H
ave just one dish at weddings? That’s just ridiculous, authoritarian, autocratic, despotic, fascistic, monolithic, oppressive, totalitarian, tyrannical. Next we’ll hear that the one dish the Congress wants us to serve at all weddings should be an Italian one. And what about the BJP? You think Nitin Gadkari earned his kilos eating just one dish? Absurd!
Dish Elopes With Spoon
Foodie Kunal Vijaykar’s foretaste of the perils of wedding feasts bereft of variety
But come to think of it, some weddings might actually be saved by the rule. The Gujarati wedding, for instance. On average, they serve at least 645 cuisines, including Gujarati-Chinese, Gujarati-Thai, Gujarati-Mexican, Gujarati-Italian...with Gujarati burgers, Gujarati hotdogs and so on. If they had to stick to one dish, we’d get oondhiyo served with rotlas. Bliss! But pity the Parsis. If they had to serve just one dish: a) No one would attend; b) the wedding would have to be held in some other democratic country.
Bengal’s one of my favourite places for food. If you stick to the one-dish principle, I have to say the hottest dish there is Mamata Banerjee. Serve her up.
In Tamil Nadu, the one-dish rule wouldn’t apply; only the no-food rule would. Instead of feeding, you’d rather hand out free TV sets, transistors etc.
Lukhnawi cuisine is one of the finest in India, thanks to the nawabs. But they aren’t around; Mayawati is. So don’t serve food; put her cut-out behind every counter.
But what’s the whole idea of this rule? To save the food shamelessly wasted at weddings? I have a solution. Force all hosts to give the surplus food to charity. And the best charity is my charity. My stomach.
Published At:
Tags