MaxH

What about the Rémy Martin VSOP, in the frosted green bottle? It has some character, it's consistent in my experience, and it does wicked things with mushrooms or the odd anachronistic rich shellfish sauce (supplementing Sherry, Madeira, etc. [Note 1]). Also, for years it has run around $29 at the local Costco warehouse store, comparable to MacCallan 12 (a sound entry-level malt: one can do far worse in whiskys for that money). I support Germain-Robin, its smaller neighbor Jepson, and other US artisanal products of my own native region but (a) the request was for Cognac (as in Charente river) and (b) the price is highly competitive. (Myself I can't picture using any of these products in cocktails -- not from concern for the cocktail, but for the fine spirit, which risks being wasted. However te gustibus . . . ) I have zero vested interest in any of this. -- Max Note 1: For instance. Take cleaned cultivated or (preferably) wild mushrooms of your choice. Cut as you like. Stir-fry hot and fast in a little butter, salting if you like. When they start to look cooked, add enough Sherry, Madeira etc. of your choice to sort of drown them, and cook off fast until almost dry. Watch carefully so they don't burn. Throw in some Cognac and (if you like) ignite, such as by tipping the skillet to the gas flame. After the flame dies out, finish with a little heavy cream to make a sauce, and adjust the salt. Serve over something bready as long as it's not a puff-pastry shell, I'm sorry, there are limits. If you really want to recreate 1971 grand-palace dining, borrow an oily headwaiter with temporary hairpiece and French accent, and an itchy palm. That is not necessary though. Note 2: Steaks au poivre probably do better when sat to come up to room temp with freshly cracked peppercorns pressed into them; cooked hot and fast in a pan; and deglazed with Bourbon. Try it. (Save the cream for the mushrooms and the Maitres d'hôtel.) PS: Katie got in here with good brief suggestions, as usual, while I was assembling this. Listen to her.

Try the meat dishes with Szechuan peppercorns, they're in a group near the red-cooked beef I mentioned. Which is a pretty simple stew with some stir-frying and a lot of green onions etc., yet it has that wonderful combination of citrus and bite from this unique spice, combined with other sound elements like garlic. I will make up that stew and serve it over plain noodles, and freeze portions and later reheat and drop them onto simple noodle soups with greens, as a topping. Soul-satisfying.

Hi John, before getting to the substance here, a sincere friendly suggestion, maybe useful to others too. It is very helpful to readers sometimes to trim any earlier text being quoted. This increases the impact of the posting, and comes partly from the general wisdom that “vigorous writing is concise” (Strunk and White), but also the firm tradition on Internet fora, ever since they became well established in the early 1980s. More on that is in classic online advisories, including the famous RFC1855 (a current link to the original), one of the most-read documents on the Internet and roughly the Net’s counterpart of Strunk and White. (It was posted on the Internet since late 1982 in predecessor versions, and from the Network Working Group since 1995.) It long predated the currently popular http/html protocols by the way, but so did Internet fora. Advice and standards of practice for forum users and administrators appear in Section 3.0, One-to-Many Communications, including this, which is widely followed. Among other things it conveys thought for the reader and for the content: First, I did Stevenson injustice by pulling his lowest-pH remark (earlier I called it crisp) out of its actual context, which wasn’t Nouveau wines specifically, though centered around them. It is from a succinct two-page summary of the Beaujolais world (including the story of the “Pisse, Vielle!” legend), in which he explains the use of full or partial macération carbonique (MC) in both Nouveau and some regular versions of Beaujolais. But he also explains the close connection of the technique to the resulting "pungent aroma of nail varnish" and the antipathy that has accumulated, including in Burgundy itself, to this style, citing Jean-Marie Guffens for the phrase “carbonic masturb*tion.” Having explained the trade word “lollipop,” early in the two-page section, from MC’s generation of flavoring chemicals used also in candies and bubble gum, he sums up the section with “Beaujolais Nouveau should be fun and used to promote a greater awareness of wine ... but readers should be aware that these “lollipop” wines are not good-quality Gamay, whereas the best Cru Beaujolais are the world’s greatest Gamay wines.” I believe this is a fact-based assessment. Second, this information appears as a tiny part of a long wine encyclopedia (2001 edition is ISBN 0789480395), endorsed by US experts including Robert Parker, and comprehensive enough, as I’ve told people for years, that a newcomer could look up a random wine of the world, just bought, with a fair chance of finding a synopsis about it. Finally I stand on my original comments. These cited the real, partly technical basis for criticism of Nouveau styles in the context of Beaujolais at large, in response to your posting, which mentioned none of this, but only “snobbery.” Stevenson nowhere claims that BNs are not real wines, but that the light MC styles are “ideal for anyone who does not actually enjoy the characteristics of real wine.” It’s possible to pay attention to the wording and detach questions of tone from factual content. Some wines appeal to people who are not wine drinkers or are turned off by mainstream wine. White zinfandel enjoyed repute for that, and before it, packaged wine coolers and cocktails in the US did so. I have used Beaujolais Nouveau myself to play the devil and seduce “white wine only” drinkers into the world of red wine (soon, they’re drinking Cabernet, and liking it!). That’s what I meant by factual, and it’s a dimension separate from how much people like the statement. In none of this thread do I find warrant for offhand stereotyping of British wine writers (coming after “Mr Stevenson can't seem to provide a fact based assessment”). I didn’t mean to feed that, or any other, nationalistic prejudice.

