Fat Guy

I would say those are examples of rudeness, but perhaps that's my cultural misapprehension. Perhaps in France ignoring people is not rude, or perhaps there's some vibe one gives off that causes one to be ignored. If so, I guess I'll try not to let it bother me anymore. Then again, the number of times I've seen French people get angry at French waiters in France for ignoring them would seem to indicate that at least some French people if France feel that being ignored is evidence of rudeness. Without labeling it rudeness or not rudeness, let me recount an incident I witnessed at La Cote St. Jacques, a Michelin three-star restaurant (this was just a few weeks before it was demoted to two stars, and we often joke that a Michelin inspector must have been there on the night we were). There was a family there with two babies and a dog. A French family, that is -- later I learned they were from nearby in Burgundy -- and I assume the dog was French too, though it was a Westie. Anyway, the dog was, unlike every other dog I've seen at a nice restaurant in France, extremely ill mannered. It kept yapping, and this caused the babies to cry. It was pretty distracting, and a couple of (French) customers complained to the waitstaff. After about an hour of this, a (French) customer picked up one of his dinner rolls and threw it at (and hit -- it was a good shot) the back of the head of the man who seemed to be "in charge" of the ill-mannered dog and family. When the head of the family turned around to see where the roll had come from, the guy who had thrown it said (I didn't capture all the subtlety, because my French sucks, but I got enough of it) if you can't control your dog and your kids you should be eating at "McDo." After that, the staff moved the family into one of the private dining rooms. The whole incident was the talk of the hotel the next day. To me, it felt as though there was plenty of rudeness to go around, not to mention some neglectfulness by the staff -- the private room solution should have kicked in much earlier. But hey, maybe it was all only perceived rudeness. Regardless, we're not here to establish whether there is or is not any rudeness in France. The issue on the table is differences in dining customs. My observations earlier were intended to steer folks away from stereotyping and hasty generalization and towards actual differences in customs. So, needless to say, the cultural difference I meant to discuss in the above example is that in France they allow dogs in most restaurants, whereas in the United States they don't.

There's a difference between a custom and a stereotype. Tipping versus the service charge, that's an issue of custom. "Americans don't bother to learn anything about the places they're going," that's either a stereotype or a nod to a stereotype -- and of course it's true of plenty of travelers from France as well (or maybe they're just pretending they don't know that tipping is customary here). I can also say, as an American who has always taken extreme care to learn local customs before I go anywhere, that I have received plenty of extremely rude service in France, especially in Paris. Not perceived rudeness on account of cultural expectations, but rather actual, universal rudeness in fact. On the whole, I think service in France is better than in the United States, but you can get excellent and terrible service in both countries, and both countries produce their fair share of rude waiters and inconsiderate, clueless tourists. There's also a difference between a universal custom and a majority practice. Fork-switching is probably still the majority practice in America, but plenty of people here prefer European style -- from a time-and-motion perspective, it simply makes more sense, and I imagine it will continue to push the fork-switching method aside. Split portions, without any fees or questions, are fairly common in the better American restaurants. Of course, many of the better American restaurants are French, which confuses the issue a bit.

I don't know that anybody can offer you 100% assurance. There are things you can do to minimize risk, but any time you're dealing with runny-center eggs you're going to face some risk. Certainly, if you have any pregnant, elderly or immune-system-compromised coworkers you should not serve them reheated poached eggs. Also, there are a number of food safety precautions that are recommended for food service professionals. For example, when you're cooling the eggs after poaching be sure to do so using a high ratio of ice water to eggs -- this will cool them quickly so they don't hover in the bacteria-encouraging temperature "danger zone." You can find more information on safe egg handling on the American Egg Board site. When cooking for myself, a healthy thirty-something with an apparently strong immune system, I don't take most of the precautions the Egg Board recommends. But if you're feeding a group of people you might want to look at it differently.

The standard restaurant technique, as we covered in the aforementioned eGCI clinic, is to poach, shock in ice water, refrigerate and reheat in hot water. You can certainly use a microwave, though. That's how I've been doing it at home. I poach eggs 18 at a time (the cartons of eggs I've been buying have 18 eggs in them, for whatever reason) and put them (usually I get 14 or 15 to come out well) in two Rubbermaid tubs with ice water in the fridge. I keep them this way for about a week. When it's time to eat them, I take three eggs and put them in a stoneware bowl and microwave for 30 seconds three times. If I go 90 seconds straight, it starts to cook the eggs rather than reheat them. If I do 60 seconds, it doesn't get them hot enough. 75 seconds doesn't quite nail it either. But 30 seconds times three, with a short break between each burst, works great in my microwave. Of course, every microwave is different, the moral of the story being that you can reheat poached eggs in a microwave but only if you take the time to do some experimenting with that particular unit.

