Noodles to me mean Asian cuisine, Lasagna is um lasagna and sheets of it are lasagna sheets.
And let’s not even go down the cookies are biscuits, which are scones, which should have Double Cream and strawberry jam on them rather than jelly, which is what we call jello discussion. :)
JamiSings said on 02.27.10 at 05:23 AM • [link]
@Ag - Yeah, I’m a rotten speller. However in the Agatha Raisin books it was spelled lasagne - with an E on the end. (And for the record, the character of Agatha was shocked at the girl who put ketchup on it. When I expressed to my boss that that was one of the things that confused me she replied, “Oh we put ketchup on EVERYTHING.”)
Okay - Jelly = fruit juice that has been stiffened with LOADS of sugars. Jam = Fruit preserves.
What I call noodles you’d probably call sheets. We also call the various pastas noodles. Spaghetti noodles, linguine noodles, etc.
So, llasagna in our house - one layer of cooked noodles, then a layer of a mix of browned ground beef or ground turkey, tomato sauce, and cottage cheese. Another layer of noodles, more beef/sauce/cheese, more noodles, then cheese. Put in oven and bake.
All that cheese and meat, totally not kosher. LOL
There’s also vegetarian ones that use a white sauce, but mom never makes those.
I saw one guy on a cooking show use thinly sliced eggplant rather then noodles. I keep begging mom to try it like that because I LOOOOOOOOOVE eggplant.
Okay, ANYWAY - has anyone remembered the Pot Roast Book yet?
AgTigress said on 02.27.10 at 02:09 PM • [link]
:-) No, I’d call them ‘pasta’. ;-) Lasagna and lasagne are both acceptable spellings—singular and plural, in origin. The word is another that comes from the name of a cooking vessel, like ‘casserole’.
We really use the word ‘noodle’ only for the flour-strips typical of Chinese, Thai and Japanese cuisine: those used in Bavarian and some Hungarian dishes (Nudeln in German, which is where we get the word from) are less well-known in the UK, but we’d call them noodles too. Spaghetti, linguine, tagliatelle, macaroni, ravioli, lasagne, penne, vermicelli—the whole vast range of Italian pasta made from hard wheat flour—are all invariably called ‘pasta’ in BE. The idea of pasta in any shape other than a long ribbon or tube as a ‘noodle’ is particularly alien!
I thought it was Americans who put ketchup ‘on everything’. Most Brits do not. I do not even keep a bottle of tomato ketchup in the house—never have done. I do, however, keep a bottle of ‘brown sauce’, an occasional vulgar indulgence. Brown sauce is a slightly spicy, fruity sauce traditional in the UK and distantly based on Indian chutneys. Indian cuisine has had an influence here since the 18th century (the first Indian restaurant opened in London in 1807).
I don’t know how anyone can love aubergine (eggplant)! It seems to me such a boring vegetable, like vegetable marrow (which is an enormous, full-grown courgette, that is, what you call zucchini). Aubergine is a standard ingredient of moussaka, though, and it sounds as though that is what the bloke on the cooking show was making—layers of aubergine, seasoned mince (ground meat) and white sauce. Again, there are many variations, but moussaka is not one of my favourite Greek dishes, mainly because of all that aubergine.
JamiSings said on 02.27.10 at 07:01 PM • [link]
Well, I DO abhor zucchini, but eggplant has this wonderful strong taste that I’m crazy for.
The packaging isn’t labeled that way, but as far as I and everyone else I know is concerned, anything that’s a pasta is a noodle. Cause noodles and pastas are made the same. There’s also rice noodles, of course, but still, pasta is noodles.
I’ve been trying to figure out, BTW, what the heck a “curry” is. Because I know curry is a spice, but I can’t picture it as a dish all on it’s own.
Gail Dayton said on 02.27.10 at 08:45 PM • [link]
I love the way this HABO strayed into a discussion of food.
