Daniel Rogov

Shelly, Hello..... From a piece I wrote several years ago: One has to be neither a member of the anti-alcohol movement nor a teetotaler to acknowledge that there is a time and a place to enjoy cocktails that have no alcohol in them. Happily, regardless of whether one is a physician on call, the designated driver among a group of friends or one who simply does not care for alcohol, there are a host of such drinks readily available, many of which are great fun to drink. Following are recipes for eight of the best known of these. Many of the recipes have been adapted from the very reliable handbook, The Mr. Boston Official Bartender's Guide (Warner Books, New York, ISBN 0-446-38763-0). Virgin Mary 4 oz. high quality tomato juice dash of lemon juice 1/2 tsp. Worcestershire sauce 2 drops Tabasco Sauce salt and pepper to taste Fill a large wine glass with ice, add the tomato juice and then the rest of the ingredients. Stir well and garnish with a wedge of lime. Innocent Passion 4 oz. passion fruit juice dash of cranberry juice dash of lemon juice club soda Fill a highball glass with ice and over the ice pour the passion fruit juice, cranberry juice and lemon juice. Fill the glass to its brim with club soda, stir gently and garnish with a cherry. Serve with a straw. Lime Cooler juice of 3 limes 3 tsp. confectioners' sugar Pour the juice and sugar into a collins glass, stir, fill with ice and water. Stir again and add a wedge of lime and a cherry. Serve with a straw. Orange Smile 1 whole egg juice of 1 large orange 1 tsp. Grenadine syrup Combine the ingredients in a cocktail shaker, shake well with ice and then strain into a wine glass to serve. Pac Man 2 tsp. lemon juice 1 tsp. Grenadine syrup dash of Bitters ginger ale Fill a collins glass with ice and over this pour the grenadine, lemon juice and bitters. Fill the glass to its brim with ginger ale and garnish with an orange slice. Punchless Pina Colada 1 oz. cream of coconut 1 oz. pineapple juice 1 cup ice 1 tsp. lime juice Combine all of the ingredients in a blender and then pour into a collins glass. Garnish with a slice of pineapple and a cherry. Unfuzzy Navel 3 oz. peach nectar 1 Tbsp. lemon juice 3 oz. orange juice dash of Grenadine Combine the ingredients in a shaker with ice. Shake well and strain into a wine glass. Garnish with an orange slice.

On the first point we are in partial agreement. The labeling procedure is avoided by a quiet word to the waiter. You may then be a s.o.b. instead of whatever else but that does share your feelings. On the second point we are in full agreement. Perhaps the solution is one found throughout Australia, in which wait-staff are paid good salaries, including incentive bonuses and/or raises depending on how well they do their job and where tips are given only for special services rendered during the course of a meal. Or, as a second-best, the European system of service compris were an extra small amount is in order for particularly good service. That works well for staff and for the customer leaves the clear and open option of not returning to those places at which the service is under acceptable standards.

Referring here entirely to my tipping habits in the USA and at better quality restaurants: Excellent service with special attention to extraneous details (e.g. watching my car) 25-35% Excellent service with no special details required 20-25% Good service 18-20% Mediocre service 15% Poor service 10% Bad or Worse Service if the fault of the wait-staff - No tip Bad or Even Horrid Service if NOT the fault of the wait-staff 10-15% depending on the attitude of the waiters

"Poisonally", as Jimmy Durante put it so nicely, I don't see the problem here. Indeed, I would not have my dinner at Guy Savoy's or the Alain Ducasse's Louis XV with a laptop on the table but then again, neither would I open a newspaper or paperback book if dining alone. This was not Guy Savoy's; it was far from peak hours; and the way in one chooses to relax is much the client's choice. I cannot help but picture a waiter at La Closserie des Lilas approaching a table and saying: "Excuse me, Mr. Hemingway but your pencil scratching is bothering the people at the table next to you". And what the devil - what about A.J. Liebling who took his Royal portable typewriter with him to half of the brasseires in Paris at 11 p.m.? Ye gods, the mind boggles. True...owner's privilege. Ours in turn to say, as politely as possible to that owner, that we consider him an ass.

