Fat Guy

Experience with oregano over that past couple of years has led me to realize, much more emphatically than I'd understood before, the range of quality available in dried herbs. At the lowest level, dried herbs fit the foodie stereotype that says they're basically sawdust and should never be used. At the highest level, dried herbs have virtues that may exceed even those of fresh. The basic dried oregano available in most Western supermarkets (or as a table condiment in pizzerias) has the one-note bitter taste that we associate with oregano -- but it has nothing else. You can stick your nose right in the jar, for example, and smell very little. You'll probably just sneeze from the oregano dust floating around in there. There are better oreganos available at some specialty markets or at the best supermarkets. At the Fairway market in New York City they have regular oregano (which is somewhat more flavorful than supermarket oregano) and they have "wild harvested" oregano. The wild harvested oregano is substantially better than the regular. It has a less bitter, more sweet flavor -- and the aroma has much more complexity. When you cook with it, it releases a lot more flavor, not just quantitatively but also in terms of the range of flavors. However, we also have a friend who brings back dried oregano from Sicily each year. This is oregano grown by a family member and dried in the home. There are actually two variants of it, from different strains of oregano grown in different locations. Let me tell you, these oreganos are at a different order of magnitude of flavor and aroma. Both have amazing ranges of aroma and flavor -- and while I haven't tasted them in their fresh form I imagine many of the aromas are concentrated by the drying process and wouldn't necessarily be noticed in fresh form. One of the specimens has sweet, minty notes and a mild peppery bite similar to that of white pepper. This one is particularly amazing when used in a salad dressing. I've found that if I make the vinaigrette about an hour before the meal and let the oregano soak in there, it releases the most flavor. It's also great to add a pinch to an omelette. The other specimen is very strong -- velvet glove bitterness and black pepper. It's great for cooking -- really enhances a tomato sauce, lentil soup and other strongly flavored dishes.

I don't think anybody is forcing Sripraphai to do anything of the sort. The weak pad Thai has been on the menu since the days when I could go there and be the only non-Asian in the room. And I'm not sure the regional logic applies -- the menu seems national in scope. But I take your point. It's a dish, not a category.

It seems more like pizza.

Nathan, I don't think you've made the case that judging a Thai restaurant by its pad Thai is at all similar to judging a Chinese restaurant by its Chinese-American dishes. Pad Thai, as it seems we have clearly established, is a significant Thai dish, served all over that country. It is not an adapted or dumbed down version of a real Thai dish -- it is an actual Thai dish, and a significant, mainstream one at that. I fail to see the sense in making these excuses. So what if it's usually the whole meal? I guess I could just go in there and order pad Thai as my whole meal -- the problem is that meal would suck. At least if you order nine other dishes that are good, only ten percent of your meal would suck. That the pad Thai at Sripraphai is poor is embarrassing. It's below the standard of even an average Thai restaurant.

I don't think Sripraphai has changed. I think, at least in my case, the perspective has changed. I used to view it as a place where, with careful ordering, you could put together a fantastic meal. There are a dozen or so menu items that I've found to be fabulous over the years -- the best renditions I've had in New York. That hasn't changed, however these days I'm starting to think more along the lines of how so many dishes are so weak, and the menu is really a minefield for the uninitiated. Again, I don't think the basic excellent Sripraphai dishes have changed. But despite Nathan's protestations I think it's just embarrassing for a revered Thai restaurant to serve bad pad Thai -- it's almost comical.

(Actually you posted without that link, and added it later). Nathan, you've made two broad claims: 1. "Pad Thai isn't eaten much in Thailand" This appears to be incorrect. I'm unable to find a shred of evidence to corroborate the statement that "Pad Thai isn't eaten much in Thailand," and indeed there is much evidence that pad Thai is ubiquitous in Thailand -- a national dish, seen on menus across the country, etc. 2. Pad Thai "didn't originate there." I don't really understand what that means. Tomatoes didn't originate in Italy, so does that mean dishes with tomatoes "didn't originate there"? If that's the standard, nothing originated anywhere. However, what it seems we can conclude is that pad Thai has been a significant part of Thai culinary culture since World War II.

According to Temple of Thai: According to Wikipedia:

Interesting. Can you point to references to substantiate those statements?

(This topic continues the old Sripraphai topic) I was out at Sripraphai last night contemplating all its rave reviews (including two stars in the New York Times) and wondering whether it had declined, it was never great in the first place, or there were blind spots that led me to love it more in the past than I do now. The first thing that jumped out at me (again) was how positively awful Sripraphai's pad Thai is. It's worse than the pad Thai at the average suburban strip mall Chinese-Thai-Vietnamese-Japanese restaurant. Overly sweet, dry, sticky. I've always known it was bad, and felt, well, just don't order it. But sometimes you're with a friend who won't take your advice. And isn't a Thai restaurant that serves bad pad Thai kind of like an Italian restaurant that serves bad pasta? In addition, our fish was as usual overcooked by a long shot. I don't think I've ever had a non-overcooked fish at Sripraphai. That being said, some dishes were, as always, amazing -- their quality has not dropped off even with time, expansion and acclaim: the chicken soup with coconut milk, ginger and mushrooms is one of the best soups going, and the soy sauce noodles are great enough that we usually wind up calling for a second order even though we've already over-ordered everything else.

