Kp, I'm with you on the allrecipes.com recommendation. I think the benefit of the site comes in the sheer size of its archives and the number of reviews the recipes get. The only thing I'm not crazy about are the sandra-lee type concoctions and the overabundance of canned cream-of-something soup as an ingredient, but I have found some good recipes there, and I will always take a peek in if I'm looking for a recipe that's hard to find elsewhere. It's also good for helpful kitchen tips and new ideas.
Okay, onto the chili. I must say that in most occasions, I try to start with the tried and true authentic version of a recipe before I venture into the idea of trying a changed version of it or changing it myself. There are many times when I'm a stickler for keeping the original as it is supposed to be, and my face pales at the idea of drastically changing a classic while keeping it under its old name (sluttified carbonara come to mind).
I am no fan of snobs in general, and I don't want to be one myself, but there are some things I get religious over. I'll get back to that idea in a sec.
I'm not from Texas, and no matter how much I try to fit the bill, I'm not a born and bred cowgirl. If I were, however, I would be kicking myself in my soft parts for suggesting 3 recipes that have verged off the ranch and into the hands of city slickers.
When it comes to "real" Texas chili, there are slight disagreements regarding what real cowboys used to stick in their pots (there are also questions regarding the true origin of chili and its chili-type offspring), but there are a couple of rules that have been so widely accepted by serious chili worshipers that certain things cannot be included in their competitions. No beans. No tomatoes.
Then you get into other conversations talking about the same thing, adhering to strict Texas chili rules, and they also have cooking competitions. The difference is that they'll say yes to the tomatoes, but you'll still get a "hell no" to beans.
Suggestions for chopped and pulled stewing meat are right on target. It's authentic, and it's good. There's a melting element that comes out of cooking meat that way, and it's killer. Ground chuck or sirloin is also widely accepted, and it can be great. You like one over the other? Use it. In my mind, it's a tie. It depends upon the recipe.
Although I've lived in the south, I'm still a yankee. This means that I've put beans in my chili without feeling guilty about it. There are all kinds of recipes for chili out there, and I've tried several without feeling like a traitor for adding any dreaded beans or (sometimes) illegal tomatoes.
Talking about serious cooking, there are some rules I just won't budge on. No powdered meals in a bag. No powdered potatoes. No names of things I can't identify as food will be going into the pot. And it gets worse, I know. No garlic salt. No pre-seasoned ingredients, including pre-seasoned tomato sauce. Well, you get the idea. That's just me.
Onto the question. I saw an episode of No Reservations with Anthony Bourdain as he traveled into the depths of Cleveland, and he dropped into a Skyline Chili joint for a bite to eat. I'm going to plead ignorance on this one, and you'll just have to forgive me. I had never seen chili and pasta together before, and I thought it might be a fluke. I forgot about it.
So, adam, don't take this personally, but after reading your post, I got a little slack jawed. I wasn't sure what the chili-pasta combination might be coming from. Well, I did my research, and it's clear to me that I've really been in the dark about Cincinnati chili. There are a handful of ingredients that are unique to Cincinnati style chili, and the result is used on everything from spaghetti, which is often also slathered with a pound of orange cheese, or to top hot dogs (cheese included), to fries, to burgers, to lots of things. Interesting.
Since I've never eaten it, I'm not going to put an opinion on it. I've tried imagining it, and I can't do it this time. I don't know what it's like, but there are certainly enough seriously devoted fans that there has to be something in it that works.
The only thing is that I'm wondering is if this thing about cooking pasta in chili is usually done by stewing the pasta in it. To avoid confusion, I bring this up because the recipe posted talked about boiling the pasta, adding it to the chili, and then stewing it in there to heat up for half an hour.
Please don't hate me. I'm just trying to send in some extra info, not force my opinions onto others. If you want to say "screw you linny, i like it that way," I have no problem holding up my hands and letting you enjoy your dinner how you like it. It's your dinner, and I'm really not trying to be bossy or mean or tell you what you have to do. I like you. You're sweet. Okay? Deal? :D okay. So, I have been looking around, and I can't find any recipes that say to do that. It looks like you're supposed to boil the pasta, and then top it with the chili-like sauce.
As an al dente girl, in my humble and overwhelmingly biased opinion, it's wrong. It's like canning cookies in juice or wearing a ripped up wedding dress. No and no. it shouldn't happen. I realize that chili and pasta is not Italian (actually, the creation is it's attributed to Greek-American immigrants in the Midwest), but even if you're going to be putting chili on pasta, I think there are some things you still have to accept about the basic rules of preparing pasta.
I realize that I could jump the rails with everything I want to say regarding the proper preparation of pasta, but I think it's better to leave that to a future thread. The bottom line is that pasta should be cooked al dente, which means that it still has a bite to it. It should not be mushy. I know that there are plenty of uber-companies that sell pasta in soups, and that pasta sits in the broth for up to a couple of years before it's eaten. It's wrong (or okay for some children), but I think it's messed with incorrect notions of proper pasta preparation wherever it's found. Pasta should be al dente.
In answer to the chili question, when one says "chili" in a non-regional setting, it's more or less supposed to refer to "true" Texas chili; other regions let beans into their chili; vegetarians talk about vegetarian chili; when you're talking about chili with pasta (and usually a different palate of seasonings), it's known as Cincinnati chili... at least, that's what I've got from the mixed stories.
It's been two days now, and every time I find one rule, another one says it ain't so. Let's just say that I think that some of what I said is true in one way or another. The one I'm sure about is that pasta shouldn't be cooked to mush.
It seems real chili making is like barbecue. If you get a chili fanatic, he'll have a five-alarm heart attack if someone strays from the high road. Still, there are plenty of delicious chili-like versions all over the country. I don't think they (or should I say we) have anything to apologize for, but I do think it's worth knowing the roots and the fundamentals of anything lucky enough to grace your stoves. Tada.
Before I forget, I found some interesting links you might want to take a peek at. Here we go, cowboys and cowgirls:
Dean's World - How To Make Some Real Chili
Authentic 1840 Texas Chili Recipe | Recipezaar
Authentic Texan Chili Recipe
Chili con carne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skyline Chili-5 Ways | Anthony Bourdain, cleveland, ohio | teamsugar - Women's Social Network & Community.
Skyline Chili - The Official Website of Skyline Chili