Carrot Top

Andre Soltner is a man who not only is a great master chef but who also is a person uncommonly charming and intelligent. I remember being dragged into his kitchen one night after dinner there, by the small determined woman who was head of "protocol" at Goldman Sachs. With a grand flourish, she introduced me as their executive chef. Quite overdone. Quite nonsensical given the reality of the situation and who he was. He nodded and bowed slightly, smiling a brilliantly charming smile as I blushed. "Ah. I am only the chef, here. No executive chef." Beautiful. Yes, there is a sense that happens often now of lionizing chefs that did not exist at this level in that not-so-far-distant past. How many of the "top chefs" that we have today are as deprecatory about themselves as he was that night, or as he was on countless other occasions that I've heard of? How many even of the "second-runner" chefs are this deprecatory about themselves? That is something to think about. But the question is: Have they become that way simply on their own, or has the public demanded this sort of theatre from them.

A dessert wine to me is no little black dress. It is no mere accessory. It is a wardrobe unto itself.

Absolutely. And a fine thing it is. When I think of these trickle-up places though, it *seems* to me that - somehow (in many of them) there is a sort of disconnect from the startup-type places. I would guess that one factor might be that the children of new immigrants are encouraged to "do better", to enter what would be considered a more "professional" field. ( As opposed to our lawyers and corporate types who go running off to become chefs. . ) The trickle-up places that I can think of are owned by investment groups, not usually the families that started them. This may be different in metropolitan areas where a trickle-up place might assure a very good income. I am thinking of trickle-up places in smaller cities. And in thinking of the food itself, if I were presented with the option of a meal at a "start-up" place or at a "trickle-up" place, I would choose the start-up place. My experience is that chances are, you might find magnificence. Which I can not remember ever finding at a trickle-up.

That is interesting, TPO. So you really did have an "epiphanic" moment. That is wonderful. And yes, you *can* dream. Remember the old saying: "Say you can, say you can't. Either way you'll be right."

My mission is to educate readers and open their eyes to food possibilities (and connections) they haven't thought of before. I also wouldn't mind my name going down in history as an expert on X! ← Yes, Workman does make nice books, don't they. Clean. An expert on X is a fine thing to be. I wonder what X is. Do you know yet or are you figuring it out as you go along? Is your Asian food focus broad-base or specific, SuzySushi?

My only comment on these trickle-up places is that they seem to mostly exist in places where the automobile traffic is truly obnoxious.

The word "gourmet" puts me to sleep. Oh. (Edited to add) Not pleasantly.

Bourdain's point might be stretched a bit to include the concept that travel is one of the ways for one to get ideas on different cultures. The foods that we eat grow from our cultures. The foods that we eat grow from our geographies and what our lands will produce. The geographies, the singular places (and here I will raise the memory of New Orleans as an emotional appeal to the idea of appreciation of "singular place") that are so varied around the world, grow the cultures that create the foods. The people that live in the singular places create the foods. It is their hands, their minds, their ways of "being", their histories that place taste and meaning into the food. In this way, travel is important. The further one travels, the more expanded all sorts of horizons become. The tastebuds shift, the eyes have more things to compare with what happens to be in front of one, and most of all perhaps and hopefully there are small indiscernable shifts in the realm of the heart. You will never find the true experience of a food of any culture outside the place it was grown. Good translations, yes. But not the true language. That is where all this goes, this thing of eating, dining, knowledge of food. It leads to our hearts. That is my argument for travel. Travel as far as you can go. Find the money. Make the money. Take the time. You will never regret it.

