Carrot Top

That was fun, now wasn't it. Hindsight can be everything. I wonder if they will change their game plans beyond the avowal not to make the same exact mistakes next time.

Who do you guys think will be eliminated tonight? My intuition tells me Casey will be.

Nope. You would just have to settle down and eat it all if you were one. You would like this book, SB. Particularly one part in the chapter "Raising an Arab Father in America" where the story is told of a day at an uncle's farm where a baby lamb appears in the barn to the delight of the children and to be the center of the story that follows. P.S. I'm not inferring that you are bloodthirsty just that you would like the story as it plays out.

Yes, I agree. The thing is either to have a good balance (which obviously many do not) of eating "healthy" things, or to have other options available in our society that will both assuage the need while meeting the criteria this group is seeking.

John answered my question on the Cuba thing in a post above and it seemed to me that his answer was quite intelligent and well-balanced. On the whole I have to say (as I am someone who questions, without having a "side") the person who has had the most success in this thread in leading me towards things that I can use towards finding answers has been John. He has not insisted, not used straightforward rhetoric, has not linked his responses to anything political that some people are "clued in on" that others somehow presumably sadly aren't, has not had an attitude of presuming to know best, and has quite intelligently used examples of historic events and current events which he takes out of his pocket and lays on the table for perusal. To my mind, these are the acts of a more-than-capable teacher who leaves the final resolution of the question up to the student without taking out a hammer and anvil and saying "this must be so because I said so", at all.

Finally I am reading Diana Abu-Jaber's "The Language of Baklava". I've wanted to read this for quite some time but every time I attempted it the dive in did not work, though I could not figure out why. It's a memoir driven by food, with some recipes. The recipes are simple, as are many family recipes that last through time and movement. I like that sense of feel in a recipe. But of course it is the emotive power of food that she is writing of here, and it is very good, this story. I did not want to stop reading last night and can not wait to start again. Her voice is gentle - it flows like the murmur of a warm river, it is consoling in a non-pushy sort of way. A quiet story told in a circle of friends of times past and of who we are. I think it was this gentleness that stopped me from being able to dive in before this when trying to read the book, for the other books read previous to it were smack-down action adventure loud and vibrant. The transition to this other feel had to be made. Not that her voice is any less intense. It is. .......................................... I read the most fantastic description of a food in Terry Pratchett's "Witches Abroad" recently. Dwarf Bread is a food that dwarves make. It is their iconic food, it is the food that means the most to them. When they have to travel from home, it is Dwarf Bread that they dream of and long for. It is inedible, however, by the tongue and mouth. It can only be tasted in the mind, for it is a dense heavy impenetrable rock of a loaf. It lasts forever and is meant to last forever. You put it before you and stare at it, and in this way it feeds you however it does. It is an idea of bread. And it is so intensely longed for by dwarves far from home.

The introduction to McDonald's was made to my (now 15-year-old) daughter when she was about two-and-a-half years old. We lived in a small town that had no real cultural or social activities going on, so I looked for some sort of Mom and Me group to join. The one that existed met in the next town over in the McDonald's which had a PlayPlace in it. It was not the food, it was the socialization that it offered, believe it or not. My son (now 13) first went to McDonald's when we lived in a rural area of North Carolina. The closest preschool for his sister was a forty-five minute drive into a larger city, which we did twice a week. While waiting for his sister at school, there were two-and-a-half hours to use somehow. I do not like malls very much, so we split the time between the library and McDonald's. Could I have taken him to a park instead? Maybe, but then again I'm not a rah-rah let's go hike sort of person so for much of the school year when it was cold out I would not really consider that as an option. The fast-food places that aim at children's repeat business offer not only desirable prizes with the food but also a free-form socialization that does not occur in as many places as it used to here. As far as Chili's, Bennigan's, Subway, and all the other range of non-indie restaurants and grouping, I decide based on taste. If there is a lurking aftertaste of oversalt and heaviness lurking on one's palate even the next day after repeatedly brushing one's teeth and even trying to douse in wine, beer, and coffee, then no matter what the place is dressed up like, to me it has entered the Family of McD's, so to speak. Sometimes a chain starts off one way, then alters the corporate recipes so that it does slip unexpectedly into this family. The only difference is that there is table service and the pricepoint is higher and there is pretense made that indeed you are eating "real" food in a "nice" place.

That's hilarious. Hmmm. Virgo or Capricorn you may be. Nope. I don't. But it sure was fun talking about it.

Cooking can be a part of creating a world that one believes in. It can be a closely held ritual that's also a sort of art in daily life. The world can be painted, and not just in flavors colors and aromas, with what we cook, within the worlds we hold close. And when the world goes topsy-turvy, when the world has betrayed us, the canvas may as well be ripped to shreds. Which means the cooking attached to the thing(s) we loved that have gone topsy-turvy has betrayed us also. It feels tainted and non-trustworthy. It did not keep things safe, in the way we hope it will in some deep secret part of us, as we will it to every day. Luckily today there are many ways to eat though they may not all be what we really want. These are a boon though they may not be perfection. Cats have the right idea. When injured, they curl up softly and breathe deeply within themselves quietly, while not doing all the usual busy cat-like things till they are again definitely ready to. It is honorable, what cats do, for it is a sort of full acceptance of the injury doled out along with the neccesary patience being given to the time healing can take. I raise a glass to your mother, Maggie. If you cook again, she will be proud. If you don't, she still will be proud.

