>Until I first tried real Turkish Delight in my 20s, I had always imagined it as a cross between crisp toffee and halvah–flaky and melting in the mouth. Here's what it really is: a starch and sugar gel often containing fruit or nuts and flavored with rosewater, citrus, resin, or mint. The texture is gummy and sticky, some of the flavors are unfamiliar to American palates, and the whole thing is very, very sweet. (In addition to the sugar in the mixture, it's often dusted with icing sugar to keep the pieces from sticking together.) While some Turkish Delight newbies may find they enjoy it, it's not likely to be the first thing we imagine when we picture an irresistible candy treat.
In an era when (white and co) americans devour all kinds of ethnic cuisines, including raw sushi, all kinds of indian, thai, etc. I find this article bordering on the absurd.
Unless you're health conscious and don't like sugar, there's not much for an American to dislike about turkish delights -- sugary, gelatinous etc. Kind of the missing link between gummy bears, jelly and marshmallows.
> In an era when (white and co) americans devour all kinds of ethnic cuisines, including raw sushi, all kinds of indian, thai, etc. I find this article bordering on the absurd.
The palate differences are real. I (an American) eat "ethnic" foods regularly: Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, Thai, Indian, Hispanic, etc. I generally love ethnic foods. The exception is sweets. There are a few ethnic sweets I've had that I like, but by and large I've found, e.g., Indian and Chinese sweets to be unpleasant. Some of them I find to be nearly unpalatable. Others just taste odd.
I doubt I'm the only person with this experience. Lots of "ethnic" foods have been modified to fit the American palate (see General Tso's Chicken), and exposure to ethnic entrees also does not imply much exposure to ethnic sweets.
Is there a large palate difference? Even many Indians agree that their sweets are too sweet.
That can be fixed though. For example, take gulab jamun, drain off the syrup and replace it with old monk rum. Suddenly it's an alcoholic bittersweet delight rather than a blast of sugar.
And Chinese sweets don't differ that drastically from American ones - they are usually less sweet, and incorporate a few uncommon flavors and textures (red bean, green tea, glutinous rice), but they are actually surprisingly close.
You are restricting the list of Chinese sweets to those limited to Western tastes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasma etc. The things put in Chinese jellies and sweet soups are far more diverse than your list which I would not even call uncommon since you can get red bean or green tea whatever at a middle american strip mall buffet. Try a Chinese dessert shop in Chinatown. Personally, I have difficulty enjoying most of the items as dessert.
When I'm in the states I regularly get sweets from a Chinese bakery in Chinatown. I'm often the only white guy there so I think it's reasonably authentic - Chinese friends have confirmed this.
There may be weirder options (any vegetarian suggestions?) out there somewhere, but they don't seem particularly common even in Chinatown. Most folks seem to order similar things to me (albeit carnivorous).
China is much bigger than Chinatown -- and then there are lots tons of regional differences, say between Hong Kong and Hainan. Even in places like Singapore, Malaisia, etc with multi-million Chinese communities you can find much more variety in foods & sweets than what's available in Chinatown.
The authenticity of said bakery may be true but one needs to go to a chinese dessert cafe or similar for a full menu of chinese traditional desserts. Various soups, congee (porridge), and jellies, and gelatin cakes. Again as someone else mentioned, it is not just the ingredients (coconut is very common) but the amounts and textures. Cashew nut soup is an example, and probably quite accessible.
Speaking as someone (an American) who has lived in Shanghai for several years, I find the authenticity of the concept "Chinese dessert cafe" pretty questionable.
I'll take your word for it. I've never noticed such a thing. There's street food all over the place, sit-down restaurants are common, but dessert is vanishingly rare outside of foreign restaurants. The closest thing I've seen to a dessert cafe served waffles. :/
EDIT: I have confirmed that stores exist selling chinese sweet pastries. I'm happy to call this a win for you. (I also got a note saying Guangdong is known in China for the local prevalence of sweets, so Hong Kong would be especially likely to have such a local tradition.)
One person I asked listed 纽约芝士蛋糕 ("New York style cheesecake") as an example of Chinese dessert, so there's that.
>One person I asked listed 纽约芝士蛋糕 ("New York style cheesecake") as an example of Chinese dessert, so there's that.
