Daniel Rogov

The original question posed dealt with how to best deal with conflicts at restaurants. I won't recommend the following to anyone as an ideal way to resolve conflicts but what the heck....it happened: - The worst insult ever paid to a chef was probably the one en- countered by Georges LeMaitre in 1955 when he was in charge of the kitchens at New York's fashionable "Monte's on the Park". A mid- dle-aged couple had started their dinner with coquilles Saint- Jacques au gratin, gone on to grilled lobsters and then finished off with peach melba. To the surprise of the waiter, the couple who never exchanged a word between them, barely touched their food. When asked if they wanted their dishes replaced, the man merely waved the waiter off with an impatient gesture of his hand. After the meal, the man asked to see the chef. When LeMaitre ar- rived at their table, the man stood up, pulled out a pistol, told the chef that "if this is the best you can do, you don't deserve to live", and shot him three times. Fortunately, LeMaitre sur- vived. The man was found criminally insane and spent five years in an insane asylum on Long Island.

Can't help but add a note on the very best food advertisement I've ever seen - a full page ad in Le Monde (circa 1970) showing a photograph of a single stalk of celery, with leaves and in the lower right hand corner the single word (my translation) "delicious"

On another recent thread the question was raised of when it would be appropriate to walk out of a restaurant. To me, walking into a restaurant (mass-market or not) and finding individual television screens on or near the table would be quite enough of a clue to me that a u-turn and rapid exit was in order. I must add though that if I had walked into the restaurant not merely for pleasure but in my role of restaurant critic, I would indeed take my place and make my way through the meal. I can assure one and all, however, that the t.v. would have a prominent and not at all positive place in my review of that establishment.

As my friend Spiros on the Island of Corfu would say, "skin crisp enough to have you drooling and meat as soft as a baby's backside". As to side dishes, I would suggest an herbed, whipped and very smooth potato puree, for that will absorb enough of the liquids and fat that make the dish so succulent. You might consider that puree as entirely of regular potatoes or a blend of 50% each regular and sweet potatoes. Alongside that something like carrottes Pauline (sweetened stewed carrots), not too soft but still al dente, the sweetness serving as a nice contrast to the flavor of the meat. Also to be served, but not on the same plate, a mixed green salad with a lemon-based vinaigrette. Damn, I'm hungry!!!!!

Jim, Hi... Leaving wine behind for the moment and looking only at the issue of standards. No question but that in physics and mathematics standards are somewhat easier to come by than in any artistic endeavor or one involving taste........Simply stated, Planck's constant remains constant. Despite that, I think there can and should be agreed upon standards - not heaven forbid standards that tell us what to "like" but that do speak to issues of fundamental definitions. Again, staying away for wine, but turning to the cinema (of which my standing as a critic is merely one of the hopefully intelligent and informed public). Many years ago I went to a theater in Harvard Square there to see the showing of the then brand new "Midnight Cowboy". After the film, which I saw with my brother, we left the cinema and I, somewhat confused, commented to him that "I thought that Dustin Hoffman was supposed to be in the film". He looked at me askance and of course told me that Hoffman was indeed the star of the film, having portrayed Ratzo Rizzo. I in turn stood in amazement and it took me a moment to focus and realize that of course my brother was correct. It was just that for me, in that film, Hoffman had been such a superb actor that he did not exist. All that existed for me was Ratzo Rizzo. I define that as one of the standards of truly fine acting. Returning to wine - but with apologies forgetting about Emerald Riesling (a very minor grape at best) and turning to Tempranillo. As memory serves, over time within the last two years I have blind-tasted Tempranillo based wines from Spain, Texas, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Israel, the Georgian Republic, China, and California. If I could not, at those various tastings, identify the wine as a Tempranillo, that was so noted in my tasting notes and the wine lost points because of that. If the wine showed certain levels of balance, depth and length, those facts were also noted and the score reflected this. I recall, for example, one of those wines in which I noted "reminds me more of a Beaujolais cru wine than a Tempranillo". It was a nice little wine and one that might have even offered pleasure but did not meet the standards of what a mature Tempranillo should present. Perhaps one the best ways to determine standards would be much as we taste wines - that is to say by measuring our own evaluations in conjunction with those of our own peers whom we respect. And of course to determine our ability to produce notes and evluations that are both "reproduceable and generalizeable" that for example by re-tastings and doubling up on tastings. On that note, to steal a line from Tiny Tim, "god bless us, every one!"

