MaxH

Broadly speaking, the contrast from the normal range of Web sites is not obvious to me, Mary. (For instance, many people might say that eGullet meets the description above. Does eGullet call itself a blog?)

My experience resembles Carolyn's but more limited. I was there a few years (and at least one venue move) ago with eccentric individualistic wine enthusiasts including one well known wine writer (unknown to the restaurant I believe). One or more participants who were in the wine business had suggested the place for a tasting of new German or possibly Alsatian wines; there may have been some advance arrangement with the restaurant to accommodate a tasting. When we sat down, we asked the restaurant to bring a selection of dishes appropriate to the wines. This was done with good skill and insight, and the dishes were fresh and interesting. But that was just one visit some time ago and I have given the experience for what it's worth and would not presume to guess what anyone might find today (let alone anything as conclusive as "good" or "bad" or "overrated"). (As with a Thai restaurant recently that asked me to appraise its cooking and compare it to a better-known competitor nearby. I answered I'd only dined a few times, random items, nowhere near enough to give an informed general opinion and as I didn't care personally for uninformed opinions I'd best shut up.)

Yes, blogs are the wave of the future. When they arrived onto the Internet several years ago, HTTP sites like this one were the wave of the future. 20 years ago, Internet newsgroups (genesis of fora like this one) were the wave of the future. 30 years ago, ad-hoc dial-up "bulletin board systems" on local timeshared computers were the wave of the future. (I wonder what will be the wave of the future in the future.)

There's some ambiguity also about just what's a "blog." As usual in such situations, many people are certain of a meaning, their certainties just disagree. I'm no expert but five or six years ago I was seeing it used narrowly as "web log," like a diary. More recently, to mean personal Web site with heavy templating (i.e., easy to set it up). Yet commercial, not just personal, Web sites now have "blogs." Further to Daniel Rogov, you may have seen the broader remarks by wordsmiths over the years on the subject of excess expression. Here are a few small excerpts (not from online) and I recommend reading their authors. (Also probably not online.) -------- "Titles, once [a] book actually gets published -- that most of them do not is one of the few consolations of contemporary life -- are another handy warning sign. How You Can Guarantee Success, by Jim Bakker (I'm not making this up), is a case in point. -- Paul Fussell, BAD (Summit Books, 1991) Q: “Ms. O’Connor, do you think the universities are stifling young writers?” A [Flannery O’Connor]: “Yes, but they’re not stifling enough of them ...” "We can pay farmers not to grow crops, but we cannot pay artists to stop making art. Yet something must be done." -- Jacques Barzun, The Culture We Deserve (Wesleyan University Press, 1989, ISBN 0819562378)

1. What is this old-fashioned stuff. Writing's merit to be judged by the reader? Reactionary! I could point to scholarly publications today that basically no one reads, just writes for. Professional meetings that boast of the number not of attendees but of speakers, which sometimes actually is greater. Get with the times! :-)2. "Signal to noise" rings a bell because it has been an issue ever since public online fora became possible. 15 years ago a tirade addressed "noise enhancement." (You may enjoy the fact that the fora at issue were technical, addressing, literally, signals and noise.) The tirade consisted of three postings: the First went into technical details; Second and Third commented more on the "Noise enhancement" effect of online fora (basically, the higher a person's standards about contributions, the less readily they post). The phenomenon is most visible in unmoderated media including newsgroups, sometimes collectively called "Usenet;" personal Web sites; and blogs.

Got it! From the files. Spinazzola, Boston Globe. First a 1979 report on the hubbub, then a 1980 in-depth article surveying California developments. Gault-Millau had sponsored a larger follow-up to Spurrier's: in 1979, 330 wines from 33 countries, 62 experts of 10 nationalities. California "again held its own" and Gault-Millau wrote "there exist today in California some estates or establishments whose wines -- though considerably expensive -- can count among the best in the world." Spinazzola added that these estates "are not household names": Alexander Valley Vineyards, David Bruce, Burgess, Davis Bynum, Cakebread, Carneros Creek, Chalone, others. Note that these were California wines made before 1980 and in my experience some of them were very, very good. (As were some from the 1960s, and some from the 1950s.) Note that "considerably expensive" meant (inflation-adjusted to today's dollars) around $50-$70. (I bought some.) Expansion followed in the North Coast after 1980; massive investment and Napa Valley lifestyle tourist industry later still. The recent phenomena of very young California wineries getting three-digit prices from noisy cult followings were even later, a middle-1990s thing. It's not clear to me how much connection these later developments have to the maverick California products in the 1970s tastings (made largely without huge investments, movie stars, focus groups, etc.) that put their region's products on the international map.

