contrarianvegetarian

Well, the chef still has to manage to prepare these ingredients in an appetizing way. Even using the simplest preparations it is possible to make Kobe beef dry and tough, or to take a free range chicken and roast it in such a manner that it comes out flavorless. Having great ingredients certainly makes it easier, but the chef still has to have some skill. Skillfull shopping should be a prerequisite for being a wonderful chef, if a chef can procur the finest ingredients, and recognize them as such, I will always prefer his or her food over another chef who may be technically more proficient but who has to try to hide the defects in his/her ingredients. You raise an excellent point: even great ingredients are no assurance of a great dish. It is perfectly possible to mask a great simple taste. I'm not suggesting overkill is never a problem. I just happen to believe that it shouldn't be either/or. The ingredients are the foundation. As far as I'm concerned, a truly skillful chef should be able to do something that will allow me to experience the components in a whole new way.

Why does it have to be either/or? Can't we expect excellent ingredients AND unique, skillful preparations that involve more than a simple saute? As a chef, you're the expert, and from what I've read, your peers tend to agree with you. But from a diner's perspective, I can tell you I want something more.

How about some strawberries WITH your profiteroles? I'm a big believer that fruit is a component of a desert, not a desert. If I saw diners enjoying a dish of strawberries more than my desert, I wouldn't ask about their pastry chef; I'd ask about where they do their shopping. Something about that just seems wrong. Thanks for your feedback

I couldn't agree more. In the hands of an unskilled chef, the simpler, the better. I just recall some really odd-sounding combinations that worked because the chef understood how tastes meld--and if we're paying for an artist, shouldn't we be getting one?

Gee, you sound a little unpretentious to me. We'll have to work on that! I think you're 100% right that simple, fresh food can be delicious, and if you're really paying a tenth of the price, more power to you. My problem is with the places that charge $37 for an entree of four "naked" scallops. Sure, they are entitled to charge anything diners will pay for it, but personally, that's where I consider it a rip-off. If you're going to charge big money, don't just buy great ingredients; make a great dish I couldn't make at home. Don't you think?...

I think it depends where you live. Here in Boston, there are quite a few places devoted to tea: TeaLuxe, Peet's, and at least a dozen independents. I hear Washington D.C. and New York have some good choices, too. If you don't have a place that serves a serious cup of tea, maybe it's time for you to open your own.

Carmel cream is a good after-dinner black tea (ideal with milk). Coconut is another adventurous and appealing black tea. Both are available through Teavana.

I hope there's no cause and effect here. Not a chance, with all those anti-oxidants!

I'll bet you have better iced tea in restaurants there, whereas we have better hot tea. In the Northeast, you ask for iced tea and it's often from a mix, or bottled. In the south, you asked for brewed, or loose tea, and more often than not, you get stares. But take heart: a mini-chain of "real tea" shops called Teavana has made its way to your region, and remember, they used to serve Sanka instead of brewed decaf, too. It's an evolutionary process.