FaustianBargain

Ok, bourdain. If you feel that strongly about it, I am sure you'll pick up a pen and shoot a missive to the NYT. Aww..shucks! I know you will. For your comrades. By the strength of your convictions. For the love of everything 'good and decent', you should! Afterall, this is exactly why the page opposite the editorials exists. For opinions about the editorials by the reading public. On a related note, this was brought to my notice several hours ago. The John Kass(of the Chi Trib) and Chef Trotter exchange. But you're missing something. "What is it?" Trotter asked, taking umbrage. You don't have Kass' Beer Can Chicken on your menu. So how can you call this a fine restaurant? "How is your Beer Can Chicken prepared?" [..] Then I explained to Trotter that he'd have to drink almost half a can of beer, insert it into a chicken's behind, and perch it on an indirectly heated charcoal grill. I even told him about the secret spice--Cavender's. "OK, let me understand this," he said. "You expect me to insert a can of beer up into the cavity of a chicken and cook it?" But of course, I said. edited to add: Explain this to me: How does a story about Charlie Trotter finding forcefeeding 'cruel' have anything to do with Chef Laurent Manrique being hounded by animal rights activists in California several months ago? Why is this the 'real issue'? Again and again, we come back to the same issue even with the obvious lapse of logic and reason when it comes to making the connection between Trotter and Manrique. I simply do not get it. Why? Why are you trying so hard to make the connection between Manrique and Trotter?

As Mark Caro mentioned earlier, the interview was requested by a journalist from Chicago Tribune. In fact...I believe it was mentioned during a conversation with Phil Vettel. We have a saying back home...something about pinching a sleeping babe to make it wail so you can rock the baby to sleep.

Sablefish along with Pacific Halibut is managed by a fishery management tool called IFQ(Individual Fishing Quota). I think I wrote something about the original Japanese idea for their fisheries that was later adopted by Maine fishermen to manage their lobsters. I dont remember where it resides on egullet. I will try to dig it up. IFQ hands out quotas to individuals and the whole idea is to protect fish stock. These quotas are transferable, the total catch is divided among the quota holders. There is increasing demand for sablefish, especially from Japan. Almost 90% of sablefish caught in Alaska/B.C goes to Japan. The supply has a ceiling thanks to the IFQ program. And this was implemented around 1996ish(altho' trials began as early as 1993). This probably explains why sablefish used to be abundant when you were younger and is rarer now. After exports, restaurant supplies, very little sablefish probably reaches the retail market. While it is quite abundant, IFQs allows time for the overfished stocks to recover. Does this help?

Most of the sablefish caught is exported to Japan. Alaska has the highest catch of sablefish. Also, I think sablefish is very rich/oily? It was conveyed to me not too long ago, Americans(dont know if this includes Canadians) prefer non-oily fish(mackarel, a wonderful oily fish, for example, isnt all that popular in America. Lack of demand, so it is cheap. But then again, mackarel is quite plentiful in most of the global waters. Back to sablefish, even with its relative abundance, it is expensive because the demand comes from Japan. Also, slightly related to the issue of low demand in America, it is my opinion that in America(I plead ignorance about Canada. Information appreciated) fish is consumed as healthy-light-protein-rich food. As a healthful alternative to 'fatty' red meat. Hence it is difficult to sell oily/rich fish to Americans. They would rather have salmon than sablefish. Also, the price factor. Salmon prices are driven down by farming salmon and salmon is way more cheaper(and therefore familiar to the consumer) than the other strangelooking 'exotic' fish. It is funny really. I was speaking to a(British) friend. He said that the same situation seems to be happening in Australia. Awesome catches, but low demand because of consumer culinary ignorance. Salmon is the Golden Arches of the supermarket fish counter. Interestingly, Britain is an island and fish is terribly expensive. Now, that is a puzzle someone should crack!

All I can say is that if thats how you feel..well..thats how you feel.

Opinion Journalism is a class of it's own. Think restaurant critics, movie reviews, sports commentries, humour/cartoonists etc. Sometimes commentries by individuals who control their own columns enjoy full freedom(and complete responsibility) can also print without adhereing to newsreporting standards(loosely read as they dont have to 'show both sides' as newsreporters do..and that is why newsreporting is a step up from opinion journalism where one has less responsibility/accountability and also less prestige..a good indicator is the placement of the said pieces in a newspaper..front pages are prestigious, but also serious responsibility)and it doesnt have to show 'both' sides. For example: Mark Caro's piece was newsreporting. John Kass'(here is the second 'opinion' based on Mark Caro's news article) two columns were opinions. edited to add:One is free to view and judge opinions, be they editorial opinions or something else. However, these are industry standards and quite well trenched. Maybe someone will change how an editorial must deliver etc in the future. But this is how it works in the industry today, afaik.... That's all, folks.

