How is boiled rice different from steamed?

Question

I recently got into a friendly argument with a coworker about how rice should be prepared.

I insisted that the goal was to steam the rice- too much water and it would boil into a soupy pudding.

She claimed that her uncle's family in a little village in India boils their rice with a lot of water and pours off the excess. She says that the rice is "fine". I don't believe her.

Is it possible to make rice that isn't a sodden mess by boiling it? If so, how does it differ from steamed rice?

Answer

It is possible to boil rice without it essentially overcooking, you just have to be careful with your ratio of water to rice and the timing. It doesn't surprise me that your colleague's uncle's family cook rice well using boiling, as they probably do so every day and are well used to the ratios, timings and temperature of their cooker.

Boiled rice is generally softer and stickier as it is a more 'violent' method, which means more water will penetrate deeper into each grain and release more starch. Steaming is gentler and so results in firmer, more separate grains.

In both methods, washing the rice sufficiently can also make a big difference to the final result. Unwashed, boiled rice is far more likely to be soupy and mushy than rice that has been thoroughly washed as there will be more starch floating around.

The standard 'Western' style of boiling rice usually results in the water boiling off by the time the rice is cooked. Your colleague's family's method no doubt works, but the timing would need to be spot on to prevent mushy rice.

Check more discussion of this question.