Just remember you also need to use good rice. A $150 rice cooker can't make bad rice good.

I've commented on this before on various rice cooker topics, but never heard a satisfactory answer. Can anybody explain what the heck fuzzy logic has to do with cooking rice?

They have carbon blades. The packaging said they were dishwasher safe, and they appear to be.

I'm talking about time. It's a little quicker for me in absolute terms, plus it's one less tool to get out, wash and replace. (I find that swivel-bladed parers are really fast for peeling carrots because you can flick-flick-flick to peel carrots, but for cucumbers you have to slow way down to peel the individual strips.) In terms of waste, at this point I'm probably wasting more with the knife than with a peeler, however that's going to change eventually.

I cut a little off the ends, then stand the cucumber up and peel it whole.

I can't do the sheets -- I lack the coordination, and I don't have the sashimi knife you need in order to make that work. I peel strips, exactly as you would with a peeler.

I was at a sushi bar a few years ago and noticed that, during their down-time, some of the sushi chefs were peeling cucumbers. They weren't using a swivel-bladed parer the way most people do. They were just using their knives. It seemed much more efficient, but I just assumed it required a formidable skill set. I filed the information away and went on with my life. Not too long ago, I found myself in a situation where I needed to peel a cucumber but both of my swivel-bladed parers were in the dishwasher -- and it was running. So, I took a knife and made an attempt at peeling the cucumber. Well, I'll be darned if, on the first try, I didn't do a pretty good job. By the fifth cucumber, I was getting pretty good at it. Then I ran out of cucumbers, and kind of made myself sick by eating too many that day. Now I've done probably 30 or so cucumbers, and I have it down. I'm more efficient with the knife than with the dedicated peeling device. And when people are over, if I just casually start peeling a cucumber with a knife, they think it's kind of cool.

I should also note, top-freezer models are CHEAP.

The one advantage I can see of the French door units is that by splitting the door down the middle you create a situation where the two narrower doors don't swing out as far. This might be important in a narrow galley kitchen. Then again you still need to be able to pull that drawer out from under. Plus you can't put the fridge flush against a wall because you need to swing doors both ways. Is there some advantage I'm missing?

Make that 36" width.

I've got to say, the thing I love about the top-freezer is that, surely, it's the best possible arrangement for the freezer. Everything is at eye level, and the freezer runs the entire width of the cabinet. It has a shelf, a drawer, door shelves -- it's quite versatile. The problem is that the bottom of the refrigerator cabinet is to near the floor. It's not a huge problem -- the bottom is made up of two produce drawers, and the bottom door shelf holds tall items like Champagne bottles. So you don't get to actual refrigerator shelves until you're up a foot or so. Still, it's kind of a pain digging around the bottom. I think, assuming infinite space, side-by-side sounds compelling, but let's assume a kitchen that doesn't have infinite space. I mean, if you truly have infinite space, you should have two refrigerators (refrigerator only), two dedicated freezers, a wine refrigerator and a vegetable/fruit refrigerator. But assuming you only have like 42" or so of width -- maybe that's how your cabinetry is built, or maybe it's a small house or apartment kitchen -- the question gets back to which design makes the best use of that amount of space.

Theoretically, I wonder how one would get one of those refrigerators in the United States.

There seem to be a few categories being discussed here: chains that no longer exist, chains that used to be different, and chains that some people think are gone but are actually still around. One thing I noted, upon reading some of the names being bandied about, is that I can't think of a single chain that has improved over time. Can you? You take any of the old-time places from Orange Julius to Arthur Treacher's . . . even McDonald's and Arby's, and they all used to be pretty good in the 1970s (that's as far back as my memory goes). And now it seems that with each passing year they get worse.

Perhaps we can assemble in one place the arguments for the various configurations of refrigerator: side-by-side, top-freezer, bottom-freezer, any other available configurations. All I've known for the past 15 years is top-freezer, which everybody seems to think is the absolute worst arrangement. What am I missing out on?

We were sitting at one of the bar tables having drinks the other day, and they said we were welcome to have dinner at that table. We didn't, but it was presented as an option.

As yet, I'm not doing anything. I'm theorizing because I think this could be the next big thing in kitchen design! I know a lot of folks with small-ish eat-in kitchens who haven't got enough countertop space and therefore wind up doing a lot of prep work at the dining table. It seems to me that with 7 inches of elevation, the dining table becomes a real counter. But of course sitting on stools is inferior to sitting in chairs. So wouldn't it be great if the table could lower 7 inches for dining, and raise 7 inches for work -- all with the touch of a button! It would need to be a very sturdy table, probably something intended for industrial applications, but with a nice butcher block tabletop attached.