I do know that the pot roast story is NOT Her Convenient Millionaire. The hero in that book was a working-class guy made good, and the heroine was a rich girl who’d lost access to her money. She couldn’t cook worth beans. (Couldn’t cook beans OR pot roast.) Y’all will have to keep looking. ;)
I, on the other hand, make several varieties of really yummy pot roast. My youngest son’s favorite is one with an herb gravy. Very Good. Usually, though, when people say “pot roast” they mean the plain variety. And I cook it on top of the stove as often as I do in the oven. You just have to turn the heat way down. Cooks up really nice. :)
JamiSings said on 02.28.10 at 12:26 AM • [link]
@Gail - I have to wonder, knowing that some of the fine folks here are authors, how many are now planning novels involving an American and a Brit and the American cooking such “novelties” like pot roast, mashed potatos, fried chicken, creamed corn, brocoli casserole - or having a tiff over if it’s just “pasta” or “pasta noodles.”
Ros said on 02.28.10 at 12:59 AM • [link]
I’d like to recommend Separated By a Common Language as an excellent resource for the discussion of differences between American and English. She has 51 posts on the subject of food/cooking…
And Jamisings, curry is a generic name for a whole range of Indian (and other S. E. Asian) dishes. The basic curry is some form of meat in a spicy sauce, though vegetarian curries can also be delicious. Different blends of spices and levels of heat are used to make different kinds of curry - some of which are authentically Indian, and some of which were developed specifically for the UK market. Pretty much all of them are delicious.
AgTigress said on 02.28.10 at 01:33 AM • [link]
Not in BE! In British English, a ‘noodle’ has to be a long, thin, worm-like or ribbon-like object. ‘Pasta’ is simply a word for dough or paste, and can therefore refer to pasta of all shapes.
As Ros has pointed out, AE/BE differences are extensive; not only do we use different names for the same things (like several examples already given), but the same words sometimes have different meanings.
JamiSings; you have never had a curry? One of the world’s great cuisines? You don’t know what you’re missing! I know that food from the Indian subcontinent is not always easy to come by in the USA, but I’m sure there are plenty of places where you could get a Thai or Malaysian curry, and they are good too, though rather different. Curries are infinitely variable, but chilli, turmeric, fenugreek, ginger, coriander and cumin are amongst the most commonly used curry spices (you may have different names for some of them in the USA, of course). The curries of southern India are normally vegetarian, and can be extremely hot: northern Indian cuisine makes a lot of use of chicken and lamb, both of which work wonderfully in curries.
:-)
Polly said on 02.28.10 at 02:54 AM • [link]
About curry: It’s pretty much a term other people use to describe South Asian cuisine rather than one South Asians use. In India, there’s no such thing as “curry,” and people who grow up cooking Indian food, either north or south Indian, don’t think of the dishes they cook as “curries.” Curry is pretty much a catch-all term for the style of spicing used in Indian food, but it’s not a term that’s used within the culture.
Also, the Indian food you get in restaurants and the Indian food you have at home are pretty much different beasts entirely—no one can eat the heavy, creamy food that’s served as Northern Indian food in restaurants on a daily basis and live to age 40.
JamiSings said on 02.28.10 at 04:44 AM • [link]
I’ve had food in curry sauce. I’m rather fond of a mix of tofu and chicken in red curry, triple spicy. I just couldn’t understand it when Jean would ask Lionel if he “Fancied a curry” or when Rimmer would get onto Lister for liking curries.
Suze said on 02.28.10 at 05:22 AM • [link]
Pot roast in my (Western Canadian) house:
Big hunk of stewing meat (round, chuck), pref. beef
1 envelope of Lipton’s garlic-onion soup mix
2 cans sliced mushrooms
pepper
oil
- Pat the roast dry and season it with pepper (no salt, there’ll be plenty in the soup mix),
- In a dutch oven, on the stove top, sear the roast on all sides in oil.
- After searing is done, remove any excess oil from the dutch oven if you want to.