Yeah, not even close, there are such chinese places (with sweets etc), but "New York style cheesecake" is not even close to what they sell.
"New York style cheesecake" is just something Chinese eat in westernized places -- so that would make it an example of Chinese dessert the same way McDonalds would be an example of Chinese food.
It's not that expensive. You can get hasma dishes at a dessert cafe for 15 CAD. Definitely higher end. But it was just one example to counter green tea and red bean. My point still stands.
I'd say that the sweetness is not the primary difference. It's the uncommon flavors and textures specifically in combination with sweetness that are the big difference. e.g.Cardamom and sugar are not a combination that my taste buds understand. Objectively, there is no reason that sweet cardamom tastes bad to me while sweet cinnamon tastes delicious, but subjectively there is.
For Chinese sweets, the ones I've had were really not that sweet at all. They were mildly sweet and just odd flavors and textures. e.g. Gummy and barely sweet was just not appealing. Others are just boring to my taste. At Chinese buffets there are often a selection of desserts that I can eat but don't care to because I don't enjoy them enough for the calories.
In fairness, I have not interested a bunch of my time trying to find new ethnic sweets that I like. I have them mostly when co-workers provide them and I feel adventurous (or less frequently obligated) enough to try it.
As someone who's married into a different "ethnic" family, the palate difference (at least for us) is incredibly wide on both sides. I can't really stomach most authentic Chinese food, and especially can't deal with the flavor and texture of the desserts.
Likewise, my wife's family can't handle traditional midwestern dishes, nor traditional soul food well at all.
That's just been my experience of course, so I'm not claiming it's indicative, but it's actually the hardest part of our marriage (which, is a good thing, I think).
In my opinion it's the finest rum in the world. A heavy drinker I know told me it isn't - it's only the finest rum under $100.
(In the US I can get it at a few places for about $15 - either Indian St in Jersey City or Curry Hill in NY - and most liquor stores in India sell it for a similar price.)
Korean here. I have no difficulty enjoying savory dishes from all around the world, but I just can't stand the ridiculous taste of American candy and mass-produced ice cream (Haagen-Dazs being the only exception).
I guess it's much easier to adapt one's palate to foreign variations of meat and vegetables than it is to forget the taste of sweets that one grew up with.
Often people also have trouble with breakfast foods. There's often no rationale for what makes an "appropriate for breakfast" food except for what you've grown up with.
Breakfasts are extraordinarily diverse: breads and jams in France, cold meats in Germany, hot meat & egg etc. or kippers in the UK, [breakfast] cereals and juice or sweet pancakes/waffles in the USA.
Of course, breakfast cereal made it across the atlantic some time ago, and there's a lot of common ground in Europe. But it's still really quite remarkable in its difference - sweet vs. savoury, meats vs. cereals, hot vs. cold - such a range!
I haven't even touched on the other continents, because I'm afraid I'm rather clueless. Except perhaps kedgeree, which I now understand to have Indian origins (I thought it was French for some reason - probably just childhood association having first eaten it there).
Certainly e.g. the pizza you get in the US is not much like the pizza you get in Italy, and the Chinese food in the UK is not much like what people actually eat in China.
I've eaten in tons of places downtown and in fancy ethnic places in gentrified areas all over America. Even there the "foreign food" is watered down compared to its country of origin. At best it's close to the quality/palette of the touristy places of the original country.
The closer you can get is in some immigrant restaurants (dives etc) that only people of said ethnicity ever go.
> In an era when (white and co) americans devour all kinds of ethnic cuisines
I suspect this is the case in big cities, I don't know how broadly it holds in America. I've been in San Francisco for 4 years, so I've tried or at least been made aware of tons of ethnic cuisine, but before that I had never tried sushi and had never even seen an Indian or Thai restaurant. Perhaps the rural Midwest is the last place these things spread to. All we really had were tons of Chinese and Mexican restaurants and a smattering of French, Italian, and Japanese places, all undoubtedly as unauthentic as they come.
They're there, just not where you were I guess. I've seen Indian places in rural Missouri. Tibetan in rural Maine. Vietnamese and Filipino in rural Georgia.
