Carrot Top

Everybody screws up sometime. The difference is that most people do it without a huge amount of eyes being focused on them intently, with each set of eyes waiting to talk about it afterwards, each set of eyes wanting confirmation of what it is that *they* think, as they do it. To screw up is to be human. And apparently to gather to watch the spectacle is human, too. This guy is getting slammed from all sides. A book recently released that raises more than the usual ire and questions from all sides: on its quality, on its credibility, on his credibility, even on his right to be called a chef. A new restaurant being opened that is high-profile enough to be discussed, with the attendant demands for his focused attention to make sure it works, the zillions of details that need to come together and come together right at each and every meal at each and every table that someone is sitting at. And now the Beard Dinner, another jump right in front of sets of eyes trained on it as if it were the theatre that it can be. As an observer who has no stake in any of these things whatsoever: not the success or lack of it of his book; not the people whose names as mentioned in the book might somehow be tarnished by his words nor even him "himself"; not the opening of the new restaurant and whether it "makes it" or not in the "scene"; not the Beard dinner where it was not I who had to eat strange distasteful foods; as an observer of all this the only thing I can say is that if I were him, I would be utterly exhausted. Exhausted in spirit as well as in body. And this sort of exhaustion can lead to screwing up. Perhaps he did bite off too much, and perhaps the bite was taken at the wrong angle. I don't know him, so I won't assume that this bite was taken intentionally as meaning to wound anyone. Others may see it differently. Certainly the world is full of people who bite and mean to wound. But as a human being, what I feel for this other human being is compassion. He seems exhausted and stretched beyond his limit, and the showing of that was the Beard dinner. I have been that tired in life. I hope that he comes through this stronger, and without carrying too much bitterness of the tastes that others have served him during this time.

I've tried really hard not to respond to this, but now it appears it is neccesary. Phalluses? (sp?) No, no, no. Trust me, they are not. Mostly I must say that that plate looks like something that my cat might do after eating a small bird, a bunch of dry catfood, and perhaps an acorn or two topped off with some grass from the yard. As a matter of fact, she has done this sort of thing before, right in the middle of the floor, to prove her extreme dieting skills to me. I guess that might be considered "Regrettable Foods, Secondhand Division". Sigh.

I like this idea of knocking things and mowing down children and old folks who may be in front of the food. It sounds fun in an odd sort of way. May I join you in this mad dash sometime? It is particularly enticing to know that our behavior can then be blamed on science. Heh.

I've never heard of that. A lightheaded "I need carbs" feeling? Are you sure this isn't something that affects only the ancient gods of music that wander the earth endlessly? Has anyone else experienced this?

This could be true, too. In a world where pressure is on for everyone to "perform" (and this has been shown recently to be true in journalism circles as well as on Wall Street) there could be people writing things that they have not fully lived with or in enough to comment on accurately. Guess that situation would be ripe for a good satire, too. Kernel of truth. Yes. Though the thought did come to mind today to question whether the "kernel of truth" that someone holds having been raised in a "low-context" Western culture as opposed to a "high -context" Eastern culture might be very different, particularly in terms of what might be considered to be funny. I don't really know, though.

Both are amusing in their own way. More fuller? ← Yeah. More fuller. That's my best try at proper English. In agreement, both are amusing in their own way. I tend to be attracted to the philosophic side of things, even though my language skills sometimes don't support the image. I just had a recent situation where something I thought was satiric and acceptable and about food was deemed to not be acceptable. Therefore my crankiness. Life goes on.

All of a sudden an urge arises. In your stomach, on your tongue, in your mind, maybe even in your heart. This urge to eat something (or alternately to dine. I am not being exclusive here. ) - where does it come from, for you, personally? Is it always at a certain time of day - a handy reminder of the biological clock that the body requires nourishment? Does it happen because it is "supposed to be" mealtime? Could it be roused, then to be indulged, by the whiff of a passing scent of coffee brewing, or bread baking, or savory onions hitting the grill? Are you made hungry by the idea that by putting certain healthy things into your system in certain measured amounts you thereby have a "system" for physical maintenance? Might the cause be visual images or even ideas of recipes that have wandered into your mind of the lovely things that could be dined upon or eaten? Does hunger happen more for you at times of accomplishment, or does it sometimes strike at times of loss or pain or confusion or boredom? Where does your own personal hunger come from? What is the spark?