- Return meat to dutch oven.
- Sprinkle soup mix over the meat.
- Dump the two cans of mushrooms over top of that.
- Bring to a simmer.
- Simmer, covered, for 2 - 4 hours, until meat starts falling apart.
For the love of all that is holy, do NOT adulterate the meaty goodness with vegetables. Cook those separately and serve them as a side.
Also, we call Italian noodles “pasta”, and Asian noodles “noodles”. There are probably other varieties of noodle that don’t really impinge on my consciousness, or else we use the original language (or the bastardized version of it—perogies, for example). Spaetzle is spaetzle. Dumplings are dumplings.
My Sicilian-American friend called all pasta “macaroni”, which she said was a Sicilian thing.
JamiSings said on 02.28.10 at 05:28 AM • [link]
See, here it’s “Spaghetti noodles,” “macaroni noodles,” “lasagna noodles” - or just the generic “pasta noodles.”
Only time I’ve heard pasta used is when talking about bow-tie pasta or in restaurants.
I mean, they ARE noodles. Made the same way. Heck, didn’t the Italians steal noodles from China or something?
I’ll have to ask my mom for her pot roast recipe at this rate. I’m tempted to invite any Brit who’s going to visit near my home town in Orange County, California, to come over for dinner to just visually show them what pot roast is at this rate.
JamiSings said on 02.28.10 at 07:07 AM • [link]
Okay, got mom’s pot roast recipe.
You need -
1 roasting pan
1 good piece of beef
Put beef in roasting pan with two cups of water. Season with garlic powder (or garlic salt - we like the kind that also has dried parsley in it), onion powder, pepper, and salt (but not the last if you use garlic salt.) You can also add peeled onion and/or celery.
Cook in oven for 3 to 4 hours, checking the water levels so it won’t get dry. (That’s why I always say to put foil over it so it’ll self baste.)
When beef is tender enough to fall apart, add chunks of potatoes and carrots. Keep cooking until vegetables are tender.
Serve and enjoy.
Course I like it better when she doesn’t cook potatoes with it, because then she makes mashed potatoes which I like the best. I don’t care how fattening they are. That’s the way potatoes taste the best.
sweetsiouxsie said on 02.28.10 at 08:56 AM • [link]
I think I am in a food coma from reading about all of the wonderful pot roast ideas. To get back on the topic, does anyone have an idea about what the book in question could be? I would love to read it while my own fabulous pot roast is cooking in the nesco. It is one of my husband’s favorite meals.
AgTigress said on 02.28.10 at 03:40 PM • [link]
Polly: of course what you say is true: ‘curry’ is a very broad generic term in English referring to the cuisines of the Indian sub-continent and also to the ‘Anglo-Indian’ cuisine that evolved from the 18th century in both India and Britain, and which is still evolving in the UK, within both the white British and Asian British communities. ‘English curries’ have been around for more than 200 years, and are perfectly valid dishes even though they are not ‘authentically Indian’, any more than HP sauce is an authentic Indian relish, but what about the Birmingham balti dishes—a sub-category of cuisine developed by the Asian British community of the English midlands?
‘Curry’ does have a real meaning as a shorthand term for a very large and complex subject, in my view. The particular range of spices and many of the cooking methods differ markedly from the traditional post-Medieval cuisines of Western and Northern Europe: in fact, Indian cuisine has rather more in common with the cooking approach of Classical Antiquity (ancient Rome imported many spices direct from India). The links with other areas of SE Asia have been mentioned, but of course to the West, there is also a cultural continuum with Middle Eastern cuisines. The Mughal Empire in India also brought Persian influences and traditions to bear on food as well as art and religion.
