• Kellamity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well, they were British chefs with South Asian heritage who of course were indirectly here because of horrific Imperialism

    But it is British, its very British. Despite what Farage and co want you to believe, we’re a multi-cultural nation and have been for centuries.

    British-Indian cuisine is at this point distinct and diverse enough from traditional Indian cuisine that it is its own thing. And its super widespread - even the racists discuss how shitty they are over a curry

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You know, this got my mind working for a bit. We have a similar phenomenon in the United States, where just about every ethnic cuisine is kind of a bastardized version of the more authentic dishes brought here by people emigrating from their home countries. American Chinese, Tex Mex, etc are all distinctly American but have clearly been inspired by their origin but modified for western tastes and sensibilities. It makes me wonder at what point a certain cuisine is considered to be a genuine and unique creation, rather than just something adopted from elsewhere by way of either conquest or cultural exchange? How many things do we associate with a particular nationality as being their specialty when that style of cooking or method of preparation or presentation were probably acquired along the way somewhere and forgotten with time? I guess it’s hard to know for sure.

    • TAYRN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      But, more to my point: let’s say I walk into an English pub, and ask what they’ve got on the menu. How many times do you think they’ll tell me about the unseasoned fried fish, or the unseasoned fried potatoes, before they mention “oh and we’ve got chicken tikka masala”

      Not exactly a national dish, in my opinion.