Well Fabby. . .I only asked those questions to prove I knew how to do this thing of "Who What When Where Why and How." That seems so important to people. I would certainly allow you to bully me into giving you a food writing assigment too, if you brandished that beautiful shoe in your avatar at me! You seem to have a tremendous amount of energy, always dashing around and getting things done. It is truly admirable. Haven't read that book yet, but will now. I have avoided reading fiction with food themes unless it runs right into me. I prefer books just about. . .other things. Having thought day and night about food for so many years when I was a chef, I tried to run away from it afterwards. It tires me. But the thing refuses to go away, it nags at me and follows me around, and I find that when I do sit to write, the ideas are all about food in some form. Can't even divorce the thing. Genevieve noted that she had made some excellent contacts through her blog. Do you all do blogs? Anything to say about blogging? And is there any subject or idea that people keep asking you write about other than the things you do want to write about? Edited because I changed Genevieve to Gabrielle. I love both names. Wish I had one of them.

That question would require a bottle of wine and some intimate conversation... ← I can definitely see you writing for Gastronomica, Carolyn. Do you have a definite focus for the book that you ultimately wish to write? A bottle of wine and some intimate conversation sounds like a lovely thing to do. We will have to plan that someday if we don't first happen to meet up at Pirate School.

Well. Only two answers. So I must assume that this is a boring topic or perhaps a frightening or distasteful one in some way. For surely there must be more aspiring food writers in the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts and Letters than two. So to finish it off, I'll answer you, Danielle. First it needs to be said that I am unsure that I even want to be a "food writer". In considering it as a real job, it seems that plumbers can make more money and can even work their own hours. I entertain the idea twice weekly, each time for about fifteen minutes, and then wish to take a nap. The nap seems much more appealing. But if I were to consider the idea, here's what I'd say: The inspiration within the genre would be MFK Fisher for me. What I would write of is. . .how food is a rather magical element of life with immense and hidden powers. Really. I've never taken up the pen seriously but have fun fooling around with words on paper. If I decided that I seriously wanted to be published, the most important thing to me would not be "where" so much as "who". As this thing would not be done for money for me as a motivating factor, the "who" is important. It would have to be a place where the editor enjoyed what I did and who encouraged me while also offering advice and direction. That precious thing is what it is all about, in that area for me. Naive? Perhaps. But vital to me. And you don't get what you want in this life usually without looking pretty hard for it. I guess that would answer the question about why I would submit to one place or another, too. Since what I like to write is stories, fiction. . .with elements of food within the story whereby the food itself almost becomes an actual driving character, it would not be to educate that I would write. Other people can do that much better. I simply would like to entertain and maybe give a grain or two of thought. If I could make someone laugh! Oh. That would be the best thing in the entire world. A laugh is as good as a fine meal, to me. So. Now. Almost anyone out there can be much more impressive than what I just wrote. Do write in and tell of your stories?

Thanks for finding that link, rancho gordo. I searched but it was hiding from me, apparently. As to your other point, merde-heels might be the object of a woman's affections for some period of time. They often are. But eventually they slip on the merde on their heel and tumble down nicely into an ever bigger pile of it. So eventually, and rightfully, the non merde-heels rule.

To bring this back to the point it must be said that there are "trends" that can be found by people who have a talent for spotting them, within their lifetimes based on what they see and sometimes feel. To my mind, some of this is intuitive. Some people have an eye for the small and unnoticed thing that ties into other things that other people see. This can be used to create opportunities for businesses to thrive within any given period of time. Even food businesses, to bring it back to the point again. But beyond using this ability within a certain narrowly defined parameter to accomplish a certain defined task, it's not my opinion that it can be done "across-the-board". But I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Edited to add: Yeah. I just went back and read your original question, Lucy. Somehow the discussion went off track. My apologies for any part I played in it. I really had no idea at all how to answer your first post, so didn't. But the other stuff came up and as it was in the thread, blah blah blah. I talked. What I should have said was: "Just who is this 'we', Kimosabe?" and left it at that.

You showed me in particular with your comment that not only did you know the culture of the Anglo-Saxon kitchen as it usually currently stands in the way of chocolate, but also that you knew the culture of popular music. Not a bad batting average for one single post, TFA.

My point is a philosophic one. And the fact that "I" think of things in philosophic or global terms and that "you" think of things in factual actual what someone presented as an actual history in a book, separates the way we see things right there. Your history is not my history. Yet you and I come from Western cultures. The history and viewpoint of two people from two cultures that are even more disparate than ours would be even wider. History is not a fact. History is written. By human beings. Human beings who can only know what is in front of them within their own culture or the cultures they have been exposed to. Then of course each historian brings their own "stuff" into the writing of history. History, even among historians, is up for debate. It is not agreed upon. I am not "picking" on a word in any way except to define it in the way I see it, and as a word that said a lot within the context of the discussion. Here's a question: Here "we" are, talking with each other in a "virtual community". Here you and I are, and many others. If each of us was to walk away from the computer at this moment, then sit down and write the "history" of even this singular, small discussion, would we come up with the same account of it? "History" has proved otherwise. We all see things differently. Therefore, "truth" is plastic. Except when it is a lie or utter bull. Those are somewhat measurable.

I can introduce you to more than a few people who can not taste when there's too much caraway in the succotash. And then I can introduce you to a few more who would stand around and, although they were capable of tasting the caraway, would endlessly disagree about how much was too much.

The word "we" is the important one in this thought, though. For is there a "we"? Has there ever been a "we" in what "we" call "history"? Available money is determined by a vast amount of factors, a chaos of factors. Finally, though, it is defined by the "we" that does not exist. It is perhaps defined more by the individual persons who are adept at accomplishing what they set out to do. These people who prove that they can "do" , and "do' well, sway and move other people to follow. And often, one of those people has a different agenda in mind than the others. So the available money goes to whomever happens to be best at gathering it in that moment. And even that affects how "history" is written. As for the future, it is important to remember that not everybody wishes the best upon everybody else. That means there is no "we".

I do remember hearing vaguely of a book-club group "somewhere" (somewhere small and local but I've lived so many places that I can not remember exactly where) that read the book and cooked the recipes. It was reported in a small local newspaper. They seemed to enjoy it. I am really intrigued by memories of the book and by knowing that the recipes are right there in it, particularly in the form you described. If I can make it to the bookstore tomorrow, will pick it up.

Looks like a re-read is in order. Might be fun to start a thread on "Cooking from 'Like Water for Chocolate' ". See what happens. At the very least, we would dine well on some lovely things, no?

Yes, technique and proportion. As in so many things.

Wouldn't it be lovely if life itself could be written that way?

If you do find the book, Jaymes, see if you "read" the family influences, the back and forth, as strongly as I did surrounding the marriage? Or whether the narrative was solely focused on the singular and independent relationship between the two suitors? I always like to check on my nuttiness level.

What I can not remember is whether there were actual recipes printed within the book, or within certain issues of the book, or whether there was a separate book printed that held recipes at a later date based on demand. For I seem to remember recipes. Somewhere. But maybe that was just a dream.

I remember the book. I took it as sexual metaphor. (So what else is new. ) It seemed that there was to be marriage, a gathering together of forces within lots of external happenings. Water being one person chocolate being another person. External forces being heat or cold. I thought heat. The marriage was desirable. Just because it is. But would the water and chocolate mix? Could they mix? Would they meld or not? Or would they remain together in that suspended (together yet not together) state which happens when a drop of water hits chocolate while trying to temper. What would make the water and chocolate blend gracefully? Could heat do it (the external forces of family, culture, society)? Or would it take something more to have this happen. . .a touch of grace perhaps as in some cream or butter. What would that cream or butter be in "real life"? Maybe something magical. Maybe something unknown. Maybe something full of grace. Maybe something sacred. Maybe sex? Really though, I don't know for sure. You might google the thing and find some critical reviews by literary folk.

As they say, "you can not always tell a book by its cover". Thank you for waking me up this morning. The coffee was not really doing the trick.