I think it's mostly the lunch crowd that gets the over-prepped stuff from the previous night's dinner. At least that's been the case in the kitchens I've observed. Not that there's anything wrong with that in most cases -- it's not like a piece of beef or lamb is going to degenerate noticeably overnight; even most seafood is pretty sturdy (you don't want to know how old most of the seafood you eat is!).

Neither can those who want to eat breakfast.

Speaking of double hits, the best mint tea I ever had consisted of a combination of fresh mint leaves, dried mint leaves and (dried of course) black tea leaves. I guess that's a triple hit.

Not to mention, they haven't run out of anything yet.

Part 2: why I like to eat early.

Continuing along the theme of places where I'm out of step with the gastro-elite consensus, I like to eat dinner early. For me, the best time to eat dinner is virtually the second the restaurant opens for dinner. First, it's easier to get a reservation. I get so many e-mails complaining that "they only offered me 5:30 and 10:30." Great! There's no better time to eat dinner than 5:30, and they just offered it to you. Second, by definition the restaurant is empty when you arrive. This means three things: you can have pretty much your pick of table, you have the undivided attention of the waitstaff during the critical early phases of the meal (menu questions, wine ordering, rapport building, etc.) and the place is quiet. Third, I find it physically unpleasant to eat late. An extensive, rich meal with wines isn't something I want to be finishing up at midnight. It's such a pleasure to have a wonderful meal starting at 5:30 and to be home in time for Gilmore Girls, relaxation, conversation and comfortable sleep. (Yes, I also prefer eating on Tuesdays, when in-demand restaurants are at their emptiest).

There are a few issues on which I find myself out of step with the gourmet majority. One of them is regarding the use of fresh herbs. Conventional nouvelle gourmet wisdom holds not only that fresh herbs are superior to dried herbs, but also that dried herbs are a sign of a feeble culinary consciousness. I see three problems with this view: First, not all fresh herbs are so great. The often grown-indoors herbs available year-round at many supermarkets are neither particularly fresh nor flavorful. And their selection is often limited. Second, as with most methods of preservation, drying herbs allows the packager to capture the best quality herbs at their peak of flavor. Not that this is always done, but it's a possibility. And the selection is vast. Third, in many instances the concentrated flavors of dried herbs are more pleasing than what you'd get from fresh. Awhile back a friend made a classic Italian-American salad dressing using top-notch dried oregano. There's no way that flavor could have been captured with fresh. Are you with me?

The trick, if you use a whisk for this purpose, is to mash rather than stir. You only want to use an up-and-down motion; not a round-and-round motion. I've found, however, that a fork is not only suitable for mashing potatoes but actually superior to a masher. At least it is for the texture I prefer: more crushed than pureed or mashed. Fork-crushed potatoes are now a common fixture in fine dining restaurants all over the place. The fork works best on small portions, though. If you're cooking for more than four or five people, forget it.

Good morning, Ms. Reichl. If I may follow up on the "why we were doing real reviews in the first place" point, have you seen the piece Steve Cuozzo wrote in the New York Post when he announced that the Post would no longer be publishing "real reviews" and would instead focus on news, trends and multi-restaurant comparative pieces? Mr. Cuozzo began by saying: His primary argument (though probably not his strongest) was that restaurants are too ephemeral to review with any accuracy: He also takes a swipe at the "myth" of reviewer anonymity: I realize you're coming at this from the perspective of a national magazine, and certainly it makes sense that a national magazine would seek to provide nationally relevant content rather than they type of reviewing that a local paper or city magazine provides. But do you think the argument might apply, as Cuozzo suggests, to local reviews as well? In other words, are restaurant reviews inherently flawed, either for the reasons Cuozzo cites or for other reasons?

Were you asking how to do this in a restaurant context, or at home? Just in case you were asking about the procedure a home cook might utilize, what I've done successfully is cook the risotto so that it's still a little crunchy in the center and then cover and refrigerate the entire pot. (In my case, a five-quart rondeau). Take the pot out of the refrigerator an hour before service, so it comes up to room temperature. A few minutes before service, add the last ingredients and bring everything up to serving temperature while stirring vigorously -- it should be done at that point. If you're adding stock, cream or any other liquid make sure it's hot, as this will speed things along. Do a practice run on a small batch if you can. It's hard to describe the point at which you should stop par-cooking, and how much less liquid you should add than for finished risotto. But once you've screwed it up once, it becomes clear where you have to add more or less, and where you needed to stop.

