ned

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I like those burritos. I don't think they're a bad idea and I hope he keeps making them.

Better late than never. I found them weak. They looked awful on the plate and the--I'm going to call it--thai seasoning package felt like an add-on rather than as integrel to the dish. They were cooked ok but not great. In general, compared to many of the other items on the menu which are very considered, the sweetbreads seemed to me a bit underthunk.

Somehow, "storage apples" sold at a Farmer's Market just doesn't cut it for me. I want homegrown, as-close-to-picked as possible. Isn't that the theory of a Farmers Market? ← Agreed. This apple business has always rubbed me the wrong way. Someone (a farmer) once told me that the apples are sometimes THREE YEARS OLD. I can't pass by them without thinking about that. Union Square Market is, I think, NYC's biggest and best farmer's market. For that reason, its praises are sung over and over and over. It's a good thing to be skeptical of what the press tells us.

Doesn't anybody watch Seinfeld? I read months ago that the yogurty powder is ok for the lactose intolerant. Fine with me. I don't care. As I keep saying, I don't give a sh--t about the price or if it makes me fatter. I like plain with granola.

Nice tripe at Casa Mono

There's a healthy population of Chinese immigrants in Jamaica, I think from several generations back. Because of their influence, soy sauce has become a pretty common ingredient in Jamaican cooking. So as far as authenticity goes, well I'd say that soy is plenty authentic. I haven't seen it used in jerk myself but I also know that most jerkers are pretty secretive about their recipes.

http://nymag.com/daily/food/tags/sotohiro%20kosugi

There may have been no butter on the burger. . . but there sure could be butter in the burger. That's the way I do mine at home. And it is so good it will knock you on your arse.

... There were sweetbreads?? Side note: The menu on their web site is also slightly out of date. The mango salad, for example, does not show on the online menu. The pineapples appear to be... pickled or macerated or something. All I know is that they're good. ← Oops. None at Fatty Crab. I was looking through your pics of momo samm and posted wrongly.

There's butter in those burgers!!!? Damn you Meyer.

There's a store that sells only baking supplies in the low twenties around sixth avenue. Can't remember the name or address but EVERYTHING baking can be found there. I also thought of Di Palo's

How'd you like the sweetbreads?

I wonder if Professor Kim has any idea what percentage of reviews are of the risky press release variety versus how many are of stalwarts or restaurants which might be considered to be in their stride? I also object to the notion of the Times reviews being considered as newsworthy rather than as defining. For better or worse (the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned) there isn't a more credible assement of a NYC restaurant than from the NYT. In their role as restaurant critic, I think they might well transcend the job of covering that which is newsworthy. The collective of their reviews represents an authoritative position on restaurants' status within the hierarchy of NYC dining institutions. There's plenty of room for an argument about whether this should be the case but what I am asserting is that as far as the populous goes it is the case.

5$ 10$ even 15$ a cup who cares? This stuff is frozen pseudo but still real dairy GOLD. I can't believe that anybody gives two shits about how much it costs when you can get sour frozen yogurt with captain crunch and brunoised mango I mean c'mon people, is anybody listening?

Brilliant. Can you explain in what sense it's "fair" for one to be reviewed on its opening night, and not the other? ← I think Sam (and with his background he's well positioned to do so) does an excellent job of differentiating the contexts in which different endeavors may be critiqued. My interest isn't in fairness. It's in accurately representing and critiquing the topic a critic sets out to cover. If, as is common for the NYT, a large bulk of reviews cover a restaurant in its nascency--and I strongly assert that a three month old restaurant no matter who's at the helm is in its nascency--then they fail to accurately represent the state of affairs whether they be good or bad. It's a blinding obsession with the new that irks me. Reviews like the one of the four seasons are all too infrequent. I'm headed to WD-50 tonight for the first time in a couple of years. I've been to a lot of newer restaurants that I shouldn't have been to in the interum. I'm certain that a review of WD-50 now would find it a much more nuanced, cohesive organsim than it was when it Grimes saw fit to critique its interior design shortly after its opening. Now is a great time to devote some serious focus to WD-50. And there are many other restaurants about which one could make the same case. I recognize that to some extent what I am advocating would be a policy change. The convention of the three month review is kind of like a high-risk press release for those restauranteurs whose reputations demand it (the review of Jean George's steak house comes to mind but there are many many such examples.) I'd rather that the NYT was blind to the PR/corpomaniacal bltizkrieg that we all suffer when certain types of restaurants are opened. Why bother with Morandi for example. It's doing fine. It will be mediocre or better than that or great and if it becomes an institution like Balthazar did then maybe consider it down the road. That's enough for now.

A restaurant is not a play.

I'd like a good restaurant to succeed. If there is criticism, I'd like it to be of the food when the restaurant is in its stride. Three months is cutting it close. There are so many restaurants in NYC many of which warrant re-reviewing, many of which are years old and haven't been reviewed. Given, as is often pointed out here, that the NYT has only 52 slots a year, it seems wasteful and even a touch malevolent to devote a review to an effort in its infancy. I agree that it's not likely that the critics will wait as long as a year before reviewing. Doesn't stop me from wanting them to.

som threads on the subj http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=45122&hl= http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showto...&hl=sweetbreads http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showto...&hl=sweetbreads http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=51992&hl=

I think its a little rude of RG to review a restaurant on its first night. Personally, I think there should be a moritorium on reviewing any new restaurant for at least 3 weeks after they open. ← Three weeks, phooey. Three months or better yet a year.

I offer the following: Everyone who loves dutch babies must love yorkshire pudding

I offer the following: Everyone who loves yorkshire pudding must love dutch babies.

Funny that you mention this as the first ones to point out this debt are Don and Chika.

How do you store tofu once you've opened the container? How do you know when tofu has gone bad?

Why does he always eat by himself? Seems like there's not enough networking.

I stopped by Grumpy on 20th street today. Instead of another belligerant statement about crema like the one I made upthread, I'll pose statement #2 as a question: Should crema be black? Lurking behind the acidity and black crema, I tasted some nice flavors. It was a little distracting however, listening to the barista in the vintage cycling jersey guilelessly pontificate about how drinking their three dollar ethiopian coffees helps ethiopian people lead better lives.