There is a lot of talk about who has the best veggie burger in town, recently I even saw a thread on Reddit about that very topic.Someone mentioned Burger King which made me really sad because we have some fabulous homemade versions in Austin! When Vegans Rock Austin did their best of Austin poll Bouldin Creek’s infamous Veggie Royale won the top honor but Arlo’s came in second which is pretty good for a little trailer that just opened up at the end of last year!
Arlo’s Food Truck is an all vegan trailer on east 6th street,
just across the way from the Brixton now next door to Cheer Up Charlies and it is fabulous. The owners and workers are super nice and they make just about everything in house. I loved the burger which seemed closer to a meaty steak ‘n’ shake burger than any veggie burger I have ever tried. You can tell it is homemade by the way it looks and you can even see some lentils poking out so it must be healthy. They also have a chipotle burger and a barbecue burger which I haven’t tried but I did get to try the chicken tacos. They were authentic enough with homemade chicken flavored seitan and nice treat after drinking more than I should have at Vegan Drinks. In case you are wondering, yes, I went back to Arlo’s later the same night for tacos after I tried it for dinner.
It is without a doubt the best burger in Austin. The real question is, is it the best vegan burger in the world? I know I haven’t had better – and I’ve had my fair share.
There is no vegan burger that is the the best burger anywhere because vegan burger is an oxymoron.
Really Mike? This isn’t that hard of a concept.
Dictionary definition of burger: short for hamburger. [with modifier] a particular variation of a hamburger with additional or substitute ingredients: a veggie burger
Dictionary definition for hamburger: a round patty of ground beef, fried or grilled and typically served on a bun or roll and garnished with various condiments
What you are thinking of is a hamburger. There is such a thing as a vegan burger.
Mike, I am sorry you are confused about this topic, let me help.
Burger, Noun: A particular variation of a hamburger with additional or substitute ingredients.
No, I’m sorry, but that definition hinges on a logical fallacy because it basically allows for anything that is a sandwich to be classified as a burger. A burger is a specific kind of sandwich. It became distinguished from other sandwiches through its use of a ground beef patty as its primary ingredient. When one alters the nature of something at its very core, it becomes something else entirely. To put it another way, I might wake up tomorrow and decide to start dressing like a fireman; that does not make me a fireman unless I begin engaging in the act most crucial to being a fireman, which is putting out major fires in the community.
I don’t see why it becomes a “logical fallacy” to allow for substitute ingredients. You seem to be suggesting that the definition for “hamburger” and “burger” are one and the same, but they are not. By saying a “burger” is a “hamburger” with alternate ingredients, you are still retaining the part of the definition that states “a round patty…” and “…fried or grilled and typically served on a bun or roll and garnished with various condiments”. The only “logical fallacy” I see is that you somehow thinks this applies to anything that happens to be served between two slices of bread. An egg salad sandwich is not, round, and fried/grilled, yet, according to you, the definition of “burger” given above somehow applies to that.
Your argument is weak. “Burgers” do not need to contain beef. Deal with it.
Also, you become a fireman when you pass the exam, not when you put out a fire. Some firemen never put out a fire in their entire career.
So, yeah, you need a better analogy there as well.
Also, here’s a little experiment for you Mike: Since you claim that anything that is not made with ground beef is merely a sandwich, go into a restaurant and order one “turkey sandwich” and one “turkey burger”, and then see if you can tell the difference.
They are two completely different things.
Another reason for me to visit Austin soon. A winning veggie burger is no easy feat!
Mike- whether you like it or not burgers can be vegan and made of grains or vegetables. They can be not vegan too and made of salmon or chicken or a million other things. This is such a silly argument that I don’t even know what to say other than to ask you to consider being a little less rigid with your ideas and maybe try to realize that you don’t know everything.
I’m really surprised that I need to explain this any further after my last post. I don’t know everything, but I do know that sandwiches featuring things other than ground beef patties as their primary element are only sandwiches, not burgers. This isn’t about what I like or don’t like; it’s merely about living in reality. That said, if I am wrong, then it would have been very easy for you to refute the very logical points I made in my last post, but predictably, you did not do that. This is the nature of avoidance.
Mike- I guess we are living in different realities then. In mine I have places like the dictionary which can help me figure things out that I am not sure. Again, it seems like you are looking at the definition of a hamburger rather than a burger. A burger isn’t just a sandwich mainly because it is in a patty form and because it is on a bun. Whether or not you like it or believe it that is what the word means. Sometimes words have multiple definitions and perhaps that is why you are confused. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burger
To the modern dictionary often falls the sad task of cataloguing what amount to linguistic aberrations. Its primary purpose as as a reference material is, after all, ultimate utility, so dictionary writers often do not have the luxury of exercising the use of reason in their profession (as you presumably do). Since vegan-speak is reliant upon appropriating the names of established meat-based foods (which is a very curious practice indeed), its proponents conveniently blur the lines between the identifiers and the identified. In this way, they are able to convince themselves and sometimes others that they are not denying themselves this or that meat-based culinary pleasure/experience. The linguistic aberrations popularized by vegan-speak reflect only one truth, the need for inclusion in activities that, ironically, vegans deliberately exclude themselves. If veganism were truly something satisfying, then most vegan dishes would not be preoccupied with imitation and would have wholly unique names.
Seems to me if you can walk into most places, ask for a veggie burger, and have the listener understand that you mean a sandwich in a bun that includes a patty made out of plant-based foods like vegetables, grains, and beans, then the word exists and has that meaning. That’s pretty much how language works.
Yes, that is pretty much how language works, and the malleable nature of language is what makes it such an effective tool in indoctrinating oneself or others into a particular way of thinking that does not reflect the true nature of a person, place, or thing.
That’s just a silly way to look at food. There isn’t an intrinsic nature to food. It’s constantly changing and adapting to cultures and available ingredients. And that’s what makes it so exciting that people write about it, dream about it, and, yeah, argue about it.
You’re not protecting burgers by narrowly defining them. The nature of what makes a burger is going to change whether you like it or not, and you’re just left looking like a sulky kid who’s unhappy that we’re not playing ball by your rules.