AgTigress said on 02.28.10 at 04:45 PM • [link]
Yes, Jami, don’t worry, I DO understand what you are saying! I just checked in some AE dictionaries (e.g. Merriam-Webster Online) and was surprised to find the same definitions with which I am familiar in BE: namely, ‘pasta’ defined as any unleavened flour-and-water dough (with or without egg) made into shapes and added to soups, sauces, etc., and ‘noodle’ (from German Nudel) for any variety of pasta made into a long, thin strip or strand. Thus, even in AE dictionaries, ‘noodle’ is a sub-classification of ‘pasta’, whereas to you, and obviously to many other AE speakers, the reverse is the case. We don’t need to worry or argue about it, since dialects are full of that sort of thing. It’s just useful to be aware of it, as otherwise misunderstandings can occur.
I also do understand what a pot-roast is! But because that particular term is not in my vocabulary, I would therefore call it a type of casserole that is made with a large single piece of meat. I see from the competing recipes here that sub-classifications with and without vegetables are becoming a source of debate! :-D
I don’t think it is possible to establish who ‘invented’ pasta: the addition of a dough made from cereal flour and water to meat and vegetable dishes, either cooked with them or served on the side, undoubtedly goes back into prehistory in virtually all parts of the world. The careful drying of fresh dough/pasta so that it can be safely stored and used later in its the dried condition is an important development in terms of convenience, but is also likely to have been thought up independently at many times and places.
Dumplings are a slightly different sub-category, because they are made, freshly each time, of leavened dough (paste): the way they expand and lighten as they sit there in the gravy is one of their characteristic charms. Spaetzle, also mentioned by Suze, are culturally distinctive, but are classifiable as noodles made of fresh (not dried) egg pasta.
JamiSings said on 02.28.10 at 06:26 PM • [link]
Oh I’m not arguing - though anyone who says bell peppers should be in any food I’ll argue with (but that’s because my mom and I are HIGHLY allergic, just smelling them can make it hard for either of us to breath) - I just explaining. I tend to explain too much. I guess it’s because I work in a library and I have to explain things repeatedly to patrons who can’t grasp concepts like you can’t renew movies!
And of course I can’t say every American speaks this way. Different sections of the country speak different ways. Like the whole soda/pop debate. (And God forbid if I call them soda-pops!) California seems to have a unique language all it’s own - and even that depends on where you live. IE: Beach cities verses mountains, Northern California VS Southern.
It’s just the casserole thing I can’t wrap my mind around. To me a casserole should have noodles (usually macaroni), cheese, veggies, meat, some sort of cream sauce, and bread crumbs - or rice, veggies, cream of mushroom soup, and cheese.
I hope that someone remembers this book because I feel guilty for it getting so off topic.
joykenn said on 02.28.10 at 06:28 PM • [link]
True story: I had the parents of a Brit friend over to my house for “American cooking” when they visited years and years ago. They’re a retired postal worker and his wife from the Midlands. I served what my Texas relatives always called Maryland chicken for some reason. It is a Sunday dish where you essentially fry up chicken lightly, make cream gravy in the fry pan, pour this over the chicken in a heavy casserole (or cast iron dutch oven as is traditional in my family). Then put this to slowly, slowly cook over low heat in the oven while you go to church. Make mashed potatoes from scratch. YUMMM. The combination of fried chicken and cream gravy and mashed potatoes really went over like gangbusters to the couple from the Midlands. I served cold watermelon for desert. I’m told they talked about their exotic American dinner for years afterwards.
Anyone found the pot roast book yet? All this food talk is making want to haul out my heavy cast iron pot and cook something!
Polly said on 02.28.10 at 08:49 PM • [link]
AgTigress: What you say is completely true, and the history of “curry” is a fascinating subject (there’s even a pretty good book about it called Curry), but I can’t tell you how tired I get of people asking me how to cook a curry or what curry is, and then having to explain that there is a difference between the Western uses of curry, and what it means in South Asian cuisine. No slur is being cast on restaurant curries in England—just emphasizing that “curries” aren’t the same thing as Indian food, just like American Chinese food is not at all the same thing as Chinese food.
