Adam Balic

Steve - a side from that fact that you seem to have forgotten about half a dozen other fish at least, Rascasse (Scorpian fish) is used in many other Med. Fish soups/Stews (it is the 'central ingredient' of the Dalmatian fish soup). As these stews are not as good as bouillabaisse ( ), it would seem that the spice and seasoning are the vital additions. "Balance" (large "B") is a 'Plotnickist-Cultural-Construct'.

I'm not sure that 5-6 hundred years of spice use can be described as a "novelty". As I have mentioned before, there is very little evidence of the actual amounts of spice being used in the medieval period, so it is not possible to say that taste "moved back into more moderate spice usage". In culinary backwaters like Scotland, the use of spices survived in a manner not that much different to the medieval period, to the end of the 18th C. I'm sure that this is true of many regions and in England, was true in Catholic families, compared to Protestant families.

It almost seems as if some of the argumentation is saying that spices are being used to cover up the innate taste of inferior quality ingredients, not necessarily spoilage. I still don't buy the "spices used to preserve meat arguement". 1) Cultures that use spice in preservation of meat/fish etc also use large amounts of salt and sometimes other techniques, like ferementation. Spice as a preservative would be secondary to these other techniques. 2) Spice is a generic term, not all spice will have anti-bacterial properties, the amount of spice required to see any anti-bactial effect remains to be seen. Spices were extremely expensive in Europe. 3) At least in England, the extensive use of spices became un-popular in a relatively short time period. People did not suddenly start dying. 4) Ditto, if spices were used to cover up the flavour of inferior meat etc, why then did the use of spices disapear in England, before any obvious change in the quality of meat? Must have been those French and there in-ability to taste inferior meat.

The is no evidence that people that use spices in there cooking, used them to cover up the flavours of food, bad or otherwise. Actually, I didn't say this, what I said was, "I don't think that there is a magic spice to ingredient ration, what there may be is a range of spice/ingredient ratios that look something like a normally distributed population. ", which in effect is the same thing as you have said.

You know I just don't agree with that. If you stick to, the technique is supposed to enhance the expression of the central ingredient school (and spicing is in reality but just one technique,) the unique qualities of the central ingredient dictate what the balance needs to be. And there is still a range, but it is really quite narrow. Steve - maybe you would like to explain what the unique qualities of the central ingredient in Bouillabaisse is, which I have been told is the best of all fish soups. Then we might be able to discuss why spices are the Nemesis of balance in food preparation.

But the main reason you can't compare Montrachet to Sauternes are 1) they make what, a thousand cases of Montrachet and they makes tens of thousands of cases of Sauterne. So the supply side is way out of whack. They are also used differently with Montrachet being a wine drunk with the meal and Sauterns being drunk only with a Foie gras course or with dessert. So they are incomparable right there. Tah-Dah. Sauternes also goes well with smoked fish, if the wine has some age on it. Doubt they make tens of thousands of cases of the upper-level Sauternes and even if they did it still doesn't address the point that last year I bought a bottle of 1976 Ch. Climens for US$35, while you can pay a hell of a lot more for some terrible Montrachet or even Puligny-Montrachet. The Free market is for tourists.

Complex can be simple.

FG - good Montrachet is going to be more expensive then bad Montrachet or Puligny-Montrachet, sure I can see that as the 'Free market' in action. What I don't buy is ' Montrachet is more expensive then Sauternes (with a exception), therefore it is a "better" wine. Free market fails when faced with the un-familiar.

Adam - No. That's how the elites would want to describe it. What it really means is every class of people who are interested and can afford it. It covers numerous economic groups. But in reality, a tasting menu made up of complex spicing routines would be expensive, and would exclude most diners Yes, Steve and when it suits you, you are a food/wine elitist (note, no negative associations intended), so why rely, in this instance, on 'free market'. Do you let the free market decide what is the best wine for you?

Steve - I think that you would have to agree that given the hugh amount of spices and the variation in flavours, taste sensations etc etc, an individuals sense of "balance" is going to vary hughly. I don't think that there is a magic spice to ingredient ration, what there may be is a range of spice/ingredient ratios that look something like a normally distributed population. You are all for asking people to accept that there are some people that are better judges of food/wine or have superior palates, in this instance I think that we are out of our depth.

Spiced food seems to have been eaten in all manner of climates, depending on time/place. I don't buy the food preservation thing, use many spices have anti-bacterial properties, but that isn't any real proof that they were used for this reason.

