110186 Fri Dec 21 10:52:30 -0800 2001 20 7 Chicago Area 0 594452 Vital Information posted a question in the NY pizza debate that I'm afraid is too important to get buried: Is there a faux-meat vegetarian Chinese restaurant in Chinatown (or the entire city for that matter)? I hope these aren't NYC's sole domain! Fri Dec 21 10:52:30 -0800 2001 0 Paul Tyksins 1 594455 For someone who knows Rob AKA Vital Information quite well his request for fake meat really took me ny suprise. This purest who feels he always knows the real thing ie margarine instead of butter, ultrapasturized milk vs regular pasteurized, real whip cream and hi fat ice cream fake meat doesn't seem to fit his needs. See you all at the benefit. More to be disclosed there. Fri Dec 21 11:07:34 -0800 2001 594452 0 Paulette 2 594460 Indeed. I too am surprised to find simulated food given countenance by Chowhounds. One can restrict one's diet in any number of ways and still eat honest food all the while. But fake food must be disgusting to any food-lover of any stripe. Fri Dec 21 12:21:36 -0800 2001 594455 0 Harry V. 3 594461 I only like authentic fake meat! Rob Fri Dec 21 12:45:46 -0800 2001 594460 0 Vital Information 3 594469 Read Irene Kuo's section on vegetarian "meat" dishes in The Key to Chinese Cooking; apparently Chinese carnivores like fake meat, well prepared. Also, she notes that fake meat is made to resemble meat dishes, not taste like them, much like Shrimp with Lobster Sauce is not shrimp in a sauce made with lobster, but rather to harmonize with a lobster dish. That said, around Chinese New Year's time, Emperor's Choice has, at the very least, special vegetarian appetizers. I can't remember if they do more; usually the appetizers make the carnivores in the party feel that they've sacrificed enough. I've always suspected that, even if they don't have any other "special" vegetarian dishes on the menu then, they could be persuaded to prepare some, if properly approached. Fri Dec 21 15:41:55 -0800 2001 594460 0 annieb 4 594477 Thanks, I have already heard that omnivores in China and elsewhere occasionally condescend to notice such whimsical vulgarities. Why they should ever do so is the mystery. Fri Dec 21 17:29:36 -0800 2001 594469 0 Harry V. 5 594512 Gosh, I'm pretty surprised at the way this conversation has gone. Calling one culture's historical culinary practices "vulgarities" seems, well, un-chowhoundish. I've read that fake meat dishes has historically been eaten in China for a long time. In fact, there's a strong Buddhist tradition in China (and other places in south-east Asia) where meat of any kind is generally frowned upon. It's from this tradition, I would assume, that the notion of fake meat chinese food comes from. All the normal delights, none of the animal product. Fake meat, by the way, is usually made from pressed soy product, and not some sort of chemical flavoring (like in most of the hot dogs that are touted on this board). Thu Dec 27 10:31:31 -0800 2001 594477 0 Michael S. 6 594518 Sorry, I didn't mean to sound quite so severe. I have nothing to say for or against anyone who chooses to impose upon himself or herself any sort of dietary restriction. Everyone is of course free to eat or not eat whatever they want; to each his own. My dislike extends only to the simulation of honest food. If one wants to eat tofu, eat tofu; and if one wants to eat duck, eat duck. But don't torturously engineer tofu so that it may be presented as if it were duck - a disingenuous deformation that I do indeed consider vulgar, howsoever hallowed a tradition it may be among some (surely not all) people in China. I would have thought that a preference for honesty in food would characterize the tastes of those who frequent this board. Indeed, most food lovers seem to praise as the highest form of cooking that which presents each foodstuff in its simplest, most natural and essential form - an idea I assumed was shared by all, certainly by all on this board. Which is obviously not the case. My apologies to those whom I may have offended. Thu Dec 27 12:34:36 -0800 2001 594512 0 Harry V. 7 594529 Please, please, please learn more about Chinese vegetarian cooking. Read Irene Kuo's The Key to Chinese Cooking where she discusses wheat gluten, not a "fake" meat, but a symbolic meat to Chinese buddhists. She calls it a "live" ingredient. Also Eileen Yin Fei Lo's excellent book on Chinese vegetarian cooking, which gives many recipes that involve neither wheat gluten nor tofu. She has some excellent recipes for stocks, flavored oils, etc. that take Chinese vegetarian cooking to the next level. Neither wheat gluten nor tofu are considered meat "substitutes" in Chinese cooking, no matter how many oriental restaurants may give you the choice of chicken, pork, beef, shrimp, or "all are recipes may be prepared vegetarian, we substitute tofu". Do not consider that the packages of marinated "seitan" in whole