Several comments: (a) I stand among the front line of those who say that "the best wine is the wine you like the best", but here we are speaking to personal taste and not to standards and there are, indeed standards. (b) When presented by impartial critics tasting notes and scores are not meant to be absolutes. Their goal is to share the evaluation of a hopefully well trained and not biased professional. © Critics may be without sin but they are human and here enters the role of the reader and that is in determining how any critic or several critics may serve to calibrate his/her own tastes. This of course as true for the critic of the arts, theater, restaurants or, if you will football as it is for those of wine. (d) The critic who allows his/her wine tasting notes and evaluations to be influenced by the inner politics of the wine trade is a critic who should be fired and scorned. (e) Using an example I have used often in the past - I do not enjoy semi-dry white wines made from Emerald Riesling grapes. Believe me, if I live to be 135 years old I will never buy such a bottle for my personal pleasure. That does not, however, in any way disqualify me from tasting and evaluating such wines for my personal tastes have nothing whatever do with whether the wine has the appropriate balance and structure, whether it is typical of its variety, and judging it against other wines in its class. The same is true of whether the critic "likes" or "dislikes" a particular winemaker or a specific winery. The critic's role is not writing about people or companies he/she likes - only in evaluating their wines. It should go without saying that the honest critic has ways of protecting him/herself from projecting personal biases onto any wine.

Following is the traditional Greek way for spit roasting either a whole pig or lamb. Let's put it this way - taste this and you'll know why the gods were Greek! Whole Pig on the Spit 1 whole pig, 14 - 22 kilos, trimmed, gutted and cleaned 6 lemons salt and pepper as required 8 sprigs each fresh thyme, oregano and rosemary 2 cups olive oil 6 cloves garlic, minced With a damp cloth wipe the pig inside and out. Rub the cavity well with a cut lemon and then rub well with salt and pepper. Into the cavity place the all of the rosemary and 6 sprigs each of the thyme and oregano. Close the cavity with metal clips or skewers. Rub the outer surface with lemon, salt and pepper and then brush with olive oil. To place the pig on the spit place the carcass on the stomach and starting from the back legs, push the spit through the center, towards and through the neck. Pull the forelegs forward and tie to the spit with wire. Pull the back legs along the spit, cross them above it and secure with wire. In a large jar combine the juice from 4 lemons with the olive oil, garlic and 1 tsp. each of salt and pepper. To this add the remaining oregano and thyme. Into this mixture drop a muslin cloth and allow it to soak. Place the spitted pig in position over a bed of hot charcoals. Turn the pig over the fire slowly, wiping occasionally with the cloth that has been soaked in the oil mixture. As cooking progresses the pig may be moved closer to the fire. Roast until the meat is cooked through (about 6 - 7 hours), adding more charcoals if necessary. The meat should be carved with a very sharp knife. Although it may be eaten with knife and fork, many will find that the Greeks are correct in assuming that the meat always tastes best when eaten only with the fingers. (Serves 20 - 40).

Ingbakko, Hello.... I plead guilty on that list to not including any Italian wines. That was not because they are not well known outside of Italy, however, for I believe even a cursory market analysis will show that they are indeed well represented on the shelves of wine shops in the USA, the UK and even tiny little Israel (in fact, in Israel they are among the most frequently imported wines). Take a peek at my own wine tasting data base, for example, and you will find that of 11,000+ tasting notes now posted about 2,300 are actually Italian. Interestingly, one could speculate to the opposite of your fear - that is to say that of all European wine producing countries, Italian wines present perhaps the widest range of wines, those including the mediocre to the superb, and ranging in price from the reasonable to the very dear. As to p.r., I believe you will even find far more coverage given by critics and wine writers to what happens at VinItaly (and last year for the first time at MiWine) than at VinExpo. From another point of view, with many Bordeaux producers living in terrible anxiety about their economic future, many Italian producers are sitting quite comfortably now, for from Tuscany and Piedmont to Sicily and Puglia these wines are receiving greater and greater attention. I do apologize for having left off the Italian wines from my list. The result only of the fingers typing faster than the brain works.

There are three issues here and those are quality of training, quality of training and quality of training. Many but not all local schools, perhaps funded by various governmental agencies (education, welfare, employment institutes) are frankly poor, and have such low budgets that although they will let you see someone cutting a fillet you will never actually hold a knife in your hand yourself. Others specialize in low-level entry jobs that are often dead-end jobs. The more prestigious schools on the other hand are far more hand-on, have far better connections for doing stages (apprenticeships), have instructors that are first rate. And the reason for this is that they charge more and can thus pay more. All something akin to doing an apprenticeship with a short-order cook or a major chef. Depends on where you want to go with your training. And depends on who will hire you after having worked with the short-order cook.

As I posted elsewhere: Sorry, but it all seems rather tautological to me. After all, what are they saying: (a) A wine that has certain characteristics will be popular with people who like those characteristics; (b) With appropriate manipulation wineries can "make" wines with those characteristics; © Some of the people who like those characteristics are critics and when they find those characteristics they will write well about and award high scores to those wines. I'm also afraid that I agree with Professor Boulton in that it all sounds just a bit too much like alchemy and not quite enough like either winemaking or verifiable chemistry. I am also growing increasingly weary of people who buy wines primarily on the basis of scores. On a more positive note, I honestly believe that an increasing number of people who read the critics are learning to perceive scores as nothing more than a "shorthand quality summary statement" and then turning to read the notes to see if they really might enjoy the wine. Those who subscribe to the NYTimes on line can find the article in question at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08....html?

There is an old Turkish saying to the effect that "the man who does not smell his melon is not worthy of eating it". Wise move!!!!!! ..............Unless of course you want unripe or overripe melons.

Hah!!!! We shall do the tour together. I adore making the street-rounds with people who love food!!!!!!!

Does it qualify that in my role as restaurant critic I have eaten* three times at McDonald's? Believe me, to me at least, that's hard work. *Please note that I say "eaten" and not "dined"

I'm not sure if they fully qualify but (to borrow a phrase from Topsey) "lawsy, lawsy" give me lobster quenelles with Sauce Nantua and a bottle of fine Meursault and I'm well on the way to paradise.

Phil, Hi... We are in agreement. I have written (probably 8,321,247 times) that scores are nothing more than two and rarely three digits at the end of a tasting note. Scores are nothing more than a way of summing up the quality of a wine but say nothing whatever about whether one person or another will or will not enjoy a particular wine. As to why "we" (the critics) award scores - simple enough. For many years my scores remained a notation to myself only, a kind of coupe memoire if you like, but were unpublished. Like many critics I began to publish scores only when readers began to demand them. Best, Rogov

Pam, Hi..... Being as diplomatic as is possible (irony is often lost in cyberspace), when next you visit Israel I will be glad to point you in the direction of dozens of burrekas joints at which you sigh for pleasure as you munch on a bit of this and a bit of that delicious offering. And then I will let you taste some of the Tnuva burrekas.

Karen, Hi Again....... Considering my own age, let's not use the term "old"....... May I suggest "somewhat more mature" as less damaging to the ego. If I had to make a comparative table it might look something like this: Younger/More Mature Viognier/ Sauvignon Blanc Ice Wine/ Sauternes/Tokaj Sherry/ Port New World Cabernet Sauvignon/ Bordeaux Pinot Noir w/out Brett/ Pinot Noir w/a hint of Brett Alsace Riesling/ German Riesling Oaked Chablis/ Unoaked Chablis Provencal Rose/ Spanish Rose Dislike for Rose Champagne/ Strong Liking for Rose Champagne Dislike for Beaujolais Cru/ Strong liking for Beaujolais Cru Krug/ Bollinger That's about what comes to mind at the moment. Do keep in mind of course that ours is a small, self-selected group, mostly European by birth and that these differences have no statistical significance whatever. All in the name of good fun in this case.

Charles, Hello... I do not know of any contolled tastings that have been done that way. In my own group however on several occasions we have done analyses of our tasting notes and scores according to sex or nationality. Althought these are far from generalizable findings, we found no significant differences based on either sex or nationality when it came to concurrence on tasting notes and scores. On the other hand, when doing similar analyses comparing our personal likes or dislikes (as those have or should have no correlation whatever with our evaluations), variation was humongous but that based not on sex or nationality but largely (and this one makes me chuckle) on age. Hah.....those damned whipper-snappers don't know nuttin!!!

Karen, Hi… The true coffee taster is not the "guy" who runs around those exotic parts of the world getting malaria, dining on pretty bad food and learning to love mosquitoes but those who taste the coffees from their raw to their finished state once they have arrived in warehouses. I have only visited a dozen or so tasting rooms, those primarily in Italy and there can gladly report that since the mid-20th century tasting has indeed become an equal-opportunity situation. I cannot vouch for pay levels or colleagial relationships as they relate to the sexes but at least from my limited viewings women seem to be as well accepted and highly regarded professionally as men. As to the wine industry – most of the critical tasting at wineries is done by winemakers and whatever consultants the winery may have employed. In this, the number of women winemakers and consultants has increased and continues to increase dramatically, to some extent in North America and to an even greater extent in Europe, this largely because young women are now free to study at the best universities for their first and second degrees in winemaking, then being accepted entirely on the basis of their skills and potential by even some of the best wineries. As a point of possible interest, in addition to some of the now very well respected women winemakers of large wineries withinSpain, California and France, the place where women are making their greatest mark these days is in lesser known regions of France, Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Israel and Lebanon where, after returning from studies and doing stages (apprenticeships) in Europe or California they are returning to wineries that have been family owned and often moribound for many years and there demonstrating that some of these areas are capable of producing truly exciting wines (regions that come specifically to mind from recent visits are Valdadige and Alto Adige in Italy, the Peloponnes in Greece, and of course the Galilee in Israel. Women are found more and more as well working for negotiants and as buyers for stores, chains and indeed in the wine departments of the most prestigious auction houses. And indeed, in Europe at least at least five of the ten most influential critic/tasters are women. ++++ With regard to the issue of sensual as opposed to analytical evaluation – the reason I discard this is precisely because that misconception is not based on use of language but on the same types of stereotypes that define some wines as masculine (e.g. hard, firm, with backbone, unyielding) and others as feminine (e.g. soft, gentle, caressing). Those terms do not, of course say anything about wines being masculine or feminine. They merely apply existing stereotypes in order to drop wines into a neat and easy little descriptive box.