People of all nationalities are scattered throughout the US and have opened restaurants with varying degrees of fidelity to their origins in many cities and towns.
They're usually out there but so few people know where to look or bother to do so that it's pretty frequent that white American families just end up at some chain resturant instead of noticing the little Thai place around the corner.
I grew up in a census designated place and there were plenty around where I was. It wasn't a super low density region or anything and a city of a few hundred thousand people was maybe a 15 minute drive. But I can't agree stronger that it isn't like you have to be in SF or NYC to get exposed to cuisines from other countries.
I guess it depends -- I think you can find at least one good chinese, vietnamese etc place in most major cities, including e.g. Memphis, Flagstaff, Kansas City, the quad cities etc. At least I had some in all of these.
But if we're talking about rural midwest away from big cities, then you'll probably have to drive a few hours to get there.
And of course even in the big midwest cities, while a few good place will exist, they wont be as popular as in NY, or SF.
That sounds right. I definitely knew people growing up who would travel a couple of hours to "big" cities and visit such restaurants, but even then, it's a fairly special occasion, and not what I would consider a part of their regular diet. Contrast that with myself and my friends and colleagues in San Francisco, where Japanese/Indian/Thai/Vietnamese/etc. are regular candidates for everyday meals.
Hey, even small, remote Hackensack, MN (pop. 308) has a Thai restaurant. So it's not exactly mission impossible to find (Americanized) ethnic food in the Midwest.
It's changing. I'm starting to see Japanese (well...sushi), Thai, Indian and sometimes Mediterranean restaurants pop up in smaller Midwest cities. Vietnamese still seems to be pretty uncommon, though. In the Chicago suburbs there's tons of ethnic restaurants (not as many as Chicago itself, but still a lot).
San Francisco has a dearth of new restaurant concepts because of the insane real estate market -- new restaurants stick to tried-and-true formulae (artisanal coffee, artisanal toast, $10 ravioli) because they'll go bankrupt otherwise.
Local regulations also prevent foreign multinational chains from opening restaurants here, just as they prevent domestic multinationals like Wal-mart. (Din Tai Fung chose to open their new location in San Jose instead of SF.)
I don't see how SF's anti-chain laws relate to a claimed dearth of new restaurant concepts. In fact, I feel strongly that they have the opposite effect.
In fact, the overall assertion that there are a dearth of new restaurant concepts is highly suspect. I can think of recent restaurants that have opened in my immediate neighborhood that are Burmese, Indonesian vegan, Japanese, Southern, Mexican, French, Californian, Chinese / American Fusion, Thai, places where you buy tickets ahead of time versus taquerias, etc. Any city in the world dreams of this diversity in new restaurants. So while I agree that high rents are pushing up restaurant prices, I see it effecting prices rather than the types of restaurants for the most part (unless you simply mean that everything gets a bit more upscale as time goes on).
I can't envision any foreign multinational chains opening up a Burmese or Indonesian vegan restaurant in northern California anytime soon regardless of anti-chain laws so we should focus on our local businesses if we want to increase diversity
Actually a large portion of the foods we consider "ethnic" such as Orange Chicken and Burritos originate or are tailored specifically for an American palate (and did not exist as such dishes natively). Even Tikka Misala is a British take on Indian flavors.
Go to the Southwestern US or Northern Mexico and you will see millions of ethnic Latinos eating burritos. Not sure where you get the idea that they're just for Whites.
I made no such claim in my original comment. To clarify, I mean that these dishes were invented in America, for an American audience. Whether anyone else can enjoy them is besides the point.
Ethnic Mexicans invented it for themselves. Whether they did so in the borders of the U.S. or Mexico is irrelevant, especially since the different ethnicities in the U.S. were much less integrated then than they are now.
I.e. there wasn't some magical discontinuity at the border that means it made more sense to count Mexican-Americans of that era as more closely similar to Anglo-Saxon Americans than to Mexican nationals. It happens that the Burrito was invented near the northern end of where ethnic Mexicans lived but that doesn't seem to say much about the type of palate it was created for.
Then we might interpret the fact that the burrito is much more popular in northern Mexico as evidence that the taste for burritos is correlated with American cultural influence.