Mere wine writing expands its audience when there's extra "bite" of some kind. After the Spurrier tasting I remember another incident, which one of the US wine critics publicized (Anthony Spinazzola in Boston, 1979, possibly). The Guide Gault-Millau carried an unusual commentary that had France up in arms. Or was it the US. Here memory is even riskier than usual: but the magazine or a respected French writer in it said something like Bordeaux could learn a few things from California. (Point is, national or regional pride became the issue, rather than the possibly valuable critical or winemaking insight that the writer offered.)

Hi Ludja, sorry to hear that. For what it's worth, I've been there more times than most people, under a variety of circumstances and at least six chefs, and never disappointed. From what I've seen of your postings, I sincerely doubt that you would be either. (Get a message to me if you want to join or set up a trial dinner there sometime and test this theory.) Meanwhile, Chez TJ got recent mentions on this site by various folks Here and also mention in the town's newspaper's reader's poll, in post #6 (currently the last post) of Another Thread.

Belated follow-up -- Excellent, I hope as many people as possible can try both. (Doc, I will be sure to seek your advice if visiting your home turf in turn.) In case anyone is interested, link below has observations from Berkeley's "Gourmet Ghetto" neighborhood before it was a Gourmet Ghetto (i.e., before Chez Panisse, the Cheese Board, Pig by the Tail Charcuterie, Cocolat, and other businesses). It's part of a thread about coffee percolators, pharmacy soda fountains, and egg creams. Before the Gourmet Ghetto Bonus: Link contains background about context behind the word coinage "yuppie," which coincided with formation of the Gourmet Ghetto and occurred nearby (by Alice Kahn in the parody essay "Yuppie!" in local tabloid East Bay Express, 1982; reprinted with slight edits in 1985 with introduction by Whoopi Goldberg, in Kahn's Multiple Sarcasm, ISBN 0898151481). I thought at the time that Kahn's 1982 essay was so good, I picked up multiple copies of the paper. The word caught on, even if not everyone duly credited Kahn for it.

Couple respondents above clearly know about the magic of German Rieslings and smoked foods -- a world-class combination widely recognized among wine enthusiasts. Often the smoked foods served this way in Europe are milder: freshwater fish, cheeses. With something like brisket though, they still work and make a sophisticated combo. While often I use Kabinett-weight wines with food as Jason suggested, for stronger foods the more concentrated wines (higher "must" weight), e.g. Spaetlese weight, serve well. OR even heavier, but with recent strong vintages some Auslesen have been outright syrupy. (Don't think "sweet" here, or you miss the point of these wines: these are about sweet-acid balance, like Champagne, or lemon juice. Also, you are much safer with German Rieslings: foreign approximations such as from the US are fewer both in number and in success rate.)

These things are always more natural and agreeable when spontaneous. To try even as a "celebration" to re-enact the Spurrier tasting inevitably gives it a different character from the original, to say nothing of public-relations freight which clearly has surfaced. (Maybe without the recent puerile nationalism among wine-drinking yahoos it would have been easier.)

Hi Gifted Gourmet, I just spotted this posting. (I posted recently on this topic elsewhere.) By the way, Bespaloff was cited more than once on this forum, including a little bibliography of classic wine-demystification books in This Thread. Bespaloff is better known for a couple of other, larger wine books including the Signet Book of Wine, but his Guide to Inexpensive Wines (1973), mentioned in the earlier thread, is useful for historical perspective in incidental remarks (more than for its recommendation specifics). Narsai David's former restaurant near Berkeley (Narsai's) featured a simple old-fashioned specialty dish, honorifically named Suprêmes de Volaille (i.e., chicken breasts) “Alexis Bespaloff”. It's on a Narsai's menu I have on file from 1978 and I duplicated it at home in those days, more or less (a sauté finished with shallots, Sauternes, and cream). Later, with credit to the restaurant of course, I posted my approximation to the main Internet wines forum at the time (July 1988, in a thread on Sauternes wines), where it proved popular, and surfaced periodically later. (I still have it handy.) Alexis Bespaloff was one of the US wine writers I found valuable when learning about wine in the middle 1970s. With other journalistic writers (Asher, Blue, Spinazzola, Prial, etc.), and the further group of writers who published independent wine newsletters starting in the 1970s, he contributed to the legacy of independent US popular wine writing and demystification. -- Max