Something I posted in April on the local food newsgroup about a widely available cookbook that addresses that question. -- One particular Chinese cookbook I have has some of the most rewarding spicy stews and similar dishes, some of which (like the simply named "red cooked beef with noodles") exquisitely use Szechuan peppercorns. (In that case, with lots of of scallions, ginger and whole garlic cloves.) This book has spoken for most of those peppercorns that I used in recent years. (Including when they were "banned," yet available by asking around.) The book seems to be an oral account, transcribed/translated by English speaking writers. Schrecker and Schrecker, Mrs. Chiang's Szechwan Cookbook, Harper and Row, 1976, reissued 1987. ISBN 006015828X for the reissue. Readily available on the used market and probably some libraries. amazon.com currently lists 44 copies available, starting at $4.07 . A good value, in my opinion. PS: The Chiang book includes a recipe for the tofu dish (spelled mapo doufu). Also, comments from Eugene Wu of the Harvard-Yenching Library who claims to've had the dish served when he was young, in Chengtu, by the famous pock-marked old lady herself, that the dish is named for. Quoted as review and recommendation: "You ordered by weight, so many grams of bean curd and so many grams of meat, and your serving would be weighed out and cooked as you watched. It arrived at the table fresh, fragrant, and so spicy hot, or la, that it actually caused sweat to break out. Dr. Wu says that Mrs. Chiang's version of the dish rivals that of the famous old lady. It is just as rich, fragrant, and hot. / If we had to choose the quintessential Szechwanese dish, this spicy preparation of bean curd and chopped meat would probably be it. Its multiplicity of tastes and textures first stuns, then stimulates, the senses. ..." (The writers go on about the relation of the dish to Szechuan cooking traditions.)