But overall my point is, different cultures may have different tastes. Hence if you would concede that northern Mexico and the rest of Mexico seem to differ in opinion about the burrito, then we have established cultural taste distinctions can exist, which is all I want to say.
Um. It's not really about whether or not you like or dislike turkish delight. Its about your imagination when you thought about the dessert you would most like to have. I was young enough that for me it was a turkey based savory food and not dessert at all. It's not that turkish delight is bizzaro or exotic. It's the contrast between what you thought and what it is.
It was actually a huge letdown for me too. C.S. Lewis described Turkish Delight in a way that made me think that it didn't even exist, like it was some perfect candy that was unattainable.
One day, also in my 20s, I stumbled upon it in the "ethnic" section of a supermarket near my college. I was so excited I could hardly get out of the store before trying it out. Just like the author, I couldn't believe it was just a thick gummy starchy mess with some powdered sugar messily slopped on top.
Also, it should be noted, I'm not sure if you're from America or not, but eating sushi / thai / indian foods can actually be quite uncommon in most of America, in particular the fly-over states.
Even someone like me who grew up 10 mins from Providence / 45 mins from Boston on the east coast never had tried thai / sushi / indian food until college, and even then, I was considered weird and adventurous by my hometown friends.
You might be right that within the past decade it's become more popular, I can't say, but I know in the 80s/90s when I grew up, there wasn't much available "ethnic" cuisine.
Lastly, my quotes around "ethnic" aren't in response to your usage of the word, they are just my own response to the fact that people would consider me "ethnic" even though I grew up in America just like they did, and the false distinction has always bothered me. :)
There are big difference in national preferences, even between America and Britain. If you'll forgive the generalisations: Your chocolate is bland, gritty and oily. Twizzlers and Red Vines taste like candle wax. Your bread is like cotton wool and your cheese is only vaguely cheese-flavoured.
It's not the texture—it's the flavors. You're right, it's basically a gummy bear covered in powdered sugar. The problem is the flavor. It's not a taste most Americans associate with dessert. I think they taste like perfumed gumdrops.
No, I'm taking of white americans, who supposedly (and perhaps actually) mainly eat in bland chain restaurants, have watered down ethnic chains, and usually always search for the nearest McDonalds whenever they are abroad.
I tend to think that's more of a stereotype than a reality. I mean, I've been all over this country, and the only place I've really found people to prefer bland food was in the Upper Midwest -- I may not know how it's possible to cook ground beef so it ends up with less flavor than it had starting out, but Wisconsin sure does. But that's the only place I've ever been where I could make that complaint.
Of course, now that I think about it, some of the tastiest dishes I've ever had were based around venison, and anecdotal evidence suggests that the taste of venison is rarely known among white Americans who like to go around making snide and rather ignorant comments about the tastes of other white Americans.
My mother (later I would help) used to make Turkish Delights along with a bunch of other holiday cookies and candies most years. I'm almost positive that the recipe came from one of the Betty Crocker cookbooks, although it's been many years.
I think for the majority of Americans that aren't used to trying these foods it's likely more a matter of supply. It might be hard to support a Vietnamese restaurant in a smaller town with an extremely small Vietnamese population, and the restaurant might go out of business before many people have a chance to even try it (or overcome any hesitance they might have).
I think it varies, region to region. I once tried and failed to persuade a roomful of Midwesterners to go to a Russian restaurant. Southerners (at least in Tennessee and Kentucky, probably in Appalachia in general; I can't comment on the Deep South) are pretty willing to explore new foods, in my experience; and in the Northeast and on the West Coast, curiosity about food is ubiquitous and routine.
Hmm...I never thought it was strange. Turkish Delight is delicious. I pick some up whenever I find myself in a Mediterranean grocery. I'm not fond of every flavor, especially the very sweet ones, but the fruit and nut options are delightful, to me. I find it interesting that it's considered a major disappointment by a lot of folks. I mean, I think every friend I've ever had that's tried it, after my raving about it, has been somewhat less enthused about it than I am, but I don't think anyone has ever said it was repulsive.
This is kind of a weird criticism since there's so much variety in Turkish Delight. It would be like saying "cereal is too sweet" or "snack bars have unfamiliar flavors", when both of those things, like Turkish Delight, can be made with all sorts of different flavors.