Maybe very useful for that area, there's a thorough, independently maintained index for Mountain View and "nearby" areas, which may overlap Sunnyvale. The following index of Restaurants around Mountain View's small downtown district (now 85 of them and counting, by the way, all within walking distance of each other) contains a further link (currently labeled "New!") to the larger list of over 250 restaurants in the rest of MV and nearby areas, and info on some former restaurants. Also, the following local independent businesses appeared as readers' picks in the 2006 "Best of Mountain View" summary just published in the Mountain View Voice. (Note that certain of these categories have considerable competition even within MV. Even just downtown MV.) Uncle Frank's BBQ (Best BBQ) Cascal (Best Business Lunch) Cafe Yulong (Best Chinese) Dana Street Roasting Company (Best Coffee) Chez TJ (Best Fine Dining) Amber India (Best Indian) Fiesta del Mar (Best Mexican) Zucca (Best Middle Eastern) Tung Kee Noodle (Best Noodle House) Amici's East Coast Pizzeria (Best Pizza) Milk Pail Market (Best Small Grocery Store) Amarin Thai (Best Thai) Garden Fresh (Best Vegetarian)

Benzene rings. Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em. --M

While it may be different in fact, it does not read significantly different from the style or kind of ingredients available in the Cafe. Yes indeed, docsconz. That is the sort of thing you can read about from menus, or a casual visit. It's what I meant earlier by information that "meets the eye." My postings in this thread are meant to complement such information, with a much longer-focus view, in case anyone is interested. From long experience rather than current menus. (And some wisdom absorbed from my old buddy Paul B. who was the longest-tenure downstairs chef, I think.) It could also be that what you experience on the plate (not just read) is closer currently for the restaurant and Café than on average. They were always independent, in my experience. Also note I'm posting here about context and background, not preferences or current offerings, which change constantly. (By the way I don't know the story of "Gordon's menu," but the kitchen downstairs has sometimes organized menus around guests or events, and that's the menu offered that day; I've participated in some of those.) French Laundry was a broad analogy. It's not that the CP restaurant should be compared in any way to the FL experience; that will always obscure the distinctions between CP and CP Café. Remember also -- again this might not be obvious if someone learned about these places at the same time -- Panisse (and its Café and other spinoffs) set the context for novel Bay Area restaurants; FL arrived into that context, much later, and presumably learned from it. Hope this has been useful to someone. -- M

Yes, they are entirely different restaurants (not just different rooms). I mentioned some of this upthread, sorry if it wasn't clear. One of them is a full high-end kitchen, the other is build around a wood-fired oven. Thos. Keller opened French Laundry, a high-end restaurant; then later expanded to Bouchon, a more casual brasserie. A situation paralleling the Panisse case, though the establishments are further apart and differently named. If the more casual of the two were atop the original and called "French Laundry Café" then maybe people would confuse them. (Keller may have learned from the Panisse case ...)

That's the issue lately when food enthusiasts visit from afar, and is the reason behind my previous posting here. I've visited the Café more than the restaurant (as an old regular of both). There is also the larger history, little mentioned so far on eG, of "spin-off" restaurants involving former CP (restaurant) personnel -- Fourth Street Grill, Jeremiah Tower's activities, etc. -- or closely associated with it, like Café Fanny elsewhere in town, and the wine bar César nearby that's relatively new. To some longtimers the upstairs Café is of a part, so to speak, with those other spin-offs, though it is co-located over the original restaurant. Certainly you should seek all of these places if you are interested in CP. (I'm just going to César shortly, in fact.) Again for orientation of anyone who doesn't know both, the restaurant is a more formal, fixed-menu, dinner venue. (If a place more or less in the format of a good French country inn can be called formal). Another (minor and semi-funny) issue associated with big-city visitors to the restaurant is when they hear all about it but find its country-inn style anticlimactic. I first encountered this reaction in early 1980s, others have written on it at length. Finally if a journalist does visit just the Café but then writes up something about "Chez Panisse" -- this started happening in the late 1980s after the restaurant was about 15 years old -- it is something of a shibboleth to regulars, or people who know the history well. It may sound reasonable, and even indignantly defensible, to the writer, just as "Avenue of the Americas" sounds reasonable to visitors to Manhattan (it's on the sign, isn't it?) Or "William-ette," sounds fine to Oregon visitors. Or the idea that San Francisco is nicknamed "Frisco," a foreign whim that locals never shared. Maybe not as strong as those, but you get the idea. Just a word to the wise.