I will admit that balti dishes totally stumped me the first time I was in the UK. In Hindi, “balti’ just means bucket, like the kind you use to take a bath in, and the idea that you would cook anything in a bucket was just weird. Once I realized it was a local thing, rather than an import, all was well, as I stopped trying to figure out how I’d missed a whole category of dishes growing up that translate as “bucket” dishes.
AgTigress said on 02.28.10 at 11:25 PM • [link]
But really quite a traditional linguistic concept — the idea of using the container’s name to describe the dish, like casserole and lasagna!
:D
AgTigress said on 02.28.10 at 11:32 PM • [link]
Or as British Chinese food, or Dutch, German or Australian Chinese food. I know all of those, but I am sadly ignorant about Chinese Chinese food, in spite of a few cautious expeditions to Gerrard Street (Chinatown in London’s West End) with more knowledgeable friends.
We have to remember that European and American versions of Asian cuisines are usually prepared by natives of the countries concerned, so they are not wholly lacking in authenticity: they are simply choices based on knowledge of both the parent cuisine and the tastes of the adopted country.
:D
Polly said on 03.01.10 at 12:13 AM • [link]
AgTigress: Not disagreeing entirely. Though one doesn’t take a bath in a Dutch oven or a casserole dish, and balti tends to mean a bucket, not a cooking pot.
Again, not invalidating how foods can be adapted to meet the tastes of those eating them, and then become standards that exist alongside other dishes that they once originated as—in other words, they develop their own authenticity. Tex-Mex food, for example, as distinct from Mexican food. Indian restaurant food as distinct from Indian home food. I’m just saying, recognize that there’s a difference between the two. The claims of authenticity are beside the point, especially as it’s a quality that people generally seek and value (we want to see “authentic” places when we vacation abroad, or eat “authentic” food when we eat at ethnic restaurants), so restaurants, for example, claim it even when the food isn’t the same as traditional cuisine (somehow, “inspired by” or “trust me, you’ll think it tastes good” isn’t as convincing as “authentic”). Doesn’t mean the food isn’t of value or isn’t developing it’s own tradition. But “authenticity” is a story we tell ourselves because it’s a quality we value even as we don’t often query what it really means (and in this case, I’m not sure that South Asian restaurant food is authentic because it’s cooked by South Asians, or Chinese Restaurant food is authentic because it’s cooked by East Asians. In both cases, the people who do the cooking end up having to learn how to cook those particular styles of cuisines just as much as you or I would have to, because the versions that are popular in particular places have developed their own tradition and characteristics that make it “authentic).
AgTigress said on 03.01.10 at 12:44 AM • [link]
Polly, I hear what you say.
I know it can be frustrating to see something (cuisine, music, literature, language, costume, all sorts of ethnically-distinctive things) adopted by others, subtly altered (= made ‘inauthentic’), and perhaps fundamentally misunderstood. Yet when that is done with positive motivations, I think we must accept that it is more good than bad: it opens minds to new possibilities, and engenders respect and admiration for the origins, even when they are imperfectly grasped.
I think this is a delicate and difficult balance. Some communities are inclined to feel patronised and angry when aspects of their traditions are taken up by others without real understanding: I have often felt this about aspects of my own culture (Welsh), which can be perceived in really, really annoying, mistily romantic ways by those who know nothing of the language, the literature or the real history; they are often admiring a complete fantasy. Yet there isstill good in all of this. Accepting that other ways are not only different from our own ways, but are admirable in their own right, cannot be bad in the wider picture of human history.
British (and other European) colonists took over in parts of India in the 17th century, and found there an ancient and sophisticated culture unlike their own: like all the best imperialists of history, they helped to create something new—a combined Asian/European culture that affected all the areas concerned in ways that were ultimately of benefit to all concerned. I am NOT forgetting imperialist arrogance, or the basic right of peoples to self-governance, to be free of foreign domination.