It's a rarely shared fact, known only to the cognoscenti, and even they do not share it but on those rare evenings when too much whiskey-and-moxie has been consumed, that John Ford was indeed inspired by the red beast of commerce and gustatory delight that we call the lobster. Several of his films were initially titled but then re-titled into the more common ones we now know after long summer afternoons spent on rocky beaches where the entertainments meandered delightfully between tying down the tarp for a lobster bake and setting up two or three or more big lobsters on the picnic tables on their heads and showing how they can be hypnotized into posing with tails in the air, claws cutely holding up their bodies. These titles are: *How Green Was My Ocean (How Green Was My Valley) *She Wore a Rubber Clawband (She Wore a Yellow Ribbon) *Young Mr. Lobster (Young Mr. Lincoln) *What Price Lobster? (What Price Glory?) and *We Eat at Midnight (We Sail at Midnight) ............................................................................ I had a Chinotto the other day and was reminded of Moxie. It was like a kinder, gentler Moxie. My grandmother used to always have Moxie in the house. She did not consider it a beverage but rather, a "tonic".

Dignan darling, it is the skills not the tool that matters.

Whoo hoo. I just enjoyed that so much that I want to make it an even three posts. Why does it matter what viewers perceive as being a Top Chef, male or female? Because these television personalities are icons. They represent to the average viewer "what a chef is". And that affects every professional chef and every possibly-aspiring chef in some small way. I hope I can be quiet now. Wednesday evening is only three days away.

Which might be why she (Casey) made the comment that she did not ever dress like this for the kitchen and even beyond that did not ever like to have her cooks/staff ever see her dressed like this. The tension of an unanswered question that can hang in someone's mind . . . that thing that makes a great story compelling while the story is being told (as is occuring here on Top Chef in the vignettes of personality and looks being tossed out to the viewers) can take the attention away from what is supposed to be really important in the picture supposedly being focused on: making great food and being a capable leader. So that is why, I guess, whether the high heel thing was real or not, it bothers me. Tre knew he was on camera when he took off his shirt. In that sense he had control over using what the women posting above were commenting on. In wanting to know the story that underlies the story, I want to know whether the women chefs knew they were going to be on-camera in those clothes before they (or someone else) chose those particular outfits. A tiny detail, perhaps. But important psychologically to the overall perception by the viewers of "who they are". Mpfh. Forgive me, I know I responded to myself in this post.

Darn it all, Dignan. I've really been enjoying seeing this new side of you as fashion maven. I don't have a bandoleer and will actually have to look that word up. But I will shoot off that the green shirt was not designed for the concept of creating beauty but for the concept of creating intense further interest and musing speculation. But of course it is one's knife skills that count in the end, when everyone convenes at the OK Corral.

I don't think it's rigged but I'm curious as to whether it is more intensively scripted/directed during the parts of the show that are not specifically set in the kitchen. It would be clearly unethical to script or direct the competition as it occurs in the kitchen. I'm watching the show in two ways: the first way just accepting what I see as "real", or real enough. Just watching a TV show. The other way I'm watching it is in a mode of analysis with not the eyes of a chef or as someone who cooks or just as a television viewer seeking entertainment, but rather with the eyes of someone who would have this show placed before them with the instructions "Direct this and produce it. Make this show catch the viewer's attention and keep it." Writing a good story, fiction or not, means using a certain bag of tricks to do it best. Just as in any recipe for cooking, there are lots of technical things one has to remember and use in order to make it work well. If it were me in charge of this show (ha, ha, I do have an ego don't I ) I would use everything at my (ethical) disposal to make it simmer and simmer and simmer till the bitter end. So I do wonder about image styling and high heel possible trickery because all these things do matter in terms of creating and maintaining an entertaining drama, even in small ways. These sort of things are like the glue that helps hold the (larger) story together. An image stylist is not always used to create the most beautiful things - they are used to create the thing that is most useful for the final goal. Yeah, I definitely think Casey's green top was chosen by an image stylist. And I won't say anything more about why. If scripting or outside-of-kitchen directing is as intensive as I am only guessing it might be, will that finally affect who wins? I sort of doubt it, actually. It's just interesting to watch and consider it all.