By the way (Molto E?) those recent photos are very impressive for quality! It could be useful for people approaching this subject for the first time to have access to orientation info or FAQ about the CP complex. A fair amount does not meet the eye, nor appear in response to a random query. (Again by the way, Pasta-Pizza-Calzone cookbook ref: ISBN 0394530942. It's the standard Café cookbook. The restaurant has others.) For what it's worth, a few other points I'd include as orientation: - The restaurant is older than the Café. (The latter was set up as an overflow or second restaurant after earlier serving things like coffee, which is how I remember it from the 1970s.) At least one of my relatives used to hang out upstairs in those days and drink coffee (and chat with David Goines or whomever about art). - The restaurant is fine-dining, prix-fixe, one menu for everyone for the day (at least traditionally). Café is casual and chiefly à la carte. ("Pasta-Pizza-Calzone" -- it was built around a big wood-fired oven.) Independent kitchens, independent personnel and planning, except so far as they share some sources. Which change constantly by the way as the whole point is seasonal local ingredients. - When food historians or senior journalists refer to Chez Panisse's impact and to "California Cuisine" they mean the restaurant, and its history, former chefs, spin-off restaurants, etc. (That writing began before the Café existed, I think I have some of it.) However, both are very pleasant and I can't imagine only visiting one of them, frankly. - A huge practical distinction was the restaurant took reservations (opening the book a month in advance and, often, filling it immediately) -- people camped on phones, grumbled it was "impossible to get into," etc. The Café took no reservations, besides special occasions. (It may now take more of them, though all my experiences at the Café, starting circa 1981 and most recently a few months ago, were walk-in.)

This comment is only historical, rather than current. But ironically the first major HTTP food site for the SF Bay Area was exactly what the original poster requested. The Bay Area Restaurant Guide (BARG) listed all of the restaurants in the region (if any were missing, you could add them); people could search by categories as mjamonica mentioned, or add comments about the restaurants. It was lightly moderated, in the modern style. Thousands of people contributed comments; everyone I knew of who was online in the region read it, including at least one other contributor here. It operated from 1994-1997 and thus predated Chowhound by three years. Archives exist. Memory lane. -- Max

Not my business to speak for JohnL but as an observer, I took his comment on Arsenic in a common, rather than the chemists', sense of "organic," viz. naturally occurring. (I'm not a chemist but do have some formal training in it and if I recall, JohnL is a physician, therefore has some too.) He was making a broader point I think, a classic one: some nasty hazards to humanity are all-natural. Isinglass's significance (as far as I can tell from running into it in many older writings on food these past 30 yrs) may reflect its venerability, not just its material properties. I agree about the foundation-building education, this is an incessant problem, I could tell some stories too. On to the original subject: Some of you may remember when Fetzer vineyards in Mendocino County, California, was owned by the Fetzer family. Part of the firm's claim to fame then, cited regularly in wine writing, was organic farming. It helped put Fetzer, the firm, on the map as well as promote the organic angle in California. When driving nearby I saw the extent of Fetzer plantings adjacent the highway then, which may possibly have exposed the plants to more than usual exhaust-borne pollutants -- no real health hazard to my knowledge, but illustrating, just as JohnL did, the further factors that enter even with organic farming.