Another thing about Beaujolais in US is that it's one of the popular old-world wine types that lacks a US counterpart, so you have to get it from France. (Rieslings of German balance and subtlety, by the way, have been another such case. Schoonmaker and Marvel's 1941 book explained why.) I'm referring here to classic Beaujolais, ageable in good years from good producers. The Nouveau types, which lean hard on the carbonic-maceration ferment technique, seem to get much of their style from that technique (especially the short-chain fruit-ester aromas Tom Stevenson mentioned -- amyl acetate, ethyl acetate, etc.). 25 years ago California producers experimented intensely with "Nouveau" wines by using this ferment technique on other grape varieties, and these products were offered at retail. I tried them with interest. The resulting wines resembled each other, especially in aroma. I assumed they were showing the ferment technique more than the grape type. Given that the French Gamay grape makes red Beaujolais, retailing Beaujolais in the US has been confusing to newcomers because of varietal-labeled California wines, "Gamay" and "Napa Gamay," which tended not to resemble classic Beauj though they provided decent light red wines; then there was "Gamay Beaujolais," another variety, by tradition a Pinot Noir clone in fact -- but not always (as Haeger traced, I think, in his recent Pinot Noir book, with superhuman patience). I don't know how widely these California products were distributed in the US. A certain, formerly family-owned winery in Mendocino County, known historically for organic wines, used to bottle a Gamay Beaujolais among its minor varietals and retail it very reasonably, as low as $4.28 in my records (when the sales rep was having a slow day and I ordered a few dozens). But the winery grew rapidly under new ownership, and such minor varietals got trimmed off. One more bit of trivia: US-published general wine books with Beaujolais sections show the Nouveau variants not even mentioned in the late 1960s, mentioned in passing in early 1970s, mentioned in depth by late 70s (as "a major fad"), and well established after that.

I've seen Beaujolais (real Beaujolais) go in and out of fashion in the last 30 years in the US. I still keep many of them too. It was common and popular here in California 30 years ago, in a simpler time when people still recollected that there were other countries in the world, even other winemaking countries, even other winemaking countries whose products were sold in California; and would start their serious wine learning by looking to tried and true exemplars rather than what was hip this week, or what happened to be made in the next county. (Imagine the corresponding situation of a budding wine enthusiast in Hungary starting with Tokaji.) In the same spirit, wkl, but surely not the same degree. (The gulf that yawns between "blue nun" ("the wine that's correct with any meal," as the smooth announcer's voice used to assure the almost non-wine-drinking US public) and the exquisite German Rieslings available for as little as $9-$10 in the US was much wider, in my experience, than the distance from classic Beaujolais to the nouveau. A light, fragile product that used to be consumed in bulk around Lyon, and very cheaply too, before the vast marketing projects started and it began appearing in the US on a pedestal, not hardly so cheap any more. Well, JohnL, I've read a lot of more specific criticisms of the nouveau, to say nothing of the lack of perspective it commands in the US, with many casual wine drinkers recently getting the weird notion that it's what Beauj is all about (!?!?). Tom Stevenson in his wine encycopedia writes crisply that most of it smells of bubble gum or bananas, and is ideal for anyone who does not actually enjoy the characteristics of real wine. Some may project the idea of snobbery into this (JohnL will doubtless have more to say) but many experienced wine drinkers I know would say that the statement is also factual to the letter, like it or not. That doesn't mean they won't also drink the nouveau, it's pleasant and has its place. (Also overlooking that we'd probably like it better, in pitchers for a dollar or two, and close to the source, 'cause it's fragile stuff. It has lost its roots and with them, maybe part of its soul.)

Very thoughtful point! (Though the New Orleans beignet, the everyday French word for fritter, common in French cookbooks and understood elsewhere to have something inside it as fritters do in the US too, might cause confusion outside its native turf). Shortly before Katrina I posted something on rec.food.cooking about Muffulettas made at the Napoleon House. In checking the inconsistent spelling I ran into a supplemental entry in the AHD about food Americana under "muffuletta," excerpted at the end of the RFC note, below. -- [Napoleon House's] is a model New Orleans muffuletta: Round Italian loaf (or large roll) about 25cm (10 inches) diameter, split and filled with sliced cold salami and ham, a little sliced cheese, warm spiced olive salad, and the aforementioned psittacine Pickled Peppers. Normally quartered and sold in quarters, one full sandwich feeds four moderate or two hearty appetites. The American Heritage Dictionary (fullsize 3rd ed. anyway; many of these supplemental notes are gone in the 4th) characterizes the Muffuletta, unlike its local cousin the Po'boy, as "one of the few large American sandwiches not made with a long crusty roll." The Central Grocery is another respected source, credited with the sandwich's invention there in 1910.