Gilt was written up in the New York Times a couple of months ago. There was a really bad photo of "Paul," even. The restaurant is in the space formerly known as Le Cirque 2000, in the New York Palace hotel. Patrick Jouin redesigned the space. There are some nice photos of Paul's work on his website: http://www.paulliebrandt.com/ I really enjoyed Paul's food at Atlas. At that time, New York City had a respectable claim to being part of the culinary avant garde. Now the center of gravity is in Chicago (Grant, Homaro) and Washington, DC (Jose). We have Wylie (we're doing first names, right?) but that's about it. I'd like to see more -- it can't be that the economics of doing business in New York make avant-garde cuisine impossible.

Is the food at the Banana Leaf restaurant(s) in California served on a banana leaf, as it often is at banana leaf restaurants in Asia?

The standard-bearer for formal afternoon tea is, in my opinion, the St. Regis. I was just there last weekend and can confirm that it is at the same quality level as ever, though they've increased the selection of snacks in the assortment somewhat and they've added a friendly but superfluous "tea sommelier." There are plenty of other choices, especially the Waldorf and the Mark. The Waldorf is a bigger space and is fun for people-watching and piano music played on Cole Porter's piano. The Mark is very intimate and clubby. The St. Regis falls somewhere in between. All these places serve what a lot of people refer to as "high tea," which I believe is correctly called "afternoon tea" or just "tea." High tea is an actual meal, as in dinner, as far as I know. In terms of bakeries, there are bakeries as in bread and there are bakeries as in pastries. For bread I'd check out Pain Quotidien (any of the branches), Balthazar and Sullivan Street at least, maybe Amy's too. For pastries, Payard and Fauchon would be good places to start.

John, I think that's an even-handed summary of the issues. One thing I'd add is that, while everybody has to make the choice regarding how much privacy to maintain, and while everybody else has to choose how much weight to assign to a given member's posts, we seek to avoid endless discussion of such matters on topics that are supposed to be about food and related issues. Real name, pseudonym, etc., these things should all speak for themselves. And one thing I'd correct is the statement that "industry/media professionals" line up in favor of full disclosure. I would say that old-media professionals line up in favor of full disclosure, whereas those media professionals with serious involvement in new media are not so sanguine about it. And certainly I don't think the industry professionals -- as in people who actually work in the food business as opposed to write about it -- are unanimous on this point. Many of them would simply not post here, for fear of various forms of reprisal, if required to use a real name.

My understanding is that both are from the forequarters of the pig, thus making the term butt a bit confusing (the cuts from the hindquarters are called leg, I think), but that what is colloquially known as butt is "shoulder butt" whereas what is colloquially known as shoulder is "picnic shoulder." The shoulder butt is above the picnic shoulder, as in closer to the back. Here's a chart indicating how the National Pork Producers Council names the cuts: http://www.porkboard.org/ProdIssues/porkcuts.pdf

The worst was when our member "Oedipus" found out that our member "Jocasta" really was his mother, causing an immediate shutdown of the Athens & Sparta forum.

I concur with the analogy between having a website and having a phone. It's the bare minimum if you want to be a business in the 21st Century. But it's also interoperative: if you have information on the web, you may get fewer phone calls asking for that same information. This will become more and more true as time goes on. Having a person answer the phone is a significant expense. But all that may miss the point. The thing is, your business is going to be on the web whether you like it or not. Open a restaurant, soon after you will be listed all over the web. You'll be on CitySearch, MenuPages, whatever there is in your local market. So the choice isn't whether or not you're going to be on the web. It's whether or not you're going to take control of what information about you is available. By having your own site, under your control, you increase the chances that people will be getting the information you want them to have, presented the way you want to present it.

Paula, in addition to your own evolution from editor to editor, do you feel the role of the editor in general has changed since you started writing? Many writers have suggested to me that editors do less now -- that they have less involvement in projects than they used to. Have you found that to be the case, either yourself or in general?

It's the one on Ninth Avenue between 50th and 51st. We had the following, all in double portions except where noted: Sichuan pickled cabbage Dan dan noodles Green parrot w/ red mouth Fresh chicken #3: shredded with spicy green pepper Fresh chicken #8: kung bao (triple portion) Mao's cooking #182: sour stringbeans w/ minced pork (single portion) Twice-cooked pork, extra fatty Pea shoots with garlic Tea smoked duck (single portion) An excellent meal. I would suggest, if you ever do a lunch like this, that you make your reservation for noon and get your order in right away. Starting at 12:30 and peaking at a little after 1:00, the place gets slammed and it's not possible to get a whole lot in the way of attention.

We went with Argyle's "Nuthouse" chardonnay. Worked well enough with the variety of items we were serving.

What wine to serve with this meal?