FaustianBargain

Once again, we dont know. The fundraiser was on the sixth of march. The Chicago Tribune is dated march 29th. It is one of the most shoddy pieces of reporting I have seen with no details as to when the quotes were obtained etc. ← In the piece Trotter says he stopped serving foie gras in his restaurant about "3 years ago" and that is the point in time I'm referencing. The recent fundraiser where foie gras was served (which benefitted Trotter's own foundation), happened on March 6, 2005. Edited to add: This point is now moot since it's fairly clear (from Trotter via Bourdain) that the guest chefs prepared the foie gras dishes at the fundraiser at Charlie Trotter's on March 6. =R= ← Ahh..yes..yes.. "the confirmation from Trotter via Bourdain". Obviously my words were invisible to most of you here even though I have been banging my head and screaming like a fucking banshee. I'd send bourdain to a corner to face the wall for raising storms in teacups. If Trotter is more than an acquaintance to bourdain, he definitely owes him an apology. Now, moving on, if Mark Caro cares to drop in, I have a question or two for him.

!I am thinking you'd like to look at Mithais. It has a spongy texture and soak up whatever flavoured liquid on which it rests.

Thank you, derricks. Much appreciated.

I studied newsreporting and journalism in CA before I went to study cooking in London. I'd like to think that I know the difference between responsible journalism and sensationalistic scribbling. Naturally, I am depressed that you disagree.

Maybe you are venturing out too far. Coulda..woulda..shoulda..*you* are not him and *you* werent there. Period. End of story. Blumenthal is tickled silly about the whole flavoured sheet thingy. He even came up with one that tastes like leather. It was ghastly. It was exactly like licking a shoe, but I suppose that was the whole point. However, you or I do not know why Heston chose those dishes. Those two seems to be the easiest to travel. Heston's menu is designed with British 'food memories'. Porridge, sardine on toast etc. My guesses are only as good as yours. Hmm. Given that his principle doesnt include interfering in other's creations, save all the foie gras ducks to protect them chefs/punters and given that it is only concerned with his own cooking, I dont think he violated his principles. Well...I suppose this means that #2 dish was Tetsuya's? No, it wasnt nice at all. But that wasnt the point, was it? Phew! We have come a long way from:

I don't agree. But I would agree that a character fault is far worse than a physical fault. Calling someone a hyprocrite is an accusation, usually based on something the person has said or done. It is an invitation for the accused to explain the apparent hypocrisy. To instead reply with a childish insult is an indication that the accuser was correct and that accused has no defense for his/her actions. ← Tramonto called Trotter a hypocrite when this fundraiser dinner was not an issue. You can thank bourdain for bringing that up. In my opinion, it is still not an issue as at least 2 out of the 3 foie gras dishes were definitely not Trotter's creation. Trotter was very clear that he wouldnt use foie gras because the birds were not treated well. Tramonto responded by calling him a hypocrite as 'all animals are raised for slaughter'. This is absolutely irrelevant as Trotter's rationale isnt based upon the philosophy of vegetarianism. Trotter didnt invite Tromonto for a debate. Trotter didnt attempt to persuade others to follow his beliefs. He is carrying on in his own restaurant.

It's not bad journalism to ask two different parties to comment on the other's statements. That's not troublemaking; that's getting the story. ← My feeling is that this was done badly. Your opinion may differ.

Hopefully, the future YOU will not resort to calling people stupid and fat when they disagree with you. Because I agree with you on one point: it is all about the right to have an opinion-- on both sides. And you do your own opinion a disservice when you express yourself like T. did. ← Yes, I agree. It was rather unfortunate. But imagine, if you can, this scenario. A reporter asking you how you felt about the Ill Foie Gras situation. You tell him what you feel. He comes back with a message from Tramonto, a fellow chef, who is calling him a hypocrite followed by one of the most irrational statement("All animals are raised for slaughter") and it seems as though it is coming out of the blue. And without provocation. I hope Mark Caro had the sense to record it all. The article says that CT "retorted" which means that his reply was directly in response to RT's comment. It is very unwise and irresponsible reporting practice to pass second hand personal comments. Of course, I am only guessing what might have happened. I should probably not dwell upon this until I have more information.

An aspersion upon character is far worse than mockery of physical attributes.

Mabelline, RT called him a hypocrite first. We dont know the circumstances under which this article developed. If the reporter was going to and fro between the two chefs, carrying messages from RT to CT, asking for comments, then a lot can get lost in the translation. This is not reporting. It is troublemaking. With some agenda probably.

Even Charlie Trotter cannot tell Heston.B or Tetsuya what to cook. Or what not to cook. That is disrespectful. Heston.B crosses an ocean to show off his two signature dishes and to prepare them for a fundraiser as a gesture of friendship..and you tell him, NO? I dont think so.

Really? You are sure, are you? How sure are you?

Purely for principle. Because everyone should have a right to their opinion. I am not defending 'Trotter', the chef. I am defending the right to hold an opinion without being judged. As a chef, I have given some serious thoughts about the issue of foie gras. It is deeply disturbing to me. However, I cannot afford to NOT cook foie gras because of my beliefs. It is simply a matter of doing one's job without letting personal feelings interfere with the work. However, I can appreciate the freedom wealth and power can offer a person in order to put his beliefs into practice. This is rare. If I can afford to stand by my beliefs without any impact on my earnings, I'd do that same. In a way, I am not defending Trotter. I am defending myself. A future ME, perhaps?

Why not? I was under the impression that both Chefs were interviewed for the article. If this is not the case, we will certainly find out soon...but I don't understand exactly why you would think that this is not the case. ← Reply also to 'plattetude': Ok. Go back to the Chicago Tribune article. See the sequence of quotes. It begins with Trotter. followed by Tramonto It looks as though(and I might as well be wrong. At worse, Mark Caro's sin may only be bad reporting) the the reporter was passing along information from one chef to the other. What questions were asked that invited the quotable answers that were published in the article? Were the two chefs in the same room when the conversation took place? Or did they hear second hand comments? Was there an audience? Why hasnt Trotter 'announced' this to the other papers/media? Did Chicago Tribune have an exclusive? Did they approach Trotter first? If they did, why did they send their entertainment correspondent? Caro must be an up and coming reporter in the Tribune. A few weeks ago, he was commenting in Eric Zorn's CT blog as a guest bloger on public policy and politics and now he is branching out into food journalism.

I suppose this means that you couldnt find out whose dishes those were..or maybe you did...I know for a fact that #1 and #3 are Heston.B's signature dishes. I am sure you have met Heston and ordering Heston not to show off his film, gels and..err..equipment... is like ordering a child not to have his icecream. But, I digress. There is no 'contract'. Why are you bringing up terms that have nothing to do with this discussion. The two chefs who are good friends of Trotter acted as guest chefs for a fundraiser. Earlier on, you suggested, and wrongly, that Trotter lashed out at the culinary community for their decision to use foie gras. You can scroll back if you forgot your own words. Now, you are saying that Trotter should have stopped two guest chefs from preparing what *they* have come to offer for a fundraiser. Do I need to waste more time on this? I think not.

Yes..yes..bourdin obviously expects Trotter to instruct all of those chefs to cook without foie gras because he doesnt want to... If the Tribune article hadnt appeared(with the unfortunate verbal lashing soundbyte) and instead the news was that Charlie Trotter BANNED the guest chefs from including foie gras in their menus for the James Beard fundraiser..then..guess what?? people here would still be screaming bloody murder and calling Trotter a hypocrite, douchebag etc.. Trotter is damned either way. Hmm..is this an example of 'irony'?

Once again, we dont know. The fundraiser was on the sixth of march. The Chicago Tribune is dated march 29th. It is one of the most shoddy pieces of reporting I have seen with no details as to when the quotes were obtained etc.

Do you know who contributed these dishes? #1 and #3 are possibly Heston.B. Langoustine salad? It is probably Tetsuya, I have just been informed that as he has done a lobster(or squid maybe) with foie gras pairing before. Is the term 'langoustines' used in the US?

Ahh..so, that is the heart of the matter, isnt it? All this because Trotter gave RT a verbal boo-boo? In anycase, you have already decided whether Trotter is full of shit or not, havent you? P.S. I'd look into how Mark Caro got those quotes and the circumstances surrounding it. It doesnt ring right to me.

That is interesting. Two very bush chefs from the other side of the pond and down under agree to cook for a fundraiser. They come armed with good will and recipes and menus. The host imposes 'rules' because it is 'his' house. You are leaving it to the 'ethicists'? I thought you were the one who called the man a hypocrite. Is hypocrisy unethical now? I find it utterly fascinating that someone who refuses to use ingredients that comes from what he perceives as animal cruelty is to be scrutinised by 'ethicists'. Re "My take? His house? His rules." It is also infinitely amusing to me that people who insist on showing their unsolicited disapproval amidst inflated expectations of some kind of cheffy 'loyalty'(to the extent that he has to work against his principles) also expect Trotter to ape their censoring behaviour by instructing his guest chefs to play by 'his rules'. Assuming that Chefs Tetsuya and Heston.B were involved in the creation of the foie gras menu. A fair assumption, I'd say.

I think you chose to understand it that way. It is about beliefs and choices. It has nothing to do with religion or morality. A lot of people may choose not to have foie gras because it makes them uncomfortable with the whole morality angle. The point is you dont know and people shouldnt be pressurised to obtain your approval for their choices. I think you need to go back and read what I have written earlier. We might reach common ground if you quit misquoting me. Or we may not. It is interesting that you say that because to me, the heart of the matter is the unrealistic and unfair expectation that one should be accountable for one's beliefs and choices which doesnt affect anyone else in any manner whatsoever.

Can bourdain confirm this? Chefs Tetsuya and Blumenthal cooked with Charlie Trotter for a fundraiser. On March 6th, I think, for the Charlie Trotter Culinary Education Foundation. And from Charlie Trotter's website: edited to add: egullet calender confirms the above info. Charlie Trotters, the restaurant, underwrites the fundraiser by hosting it and by providing manpower etc, as the snippet from the website says..next step, Who chose the foie gras in the menu? Who cooked this foie gras dish? Where was it sourced from?

Did I say that the Jewish religion advocates the avoidance of pork on the basis of morality? It is about beliefs. Beliefs can be faith based(like religion) or value based. The nice thing about beliefs is that one can choose to adopt or discard them. There is necessity and then there is free choice. Sometimes, choice can be based upon necessity too. Sometimes, one chooses a certain path because..well..he can. I dont know about the rest of that dinner's details. I would like to refrain from expressing my thoughts on that issue. Who is comping it?

I find the whole reporting bizarre. I have the urge to express an opinion but I don't want to comment before I investigated the reporter's sources. I am googling Mark Caro and he has made some interesting comments about the purpose of adding a 'first name and a last name' under a 'slightly different context'. He guest blogged in Eric Zorn's(another CT reporter) journal.

He chose to take a personal stance when a fellow chef has been subjected to trauma several months ago(august 2003)? Is there like an acceptable waiting period?