foods, etc. are at all indicative of what wheat gluten can do. Irene Kuo tells you how to make it, you can buy it at an oriental market on Broadway about a block and a half north of Lawrence, east side of the street, in a strip mall. It's in the produce section, in a tub of water, looks like a giant pale sausage. I think theirs is a whole wheat version. If you want to try it cooked first, I would recommend the soul twist sandwich at Soul Vegetarian East on 75th St. just east of the Dan Ryan. I have had many a south side carnivore express wonder at the lack of meat, all the while eating as fast as they could, as well as having had the pleaseure of seeing a vegan anarchist grin with pleasure and say "It tastes like it's got gristle in it." Tofu is an ingredient enjoyed by vegetarians and non alike in China. It has properties of its own that are appreciated and played against (instead of trying to turn it into "not-dogs"). It is often combined with meat or fish in casserole cooking. Finally, the artifice vs. authenticity/simplicity argument. Simplicity, the back to the basics, let's hunker down cooking that is so fashionable of late, is no more or less simple, authentic, or artificial than the fashion that preceded it. Just you try to make a nice "simple" bowl of clear chicken soup, or whatever. Simplicity, authenticity, and artifice are culturally induced notions that pervade every aspect of a culture--food, language, song, whatever, and should be appreciated as what they are. Carnaval in Brasil, for instance, could not give a better example of all three co-existing, and being appreciated for what they are--the simplicity of the food, the authenticity of the music and dance, and the artifice of the costumes. Thu Dec 27 23:06:42 -0800 2001 594518 0 annieb 8 594544 Thanks for that great post! I knew I read about the Chinese Buddhist tradition of gluten somewhere, and I'm glad you were able to put my librarian skills to shame, and also to provide my argument very, very eloquently. Fri Dec 28 17:12:59 -0800 2001 594529 0 Michael S. 8 594593 Thank you, I appeciate your effort to spread information. However, please, please, please understand that I am simply indifferent to any attitude that presumes to reject the natural biological endowment of the species to which we belong. Human beings are omnivores, and people who presume somehow to be able to amend this simple law of nature can say nothing of interest to me on the subject of food. “Vegetarian cooking” is, to me, an oxymoron in all but the most literal of senses. Cooking that is premised, in any degree, on antagonism to normal human food is, in my eyes, unworthy of notice in any gastronomic sense. Religion is an institution for which my kindest thought is indifference. That it should pollute culinary attitudes increases, if anything, my contempt for those attitudes. I am also aware that China, a culture so much more ancient than any of the West, features strains of boredom among some people in which baroque oddities such as the simulation of one foodstuff by another (of sight, or smell, or taste) can take on a fascination in its own right, independent of any extragastronomic motive for such fabrications. I can only say that those who are entertained by such whimsicalities are welcome to them; my culinary tastes are not yet so jaded that I feel tempted to pursue them. I do not recall writing anything particularly about tofu, an authentic foodstuff of moderate but uninspiring utility. Its ubiquity in the households of China is a phenomenon with which I am acquainted. It also happens to be ubiquitous in my own household, as my girlfriend cannot seem to live without it. It is true that I have little first-hand experience with wheat gluten in the guise of an autonomous foodstuff. If I ever hear of anyone getting excited about it for purely gastronomic reasons, I might want to learn more. I might also please, please, please suggest to you that you might do well not to assume that someone else’s indifference on a given subject must necessarily stem from ignorance. My interest in the cultures of China (a vast panorama that extends far beyond the bounds of the Buddhist tradition) is pronounced, and I believe myself to be familiar with the general premises and rationales of the attitudes and approaches you mention. It is not ignorance that induces me to regard such attitudes with disinterest. Of course this is all merely one person’s opinion, and should be of no account to anyone. And of course I hope I will not be taken as saying anything against people who elect to restrict their diet according to nongastronomic criteria. Certainly no one has the slightest obligation to assign any priority to gastronomy in his or her life over any other competing impulses he or she may feel. Wed Jan 02 15:45:24 -0800 2002 594529 0 Harry V. 9 594665 I'm not really sure I understand the positions you take. There are a couple of