This posting is about moderately-priced "value" Burgundies, mostly red. Reviewing this thread I saw 2roost's three recommended modern general Burgundy books, good advice. Of those three I know the Kramer and the Coates, both good. That's absolutely true, values are found among less fashionable names. (A basic principle in many consumer markets, yet worth citing.) All of the insightful Burgundy books stress this point too. Big brand names are so widely known and sought that today, the most famous classic wines all see routine counterfeiting. For instance one expert mentions that you can find offered online, at huge prices, on average, two to four magnums [double bottles] of "1945 Romanée-Conti" and in a good month, a jeroboam, even though only regular-sized bottles were made, no magnums or jeroboams (according to authoritative sources). And only some 600 bottles, far fewer than allegedly sold under that label over the years. No such problem with good moderately-priced Burgs but of course you must learn about them and watch for them. And often age them a year or three. A US retailer once sang praises of "the $6 Bourgogne Rouge that develops beautifully," which was not so rare (some years ago when the B. R.s were often $6). Here is something I posted a few years ago on experiences of good Burg values at USD $10-$20. Also (am I repeating myself again?) You Have To Learn Them And You Have To Watch For Them -- you can't expect to look these things up in some publication -- it does happen, but usually such endorsements themselves kill off a good value. (I have dramatic examples on file.) Knowledge pays off better. As a rule I've found the $10-$20 red values, when they did appear, among exceptional Bourgognes Rouges; regionals (Beaune, Nuits, Hauts CdB, etc); and the less-fashionable village wines -- Givry, Mercurey, maybe Rully, all of the Côte Challonaise; sometimes, from even more fashionable villages than those. A few years ago the 1996 Jadot B.-Rouges at $11 was in big US supermarkets and it tasted to promise -- and did deliver -- good meaty stuff in a few years, amazing. (Jadot does many good values and has expanded impressively over the years.) A good merchant showed me Jadot 2000 Chorey-les-Beaune at $12 in California, "you may find it a little hollow;" true, but what it had around its hollow part seemed creditable and true to region, certainly for US $12. Even better were the 96 Rouges, 91 Lafarge Rouges, 93 Jadot Beaune-Bressandes, 95 de Villaine Mercurey "Montots," many 94s that got sold off in 98, and the 96 Jadot Santenay (another good-value, non-hip appellation) "Clos de Malte" [drinking well now as the 99 promises to do also] or the 96 Hudelot-Noellat Rouges [sTILL developing] or the 98 Groffier Rouges or 99 Lafarge Rouges or others. ALL of these were under $20, some were $10.

I would add 1990 to your list of outstanding vintages. Hi, JohnL, yes I certainly agree on the general strength of 1990 reds, one of the best years in late 20th century, many other people think so too. I could mention other strong years too. Could also mention other years that showed early charm, but lack of depth or aging promise. The point above was years with both early charm, and also depth and potential, demonstrating that the two aren't exclusive. It has been a while since I (or anybody) tried young 1990s but those don't stand out in my memory for the same kind of early charm. Cheers -- Max

Hi Linda K, I'm not going to be able to do those questions justice in two minutes -- no one can, I think -- the subject is large -- wines of Burgundy have many producers, many considerations, I've been poking into these wines for many years and still some questions don't have simple answers -- but here goes. Keeping in mind I have no info of which 2001 is involved, red or white, etc (Yoxall in his popular though dated introductory Burgundy book cited over 45000 properties averaging 2.3 hectares for instance) and am trying to answer in one shot without opportunity for Q&A. "How long" can be anywhere from a year to maybe 20 (for hard-case red Nuits in certain years, I named some but edited them out for concision). It All Depends. 2001 reds are not as a rule an early-blooming group (2000 is the early-maturing year of recent vintages) and I expect to open most 2001 reds only after a few more years. "Decant" again depends: the highly respected Anne-Claude Leflaive at her domaine not long ago advised us to "carafe" her (highly concentrated, mineraled) whites for some hours, if tasting them young. "Preferably overnight" except for the lightest ones. Do not (anyone!) judge the whole of Burgundy based on one particular bottle! Once you see what the region can deliver, you are apt to keep seeking it. Really, whatever advice anyone can offer, there is no substitute for being introduced to good examples of these wines served at suitable ages by a knowledgeable friend or merchant, maybe at a tasting or course (many merchants and some wine-education organizations offer these if you look around). That is not always what people want to hear but it's valuable advice. Here's some more: do a little homework. A few wine books, not many, have good overviews of Burgundy, again I'll mention Yoxall (cited earlier this thread) not for the whole book, much of it obsolete, but for a couple of exceptional succinct chapters "Some optional history" and "Some compulsory geography." (This is content that most Burgundy fans learn, one way or another.) Also it's full of quips. Cheaply available used on amazon or elsewhere, search by ISBN given upthread.

I didn't see much in the recent postings about wine or wine service. It has been in the past a highlight of the restaurant. I don't know if Larry Stone still hangs out there -- he is one of the more celebrated master sommeliers in the US, at Charlie Trotter's in Chicago I believe before Rubicon.

Yes, lots of them. All already posted, here or elsewhere. There's even an entire Web site or two on the subject. Search under "French Laundry." That itself is a useful tip online by the way, maybe worth repeating. Of all of the advice that's available on a popular topic, most of it generally will have been posted already, available by self-service search. Of course you can always ask more questions once you know what's there. All things come to those who search ...