I think this will clear up certain misunderstandings about how editorials work: source

In the 1920s even...Fernand Point bowed to Mere Brazier.

True. That piece aint an 'article', it is an 'editorial opinion'. Lawrence Downes penned an 'editorial opinion' which is nothing but the opinion of someone from the editorial team(diff from op-ed, opinion editorial which is usually sent in by a reader of the publication). Mark Caro's piece, as opposed to Lawrence Downes' opinion, is a news article based upon interviews and all that... Yea.

Stolt Sea Farm(Sterling-caviar?, Seasupplier Ltd-software, offshore oil/gas industry, runs ocean carriers-Norwegian) Pan Fish ASA(edit:aka Omega Salmon Group in Canada - Norway) Nutreco Holdings NV(Marine Harvest in Canada..also into pet food, fish feed, pork and poultry industry-Dutch) Heritage Salmon Ltd(Supermarket chain like Loblaws/Red Canadian Supermarket - North America/Canada, also manufactures cookies, cakes, yogurt etc..Weston Fruitcake, Udderly Cool brand of dairy products, Bestfoods baking products and across the pond, Fortnum and Mason, majority stock holder-London, British Sugar, ) Cermaq ASA(known as Mainstream Canada - Norway- owns grain silos, into fertilisers, grain feed etc ) All wonderful companies, I am sure..but as the title of the resource link below explains, it is essential to increase volume of production to maximise profits and achieve economies of scale. And that isnt always beneficial to everyone involved in the process..salmon included. I will dig up the relevant link/resource. edited to add: and here it is..

I'm trying to figure out how this is ironic. More like tragic .... My understanding of the process involved in "getting rid" of sea lice, is that the chemicals used to do this are more harmful to the surrounding echo-system. And yet again we are faced with another man-made problem compounded my another man-made solution. The solution is really simple ... contained pens. Nobody is saying you can't farm fish. What they are saying is that open water farms, like those in the Broughton Archipeligo have been proven a serious threat to wild stocks, both through sea lice, waste polution, and escaped Atlantics contaminating our Pacific stocks. This chemical used to 'get ride' of sea lice is called Slice. It has replaced its more expensive and less effective predecessor. The problem is that Slice is not an approved chemical and it somehow 'slipped' through the Emergency Drug Release Program(EDR program). The last I checked there are no mandatory govt monitoring program. Also, Slice is not a pesticide(so, it is not governed by the rules governing pesticides) and it is more of a 'drug' because it is ingested by salmon as pellets. The active ingredient in Slice is toxic to all marine life, but it only constitutes about 2% of Slice. So once again, there is nothing regulating this drug/pesticide/chemical. And nobody knows about its long term effect because it is still being 'tested' and is not approved by the relevant authorities. Closed contained salmon farming is an answer, but it is way too costly. It also helps to keep in mind that about 80% of B.C's salmon farms are controlled by five multinational companies of which all except one has been sued in other countries. It is interesting how these five multinationals work. These five major companies have vertically integrated their operations. They control everything from eggs, feed, production, processing, distribution and even sales. For example, one of them supposedly owns a major supermarket chain that sells salmon. At one point, all of them reported losses due to disease outbreak. This directly increased the overall use of pesticide/drug/whatever. These companies have bad track record worldwide wrt the environmental damage they inflict. They have been sued in many countries, but Canada lets them off with a rap on the knuckles even though they are directly responsible for the leap in the Slice usage in BC salmon farms. The fact that they are using an unapproved chemical(altho' much more effective than the previously approved pesticide) that was allowed under the EDR program is something that should cause concern. There is no telling when the salmon stocks will become resistant/immune to Slice. There is not enough govt funds allocated to test fish stocks. Another good reason for contained pens for fish is interbreeding between farmed and wild fish stocks. It happened in Chile where over one million farmed fish escaped from their pens! For some reason, the govt is rather soft on these five multinational. Interesting closed container fish farming solution.

Dried green mango is a wonderful side to curd rice in India. The same is available with citron(I think..it is called 'narthangai' in tamil..i'll check). Green mango(read as raw) is sliced, salted and dried. It is lovely with smoothly mashed curd/yogurt rice and the tanginess and saltiness goes very well with the rich fatty yogurt. The perfect meal, if you ask me. But I digress. This preserved, salted mango is shrivelled and thick, but looks black and has a chewy texture. Anything preserved will not retain its original colour without artificial colouring/preservatives.

Mr.Caro, thanks for dropping by. Few questions: Is it true that it was splashed on the front page of Chicago Tribune? I dont buy Chicago Tribune, you see, but I heard that it was on the front page. re Grant Achatz, this bit from the Chicago Tribune article: Achatz statement #1: "You cannot go to Whole Foods and buy a [fresh]lobe of foie gras" BECAUSE WF is a 'leading organic and natural food market' and apparently, they have cut off all ties with Sonoma/Grimaud Farms after an 'expose'. Foie gras is available to the public through several other outlets. Look up the internet for details. now, Achatz statement #2: "It's just one of those items that really seperates restaurants from the residential side." BECAUSE it is expensive, it is a rich treat nutrient wise, the available demand does not justify the business loss that may occur when those who protest foie gras selling establishments and most importantly, many people balk at the thought of consuming foie gras, a product of perceived animal cruelty. Incidentally, this is related to Trotter's given reason for not serving foie gras at his dining establishment. So I guess my question is this: Did Achatz mention the two statements as seperate issues or were they mentioned in the same context? You made an appointment with Trotter and then called up chefs Rick Trumonto, Grant Achatz, Roland Liccioni and Sarah Stegner for their comments on Trotter's comment to Phil Vettel before you yourself spoke to Trotter? Basically, you gave the opportunity to Trotter's peers to comment on a statement before you obtained a statement firsthand? Supposing Trotter wanted a specific wording or a carefully crafted, non-political, gentle, non feather-ruffling announcement that he wishes to present to his peers who do not share his stance, he doesnt get a chance to make his presentation, does he? He has to get defensive with his initial announcement because others already have come up with their reactions and made up their mind about his position which they assume, and rightly so because it comes through a media person, is a public statement. Chef Charlie Trotter Chef Rick Tramonto Jacques Bissonnette, export manager of the Palmex Inc., a farm in Quebec. Chef Grant Achatz Sen. Kay Wojcik (R-Schaumburg) introduced the Force Fed Birds Act. Gene Bauston, Farm Sanctuary head Guillermo Gonzalez, owner of Sonoma Foie Gras in California Michael Ginor, Hudson Valley Foie Gras co-owner Jeffrey Steingarten, Vogue magazine food writer Chef Roland Liccioni Chef Sarah Stegner These are the people who have made an appearance in your article. How does your choice of participants represent 'both sides'? As you can see from this egullet thread, it is read by people outside of Illinois and even abroad! It is my opinion the reporting was not balanced and I dont see 'both' sides represented. Was not foie gras an issue in CA before it came to Ill? The 'other side' may be found residing on the opposite coast. Where are the other restaurant chefs who chose not to include foie gras in their menus? Where are the consumer polls? What do regular customers of Charlie Trotters feel about it? Where is the comment from Whole Foods who, as Grant Achatz rightly points out, does not carry foie gras and where is their public statement meant for Chicago Tribune about why they choose not to carry foie gras? Once again, thanks for dropping by and the response is much appreciated. P.S. Now that I am looking at the list of names appearing in the article, were the rest of them(other than the chefs) also interviewed before your first phone interview with Charlie Trotter?

Thank you. I'll keep you posted.

Fair and balanced reporting from Too Many Chefs Blog. When was the last time *you* sprayed coffee(ok, so I sprayed milk because I dont do coffee..but that doesnt sound quite right, does it) over your keyboard? edit: I just had a weird thought. Friday morning Trib will announce that it was a protracted April Fool's joke? Certain things in that article are so bizarre on so many levels, it just doesnt gel. It was, afterall, written by the entertainment guy.

This is a big public statement in the Chicago Tribune, one of the leading newspapers in the country. Ahh..this one bothers me. Did Trotter really stop serving foie gras around March 2002? I dug around a bit and I dont see any significant detail in the animal activists against foie gras timeline during that time. Maybe, I am guessing, a couple of weeks/months before July 2003, he stopped serving foie gras.

How many minutes for the salmon? I could probably finish it off on a hot pan after it is done, I suppose. For the crust thingy...

Sadly, it wont. It is not very uncommon either. First there is a sensational 'breaking news' item with a lot of holes(lack of details like time, place, situation etc). It is very convenient that an entertainment reporter picked this piece. Everything that follows in the media will be based on this parent piece. They will keep borrowing from this original item and every story that develops will be hinged to this parent piece. As long as nobody questions the Big Mother Item, the story grows. Like a tree, it will branch out. When the motives and methods of the parent story is checked for any weak spots and a few weaknesses are revealed, the entire story collapses. But this rarely happens because the reading public is usually happy to be swept away by sensationalism. The NY Post article is once again based on the Chicago Tribune quote by Trotter and reactions to it at the Food and Wine Best News Chefs party. It is very interesting that they were talking about the March 6th fundraiser dinner. One they would have probably never discussed without the Chicago Tribune article. The hypocrisy comment, the fat comment and the complete omission of the fact that Tetsuya and Heston cooked and served the foie gras dishes makes me wonder if the NYPost page 6 are egullet members. Gossip is more infectious than information. ←

I think I owe you an apology for being snappy. My interpretation of the situation is that if you dont approve of someone doing something, then it automatically means that you dont disapprove if they do the opposite of what they did. But, let us move on. There seems to be a major rift me and the majority of egulleters here. To me, this follows the same pattern as with another thread, Defensive Chefs. What *is* the relationship between a chef and a dining customer? It doesnt have to be anything more than what is between the person who is providing a service, in this case, providing food prepared with a high degree of skill, and one who is paying for the service. This aspect of chefs and customers socialising is completely baffling to me. Like any relationship, it is bound to become sour when expectations clash. In a way, chefs become slaves to the extremely fickle customer opinion. I am utterly blown away by your statement that you are less bothered about what a chef feels his raw materials/ingredient and the sourcing of said product and how his personal interactions with a fellow chef and his personal reaction to a collegue's comments is of much more importance than the basic professional contract between a chef and a customer. Our diametrically opposite viewpoints only confirms to me that we come from different worlds.

Well, yes, at least for me, the meanings of words are indeed often hard to comprehend in the context of head-banging and fucking-banshee-screaming. ← Something stronger is in order then.

The recipe I have is for Tenderloin of Lamb in a marinade of olive oil, rosemary, thyme and garlic. After an hour, it is poached in olive oil that is at a temperature of 68-70 deg C for 4-5 minutes. Apparently, it turns out medium rare. Chives, truffles and sea salt sprinkled on the top. Accompaniment, pea puree. The poaching is so bizarre. I have never come across anything like this. At that temperature even.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columni...ll=chi-news-col It gets curiouser and curiouser. Yet another Trotter bashing article from the same Chicago Tribune.

Ok. Gotcha. I take it that you will be stand behind and will not criticise chefs who prevent other chefs from cooking with ingredients that they think are derived from animal cruelty. By extension, you also support those anti-foie gras people who take it upon themselves to prevent others from obtaining, distributing and consuming foie gras. Violence, barring, of course.

And that is? That he wont serve foie gras? How utterly fascinating! You would rather Trotter instruct chefs to NOT cook foie gras? Trotter provides the restaurant and the 'manpower' for the fundraiser. Essentially, you are saying that a person can impose his preferences and decisions on others? Do you also value the opinion of rabid animal rights activists who insist that others who like foie gras be denied their pleasure. I am asking because I want to hear it here so I can come back to this thread to pick up quotes the next time someone complains that those against animal cruelty should not stuff their views down the collective esophagi of the eating public. You know what happened the last time someone took it upon themselves to do that, dont you? Let me refer back to the Manrique incident which bourdain will be more than willing to re-narrate. In common parlance, this is called 'setting up the sucker'. Basically, villify every action of the person who disagrees with your own set of views giving them very narrow wigglespace. Probable, you say? How quick we are to throw judgements without digging deep enough! It must be an universal human characteristic. I'd still clarify the circumstances surrounding this unremarkable piece of reporting before making up my mind.

Has anyone had success with tenderloin by poaching it in oil? The idea is to bring the oil to 68-70 degrees and to poach it for 4-5 minutes. For medium rare. Can I substitute duck fat for olive oil?