With all due respect to the New York Times (for which I do hold in very high regard), they are a bit off on this one. The first equivalent of frozen cider, along the lines of ice-wine, originated not in our time in Quebec but in the early 1720's in France when many of the apples of Normandy froze on their trees, were harvested and pressed while still frozen, the liquids thus containing a higher concentrate of sugar in order to allow fermentation of a strong and intense form of cider. Today, even in years when the apples do not freeze on the vine this ice-cider is still made using cryo-methodology at the facilities where Calvados is made.

I'll not get into the legal hassles but if your beer is German in style, if you set a minimal Germanic decor (ratskeller), your sausages (which must be excellent in quality) are called "wurst" and you serve them with nothing but good mustard (ideally German senf) and good quality rolls there is no reason why it shouldn't take off like hotcakes! Considering offering as well a few different high quality cheeses, butter and rolls as a separate order or as part of the wurst platter.

Danny, Hi..... I'm not sure if you don't have it backwards..... that is to say that cocaine may be the newcomer. After all, on the first occasion that Edgar Allen Poe dined on foie gras he observed that "It is even better than the pleasures of the poppy". And of course there is the well-known Dylan question: "Which came first, the joint or the screaming munchies?" Yours in all good (and of course, legal) faith

James, Hi.... The ideal long term storage temperature for most wines is between 46 - 59 degrees Fahrenheit and the ideal humidity about 70%. Considering that your temperature range is higher than that and humidity lower your wines will age about twice as rapidly as is ideal. The first year or so under those conditions will show little additional aging but after that the aging process will be exponential..... Much here depends on how well aged you like your wines. And that keeping in mind that wines that age more rapidly than they should often lose their charms after a certain point..... Up to you now.

My options would include: Roast rack of lamb, boeuf bourguignon, coq au vin or a fine porterhouse steak. As to drinking, my tasting note follows. A. Gros, Clos Vougeot, 2004: Medium- to full-bodied, dark ruby towards garnet with orange and purple reflections, and with generous soft tannins that coat the mouth gently. Opens with earthy minerals that yield nicely to blackberry and purple plums, those on a background of spicy wood. On the long finish tannins and fruit rise in harmony. Approachable and enjoyable now but best 2009-2015. Score 91. (Tasted 27 Sep 2007)

I am growing weary of the need, both by critics and the critics of the critics, to find it necessary to either apologize or accuse. As I have stated before, not all critics are competent or honest but those of us who are have no need for such apologetica. I could comfortably name a host of professional critics whose reputations are beyond tarnish, whose knowledge is encyclopaedic, and whose palates are well past reproach. That is not to say that we have to agree with those people on all of their judgements. It is to say however that we do have to weigh what they say in order to determine whether they can serve as benchmarks for our own desires and palates. I wonder if much of this need is (a) on the part of critics in the name of political correctness (i.e. "we are not better than them") and (b) on the part of others as a reflection of "down the establishment" Indeed the critic should be open to criticism. Indeed as well, however, let us not let the baby go down the drain along with the dirty bathwater.

I encounter and taste a great many wines every year but this one has eluded me. With a name like that, I have the feeling it is just as well. Reminds me too much of "Chateau Garlic" that is produced by the good people of Gilroy, California.

It strikes me as odd that it is the bloggers who seem most defensive about their abilities and have Fat Guy rather firmly on their side. I have been an in-print wine and restaurant critic for more years than I will admit in public. My internet presence is only about 10 years old and that largely in the form of articles and a forum. And I have a terrible secret to share - I am not the least bit in fear of bloggers stealing my readers or my job. Oh sure, one day I will go the way of all flesh and all I can do is hope that my replacement will be one I enjoy reading and can learn from. But worried - hell no. I, and a good many senior journalists I know and respect devote a fair amount of time to actively encouraging the young to enter the field, in encouraging them further once they have entered and then serving at some level as shall we say fair godmothers or god fathers to them. What do they call that in the police - their "rabbis". I cannot help but think that Stephen would have the major factor involved in accreditation as how many times people dine out. I know lots of people who dine out seven times a week in places ranging in quality from Wendy's to Alice Waters, from Hooters to Guy Savoy. And the sad part, to the true lover of dining is that they many of them can far better describe the fare at Hooters than they can t Guy Savoy's. two final notes: (a) Professionalism is not a dirty word. (b) Striivng for an intellectual, philosophical point of view in anything, including restaurant criticism is not a sin.