We're talking about subjective personal reactions. For me, it's a matter of tone of address--what I gather of the writer's attitude. If I detect a snobbery equal to or even surpassing that of the object of scorn, it turns me off. I love good satire, even vituperation that is proportionate to its subject, coming from a mind whose quality I admire; if it's just a pot/kettle slanging match, I lose interest. ← I wonder at this idea of satire. It does not seem that it is anywhere near as easy to give a formula for writing satire as it is to give a formula for writing a good rhetorical piece or even a decent fictional piece. Attitude does tell, the underlying intent, hopefully. But then again, the angling of even a singular phrase into this shape or that - would give each reader a different sort of frisson (if it gave them a frisson at all). Subjective, yes. Probably the taste of satire to a person might be every bit as subjective as the taste of a meal. What I enjoy about satire is the boldness and brightness of its flavors. But boldness of flavor can be bitter to some, who prefer a gentler taste or texture. ........................................................ Sort of like a flamenco dancer. As opposed to a tawdry stripper. Tastes. ........................................................... Perhaps the whole thing comes down to whether the author considers him or herself to be as human as those within the satire. Let me try to grab this thing and bring it back into the realm of food and "food-writing". Can anyone tell me of writers they have read who *do* write of the food "scene" satirically, and what your thoughts and feelings are on how they present the scene?

Mention was made previously about David Sedaris' writings. Is he guilty of the same sin, therefore ending up "down in the trough alongside all the other publicity hogs", also? Or does he shape what he does differently? Is it possible to take on the subject of pride and prejudice (so to speak) that sits at the heart of snobbery that is then displayed in the ways we choose to live our daily lives. . .without ending up in this trough? Or does the nature of the world make the trough just where one ends up in the doing of the thing. I am not being facetious here. This is a serious question.

Elitism and the search for quality and/or beauty are two different things, though.

While I can deeply appreciate the point you make about "educating" the palate of the people to finer, healthier foods (and can also deeply appreciate why this should be very important) I don't think that a satire on the "Everyday American's Diet" of canned and frozen, dead and chemically altered. . .would sell at all to any newspaper in the country, Rancho Gordo. There is something about satire that can be amusing to the public only if it is not too deadly serious about real problems that we as a society face. People who are stuck in a maze of something that perhaps they sense might be wrong in some way but who can not figure out a way out of it, as the average consumer of the foods you speak of might be, the regular guy, the family down the street. . .they are too easy a target for satiric writing as it might be presumed that in some ways they are already a target in some vague sense. Doesn't seem fair play. But elitism is a choice. Fair play.

It's milt again.

How did Varmint know that? ................................................ Nice tongue, Chris. Big and firm. Definitely not kosher though. I will have to go hunt one up now to throw on the back of my couch. Thank you.

Could this piece, and indeed most of this author's writing, be termed a satire? Was it about food? About "anything culinary at all"? Or was it about the things that food "is" to people perhaps? Some people believe that food is only food, nothing more nothing less. Food. A thing that sits. A thing with no feathers. The Washington Post thought this writing worthy of comment, and apparently lots of people also seem to appreciate it and get the benefit of a good laugh from it. Interesting. Why don't we get to see more of this I wonder? I would rather read this than watch a fast-food training video from some years ago that spoofs how to cook a dead hamburger. It would seem to be something that would bring a more fuller thought level. About food. But that is just my opinion.

It's a pig's stomach of course. I have the same thing in my house but not as gloriously photographed. I drape them over the backs of chairs for a homey look. Nice to cuddle into. Arguable as to whether they are as nice to cuddle into as Yoko's ass might be to some folks, but they don't offer that at the local butcher shop, and that would be the wrong sex for me. Pig's stomachs are acceptable as they are completely sexless. Or so I think.

