A C from Albertario, Canada writes: I've been lucky enough to eat at Vij's numerous times and to speak to (and thank) the owner for the dishes I've eaten there. I can't say a bad thing about Vij's (or Vij) and I'd strongly recommend it to all who enjoy food made with care, understanding and great passion. It's a treasure.
However, I'm less comfortable with Mr Vij's choice of "evolution" to describe the sense of difference between traditional dishes and his own culinary creations. My point is only that "evolution" contains the suggestion of "progress" as much as change. And I don't think that progress, with respect to traditional cooking, really applies.

Perhaps this meaning (of progress) was not intended, but it's not unreasonable to infer it as it's used here. I prefer "interpretation," in the spirit of jazz interpretations of standards.

As well the article suggests that "People who live in this part of the world did not grow up eating traditional Indian food . . . If we want to bridge the gap, we have to do a better job of meeting them halfway."

From pita to pad thai, the same thing may be said of many Mid-Eastern and Asian cuisines that yet manage to succeed in becoming near staples of kitchens, even without (and before) the principles of fusion became commonplace.

I'd propose that the relatively limited embrace of Indian food (relative to Italian and Chinese, for example) has as much to do with its association with privilege and royalty as it does to to with its exotic qualities. North American Indian restaurants are often "palaces" or invoke a sense of majesty and privilege. That is, the food here has not appeared at "street level" in the way other cuisines have. I think that Vij's and Rangoli (and Indian Rice Factory) have gone a long way to challenge this view of Indian cuisine and are to be appreciated as much for re-interpreting this cultural context as much as their recipes.

Please open your next restaurant in Toronto.

• Posted 28/11/07 at 10:41 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment