When you travel to Japan and go to an Indian restaurant, the food tastes and is presented differently than it is in India. Then if you travel to Greece and find a small Indian restaurant, the Indian food is different there from the other versions. Same in Africa, South America, Europe. All of the Indian food sold in these places are nearly unrecognizable from each other.
This variation isn't limited to Indian food. It's the same with Thai food, Chinese food, Indonesian food, Italian food, Mexican food, Greek food, Japanese food. The ways of preparing and presenting these cuisines in foreign lands are as varied as the countries themselves.
It's probably a human universal: restaurant owners of ethnic restaurants change recipes to suit local taste and popularity.
I think this is also perhaps partly why Indian food has not established itself in the fine-dining scene in North America and Europe, yet people get shocked when they see a dish priced at $16+ in a local Indian restaurant (the preparations are elaborate and laborious).
If you went to a Michelin Star restaurant, would you expect a bog-standard Caesar salad, Chicken Chasseur and Black Forest Gateau (all made "the traditional way")? Nope. You'd want the chef to surprise you. Why should any cuisine limit itself to "Mama's cookbook"?
The food was exactly like the cheap Indian food cart outside the office. Good whisky though!
Great food, great cocktails. After covid forced them to close in London, I’m happy to fly across the Atlantic just to eat there.
European fine-dining scene hasn’t entirely ignored Indian restaurants, UK has 8 Indian restaurants with Michelin stars.
https://www.thehandbook.com/london-guidebook/posh-indians-lo...
What I find interesting is the way that strict recipe following culture interacts with interpretive make-it-up-as-you-go culture.
Take Italy for example - recipe culture is very strict - you make the dish _exactly_ the way Grandma taught you or it is wrong (and by implication bad). Italy has an incredible food culture, and this strictness has resulted in amazing food being largely unchanged for hundreds of years. Every village member has experienced the exact same lasagne for ever - even if it's just the tiniest bit different to the next village.
By contrast countries with little or no food culture simply adopt and fuse everything they come across. The UK is a good example, long lambasted for bland food, there was nothing to lose and everything was assimilated. It promotes experimentation - mixing things never thought of - every day a new adventure.
Each influence is named, "Indian", "Chinese", "Thai", all of which would be unrecognisable in those areas. In one sense it is none of those, it is "British" food.
Thus an Indian restaurant in London does not pretend to be "authentic" (unless of course it explicitly does) - it wants to offer an amazing meal you will enjoy.
An Indian meal in London is different to one in Mumbai is different to one in Beijing is different to one in Washington - and I think the world is richer for that.
So we decided to set out something better.
The first restaurant we came to was an Irish pub. Looking at a map, it was probably The Crown & Anchor. We looked at the menu and I was starting to think that this wasn't going to be acceptable - it was all meat... and while that was fine for me, my coworker had other constraints... but his eyes weren't drawn to the fish and chips or steak sandwich that my eyes were - he immediately saw "curry" and "vegetable".
It was a good lunch.
One of the comments that he made was that with Indian restaurants, they are all very much a family's recipes and no two are the same. One shouldn't expect consistency of flavors between them. And then yes, it becomes a mix with the local styles too. But British pubs are all fairly consistent. The quality may be variable - but a British pub curry is likely going to be pretty much the same from one to another - east coast to west coast.
British food is all the same color (brown), often some kind of sludge with mystery bits in it, and they want you to try several different gross things all called "pickle", but they have spices. Mustard is a spice.
Mushy peas.
Luckily, Japan has a long history of importing recipes from other cultures, for example ramen. I live in Tokyo and haven't had much success locating spicy Indian-style curry, but Sichuan-style dishes are widely available and will blow your tongue off if you're not expecting it (I didn't know what 四川 translated to at first, but I made sure to look it up later...).
And yet, Italian food in other countries is recognizable as Italian only in that it's pasta and tomato sauce.
The partition didn’t happen along culinary lines, so I don’t see a reason why it would be inappropriate for a restaurant for a restaurant run by Bangladeshis to claim it serves “Indian” cuisine within the general meaning of the word.
If you go to a Bangladeshi restaurant in the UK and ask for authentic Bangladeshi food, most often they will be happy to serve it for you.
Multilingual puns are the best.
and thus engaged in Marathi cultural appropriation of what are clearly Tamil dishes.
/s (although many Indians would not think so)
Essentially the majority of British Indian curries are made using a base gravy and different items are added to differentiate them. Giving each curry house its own distinct flavour that’s present between most dishes on the menu.