My best friend of thirty years is native Lithuanian. Displaced as a child during the war to the US. She travels to Lithuania often now. Now being a key word. Her claim is that the long-standing hunger (may I use this word outside of a context that links one-to-one directly to food here I wonder?) of the people for their freedom has led directly to an explosion of ideas and creativity and burning desire to live as they please, and that, for Lithuanians as for many others, has a huge food component within it. They eat very well, poor and rich alike.

as though a Virginian like yourself knows anything about the Alabama 'cue FFB was discussing. Best stick with country ham, my friend. ← I can be the ham. The country folk don't want me though. Life is incredibly difficult.

Yes. You are absolutely correct, Busboy. You are so vastly intelligent that you must have eaten your Wheaties today and also have stayed at whatever hotel it is that gives one Knowledge last night. It is true. One must BE the Southern Barbecue to be able to write about it with any credence.

I can see what you mean, Shalmanese. My own particular focus is aiming towards whatever that thing is popping out from the top. What is that? Does it move?

Surely DNA testing would prove someone right. Isn't there a Barbecue Knowledge Gene that one is either born with or not?

If Yankees can not be counted upon to have the intelligence and presence of mind to be able to study Southern food adequately to write about it, then I would also say that Non-Chefs do not have the same set of things available to them to be able to write about restaurants that are run by Chefs. I take no sides here. Just a thought.

There does not seem to me to be anything wrong at all with discounting the book. Nobody says it needs to be bought, nobody says it even needs to be read. But to demand truth with a capital T from a book of this sort, and then furthermore to demand it in an accusatory and grinding tone, does seem a bit odd. Not to mention unpleasant, unmannerly, and slightly out of whack. I would take a meal made by Doug Psaltis any day, and even would consume a bit of his book, and be made a happier and more nurtured person by either, than I am certainly made by the all-consuming need by some people in this thread to be Right about something they have no direct knowledge of, and True in a category where Truth can often be questionable. Of course, I speak as someone who comes from the Hospitality business.

If Doug Psaltis had not done an effective job of self-promotion from the start, along with performing at a certain level, nobody would have ever heard of him. So the point of self-promotion might be moot. Psaltis wrote a book in partnership with his brother. It is a book about things as he viewed them in a certain time and place. .......................................................... Will this book change the world in any major way? It is doubtful. The only effect I can see is that some people seem to have gotten their knickers in a very painful twist about what he wrote. Will this book affect any of the people he wrote about? Again, it is doubtful that it will. People dine at places for the food and the atmosphere. Or one would hope so, anyway. ................................................................ He was a chef. At a certain level. He wrote a book. He got it published. It is selling. I would advise anyone who has comments to make on what he wrote that in order to be taken as seriously as they take him, they do not just need to read the book. They need to get themselves on the same playing level. Accomplish the five simple steps above, and then you will have some level of credibility in terms of your ongoing criticisms. And of course then you would have had to have been there. Were you?

Fancy title there, wasn't it. In this forum a lot of information has been posted on various ideas within the scope of "The Future of Dining". Yet there is still a question that begs answer. Oh. In the form of a list of sorts, I mean. A simplified list of major determinants. What are the cultural and economic drives both in current existence and which are anticipated in the future that will define the future of "dining"? We can hope all we want for what we each wish. But finally, there have to be some major things that will shape what happens. Theoretically, anyway. For the most part here, we have been speaking of the future of dining on the North American continent, so I'll continue along with my ideas of what these drives might be. *Lack of time - The situation as it exists where many people work ten hour days as a usual thing as opposed to the eight hour days is a massive influence. *Economic environment - It seems we have a huge middle class that is moving itself into being a huge upper-middle class. *Health concerns and obesity - Need I say more? *Globalization - as discussed in several other threads. *Education - of chefs in terms of formal education and of consumers (sorry could not think of a better word at the moment) who have been more exposed to a variety of options. What do you think? Could these drives be of major influence in guessing which paths "dining" will follow? Which of these drives will be the strongest? Are there other drives that could be vital to consider in trying to guess the outcome of it all? Drives, now, not trends.

Let me try again. It can be used to help whack open large jars but it can be dangerous. It also makes a very quick job of scoring hams. And if you use it to start cutting veggies and get used to it, it can be habit-forming, particularly with roll-cuts.