Saturday, April 12, 2008

Why can't they make a decent canned chili?

Look. Chili isn't hard to make. Take some good beef, cook for a long time with appropriate spices and water (see these fine examples of Texas chili), add a bit of masa flour to thicken up the result, and voila. You have great chili.

Now, the deal is that because of this, it should be damnably easy to produce chili on a production line. The usual problem with canned stuff is that because of the high heat and long time needed to steam-bathe the cans to make sure any nasties inside are dead, the stuff inside tends to get over-cooked. But chili is supposed to be overcooked -- cooked till the beef practically disintegrates it gets so tender. That's the whole point of the deal.

So I go to the store to look at canned chilis, and I run into several problems. First of all, the chili they have on the shelf has beans in it. Real chili doesn't have beans. Beans are a filler used to extend chili when you can't afford enough meat, not something you should voluntarily put into chili. Secondly, the quality of the beef in these chilis is, to put it bluntly, "dog food quality". It looks like something I'd feed to a dog. Then there's the texture of this chili. It's somewhat gelatinous, like a fine cat food. Except I'm not a cat and I don't appreciate that, thank you very much. Finally, there's the "spice". Put in quotes because there is no spice. The whole point of a good chili is to work up a good sweat so you can quench it with the beer that you just happen to have nearby for some reason. Chili that's as bland as a Republican candidate at an old folks' home is practically heresy.

Thus far the closest I've gotten to real chili in a can is the "Stagg Dynamite Hot Chili With Beans". But that's not saying much. It's not "hot" by any measure of hotness. Real chili makes you immediately reach for a beer when you take a bite. This chili makes you reach for mouthwash to wash out your mouth. And it has beans in it. The texture is still vaguely gelatinous, like a fine catfood. And while the beef in it is one step above dogfood, it's only one step above dogfood. In short, I would rate this chili as "barely edible" on the scale of things you find in a supermarket, a little above the dishwashing soap on the edibility scale, maybe equal to the best cat foods, and quite a bit below the best frozen pizzas (which have gotten so good now that they rival pizzeria pizzas).

So here's your opening, free market advocates. There's a market for a good canned chili, just as, twenty years ago, there was a market for a good frozen pizza. Right now, there is no good canned chili, just as twenty years ago, there was no good frozen pizza. A good canned chili is technically possible. I await your entry into the market, oh free marketeers!

-- Badtux the Food Penguin

7 comments:

  1. Down here in Texas we have a saying - Chili don't come in a can!

    But I agree with you, there's no reason why it couldn't except that no one has thought to put real chili in a can.

    I personally love good chili. I've eaten hundreds of different chili recipes and loved most of them. But I consider it heresy to call that canned stuff "chili" nowdays.

    As for the beans, adding them would get you kicked out of any chili cook-off in this state.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sadly, generations have grown up thinking that the pathetic stuff sold in stores is chili, and that therefore chili must have beans. It is, of course, the most vile of heresies to add beans to a fine chili, but until someone cans real chili... sigh!

    - Badtux the Chili-yearnin' Penguin

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'll bet you can make way better chili than you'll ever find in the store.

    Freeze it & take it to work in these.

    Look Ma, no fucking Tupperware parties yipeeeee!

    Man I hate Tupperware parties.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Did you try Bush's? It comes in a Jar, not a can, but it has both "with and without" beans varieties. I won't eat the beans. I find it tolerable.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think there are several issues conspiring to result in the lack of a good chili in a can.

    The first issue is that the chili must be overcooked to start with to ensure that no bacteria survive the canning process. That tends to turn things into a gelatinous mass, which good chili should not be.

    The next issue is that manufacturers tend to economize to the maximum by using the lowest quality components possible. That results in a poor flavour for the product.

    The next issue is that manufacturers also don't want to over-spice their chili since that makes in inedible for people with delicate palates. They'd rather put out a weak flavoured product to maximize their market potential (regardless of the fact that true chili affectionadoes won't like it).

    Yet another problem is the use or non-use of beans. This can be a highly political issue. Some people think that chili should never have beans. Some people think that chili may (or even must!) have beans. Some people, such as I, think that chili should have a couple of different kinds of beans (which produce a more varied flavour).

    Anyway, I think the blend of all of those issues conspire to produce unacceptable canned chili.

    Dave

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Chili" with beans isn't chili. It's bean soup with meat. Chili originated in Texas as a way of cooking tough range beef into a stew that was tasty and tender enough to eat. The spices were mostly to cover up the taste of beef past its eat-by date in those pre-refrigeration days.

    I agree that the reason canned chili is so rancid is because of poor quality ingredients and lack of spices due to a desire to appeal to people who don't like spicey food. However, that does not explain why there is not a single "premium" chili on the market made with quality ingredients and adequate spices. Folks said it was impossible to make a good frozen pizza too. But reality has proven them wrong, the best frozen pizzas are on par with a middling pizzeria pizza.


    BTW, the canning process itself should not be an issue as long as the chili is slightly undercooked before it is sent to get its steam bath, that should finish cooking it. Good chili needs a lot of cooking, and if you have good quality lean meat in it and more importantly no beans, you will not get a gelatinous goo, guaranteed.

    - Badtux the Foodie Penguin

    ReplyDelete

Ground rules: Comments that consist solely of insults, fact-free talking points, are off-topic, or simply spam the same argument over and over will be deleted. The penguin is the only one allowed to be an ass here. All viewpoints, however, are welcomed, even if I disagree vehemently with you.

WARNING: You are entitled to create your own arguments, but you are NOT entitled to create your own facts. If you spew scientific denialism, or insist that the sky is purple, or otherwise insist that your made-up universe of pink unicorns and cotton candy trees is "real", well -- expect the banhammer.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.