Thank you for posting this. It is a relief to see something with good vibes that contains Turkey in it. Reading about Turkey in world news and comments is depressing. Believe me, Turkish people think more about lokum and food than politics.
Hacı Bekir company is mentioned in the article. Another interesting point is that it is the oldest operating company in Turkey founded in 1777:
I've never been lucky enough to visit Turkey, though I have some hope of attending a conference in Istanbul next year.
I _have_ gotten to stay with two separate Turkish AirBnB hosts here in the UK -- and both times were amazing. I'm sure it's not right to generalise from this small number of examples, but Turkish hospitality is clearly a _big_ deal. Even just visiting Turkish friends in their respective homes, there seems to be this feeling of great pride in hosting a guest.
I hope it's something that English culture can learn from.
Edit: hope I'm not coming over as patronising here. Just thought I'd share a more positive view.
I've spent some months in İstanbul over the last ten year. Lovely place, one of my favorites in the world.
Some tips for Americans:
* Always bring a gift for the host.
* Always offer multiple times; frequently it's considered rude to accept something on first offer.
As an American who knew next to nothing about Turkey before ~2000, it seems like Turkey is in an "Uncanny Valley" in the American mind. The results of the reform/revolution era (1920's and 30's) are astounding, and I think that the Turkish Republic doesn't get nearly the credit it deserves.
It's one of those "truth is stranger than fiction" things. Usually societies that get to the point of the Ottoman Empire just collapse. That when the Empire fell, the Turks took a such a hard look at their society, decided it wasn't working, and radically changed it overnight, is a fascinating story that isn't really known here.
Thank you. I also think that reform era is an example of fast modernization and execution in general. History and geography puts Turkey in a strange position by force :)
I wish Ataturk had lived longer. He had a vision that was a valuable gift to a country after a devastating war.
"Countries are different, but there exists only one civilization, and for a nation to progress, it must take part in that unique civilization." [1]
"We shall raise the national culture beyond the level of contemporary civilization."[1]
I also admire how philosophically thought the U.S. governmental system and constitution in search of a ideal state system.
It's better to appreciate good things. It's better to hope together for the future.
If it makes you feel any better, I have wonderful memories of visiting Istanbul with my family when I was a child and would love to go back. The people were wonderful and friendly. Im not keen on the direction that Erdogan has been taking your country but that's something that is only my business in the sense that I can complain about him from the comfort of my own country.
Thank you. It made me feel better! I would like to host you/have a coffe with you if you come to Istanbul again. On the subject of direction of Turkey, there are more objective and problematic indicators like press freedom. And then there are superfluous statements made by Erdogan just to get some more votes, just to troll opponents etc. Don't mind the latter. Those words are just sauces and masks, not the real stuff. Most people vote for the lesser evil, and Erdogan's party only won in the early elections after forming of a coalition has failed by other parties. Most of the people live modernly and want to live modernly. So I don't think the direction will go to extremes.
I grew up on "turkish delight" in Washington state, home of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Orchards which makes "Aplets and Cotlets", Turkish Delight flavored with apples and apricots. (It's incredible)
Wow, I mentioned Aplets and Cotlets on another thread. I didn't realize that they actually are Turkish Delight (that is, based on a recipe for lokum). They are delicious!
As a kid I envisioned it as kind of a sticky, tender, caramel-y confection, like a nutty blond fudge. But from now on I'll think of it as Aplets and Cotlets.
"Aplets and Cotlets" is exactly what I always though Turkish Delights would taste like from the books.. and something I really enjoy myself once I had the chance to try it. I'm a little confused about TFA...
A Muslim coworker once told me many believe the Christian apologist CS Lewis was showing an anti-Muslim bias in using Turkish Delight as the temptation ... supposedly it is a warning against the enticements of a non-Christian world view. Does anyone have more info on this angle?
It's almost assuredly a splitting of hairs, but having read a decent amount of Lewis, and knowing a bit about the times and places he lived in, I think Lewis would admit to having a conscious bias against Islam, but not a conscious one against Muslims. (A bias against the belief system, not against the people that practice it)
His use of Turkish Delight is, I have heard, thought of as a personal thing, that Lewis as a young boy would have been mightily tempted by Turkish Delight.
