The Sandwich Alignment Chart (cue John Hodgman's exploding head!)

ok then, what about this bread? - the “hot dog bun” on the left is basically a short, very thick slice of bread, cut almost in half but left attached at the bottom crust - versus “frankfurter roll” on the right (source:


Left: Worst kind of hotdog bun; Right: Best kind.


except that’s what’s used for lobstah rolls, the best kind of sandwich, so it gets special dispensation, expecially from newenglandahs


For me, I eschew ingredient rebellion for neutral to purist contents. Though I acknowledge that rebellious ingredients of various kinds are very tasty, and will not turn such foods down.

1 Like

Fine for lobster rolls, terrible for hotdogs.

Where does a hotdog sandwich with ketchup end up on this chart?


No no no this is all wrong.

The root definition of “sandwich”, if it’s to mean anything at all, must be that it’s nominally hand-portable (even if it would require unrealistically large hands), and features wet foods symmetrically bracketed by single pieces of a dry food such as bread.

The main axes of disagreement are then:

  1. nature of the sandwiching material: does it have to be bread?

  2. disposition of materials: does the sandwiching material have to be repeatable prismatic “slices”, or can it be an object (such as a spherical bun) into which the filling has been inserted? The problem with the latter position being that it blurs the boundary with fully-encapsulated meals such as pirogies, pasties, pies etc.

Wraps and burritos and things like that are plainly not sandwiches. Because they have a similar bill of materials, they may be sold by sandwich places, who might include them under the heading “sandwiches” for operational purposes; and if you say “let’s get sandwiches for lunch” people might reasonably assume such foods as these to be included. But that’s just a kind of loose synecdoche, it’s not because anyone looks at a burrito and thinks “oh, a sandwich”.

As to the idea that the filling alone could disqualify something from being a sandwich, that’s just trolling and I shan’t dignify it with a response.


Is an oreo a sandwich?


That’s a sandwich cookie.

Cookies deserve their own chart.


But is a sandwich cookie both a sandwich and a cookie?


I think it bothers me more that if you did apply law vs chaos it’s the vertical axis of this chart, when this is obviously inspired by alignment charts memes.

1 Like

What about open sandwiches?


I find this chart’s lack of Hot Pockets … disturbing.


I once had something called a St. Germain.* It was like a pizza, but it had barbecue pork and slaw, and it was folded over like a sandwich. This alignment chart puts it right where the hot dog is, but it is way more innovative than a hot dog.

*I can’t find references to this anywhere. Does this barbecue pizza sandwich actually exist, or did I invent it while stoned or something?


The real test comes when you run out of bread, and make a sandwich with a hot dog bun. It turns out that a hot dog bun is just a miniature sub roll. Chicken tenders are the perfect shape, and shapeless things like pulled pork or sloppy joe work great too.


We use the word “sandwiched” as a past tense verb to mean “something crammed between two other things” not “something wrapped or encased in something else.”

Example: “Billy was sandwiched between two construction workers on the crowded subway car.” But you’d never say “Billy was comfortably sandwiched in his sleeping bag” or “Billy was sandwiched atop his kayak.”

Burritos, hot dogs, Pop Tarts etc. may be “foodstuffs within carbohydrates” but brother, that don’t make them sandwiches.


In the trash. That shit’s disgusting.


I like the way you think sir.

They’re not sandwiches, which is why they require the modifier. Kind of like how a wedding breakfast isn’t breakfast.


How about slicing it crosswise into little rounds like salami? And some sliced cheese and pickles?

I’m guessing it’s more the topology of a hotdog that is bothering you than the ingredient.