I know, I was screwing with you mind . You see, I just don't get this "foreign" business, food development is a continuous process, what we are eating now is just a snapshot in time. A "Cusine" would seem to me to consist in part as a concept, rather then any particular concrete set of rules. Stick Osso Bucco with Gremolata into a nice tagine serve it with cous cous and it become "Moroccan" to many people.

The Colonel was a real person? I thought he was like Ronald McDonald. Live and learn.

This BBQ/smoking business could be considered a 'spicing routine', I guess it isn't popular in the US right?

Nope, I don't get any understanding about what you are talking about. "Foreign Spices", sounds like somthing my grandmother would say and I know you aren't my grandmother as she doesn't eat testicles (to my knowledge).

What about KFC?

Isn't the "Free market" a nice way of saying 'lowest common denominator' by the ill-informed middle classes? Doesn't seem a very good basis to judge food merit by.

"Spice" can me many things to many people. Mostly, ground powder sold in little jars next to the freeze dried dill I guess. What traditional European cooking are you speaking of? I would find it difficult to imagine Trad. Eur. cooking without spices. For the spice mixtures used to cure meat, to mace and nutmeg used in many English savour dishes (last cry of the 18th C.), to the use of peppercorns at most tables. Pity the goulash without its paprika and caraway seeds.

I believe that lemon grass was used pretty heavly by some French Chefs during the 1980's, became a bit a symbol of 'un-fashionable fushion'. Kaffir lime leaves, I'm not so sure. Ginger and galangal were both used extensively in European cooking. Ginger is still used in some cases. Think that the 'out of placeness in Western cooking' as mostly a perception thing. Almonds as a thickerning agent, went out of fashion after the Reformation, as did the use of much spicing (seen as 'Catholic' in England for instance), however as the reformation had different effects on different countries, it is difficult to make to many generalisations about the effect of the Reformation on the use of spices. Ground almonds are still used in Spain to thicken soups and stews through.

Bux - just playing a hypothetical, not actually my view. I didn't mention the "F" word, but within that country where is the use of spice? Langoustines with curry powder?

Martin, to my knowledge there is only one historical European cooking book that states the amount of spice to be used per dish (And older man writing for his in-experienced teenage wife) and in this case the amounts used would only add a subtle seasoning. How representative this is I don't know, hoever, in recipes of the period that state they are for bad-meat, they use a vinegar soaking method as the cover-up. I didn't mean to suggest that spices can bring out a flavour of a second ingredient that would not normally be tasted (although I'm not ruling this out), more that there is a synergy of the two. As for spices being used to for spice flavour only, well who can taste anchovies in Wostershire sauce or for that matter, anchovie flavour in a leg of lamb that has been larded with them ? I often note that the particuler flavours present in spiced dish are not of the base spice flavour alone. Why should it be?

Do you think that an ingredient like Sichuan peppercorns could be used to prepare a non-Sichuan dish, in a way that wouldn't seem trite or be immediately labeled as 'fushion'? Is there a prejudice in Western diners against using spices out side of their 'proper' place?

Oh, I absolutely agree. Just because somebody tosses a handful some cinnamon in a lamb stew and calls it "Morroccan" doesn't mean it is a good thing. The point is, could spices be used more often in groovy, funky, cutting-edge type European cuisine, in a way that wasn't cliched and inappropriate?

Several people (well actually Steve P., but it is the same thing) have expressed the idea that many cultures cuisines are overly spiced. In European cooking spices were much used as a flavouring, to add interest to the food, rather then to cover the flavour of bad meat, however, they fell out of favour and are not commonly seen in savoury cooking. The period in which the use of spice disappeared in European cooking co-insides with the 'refinement' of European cuisine. The two may or may not be related. Now it is the funky, groovy, 21st C. and we are all being exposed to the cuisine of cultures that weren't lucky enough to be refined (some of us are even from these countries!) and they sometimes use spice. I like spice. I think that the spice can bring out other flavours in a particular ingredient, that is not necessarily the flavour of the spice or of the spiced ingredient. (eg. Cinnamon changes the flavour of tomato-based dishes, without making the dish taste of cinnamon). The question is: Is the use of spice in savoury cooking a good thing or does it detract from the main event, which is the 'true flavour' of the base ingredient?

In that case, I also am trying to make authentic ratatouille this weekend....... And authentic Beef burgundy........ And.......