issues. First, you seem to reject "vegetarian cooking" because we have evolved as omnivores. While you might not want to be a vegetarian, I assume you have nothing against eating items that are not meat-based, in which case wouldn't you want the best that that vegetarian cooking has to offer. For example, I don't plan on eating only noodle soups for the rest of my life, but when I want to eat a noodle soup I would sure like to have it made by someone who had devoted his/her life to that specialty. Also, if you really wanted to be faithful to our evolution, you should probably avoid all processed foods and all kinds of stuff for which we are not biologically adapted. There are studies that argue we'd be much healthier if we ate a more evolutionarily authentic diet. The other point I don't entirely understand is your opposition to "fake" foods apparently based solely on philosophical principles. Why wouldn't you just take food as it comes. Taste it. If you like it, good. If not, so be it. I am about as carnivorous an eater as I know, but I love tofu and gluten-based products. If you don't like tofu that's fine. But base that judgment on the taste and texture. You may well know this, but I'd point out that there are tremendous varieties of tofu-based products, most of which have little resemblance to the standard tofu found in a regular supermarket. Just as I appreciate the wide range of things that cooks over the years have learned to do with meat, I appreciate the wide range of things that cooks have done with tofu or gluten. None of these creations or innovations are, of course, true in any sense to our evolutionary heritage. They are the artifacts of our leisure society. Fri Jan 04 16:48:53 -0800 2002 594593 0 DPZ 10 594753 Thanks for your post. Again I find I must have expressed myself poorly, for I do not see how the issues you discuss relate to my posts or to my humble opinions. First of all, I cannot imagine what it might mean to be ‘faithful” to the evolutionary heritage of our species. I simply observed the natural omnivorous behavior of Homo sapiens as a fact pertinent to the subject then at hand. I regard "vegetarian cooking" as an absurd proposition, because, as I attempted to say earlier, antagonism to food contradicts the premise of cooking as I conceive of it: as an embrace, a love of food. How can anyone love food who simultaneously professes himself/herself to be opposed to it? Of course “vegetarian cooking” is not identical in meaning to the cooking of vegetables; I cook and eat vegetables all the time, though I am not a vegetarian. Whether a cook is good at cooking vegetables has to do only with their skill as a cook; a good noodle soup is its own proof, and any prejudices to which its cook might be beholden are incidental. (Of course the best noodle soups will generally be made with stock.) It would indeed be a good idea to avoid processed foods, although the reason has nothing to do, directly, with “faithfulness” to our evolution, but because they are generally unhealthful and unsatisfying as food. My response is to the food itself; it is not guided by some extragastronomic dictate. In fact, I have expressed myself so poorly that your post directs to me the very advice that I myself would have proffered: not to let the experience of food be contaminated by nongastronomic prescriptions. Indeed, I feel it is pointless to make arbitrary categorical distinctions about food – that is the essence of my position. And I certainly do not do so myself: as it happens I enjoy eating the remains of all kinds of organisms, animal and plant alike. I can assure you that the fact I find tofu uninspirational (it is too bland to dislike actively) arises entirely from my direct experiences with it. I do look forward to visiting China and having the chance to expand my experience and perhaps change my opinion of tofu. You ask, “Why wouldn't you just take food as it comes.” My answer is that I will take food as it comes if it comes honestly, without disguise. This is merely one of my own food preferences: that food should express its own nature. Some might argue that that is a nongastronomic principle, of the kind I have admonished; but needless to say, I disagree. Of course I like food that tastes good; but I believe that the experience of food can go beyond that. I feel, in a way difficult to express, that the experience of food, perhaps more than any other human experience, connects us with nature, with the earth, with our own fundamental animality; and I believe that this experience depends in significant measure on food maintaining its essential identity, without disguise. The disguise of food contradicts this experience, at least for me, and thus it is not to my taste - regardless of whether such disguising is motivated by the desire for novelty (a gastronomic taste I do not happen to share), or merely arises as a consequence of food puritanism (a nongastronomic