The authenticity of the Chinese character within the Indo- Chinese classification of cuisine has been long disestablished. But the profusion of flavours characterising this category of food in irresistible uniqueness means that the desi imagining of what cooks across the border occurs in as much fame of its droolingness as what had simmered this array of preparations to widespread popularity. As a style of cooking that deploys the techniques of the Chinese in dishing out preparations of a definite Indian undertone, even as ingredients are very often swapped or borrowed and worked with as availing upon either of the identities, the Chindian smack of taste accounts to a gastronomic experience that is indeed unlike any other assertion encountered elsewhere along the extents of the epicurean.
The characteristics though in occurring would be similar to quite some other dishes of the greater Southeast Asian classification, with the classic hot and sour narrative being what brings upon such food the lipsmacking assertion of taste. And yet, even in its prevalence then as feature of a regional repertoire, the Sino- Indian scouting of the semblances in savoring is one specifically significant. The place of its exact origin is one of unexpected emerging since the nation of China is not geographically adjacent to the city from which wafted the first smells of this fused mode in cooking. But the universal nature to which food accrues in its core stemming as one of the basic needs of life means that this transcending of the borders is not any case in dumbfoundedness.
In fact quite certain is the context out of which Chindian came to be a character of the culinary in ‘harmonious coexistence’. Curated in its cooking by Chinese people themselves then living within the precincts of what identified as Calcutta has been this panoply of preparations that has gone on to find itself soaring in popularity ever since. The city had been then quite a hub of confluencing, deriving upon its assuming of significance as being the capital of India ruled by the British. And it had been upon these grounds of eclectic expression in cultural cosmopolitanism that this piquant premise of what tickles the taste buds found unfurling. To claim therefore Indo- Chinese as either Indian or Chinese would be more of a farce then, since it is a derivation upon each of these dimensions that led this holy grail of indulgence to assume identity.
There rests evidently in this assortment of widely appreciated ‘appeasements’ such appeal that plays out in palatable predominancy of very distinct devouring. Think Manchurians and Schezwans and Hakkas within the extents of the edible and nowhere else would your tongue find its final place of blissful resting than what asserts as the divinely delicious definition that Indo- Chinese cuisine alludes to. The names of these preparations can be deceptively Chinese in such singular mentions of their supposed essence but calling for a serving of hakka noodles for instance and what you would be led to dig into anywhere along the length and breadth of India isn’t in any way an interpretation of authentic Hakka cuisine.
That, even when the Chinese people who had settled in the present day cultural capital of our country identified specifically as being Hakka people emigrating from the northern region of the Land of the Red Dragon. But once they found their home within the hearty confines of our diversely composed land, they became so much assimilated into this identity and experience of existence that their style of fooding assumed also such essence that retained the Hakka name while delightedly incorporating more than a few influences of the Indian character.
Essentially then, Hakka Chinese is an alternative expression in attending to the Chindian exploration of cuisine and one readily identifying in rampant popularity as well in this preference of food. The curation is one availed out of a fusion of ingredients and techniques and tastes so that the resultant flavor is one of distinctive deliciousness. The tale is one of cultural assimilation, as tastes were adapted and ingredients crossovered to cook up cauldrons of a culinary conte as flavorful as could be.
This flavorsome reputation of the Indo- Chinese identity in cuisine is only obvious since each of the individual components are differently but definitely steeped in a bevy of irresistible tastes themselves. And thus has permeated the Chinese style of stir fry cooking in woks the ‘seasoning’ of an Indian assertion. Such spices and flavors quintessential to the general culinary preparations in a greater identity of the cuisine of our country, like cumin and coriander seeds and turmeric sum up the other fore of expression even as commonalities rule too in deriving upon the punch of chillies and gingers and garlics and black peppercorns. More definite Chinese impressions shine through pours of soy and schezwan sauces and serving impeccably the Indian quest for a pungency as spicy as can be.
So immensely gorged over is this version of the Chinese cuisine in India that it emerges indeed as the country’s preference in indulging, second only to the obvious first of the local taste. No wonder authentic Chinese cuisine is only rarely encountered in India with the reference in Indo- Chinese conveniently passing off in its more smacking reputation. Indeed, so accustomed are the taste buds of the people here to this style of what they perceive to be Chinese food that a partaking of the real stuff would likely fail to excite their senses in the subtlety of that spice sensation.
For all its piquancy then derived out of the essential employment of spicy somethings in their preparation, Chindian cuisine strikes as being not just different from authentic Chinese fare but also as evidently Indianised. Indian indeed is the identity then of many such items of relish that we regularly rave about, with everything from the obvious manchurians and schezwans to the otherwise unassuming chili chicken and chowmein asserting their allegiance to this realm of residing. The stir fried narrative as well takes a backseat more than often as the Indian preference for deep fried is allowed for in this fusion mode of cooking and eating to one’s heart content indeed.
Characteristic also would be the sour and spicy taste dominating this entire platter of dual influences, that boasts of such ingredients as garam masala and corn flour that would occur as oddities in the Chinese and Indian context respectively. Given its originating in and popularity through the Indian subcontinent, Indo- Chinese food too curates many of its recipes around the exclusively desi reputation of paneer. Why just paneer though versus the Chinese pick of tofu, even every other choice of protein encountered in authentic versus the Indian tweaking of China’s food parlance strikes as distinct. We of course are devoted to our chickens and muttons and prawns/ fishes while the taste preferences of our neighbour is largely satiated by servings of beef and duck and pork.
Significant in pointing to the that prevails can also be the use of yogurt as a definite ingredient in many of these preparations that involve deep frying certain veggies or meat coated with a batter. Consider other options necessarily printed upon every Indo- Chinese menus like a sweet corn soup for instance and the authenticity of nationality would once again present itself as ambiguous. Soups for that matter though are more Chinese than Indian if one considers the beginnings of their cooking but even then what we seek comfort in as healthy bowls of the liquid tend to be adapted as well to appeal to the taste buds that rule large in this domain of the Asian territory.
Even the traditional Chinese specialty of fried rice ceased to remain true to its roots once it acquired the ‘benevolence’ of the Indian identity. Encountered in quite an opposite vein of revelation would be the prevalence of such preparations as manchurian gravies or schezwan curries and similar such iterations of not the dry kind as definite offerings as part of the Indo- Chinese composition. Curry is very prominently Indian and while it was introduced indeed in China, the country did not take a liking for it strong enough to simmer in the pride of that national identity. Forget even such expressions stretching across this span of the nonsingular and allow for recipes like schezwan dosas or chowmein dosas as well to constitute part of the Indo- Chinese classification and the unauthenticity of its arising is glaringly apparent.
To say then that Chindian cuisine is at least as Indian- if not more- as it is Chinese would not amount to a distortion of facts. But that does not quite matter as much if one regards their food as what it is- a necessity in subsistence, a recipe in indulgence, an experience in culture as ultimately it all boils down- or boils up in fact to the plain yet pleasurable assertion of the proof of the pudding being indeed in the eating.