I am 100% behind what Lesley C. wrote above concerning the qualifications of the restaurant critic. In fact, that post made me realize that "accreditation" may be the wrong word – perhaps what we should be looking at is the question of "qualifications". First of all, accreditation smacks just a bit too much of forming a guild, and as is well known, all guilds eventually turn self-protective and a good deal of their effort is towards blocking out those not already "in". Guilds also lead to a form of elitism of which we have suffered too much in our lives at any rate. Second, as is well known, any form of accreditation requires a committee. The logical question that then arises is: "Who accredits the accreditors?" With regard to qualifications, I would propose as a minimum the following: (a) The love of dining out and the sense of optimism that must precede all criticism. People who hate restaurants should not be restaurant critics! (b) A large and ever growing repertoire of experiences in dining out. People who dine out twice a month are not qualified to be critics. They are, of course, entitled to their opinions but have too small a repertoire to make valid comparisons. © A discerning palate and the ability to make valid comparisons between various dining experiences (d) A keen knowledge of what happens and what should happen both in the kitchen and in "the front" (e) The realization that food is not merely something we eat and later eliminate but is a reflection of human history, psychology, sociology, religion, anthropology and physiology. (f) The attainment of realistic standards – that is to say that it is not the critic's likes and dislikes that are of ultimate importance but the standards to which the dining experience adheres (g) The ability to report and analyze without prejudice. (i.e. Whether one likes or dislikes a chef or restaurateur should have no bearing whatever on the dining experience) (h) The ability to write in a coherent, informative manner. Whether one remains a formalist or an entertainer is much a matter of personal style. So long as the other qualifications are met, both are valid methods of criticism (i) The knowledge that the ability to analyze and criticize is an entirely human trait and not one to be abused for personal gain, power or favor None of the above precludes the amateur (either in the English-language sense of beginner or the French sense of "lover of") from writing. That does, however, imply that the beginner should be approaching criticism in what many philosophers have referred to as "the naïve way" – that is to say, the open and honest acknowledgement of lacking of any but the moral requirements listed above. Indeed, we all start somewhere…..and the naïve critic should never feel the least bit embarrassed to admit that he/she is just "starting out on the road". If anything such a statement is much to one's credit. As to the moral side of criticism – for all of the discussion, there are no dilemmas. One either has or does not have and maintain integrity. More simply perhaps, one is either honest or one is not. All one has to do is acknowledge that even though the critic's major moral obligation is to his/her readers there is also a moral obligation to the restaurants that we are reviewing – and that obligation is honesty and integrity. I am clearly not saying that all critics are wise, intelligent, honest or discriminating. What I am saying is that if we are going to read and value a critic we should know from where he/she is coming.

Many good books but none receives my higher recommendation than Claudia Roden's New Book of Middle Eastern Food.

Putting aside the amusing issue of Fat Guy "appointing" and/or "anointing" people, there are two serious issues here, those of accountability and of professionalism. Those who have received the appropriate position from their editors do have accountability - to their readers, to the restaurants they are reviewing, to their editors, and to their publications. Fall short of one of those and you'll get a reprimand, fall short of two at the same time and you'll receive a warm handshake as you make your way out of the door. As to professionalism - I am the first to grant that the un-appointed critics can be thoroughly competent. I am also the first to admit that not all professionals are competent. Again though we return to issue one - that of accountability. The blogger is accountable to no-one unless, he/she wanders into those horrific realms of libel, slander and, of course plagiarism.

Tracey, Hi.... Not yet. The Hooters branch is just in the process of running-in now. I want to give them a bit of time before visiting. (I think that critics who visit restaurants within the first few days, weeks or sometimes even a month more are doing a disservice to themselves, their readers and the restaurants... No fear though....I shall be there and as soon as my review is published I will post a link here.

Reminds me of the old joke: Q: What's the first step in making a chicken soup? A: Steal a chicken Playing on that: Q: What's the first step in writing your own cookbook A: Steal 100 recipes

With regard to chicken fried bacon as defined here: Any gourmet who denies him/herself the pleasure of this treat has got to be a hard-hearted curmudgeon at best! With regard to steaks: Do they make them smaller than 450 grams (1 lb)?

Eric, Hello.... Indeed it is the INAO that is largely responsible for the various legalities involving the delineations and delimitations of the various AOC regions. The precise information you want is not, however, available on line. It can, however be obtained by contacting the INAO at: 52 rue d'Anjou, Paris 75008 Tel: 01 53 89 80 00 Fax: 01 53 89 80 60 or by email to: info@inao.gouv.fr You will also find the various INAO publications at major university libraries both in the USA and in France.

John, Hello... Is not perdreau nothing more than a young partridge?

In the beginning, God created the grape because in her great wisdom she knew that no other fruit would ever produce wines with such complexity and elegance. Because God gave men and women free will, they went on to mess with a whole bunch of other fruits to make wines. God didn't really rest on the seventh day. After a few glasses of Brut Champagne she did take the time to clean hercellar of all of those fruit wines. On a more fully serious note, I have tasted many pleasant fruits wines. I have never tasted one that came anywhere near greatness.

Steven, Hi.... But the chef would have been kissing my posterior at any rate. Paying, albeit in a different way simply negates the idea of having received a freebie. As to the ass-kissing, the pro who does not recognize (and probably despise) that and does not know how to put it aside as a form of black comedy should not continue being a pro. Truth is, the more they try to butter up to you, the less enjoyable the meal. What you have to put aside is not the "positive" (i.e. ass-kissing) but the "negative" (the pathetic behavior that leads to such ass-kissing). I learned long ago that when you are "made" as a critic the wise chef will come to you table, say hello, wish you a pleasant evening and then leave you in peace. Indeed, the staff is also then aware of who and what you are (whatever that may be) but have you ever noticed that the more important they perceive the personage the more nervous the staff becomes and the more amusing errors they tend to make? I will never forget once in a restaurant in Monte Carlo when the President of France came to dine and one of the staff was so nervous that she referred to him as "Your Holiness". M. le President smiled and said "Not yet, my dear, not yet.

Based on a good deal of experience, much of which quite sad, I am highly skeptical that any vegan restaurant has the potential for "great cuisine". Considering that most vegans eat in the manner in which they do (that is to say, a vegetarian who eats no animal products of by-products such as eggs, cheeses or other dairy products) either for reasons they perceive as moral or out of concern for their physical heath, I do not believe that is a critical issue. Vegetarian or vegan restaurants can offer up tasty and wholesome fare. I do not believe they can go much beyond that. I concur that the very best vegetarian offerings to be encountered are in non-vegetarian/non-vegan restaurants. In such places, however, we are usually speaking about one or two dishes and most surely not an entire "cuisine"

We return once again to the difference between a "food writer" and a restaurant critic. For the food writer, who is not expected to write in a critical tone, there is no sin whatever to attending press luncheons as it gives an overview of what the particular chef/restaurant is attempting. For the critic, however, to attend such freebies, except perhaps to gain background material, is merely a form of whoredom. First of all, because the chef is doing his utmost to please those who attend such meals, there is no true representation of what the "standard diner" (aka client) will receive. Second of all, it's hard to kill the efforts of a chef who has done his/her all to kiss your proverbial backside. We return also to the question of the legitimacy/alidity of blogging and bloggers. But that, of course is another story altogether.... In the name of what is today known as "full disclosure", there are two restaurants in my country of residence that I will allow to comp my meals and that simply because it is not worth fighting with the chefs/owners. In both of those places however, I calculate the bill and that plus 15% or so is the amount I leave as a tip for the staff.

My own concept of food-art relates to the salamis, sausages, cured hams and cheeses hanging from hooks in my kitchen. Art, of course, that is meant to be "destroyed" by its consumption over time. Oh yes, and a small photograph of Curnonsky that sits on my desk.