Knowing also the yelling that goes back and forth between Christians and Muslims about bits and bobs in the other's corpus of literature and culture, I'd imagine that it is as much planned anti-Muslim bias as unintentional.
Slightly offtopic but I had the fortune to visit Istanbul in October and it was by far the highlight of our European holiday.
The culture is fantastic. Turkish breakfast is an amazing thing. Fresh simit pastries are insanely good. I love the hamam, the bazaar, and even turkish delight.
I'm Asian American and grew up eating and enjoying a ton of weird shit including rotten fish, pork blood, durian, etc, but even I encountered the same feeling of disappointment after tasting my first Turkish delight. Like the OP, I had imagined this amazing treat in my head after reading those books and seeing those movies/cartoons as a child. It's definitely an acquired taste that I eventually learned to like after finally finding a flavor I enjoyed (pistachio). Most of them taste like powdery gummy perfume.
You can't simply blame "uncultured Whities". An analogous "weird" flavor in the West is licorice. I just don't get it.
My first experience with Turkish delight was a commercial product in a gold foil wrapper and a purple label (I don't know if it was fry's or not - it was in similar wrapping to the old kitkat - 1/2 paper, 1/2 foil). It was covered in chocolate with a centre that was chewy like a slightly softened beef jerky. It had a fragrant flavour that reminded me of perfume, but it was a resounding yuk.
In later years, I came across a gelatinous pink treat covered in a white powder - the texture was about as squishy as jelly. There was a more subtle taste and it was delicious.
I never remember associating Turkish delight with Narnia. But, I remember associating gold foil wrappers with willy wonka.
My experience has been the worse the packaging, the better the Turkish delight. Ideally it'll look like something someone threw together in their home kitchen.
If the first was "covered in chocolate" it was decidedly not a turkish delight, but some mass market abomination of such.
The second sounds much closer to actual turkish delights. (Which are not just turkish, but all over the arab world + balkans, greece etc. Some of the best are said to be made in the middle east).
The centre is flavoured with rosewater, which is what makes it a bit odd to western tastes.
Turkish Delight (proper Turkish Delight) can be flavoured with all sorts of different things. Rosewater is traditional, but I prefer lemon or orange. I've seen it with nuts.
I have never tasted Turkish Delight, but it sounds like a unimaginably sweet exotic masterpiece of confectionery.
I mean, I always imagined that it would be something a sultan in his majestic palace would order, and it would taste about the same as the illustrations of some wondrous palace in Istanbul by the illustrations in the book (by Pauline Baynes) looked like.
I know when I read it (when I was 7 or 8), I envisioned it as a candied turkey - kind of like the crunchy sweet shell on a honey baked ham. Very disappointing in that context.
Along similar lines I always imagined a middle eastern variation on General Tso's chicken. Candy never entered my mind, I always assumed it was an entrée of some type.
"Probably the Queen knew quite well what he was thinking; for she knew, though Edmund did not, that this was enchanted Turkish Delight and that anyone who had once tasted it would want more and more of it, and would even, if they were allowed, go on eating it till they killed themselves."
The article actually points that out too, but glosses over it: "(To be fair, it was enchanted. But still, Edmund. Still.)"
Seems like an important point though. Yes, Edmund liked turkish delight enough to ask for it in the first place, but once he had the Queen's Turkish Delight he was more hopeless than a heroin addict desperate for their next fix.
As an aside, I can't believe we're debating Turkish Delight and "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" on Hacker News.
Kind of like saying it's awful how people paint Hitler and Nazism in general in such a dehumanizing evil light, when they rebuilt a war-torn Germany into a well-oiled prosperous country (To be fair, they genocided some minorities¹. But still, people. Still.)
¹ - Assuming that the holocaust happened. It is my understanding that a lot of people deny that any ethnic minorities were killed by the Nazi regime and that the entire thing was fabricated, but the overwhelming opinion is that a number of people perished in the camps and a not insignificant amount of the survivors were severely maltreated.
my imagining was actually a meat-with-gravy dish, just like someone else in the article -- I think "sticky turkey" was what I had in mind.
In terms of reading more into it: I didn't get the impression that Edmund was willing to "sell everyone out" for a piece. More like, Edmund was willing to judge the white witch positively because she gave him attention and gifts. He became enchanted, both in the magical and in the mundane sense -- he was sure that she was telling the truth, that she had his best interests in mind, and therefore that anyone who viewed her negatively must have selfish ulterior motives. Whatever negative feelings he had about his siblings became magnified -- every memory of every white lie any of them had told, every mistake in judgement shown by any of them, became a reason to think they were now intentionally committing treason against the true and righteous queen of Narnia.
We've all seen that effect with someone becoming "enchanted" with a politician, celebrity, or religious figure. Their reasons for thinking highly of that person might be trivial or even stupid, but once they hold that opinion, they'll respond to criticism with anger. It's a pattern often seen with abusive relationships -- "he's just a great guy!" "he comes home drunk and chokes you" "YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS!!!!"
I'm falling for a bit of forum bikeshedding here of commenting on something very important :) but...it's one thing to say "I imagined it was like this, but it was like that. And here's what my friends imagined" and another to start the thing like "man, c.s.l. sure tricked everyone with his weird, weird candy!"
I can't remember whether I tried to imagine it or allowed it to be intriguing-but-unknown in my mind.
The time of publishing may have been a factor - in 1950 Britain was still recovering from the second world war, and rationing was still in force, so there would have been nowhere near the abundance of sweet foods available that there are now. In that context even some Turkish delight could be an exciting treat.
There are also some varieties available on Amazon, and elsewhere online.
A lot of good Turkish Delight in the US (including Aplets & Cotlets) is made by Armenians, who aren't in any hurry to credit the Turks for it. They typically call the confection by its Turkish name, "lokum" -- which roughly means "delight."
It's funny though, it's true I heard of it from the Chronicles of Narnia. It sounded so good for some reason. I mean, if that kid would throw his family under the bus for some, I want to try it!
Bad ones, yes. Unfortunately most of us like to cheat tourists. (Actually, each other too)
Buy from specialized shops who sells their own products. There are so many types and flavors, you would find the one you like.
I loved them, so I bought my family boxes of them last Christmas. They complained that the turkish delight tasted like flowers/perfume -- now that's all I can taste, and I don't get it often anymore.
I tried it as a child and it tasted like how I imagine pot pourri would taste. Really not my thing.
If you want a sweet Middle Eastern food, I'd definitely suggest baklava. The worst that'll happen there is a bit of coconut. (Or... a swift and painful death, if you're allergic to nuts.)
One common flavoring is rose-water, which yes, comes from roses, and smells like them.
Then again, it's delicious, and nothing much stranger than smelling like strawberry etc.
It's just a matter of taste. If Americans can adapt to all the asian/l.american etc food they eat, they can adapt to turkish delights in a week or so of eating.
I find them pretty tasteless, it is the powdered sugar that gives them taste.
This will sound strange, but try taking a Turkish Delight and dipping it in some water. It will remove the powered sugar, and you'll get to taste what the Turkish Delight itself tastes like (very little).
If you want to try Middle Eastern sweets, check Kunafa or Baklava instead because Turkish Delights (Lokum) are really for kids not adults and they're served along something like Dragée in special occasions and mainly to kids too.
Well, in Turkey, Turkish Delight is not as popular as people may think. Probably, tourists eat more Turkish Delight than Turkish people... I eat more of this sweet here in US then back in Turkey. Looks like another article that just enjoys stereotyping.
Does anyone really remember what kid-them thought of when they read these passages about Turkish delight a decade plus earlier? I certainly don't and I read the Narnia books at least twice.
The author is a she, and the article is really about childhood fantasy, imagination and disappointment, via the lens of how a bunch of American kids imagined the unknown "Turkish Delight."
(Also, the only lokum I ever had tasted like gummy rosewater with nuts. Ew.)
.jpg){kind=link}
In an era when (white and co) americans devour all kinds of ethnic cuisines, including raw sushi, all kinds of indian, thai, etc. I find this article bordering on the absurd.
Unless you're health conscious and don't like sugar, there's not much for an American to dislike about turkish delights -- sugary, gelatinous etc. Kind of the missing link between gummy bears, jelly and marshmallows.
They've eaten far more bizzaro foods.