taboo). Your point that cuisine is a product of civilization is obviously correct, yet I do not understand the relevance. I never denied or lamented the influence of civilization on cooking (or eating). My only suggestion in that regard would be that cuisine would do well not to contradict the biology of our species. As it happens, it is my perception that nearly all great cuisines, however elaborate, nevertheless recognize that nature must be at the heart of great food. But now I am getting abstract. Wed Jan 09 14:30:52 -0800 2002 594665 0 Harry V. 7 594547 Just so you know, I'm Chinese, and I don't think that the Tzai duck, or any other such traditional vegetarian food is "dishonest". It's not dishonest, because we never called it "fake meat". We call it Tzai dishes which has a spiritual overtone. A vegetarian diet is thought to give you clarity. Besides the Buddhists who maintain a vegetarian diet, it is common for non-vegetarians to eat Tzai dishes for certain amount of time, and certain days in the calendar to show respect, or to give thanks to the ancestors. For you to attack something because of your association with a name (which is not even original)is a process that has nothing to do with Chowhounding. Think about it, you put a made-up label on something and then attack it base on that label.....Sounds like the stuff Cultural Revolution is made of. Wheat gluten and soybean products have been the staple of Asian cuisine. Yes, I love the taste of them, not because they were made to "imitate" meat, but because they have their very own unique flavor and texture. I kid you not. It's totally illogical for us to call it "fake meat" when it is meat we want to take away from this diet. Thanks, Michael and Annie for speak up! Sat Dec 29 01:57:06 -0800 2001 594518 0 HLing 8 594548 My initial reaction was similar to yours, great offense at Harry's comments. But in fairness, he didn't make up the "fake meat" label and was only taking the words at face value. Let's not attack him for the sins of Chinese-American restaurateurs who have figured out a way to market tofu to vegetarians. It helps to set the record straight, as you have, and we're lucky to the have the Chowhound boards to do that. There are thousands of forms of tofu and many times that number of preparations in China. Only the teeniest fraction of them are available in the US. They have their own type of deliciousness that we love, not because they can taste like meat. The Chinese banquet table is not complete without at least one tofu preparation, even for the most luxurious of spreads. The product of the soy bean can achieve high art and shouldn't be dismissed as not worthy of chowhounding. In fact, for our recent Chowhound banquet in SF, the tofu dish was one that our guest of honor was most impressed with. Calling these special dishes "fake meat" is right up there with referring to certain condiments as "duck sauce" in some parts of the US. (g) Sat Dec 29 02:41:34 -0800 2001 594547 0 Melanie Wong 8 594594 Again I apologize for giving offense, and also for failing to express myself well. I do not call a food dishonest if it aims at no pretense. I will point out that when you talk about foods being eaten for spiritual reasons or to show respect, you have left the realm of gastronomy, to which I had hoped to confine myself. I have nothing at all to say about foods that are eaten for nongastronomic reasons. My vegetarian girlfriend is the smartest person I know, so the idea that a vegetarian diet gives clarity might have something to it. Wed Jan 02 15:57:09 -0800 2002 594547 0 Harry V. 7 594549 When you munch on gingerbread men, do you call them "fake human"? (g) Same difference... Sat Dec 29 02:44:26 -0800 2001 594518 0 Melanie Wong 8 594595 Yes - but of course I always take care to leave their heads and vital organs intact. :) Yes, simulation is often meant as a flight of fancy rather than as earnest (self-)deception. It is not greatly appealing to me - not even representational cookies! (plain round blobs tend to cook more evenly) - but of course that's a matter of taste. Wed Jan 02 16:07:14 -0800 2002 594549 0 Harry V. 1 594456 We posted simulaneously, but I replied to VI's query on this. Link to it below. Link: http://www.chowhound.com/topics/show/110183#594454 Fri Dec 21 11:09:17 -0800 2001 594452 0 Michael S. 2 594464 Q: Have you heard about the fake meat Vietnamese restaurant? A: It's called Pho Nee Sorry, I couldn't help myself- happy holidays everybody! Fri Dec 21 14:21:03 -0800 2001 594456 0 Mark 3 594659 To MOD: Must we loyal reader be subjected to such ill-advised attempts at humor? It is obvious that the author of the question regarding meat substitutes is serious in his or her effort to gain informations. Let us help this person out and stay on topics please. At same time, this hopefully will preserve integrity of this board. Thanks! Fri Jan 04 12:39:14 -0800 2002 594464 0 Xiang No