But in the long term, combining cultures produces something new and unique, and is of benefit to both sides. The steady immigration from the sub-Continent to the UK since their regained independence more than 50 years ago is a fascinating reversal, historically and culturally, and with good will, both sides should feel enriched by it.
Polly said on 03.01.10 at 02:46 AM • [link]
AgTigress: I think maybe we’re talking at cross-purposes. I’m not assigning value judgments to the various accommodations and adaptations that we’re looking at here. In the course of this discussion, I’ve had two main points: one, that “curry” and “Indian food” are not necessarily the same things, and that one should know that pretty much any ethnic food served in a restaurant only only sort of resembles that ethnic food eaten at home (which shouldn’t be a surprise; “American” restaurant food isn’t exactly home food either); and two, that authenticity is a red herring, and ultimately, unnecessary as a justification for why we eat something, and why it tastes good.
I’m not frustrated or upset by things being made “inauthentic.” I don’t, for that matter, claim that the Indian food I cook is “authentic.” It’s not even a term I brought into this discussion, as I truly do think it’s beside the point. The search for “authenticity” is, I think, a particularly modern western concern that really took on steam in the 1950s and later (think how popular folk dancing got in the 60s, road trips and backpacking looking for the “real” America/Italy/Morocco/you name it, the number of travel channels where you can view the real/insider’s guide etc to a particular place/food/whatever). I actually find the preoccupation with the “authentic” a fascinating aspect of the modern western worldview (and by western, I don’t mean white, just western. Immigrants growing up here tend to adopt authenticity as an ideal too). Why is authentic such a desired trait? Why isn’t yummy, or interesting, good enough? Especially since all cultures are in flux all the time, and there is no static “authentic” that can be found of just about anything since nothing is unchanging.
As far as food goes, my attitude is pretty much eat what you like, provided it’s healthy most of the time. Just recognize that it is what it is, and what it isn’t is a direct translation of any particular ethnic cuisine. Or rather, the food you eat in a restaurant is always in translation. That’s all.
AgTigress said on 03.01.10 at 01:53 PM • [link]
I had misunderstood you slightly, and actually I agree with what you say, Polly. I can understand, though, why some people get worked up about ‘authenticity’. It is often based on the fear of their own traditions being changed and diluted by those whom they see as not being entitled to do so. I can envisage that as particularly likely in an immigrant community.
And of course, as you say, ‘restaurant food’ is never quite the same as ‘home cooking’, even within exactly the same cultural framework. It has to be different in some ways.
I think we are in general agreement. :-)
Jody said on 03.01.10 at 05:31 PM • [link]
Have no clue as to the pot roast book, but do have a .02 contribution to the food discussion.
Pot Roast (a variation on Laurie Colwin’s version)
Dust a chuck or sirloin roast with tons of paprika and pepper, chop up an onion and a carrot and smash three or four garlic cloves. Spray a covered casserole dish with cooking spray and put everything in. Pour in a glass of red wine, cover and bake at 325 for a loooong time—at least 3 hours. An hour and a half before you want to eat, peel and quarter some potatoes, onions and carrots, toss them in about a quarter cup of flour and add to the casserole. There is no such thing as cooking this too long. After five hours or so, the vegetables will merely disintegrate into a sauce, but that just makes everything better.
As far as curries go, I’ve been using Penzey’s Vindaloo seasoning for years (http://www.penzeys.com). A big ol’ pot of Pork Vindaloo—the recipe is on the package—is a wonderful midwinter treat and makes the house smell amazing.
You wouldn’t want to eat either of these every day, or even every week, but once in a while… YUM!
Shaheen said on 03.02.10 at 12:29 AM • [link]
Having lived for a number of years in Pakistan (where the food is roughly the same as Northern Indian cuisine, just as Urdu is roughly the same as Hindi), the mere thought of a Pork Vindaloo leaves me faintly nauseous, whereas a pork roast, pork sausage, or BLT makes my mouth water. What a strange thing cultural indoctrination is!
By the way, has anyone found out what the book is?
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments