I hate Bagel Hole

Carnivore wrote: I don't know why this is so difficult for you to understand. No one would argue that some current-day Northeastern version of a Mexican taco is better than a traditional one made in Mexico, or that someone from New Orleans isn't a better judge of what a great Jambalaya is than some visitor from Minneapolis ...

That's 100% rubbish, and I have no doubt that as a result of the culinary blinders you have on that you have missed out on opportunities for great meals. You don’t have to be born in a certain country, region or culture to make that food exceptionally. And you don’t have to have lived your entire life in Brooklyn to make or appreciate bagels. That’s absolute nonsense. Many of the top chefs in the world are experts in cuisines from cultures other than their own. Le Cirque has always been owned by an Italian family. There are countless other examples.

And thanks, but I don’t need your “advice” about bagels, not that I ever remember asking. I may not yet know who the authority on bagels is, but I have decided it’s definitely not you. My parents were born and raised in Brooklyn and my grandparents lived here as well. They know bagels. If I need bagel advice, I’ll ask them. Why you think I would possibly defer judgment on that to a complete stranger over them is mind-boggling just as mind-boggling as your desperate need for complete strangers to agree with you on everything.

Oh, and just for the record, I also grew up eating the small bagels you fanatically insist are the one and only true bagels. I was alive in the 1970s and I’ve eaten bagels made in Brooklyn in Brooklyn in the 1970s and early 1980s. And I’m saying I like the bigger ones better. Do you really think no one who ever grew up eating your kind of bagels prefers the bigger ones? I bet you do.

Look, I put up a post merely saying that I gave Bagel Hole a try, and that I liked it, but not as much as LBD or Terrace. This wasn’t a debate. No one has to care. Just offering a review from someone who is not emotionally involved in this. I have absolutely no idea what on Earth it is you’re trying to accomplish or what your point is. You’ve already said I’m a bagel heathen for preferring the bigger bagels, repeatedly. So what. I really don’t care what you think, and nothing you say is going to change what I think, say or do one iota.

You are simply going to have to find a way to live with that.

Sometimes a bagel is just a bagel...

Can we all calm down a bit?

According to the Torah, the Philistines invented the bagel.

This is a shop that caters to the modern need to feel more "authentic" and "real" than the common rube. In such a place, lack of variety or customer service is transformed into an advantage; after all, only an ignoramus or someone from Cleveland would want a bagel toasted or sliced. Patrons of such establishments may - if they choose - consider themselves above such sad riff-raff.

This comes across as strikingly narrow minded. I grew up in a household that served South Indian food every day. If that by itself makes me the resident expert, it's only de facto. Dare I say that there actually might be a non-brown person who can best my mom's akki roti.

To continue your syllogism below: you would not question my right to weigh in on where to find the best South Indian food in NYC, but you would question a non-Indians right to do so?

Frankly, my experience with S. Indian cuisine in the area has been confined to the Village and Curry Hill, so you might be better off getting advice from someone that has actually made it to Flushing or Edison, NJ - even if they're white and just fell off the proverbial turnip truck.

Carnivore wrote: Not everything is better because that's the way "real" New Yorkers did it, and the bike lane is a great counter-example. But bagels are a New York tradition, part of what we're known for, especially for Jewish New Yorkers. Sorry you're not a part of that, but I don't understand why it irks you. I wouldn't dream of questioning Mamacita's right to weigh in on what's the best Mexican food around, or sweet tea's opinion about shrimp and grits. Show some respect for people speaking about their cultural tradition is all I ask.

whynot_31 wrote: a summary of the blue hat spat for Park Slope newbies

http://gawker.com/166214/the-park-slope-hat-spat-read-all-the-emails

Many thanks for reminding me of this gem, by the by. Even my friends in San Francisco thought that was some insane crap.

I think what you're trying to say - and please correct me if I'm wrong - is that someone who grew up eating the food is, on average, better equipped to judge. This I agree with completely. In your example below, e.g., you are far more likely to get a more meaningful opinion from me.

My issue is (was?) that you made a mere assertion and then presented it as axiomatic, when in reality there is some nuance there. E.g., I'm sure there is a non-Indian out there who has dedicated his/her life to the cuisine of India, who has traveled and tasted a more diverse set of Indian culinary offerings than I, and would proffer a more valuable opinion on where to get the best, most authentic South Indian around? However, until this person rears his/her head on DH, you're probably better off taking my advice. My sense is that this is a more accurate example of where your sentiment lies.

Carnivore wrote:
I'm not saying someone from outside the tradition can't have an opinion (I certainly have one). It's just that someone who grew up eating the food is better equipped to judge because they have context. I would trust your opinion on the ones you've tried over the opinion of someone who went to Jackson Heights once as a child to visit their grandparents, but otherwise didn't grow up with Indian food. I would assume that you would know better how it's supposed to taste.

For the record, I grew up eating Lender's, graduated to LBD-style, and have since culminated my education with BH. Throw me in the old-school camp as well. Love, love, love Bagel Hole.

shekb wrote: Whoa! Now it's starting to look like a message board in here.

I think the basic issue with the old style bagels is that a) the people who like them really like them (raising my hand here), and b) they're disappearing fast in favor of the big-uns. We don't want them to go away, so we're leaning pretty heavily on whatever argument we think is going to keep them around the longest. We're pretty clearly in the minority, if we go by the market. Our preference is unpopular (albeit correct. Now ducking). It's just that most of us probably don't happen to own a dough hook.

That's cute, but I doubt that KFC is part of his ancestral cultural tradition.

At least nobody has come forth with that Montreal nonsense.

Mougar wrote: I haven't read any of this.

Clearly, because this thread is about which is the proper way to roll toilet paper: over or under. What are you going on about bagels for? No one here's said word one about bagels. So you over or under?

dw438 wrote: [quote=Drano]At least nobody has come forth with that Montreal nonsense.

At least the Canadian bagels are closer to size and taste to the Bagel Hole types, not like the bagels-on-steroids types found at LBH and elsewhere in the area, like H&H, etc.
True. They do the size and texture pretty well, but the dough is a bit too sweet (similar to H&H in that respect, actually). I'd definitely rather have a Montreal bagel than a big fluffy roll-like bagel.

Pizza; hamburgers; bagels; California-style burritos.

These are the foods that cause the most dissension in the world. Down South they have civilized contests to determine the best barbecuers. You could never have a bagel-makers contest, people would slay each other.