The first sentence of the next to last paragraph should be “Thongchai, strangely enough, when there has been strong public criticism of academics either individually or as a group, seems to regard such exercise
First of all, apology for a long quote. Thongchai writes (emphases mine):
When some people call for “scholars of Thai studies” to do this and that, I wonder if they think the community of Thai studies is a homogeneous, like-minded, and coherently organized that can make a collective decision one way or another as a single group. We can and should make appeals, comments, criticisms, and so on to colleagues. But we cannot expect those individuals to make a collective actions as a single group. Scholars of Thai studies are diverse individuals like academics in a university – perhaps even less organized. We cannot expect or demand them to move in one direction or participate in an international conference with similar agenda in minds.
I read this paragraph several times and still cannot get the point.
I don’t see anyone, myself included, when making criticism of academics, make any assumption that those academics are “homogeneous, like-minded…”
But, more importantly, I cannot see why, recognizing the heterogeneity of any particular groups has to prevent us from making criticism or demand of that group as a group. We all make such criticism and demand to doctors, reporters, media personnel, and so on, as a group all the times. Nothing wrong with that. We demand that people in the media, for instance, should try to be politically-neutral in their presentations of news and not playing politics, etc.
Or, by this logic, should we stop making criticism or demand to “Thai society” as a whole, because it’s so heterogeneous, etc? Should we stop, for instance, demanding that Thai Buddhists should show more understanding and toleration towards Muslims minority, because that would mean demanding so heterogeneous a group to “move in one direction” ? Of course not. When we make such demands, I think we are all realist enough to know that there would be more than a few Buddhists who continue to show bigotry, intolerance, etc. But making demands or appeals to them as a group is a legitimate exercise. Why?
Thongchai, strangely enough, when criticism of academics either individually or as a group, seems to regard such exercise as exclusively a private conversation with that persons or that group of people. But such exercises are social undertaking, or, to put a matter in a more political language, an ideological-political struggle, a matter of “cultural politics”, which involve people more than that persons or that particular group of people (their readers, their students, and the status of health of a culture of society “as a whole”, etc).
By the way, let’s suppose – God forbids – that an academic of high stature in Thai studies community like Thongchai got arrested for political reasons, would it not permissible to demand that, say, an international gathering of academics of Thai studies, no matter how “heterogeneous…” the participants, should “make a collective decision” to issue a statement of condemnation of the arrest? Would it be totally inconceivable that such a “collective decision” could actually happen? (Even if, in such hypothetical scenario, there could not be an agreement among the participants to issue the statement, I still cannot see why one cannot make such a demand to them, and criticizing them strongly as a group for failing to do so.) My point is, while we are realist enough to know that, as in other professions (journalists, doctors, Buddhists, etc.), academics rarely move in one direction collectively, it’s not totally inconceivable either that there could be cases that an overwhelming majority of them do. But more importantly, this is not the reason why demands to a group of profession should not be made. (When we demand or appeal that Thai Buddhists should show toleration towards Muslims, do any of us ever think that every Thai Buddhist would do so? Of course not. But can and should we continue to demand, and hope and expect that at least the majority of them would one day do so? I cannot see why not.
As the convenor of the conference, I have addressed our intention to organise this conference from the beginning that we need to promote contemporary research about Thailand to academics in this part of the world. No need to mention my point that we have established a team of academics to work on the peer-review process and academic mentor. We do not mean to be an alternative of any other Thai studies conference. For positive thinkers like us, the more dissemination about our country, the better for young, novice researchers and the public to understand various issues in Thailand.
To me, your questions have painted our conference and those who organised Thai studies in Melbourne as the competitor to ANU. I am very concerned about this kind of message because it neither promote development of the field nor collaboration among academic institutions.
I don’t see the relationship between the role of the Thai ambassador and our conference, as you pointed. In fact, you should have attended the Melbourne conference.
I think the central reason for Thai food’s popularity in Australia is the price point. Students can eat out at their local suburban Thai place (usually they have an option of two or three different ones) for $10 – $15 a head, including bringing a bottle of clean-skin wine to share. This earns the Thai restaurant a mystical, nostalgic quality that is hard to shake as the student (hopefully – or perhaps not) matures into a yuppie.
I hear this all the time on campuses:
“Let’s get some food”.
“Ok: Indian, Thai, Vietnamese … ?”
This isn’t because Australia’s self-funded students are obsessed with Asian food – it’s more that they can’t afford to eat out anywhere that charges more than $12 for a main meal very often. And whether you’re in King St, Sydney or Lygon St, Melbourne, most of the affordable restaurants are Thai, followed by Vietnamese and Indian.
Further to what some other comments have said – Thai food in Australia IS pretty boring. There is the odd restaurant that surprises you, but on the whole, it’s the same eight dishes served up again and again. Vietnamese and Indian restaurants, by comparison, usually have a larger range in terms of regional variety (obviously not counting the pho canteens).
For me, Thai restaurants are rapidly losing ground to the Vietnamese restaurants in Australia. Australian Vietnamese cuisine is becoming less separable from the real thing.
I’ve had some absolutely sensational Thai dishes – but always in Thailand.
When I was at a Thai language school we were told in all seriousness that many Thais were apprehensive about travelling abroad because they would not be able to find their favourite Thai dishes and “might starve.”
So maybe the explosion of Thai restaurants was a kind of self preservation exercise?
At the same time it appears that Thai food abroad becomes a craze among non-Thais for a while and then levels off. There are many forums that discuss these issues.
Of interest to me is how farangs have adapted in various parts of Thailand. How many cling to Bangkok for the food? How many settle in Isaan and love the local dishes? If they don’t then what do they do? How many farangs are out there baking their own bread?
Eating posh food is not the problem, it’s the etiquette that can be disconcerting, whether it is western or Thai food.
Food is a bit like education, anyone who has experienced it is automatically an expert. At the end of the day just eat what you like and don’t worry about whether it’s Thai, Italian, Mexican, French or just something made up out of what’s available.
It goes back very deep into the culture. Let’s take a look at the French, Italian and Thai. When it comes to eating. They have many similar things in common. They are very serious about eating good foods. When they get together with friends and families, eating is their main social function. They usually like to cook and take pride in their cooking.
2) why have the Thais been so successful at taking their cuisine to the far corners of the world?
Thai foods have very good mixed of tastes . I can give you a few examples. Som tum, Tom Yum, Khaw Soy, and all kind of yums and curries. Some dishes is known for sudden taste. Example are Khaw Mun Gai, Mooh Satay, Khaw Kai Jeaw, Pad See Aiew.
Now my mind is fooling me again . My alarm clock tells me that it is five past twelve AM. I had a big plate of spaghetti with basil pesto plus a big greek salad. How can I feel hungry again
Is the Melbourne one an “alternative”? In what sense? Alternative to what? Definitely not in the sense that it is more for social activists — that’s not what the Thai Ambassador saw it or wanted it to be for sure. According to the Ambassador, it was alternative to ANU/ Canberra. Is it alternative to Thai Studies at ANU too?
An international conf like the ICTS doesn’t have a fixed character. It depends on the host and participants each time. In a way it reflects the broad arrays of scholars who work on Thailand. I don’t think we can make it the way we like every time. It will be up and down in different ways, both politically and academically. And typically it would include a wide range of interests, politics and ideologies — which reflect the field of Thai studies and people in that field.
By the way, the ICTS at Thammasat in 2008 might be seen by some as a “down” one. (I wonder if such is a reason for another one that is relatively more “friendly” to Thailand.)
When some people call for “scholars of Thai studies” to do this and that, I wonder if they think the community of Thai studies is a homogeneous, like-minded, and coherently organized that can make a collective decision one way or another as a single group. We can and should make appeals, comments, criticisms, and so on to colleagues. But we cannot expect those individuals to make a collective actions as a single group. Scholars of Thai studies are diverse individuals like academics in a university — perhaps even less organized. We cannot expect or demand them to move in one direction or participate in an international conference with similar agenda in minds.
But we can participate or take actions to make our voices heard and our views known.
I attended both conference and I must admit, although the Melbourne conference is much smaller, it has more academic vibe and much more interesting than Mahidol’s conference.
The speakers and subject matters at Melbourne focus on the contemporary issues in Thailand and the future of the kingdom. To be honest, Mahidol’s conference was just another gathering for historians or political scientists who can’t find a descent job so they decide to teach and do research on Thailand where they can feel important anytime they visit the country.
and I am not talking about ANU scholars who are interested in Thai studies.
…saw the ethereal world of Thai studies to be a cold and airless realm…
…We academics have chosen to be educators, I hope, because we think we can make a difference in the world. The lack of strong emotion here was most disappointing…
When I first saw the program of this Conference, I felt surreal, as in a dream. Sure, there’re perhaps one, or two, or three topics of some interest or relevancy, but overall the Conference looked like being done by people who lived in dream-land. It’s hard to believe that the Conference was taking place virtually at the same time as the largest-ever number of people had just been killed for political reasons on the streets in the same city of the Conference.
Khun Hinke’s account as well as some verbal reports from people I know only confirm that my feeling is sadly correct.
In Thailand about 40% of the labour force is estimated to work in agriculture, which accounts for about 11% of GPD. A lot of recent Thai politics can be understood in terms of that striking pair of statistics. AW
@ Eisel Mazard #3
What hope do academics have of expressing an opinion about Thailand and its convoluted history when draconian laws hang over their head if they should happen to say the wrong thing? And with deputy rectors monitoring conversations, lectures and blogs for just the slightest of infringement; eg a student posting a link to a site, so they can swear out a complaint with the police, what hope do academics have of saying what they find is wrong?
Even sane friends in the street whisper when talking about certain happenings/events for fear of being carted off to jail for 15 years, after a trial held in secret, of course.
And you complain about the type of food, even though you could have lunched elsewhere, which is what the academics who have the Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads; mostly did in protest, for fear of that 15+ years.
I’d be much more clearer/lucid/expressive, but I live in Thailand and I’m old, having served in Malaya, Borneo and Vietnam, and as I have no wish to die in a Thai gaol, I’ll leave it to you to look into the reasons and it certainly isn’t about food and money.
Is it possible to write about MSG, a very dangerous excitotoxin (check dr. Russell Blaylock) present in every Thai dish? Or New Mandala would loose its corporate sponsors?
Thai food and SE Asian food is delicious, but who is pushing all that MSG? Their grandmothers could cook without it, right? So what is this craziness about must use of MSG. Braiwashing and addiction?
Too bad for the Thai cousine. Poisoned after every meal.
Just to make it clear. A country where the majority of the labor force work in agriculture, is a country where the majority of the population live in poverty. There is no exception and no way around it, unless it exports enormous amount of food. Despite Thailand’s large agricultural sector, it still only contributes to 10% of its GDP.
In any developed country, less than 5% works in agriculture. In Thailand it is currently around 40%, down from more than 60% in the 90’s. Unless economic development is reversed, it will continue down toward 20% in the next 10 – 15 years.
Nich, though I’ve never been, I imagine Rome would be somewhere where I’d find some of my favourite food – so I searched for Thai restaurants in Rome, and there seems to be just one (though I didn’t search particularly thoroughly) http://tinyurl.com/4xewwpz
Also, is it just me, or is there not a big variety of mangsawilat Thai cuisine, compared to, Italian or Indian etc? How can it be universal if it doesn’t include vegetarians?! Haha!
We do not only have to rely on people such as Chai-anan for neo-romamticism. The Master himself, Sonthi L, declared that Thailand must ““determine a path towards agriculture, not industry. Thailand cannot do this.”
Much food for thought here. Among other things, and to put the question differently, what I am wondering is are there places where Thai food/restaurateurs/etc tried and failed to break into a local food scene (because the food wasn’t considered up to local standards of “deliciousness”, or perhaps for other reasons…)?
I know Thai food is considered delicious (among certain demographics) in Burma — I have eaten it there often enough. I also know that lots of Canberrans rave about the few places around this town that serve Burmese food. But Burmese food will never, I expect, crack the Thai market. Many popular Burmese dishes would probably be considered “mai aroy“. I am intrigued by these flows of nourishment, ideas, prejudices, and all the rest.
Most Thais of my close acquaintance find the prospect of eating posh Western food somewhat disconcerting, and seem to rarely enjoy the experience. At the same time I’m not sure if that is because of the flavour, the style, the atmosphere. So many factors can be considered. “French food: Universally delicious?”, we could ask.
But all of the responses here suggest to me that interesting things happen (and have happened) with Thai food in particular. I have an appetite for learning more.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
No passion at ICTS11
Sorry for the error.
The first sentence of the next to last paragraph should be “Thongchai, strangely enough, when there has been strong public criticism of academics either individually or as a group, seems to regard such exercise
No passion at ICTS11
First of all, apology for a long quote. Thongchai writes (emphases mine):
When some people call for “scholars of Thai studies” to do this and that, I wonder if they think the community of Thai studies is a homogeneous, like-minded, and coherently organized that can make a collective decision one way or another as a single group. We can and should make appeals, comments, criticisms, and so on to colleagues. But we cannot expect those individuals to make a collective actions as a single group. Scholars of Thai studies are diverse individuals like academics in a university – perhaps even less organized. We cannot expect or demand them to move in one direction or participate in an international conference with similar agenda in minds.
I read this paragraph several times and still cannot get the point.
I don’t see anyone, myself included, when making criticism of academics, make any assumption that those academics are “homogeneous, like-minded…”
But, more importantly, I cannot see why, recognizing the heterogeneity of any particular groups has to prevent us from making criticism or demand of that group as a group. We all make such criticism and demand to doctors, reporters, media personnel, and so on, as a group all the times. Nothing wrong with that. We demand that people in the media, for instance, should try to be politically-neutral in their presentations of news and not playing politics, etc.
Or, by this logic, should we stop making criticism or demand to “Thai society” as a whole, because it’s so heterogeneous, etc? Should we stop, for instance, demanding that Thai Buddhists should show more understanding and toleration towards Muslims minority, because that would mean demanding so heterogeneous a group to “move in one direction” ? Of course not. When we make such demands, I think we are all realist enough to know that there would be more than a few Buddhists who continue to show bigotry, intolerance, etc. But making demands or appeals to them as a group is a legitimate exercise. Why?
Thongchai, strangely enough, when criticism of academics either individually or as a group, seems to regard such exercise as exclusively a private conversation with that persons or that group of people. But such exercises are social undertaking, or, to put a matter in a more political language, an ideological-political struggle, a matter of “cultural politics”, which involve people more than that persons or that particular group of people (their readers, their students, and the status of health of a culture of society “as a whole”, etc).
By the way, let’s suppose – God forbids – that an academic of high stature in Thai studies community like Thongchai got arrested for political reasons, would it not permissible to demand that, say, an international gathering of academics of Thai studies, no matter how “heterogeneous…” the participants, should “make a collective decision” to issue a statement of condemnation of the arrest? Would it be totally inconceivable that such a “collective decision” could actually happen? (Even if, in such hypothetical scenario, there could not be an agreement among the participants to issue the statement, I still cannot see why one cannot make such a demand to them, and criticizing them strongly as a group for failing to do so.) My point is, while we are realist enough to know that, as in other professions (journalists, doctors, Buddhists, etc.), academics rarely move in one direction collectively, it’s not totally inconceivable either that there could be cases that an overwhelming majority of them do. But more importantly, this is not the reason why demands to a group of profession should not be made. (When we demand or appeal that Thai Buddhists should show toleration towards Muslims, do any of us ever think that every Thai Buddhist would do so? Of course not. But can and should we continue to demand, and hope and expect that at least the majority of them would one day do so? I cannot see why not.
Unity is dead; long live coexistence
Thank you Andrew for your comments and review.
No passion at ICTS11
Dear Thongchai,
As the convenor of the conference, I have addressed our intention to organise this conference from the beginning that we need to promote contemporary research about Thailand to academics in this part of the world. No need to mention my point that we have established a team of academics to work on the peer-review process and academic mentor. We do not mean to be an alternative of any other Thai studies conference. For positive thinkers like us, the more dissemination about our country, the better for young, novice researchers and the public to understand various issues in Thailand.
To me, your questions have painted our conference and those who organised Thai studies in Melbourne as the competitor to ANU. I am very concerned about this kind of message because it neither promote development of the field nor collaboration among academic institutions.
I don’t see the relationship between the role of the Thai ambassador and our conference, as you pointed. In fact, you should have attended the Melbourne conference.
Thai food: Universally delicious?
I think the central reason for Thai food’s popularity in Australia is the price point. Students can eat out at their local suburban Thai place (usually they have an option of two or three different ones) for $10 – $15 a head, including bringing a bottle of clean-skin wine to share. This earns the Thai restaurant a mystical, nostalgic quality that is hard to shake as the student (hopefully – or perhaps not) matures into a yuppie.
I hear this all the time on campuses:
“Let’s get some food”.
“Ok: Indian, Thai, Vietnamese … ?”
This isn’t because Australia’s self-funded students are obsessed with Asian food – it’s more that they can’t afford to eat out anywhere that charges more than $12 for a main meal very often. And whether you’re in King St, Sydney or Lygon St, Melbourne, most of the affordable restaurants are Thai, followed by Vietnamese and Indian.
Further to what some other comments have said – Thai food in Australia IS pretty boring. There is the odd restaurant that surprises you, but on the whole, it’s the same eight dishes served up again and again. Vietnamese and Indian restaurants, by comparison, usually have a larger range in terms of regional variety (obviously not counting the pho canteens).
For me, Thai restaurants are rapidly losing ground to the Vietnamese restaurants in Australia. Australian Vietnamese cuisine is becoming less separable from the real thing.
I’ve had some absolutely sensational Thai dishes – but always in Thailand.
Thailand: an upper-middle income economy
Does this mean that HIV drugs will cost more?
Thai food: Universally delicious?
When I was at a Thai language school we were told in all seriousness that many Thais were apprehensive about travelling abroad because they would not be able to find their favourite Thai dishes and “might starve.”
So maybe the explosion of Thai restaurants was a kind of self preservation exercise?
At the same time it appears that Thai food abroad becomes a craze among non-Thais for a while and then levels off. There are many forums that discuss these issues.
Of interest to me is how farangs have adapted in various parts of Thailand. How many cling to Bangkok for the food? How many settle in Isaan and love the local dishes? If they don’t then what do they do? How many farangs are out there baking their own bread?
Eating posh food is not the problem, it’s the etiquette that can be disconcerting, whether it is western or Thai food.
Food is a bit like education, anyone who has experienced it is automatically an expert. At the end of the day just eat what you like and don’t worry about whether it’s Thai, Italian, Mexican, French or just something made up out of what’s available.
No passion at ICTS11
Thai scholars are like bugs flitting about a streetlight, the closer they get, the more likely to get burned.
Thai food: Universally delicious?
1) what makes food universally delicious?
It goes back very deep into the culture. Let’s take a look at the French, Italian and Thai. When it comes to eating. They have many similar things in common. They are very serious about eating good foods. When they get together with friends and families, eating is their main social function. They usually like to cook and take pride in their cooking.
2) why have the Thais been so successful at taking their cuisine to the far corners of the world?
Thai foods have very good mixed of tastes . I can give you a few examples. Som tum, Tom Yum, Khaw Soy, and all kind of yums and curries. Some dishes is known for sudden taste. Example are Khaw Mun Gai, Mooh Satay, Khaw Kai Jeaw, Pad See Aiew.
Now my mind is fooling me again . My alarm clock tells me that it is five past twelve AM. I had a big plate of spaghetti with basil pesto plus a big greek salad. How can I feel hungry again
No passion at ICTS11
Is the Melbourne one an “alternative”? In what sense? Alternative to what? Definitely not in the sense that it is more for social activists — that’s not what the Thai Ambassador saw it or wanted it to be for sure. According to the Ambassador, it was alternative to ANU/ Canberra. Is it alternative to Thai Studies at ANU too?
An international conf like the ICTS doesn’t have a fixed character. It depends on the host and participants each time. In a way it reflects the broad arrays of scholars who work on Thailand. I don’t think we can make it the way we like every time. It will be up and down in different ways, both politically and academically. And typically it would include a wide range of interests, politics and ideologies — which reflect the field of Thai studies and people in that field.
By the way, the ICTS at Thammasat in 2008 might be seen by some as a “down” one. (I wonder if such is a reason for another one that is relatively more “friendly” to Thailand.)
When some people call for “scholars of Thai studies” to do this and that, I wonder if they think the community of Thai studies is a homogeneous, like-minded, and coherently organized that can make a collective decision one way or another as a single group. We can and should make appeals, comments, criticisms, and so on to colleagues. But we cannot expect those individuals to make a collective actions as a single group. Scholars of Thai studies are diverse individuals like academics in a university — perhaps even less organized. We cannot expect or demand them to move in one direction or participate in an international conference with similar agenda in minds.
But we can participate or take actions to make our voices heard and our views known.
No passion at ICTS11
I attended both conference and I must admit, although the Melbourne conference is much smaller, it has more academic vibe and much more interesting than Mahidol’s conference.
The speakers and subject matters at Melbourne focus on the contemporary issues in Thailand and the future of the kingdom. To be honest, Mahidol’s conference was just another gathering for historians or political scientists who can’t find a descent job so they decide to teach and do research on Thailand where they can feel important anytime they visit the country.
and I am not talking about ANU scholars who are interested in Thai studies.
No passion at ICTS11
…saw the ethereal world of Thai studies to be a cold and airless realm…
…We academics have chosen to be educators, I hope, because we think we can make a difference in the world. The lack of strong emotion here was most disappointing…
When I first saw the program of this Conference, I felt surreal, as in a dream. Sure, there’re perhaps one, or two, or three topics of some interest or relevancy, but overall the Conference looked like being done by people who lived in dream-land. It’s hard to believe that the Conference was taking place virtually at the same time as the largest-ever number of people had just been killed for political reasons on the streets in the same city of the Conference.
Khun Hinke’s account as well as some verbal reports from people I know only confirm that my feeling is sadly correct.
Thailand: an upper-middle income economy
In Thailand about 40% of the labour force is estimated to work in agriculture, which accounts for about 11% of GPD. A lot of recent Thai politics can be understood in terms of that striking pair of statistics. AW
Unity is dead; long live coexistence
great job to the organisers.
No passion at ICTS11
@ Eisel Mazard #3
What hope do academics have of expressing an opinion about Thailand and its convoluted history when draconian laws hang over their head if they should happen to say the wrong thing? And with deputy rectors monitoring conversations, lectures and blogs for just the slightest of infringement; eg a student posting a link to a site, so they can swear out a complaint with the police, what hope do academics have of saying what they find is wrong?
Even sane friends in the street whisper when talking about certain happenings/events for fear of being carted off to jail for 15 years, after a trial held in secret, of course.
And you complain about the type of food, even though you could have lunched elsewhere, which is what the academics who have the Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads; mostly did in protest, for fear of that 15+ years.
I’d be much more clearer/lucid/expressive, but I live in Thailand and I’m old, having served in Malaya, Borneo and Vietnam, and as I have no wish to die in a Thai gaol, I’ll leave it to you to look into the reasons and it certainly isn’t about food and money.
Thai food: Universally delicious?
Is it possible to write about MSG, a very dangerous excitotoxin (check dr. Russell Blaylock) present in every Thai dish? Or New Mandala would loose its corporate sponsors?
Thai food and SE Asian food is delicious, but who is pushing all that MSG? Their grandmothers could cook without it, right? So what is this craziness about must use of MSG. Braiwashing and addiction?
Too bad for the Thai cousine. Poisoned after every meal.
Thailand: an upper-middle income economy
Just to make it clear. A country where the majority of the labor force work in agriculture, is a country where the majority of the population live in poverty. There is no exception and no way around it, unless it exports enormous amount of food. Despite Thailand’s large agricultural sector, it still only contributes to 10% of its GDP.
In any developed country, less than 5% works in agriculture. In Thailand it is currently around 40%, down from more than 60% in the 90’s. Unless economic development is reversed, it will continue down toward 20% in the next 10 – 15 years.
Thai food: Universally delicious?
Nich, though I’ve never been, I imagine Rome would be somewhere where I’d find some of my favourite food – so I searched for Thai restaurants in Rome, and there seems to be just one (though I didn’t search particularly thoroughly) http://tinyurl.com/4xewwpz
Also, is it just me, or is there not a big variety of mangsawilat Thai cuisine, compared to, Italian or Indian etc? How can it be universal if it doesn’t include vegetarians?! Haha!
Thailand: an upper-middle income economy
Dear HRK #10
We do not only have to rely on people such as Chai-anan for neo-romamticism. The Master himself, Sonthi L, declared that Thailand must ““determine a path towards agriculture, not industry. Thailand cannot do this.”
Thai food: Universally delicious?
Thanks for all of these terrific comments:
Much food for thought here. Among other things, and to put the question differently, what I am wondering is are there places where Thai food/restaurateurs/etc tried and failed to break into a local food scene (because the food wasn’t considered up to local standards of “deliciousness”, or perhaps for other reasons…)?
I know Thai food is considered delicious (among certain demographics) in Burma — I have eaten it there often enough. I also know that lots of Canberrans rave about the few places around this town that serve Burmese food. But Burmese food will never, I expect, crack the Thai market. Many popular Burmese dishes would probably be considered “mai aroy“. I am intrigued by these flows of nourishment, ideas, prejudices, and all the rest.
Most Thais of my close acquaintance find the prospect of eating posh Western food somewhat disconcerting, and seem to rarely enjoy the experience. At the same time I’m not sure if that is because of the flavour, the style, the atmosphere. So many factors can be considered. “French food: Universally delicious?”, we could ask.
But all of the responses here suggest to me that interesting things happen (and have happened) with Thai food in particular. I have an appetite for learning more.
Best wishes to all,
Nich