Indeed I did and its omission was simply a typgraphical error. I would long ago have shot the typist except that in most cases, the typist is me!! The score is 91.

Following are my tasting notes for the two wines in question. Domaine Boyer-Martenot, Meursault, l'Ormeau, 2002: Medium-bodied, with just enough spicy oak to enchant and with fine balance between citrus, honey and spice flavors all leading to a long and generous dill and lemon-rind finish. Drink now-2008. Score 90. (Tasted 28 Jan 2005) Domaine L. Boillot, Pommard, Les Croix Noires, 1999: Deep ruby red, with generous minerals and hints of freshly turned earthy on a medium-bodied background and showing appealing raspberry and cassis flavors, all of which linger nicely on the palate. Drink now-2008. (Re-tasted 19 Nov 2003)

Karen, Hi.... From the point of view of research, only one difference and that relates to the fact that women have a better statistical chance than men of being super-tasters. This has been discussed many times I am sure, so I won't go into it here, except to note that recent research (2002) at the University of Montpellier seems to demonstrate that this is as true among wine tasters as teetotallers. From another perspective, some have speculated that women tend to be more sensual in their evaluations of wine while men are more oriented towards the analytical. I for one do not agree with this, the sensual-analytical dichotomy between men and women as a group being a rather artificial one.

Several comments and question, those from a professional wine critic who happens by birth to be male and by choice hopefully not chauvinistic. 1. The idea of a group of winemakers turning critics smacks of something with a distinctly inbuilt ethical contradiction, and this regardless of the sex/gender of the members of the group, for those involved in the trade in any way should not play the role of critics. The opportunities for conscious or unconscious conflicts of interest is far too difficult to deal with here. 2. Is the concept of a "group" of critics to form a panel that will evaluate wines or to give each person in the group the opportunity to form and publish individual evaluations. Panel evaluations are, after all, considerably different in technique, style and impact than those of individuals 3. Agreed that in the United States and probably Canada women are underrepresented in the group of critics but in Europe this is anything but true, women's voices being no less heard and having no less impact than that of male colleagues. Are we talking about a uniquely North American need? 4. Agreed also that women have no less and perhaps greater ability than men (as potential super-tasters) to evaluate wines, but why the "group" concept. 5. I can easily understand why women would want to form their own tasting groups, their own groups of profesionnal colleagues, but do ask just what impact such a group will have on getting women into critic's positions. As a point of possible interest, I am a member of a small group of colleagues that meets thrice annually in Europe for various tastings and discussions, with each person attending having his/her own agenda as well sharing a group agenda. We are a self-selected group, selection based entirely on mutual respect for each other for our wine knowledge and our palates. As it fell, the group consists today of 6 women and 5 men, four of whom are winemakers, one a wine negotiant and the rest of us either wine writers or critics. We never publicize our meetings, never publish group "reports" and have agreed that we will never publicize the names of our colleagues in contexty of our little group. Our main purpose - quite simple - continuing our own learning and development. Our secondary purpose - being with people we respect and enjoy. Perhaps a better model for what you are trying to accomplish?

Chris, Hi..... I wouldn't dare post a recipe for that. The famous pizza in question was tried only once by a simultaneously brave and foolish joint in Jaffa and believe me, fell flat on its face. The ingredients mentioned belong not on a pizza but in a pita. Let's be kind though and call that person's attempt a stab at "originality". Believe me....more to be pitied than censured.

Marlena, Hi..... As I said in my little talk, there are three food writers of the 20th century that I adore and Claudia Roden is one of those. Despite that, one maintains the privilege of occasionally disagreeing even with those one adores...... With regard to felafel - the first remains of ground chick peas have been found in the tombs of several of the Pharoahs. This does lead one to suspect that felafel or at least something damned near felafel does predate the foundation of Israel. As to combining felafel, what Israelis call Arabic salad, hot peppers, white and red cabbage, amba sauce, tchina, humous, hot sauce, sliced onions, slices of fried eggplant and a dozen other things in a pizza... I won't vouch for where it started but by heaven I will say that eating those things is an art-form and it may well be true that native-born minally sixth generation Israelis are the only people on the planet that can avoid having any of those ingredients drip onto their shirts or blouse fronts, their trousers or skirts or their shoes. A true art-form...one definitely to be much admired. Smiling........believe me, I'm smiling