I had several thoughts when reading this, most of which you've probably already had and dismissed . There are a couple of phrases (put in bold above) which made me think that cat-as-food in this case might have been in origins specifically linked to some sort of mysticism or folk medicine. I particularly like the line but that is neither here nor there it just makes me curious as to whether "whipping it" translates to a rather action-packed and exciting way to say "basting it". Could someone from that region have made a trip somewhere to a faraway place where cat was eaten as a more usual thing, bringing back the idea of cat-as-food from that place? It would have to be someone with influence in the area if this were true, possibly someone "noble", for others to want to copy the idea of cat-as-food.

sazji, you are a gem! I made a pledge to myself that I would no longer use the word "fabulous" but really I can not help it. This is fabulous! Interesting that the hamsili ekmek is a loaf rather than like a pizza. I've had loaves of bread with things like olives or rendered salt pork bits among other things baked in, but never one with fish. Will let you know how it comes out when I try it. Thanks again.

It doesn't have to cost a thing. Heck, you can get paid to learn. Culinary school isn't worth it. Learn on the job - you'll learn more, and have more money in the end. Besides, half of the techniques they learn in school no one uses anymore, and they don't teach techniques that restaurants actually do use now... (frustrating those of us who have to deal with the culinary school grads...) When you have to show a culinary school grad how to make a mayonnaise or a ganache because they don't know what an emulsion is, theres a fucking problem...(true story) ← Mike, I completely agree with you about culinary school. I became an executive chef with a six-figure salary without it and even without a high school diploma or GED. And the first person that I ever had to "terminate" from his job as cook happened to be a CIA grad. (Note: We do live in an intensely academically-credentialized society, though, so what you describe may not be for everybody or even for most. There, I've added my cautionary note. ) ............................ There's a million reasons why so much food sucks, so I expect this thread will be a very long-lasting one. divalasvegas, I've tasted that coleslaw before somewhere. It is rank and disgusting and a crime against humanity. I am sorry you had to experience it.

Yep that's what happened. Whiners don't win. Personally I would have worn the heels and probably would have somehow kept stepping on Howie's big toe with the stiletto part. Then I would have kept them on till the judging where I would take them off and throw them with damning accuracy into Padma's teased hairdo. I would have tried for Tom's head but there's nothing for the heel to grab onto there and that look of sweaty oil and batter covered high heel hanging from someone's head would be so precious.

Sure you can. Probably at greater risk for injury if you are in a fast-paced hectic professional kitchen (unless of course the clubs you go to are a bit more athletic than the usual and there is hot oil, sharp knives, and performance demands around. Sometimes this can happen in Coney Island or the Bronx). The question is whether as a professional would you want to. Again I say let's try it on Howie. Poor CJ would hit his adorable head on the ceiling, so it shouldn't be him we try it on.

That would be quite a controversial topic, Anna, most particularly with any women professional chefs who might respond. The combination of the sexuality that high-heels and low-cut blouses offer (and either the loss of gain of power of various sorts) blended with or opposed to the pre-requisite performance or image demands that various places of work require and how that all plays out particularly with women in management positions is indeed fascinating.

Bolt of blah may be the next thing in fashion. One never knows. If it is, credit should definitely be given to you for inventing the phrase. Yes, I always carry a gun and badge when giving fashion advice so do think you've got the right idea. Yeah, they might be like "normal people" but I am a true believer in the concept that it takes a Macchiavellian mind to create and produce "reality" TV. I'd like to give those minds full credit if they indeed deserve it. (Edited this time because I dropped the h from Macchiavelli and we simply can not have that happening.)

These stories have been wonderful to read - thank you for posting them. And I will definitely get that book. I have to admit that part of my mind is still snagged on what people were feeding their dogs. Admittedly this is giving short shrift to the people that lived through this time but somehow this question just got stuck in my mind somehow. Considering the relationship that is espoused as being between the English and their doggies - one of great respect and all that - it just worries me how everyone managed. For some reason I don't think that canned pet food was widely available then, and that table scraps were the thing. But when there are no table scraps, what does one do? ........................................... Aside from my little obsession here, I'd love to hear more stories about rationing and how it affected people too during this time.

I'd guess that they are all being dressed by stylists on that show and that they did not even have to bring along clothes for the set. If this is true it would mean, of course, that the whole high-heel thing was a set-up designed to add an exciting tension to the story. Which of course it did. It might be interesting to check the credits (if they even show them) to see if fashion stylist or some similar title is listed. I agree with you about the final likely disposition of the shoes. But I still think it's a worthy point to make a call out on it just because, but more importantly if it is a real competition and just not a highly staged one. If it is just a highly staged competition, that would explain the look Padma gave the chef who complained about the heels. As in "Your real payoff here is being seen by America, not winning the contest, and you know that". If it is a real contest, I'd weigh my vote between Brian and Tre. They both have assets I won't dwell on either, Dignan. Besides having what it takes to win the contest. But if it is not a "real" contest and is highly staged, the winner will be whomever can create the longest lasting tension and entertainment in a way that will not compromise the overlay idea that there is a "real" contest going on. One side bonus of watching Top Chef is that I think I finally understand football fans. (Edited to alter Brian's name to its correct spelling rather than call him "Brain". Phew.)