Mayhaw Man, thanks for a thoughtful report. New Orleans has drawn tourism and related (convention, football) business for a long time, and the restaurant business there built up for that. Those of you there following 9/11 will remember the shock to the industry then, restaurant trades hurting and the governor on the radio asking residents to eat out on Wednesdays to support the industry.

I've been hearing about this KQED program. One thing positive about any local TV restaurant show is the chance of learning about restaurants you didn't know about. CBS-5 (San Francisco) has been running novel restaurant features also, in the locally produced "Eye on the Bay" show. I saw an in-depth program there on "cheap eats" featuring notable good-value restaurants including one I knew (Hunan Chili in Mountain View). (The proprietress later told me she had customers coming in the door because of that show, within a few minutes of its airing on October 14.) More info under CBS5.com/eyeonthebay . An amateur reviewer team has limitations, not always instantly obvious, from the consumer's perspective. Krys Stanley described an example above. When KQED was recruiting people for this show a few months ago, a message appeared on the local Bay Area food newsgroup. The opportunity was described as a "chance to become famous." I responded In case anyone is curious and didn't see it before, that last reference is to SF Chron journalist Jon Carroll, who took over Charles McCabe's famous column in 1983 (I think it was) when McCabe died. Soon afterwards, Carroll described his experience editing New West magazine in the 1970s and the deluge of unsolicited applications from people offering themselves as restaurant critics, with all kinds of notions about what qualified them (and what perks they expected). He concluded from the experience that more or less every person alive regards themselves qualified to work as a restaurant critic. I call this Carroll's Law.

Can't help with an opinion, but the same site reported (Sept. 21) Ruth’s Chris abandoning its corporate HQ site in Metairie. This has some historical significance because what became an extensive chain of properties began as Ruth Fertel’s single New Orleans restaurant (the original Chris Steak House, bought by Fertel, a divorced chemist, under stipulation to retain Chris Steak House in the name -- if I am rightly remembering the account I read 15 or so years ago).

Exactly: Any rating based on polling customers will automatically have more information about places "everybody" knows about. (This is different from sorting out, for instance, which kitchens do the best current work, or which new places merit your attention.) Good point. There are other differences too. Professional restaurant reviews are signed, accountable, often well informed, and from perspectives you can get to know (and compare their tastes with your own). They are free to report on a restaurant whether or not everyone has heard of it. If they know their trade, they do fact-checking, and sometimes other research, to support the article.One high-end restaurant I know had loyal local following throughout the 1990s and showed up in professional reviews in places like Gourmet. Eventually it became fairly busy, and then I saw it surface in Zagat, with one of those glib anonymous comments they select to print . The comment was such a mis-take on what the restaurant was about as to sound like an atypical experience to anyone who knew the place.

Yes indeed, those places in SF are very popular. House of Prime Rib is an old-line institution almost to the level of the Tadich Grill or some of the beloved SF institutions still remembered by many residents but no longer open. House of Prime Rib reflects the old tradition of portable carving carts with the hot meats and garnishes. (A step in the direction of the old-line Tafelspitz places in Vienna, with their connections to Habsburg days and their even more elaborate service carts -- a few still do that, fewer and fewer.) These SF restaurants are well away from silicon valley, the subject of the thread (even if the "angle subtended is very small" from far away -- as a professor friend in Cambridge Mass said to me in the 1970s, excusing some Northeastern confusions between Los Angeles and San Francisco at the time). Other regional favorites are in the upper SF peninsula, well away from SV but not in SF either. Bay Area-wide steakhouses might be a useful complementary thread. Although as I said at first, for steakhouses the Bay Area isn't New York or Chicago or Texas. (Or Oklahoma or Nebraska or Colorado.) (Or Kansas City.)

Perhaps, but let us think of Beaumarchais who observed: "Every time I open a bottle of wine I stand in awe, for this is not merely a bottle of wine. I am opening 5,000 years of human civilization" Would that be Pierre Caron de Beaumarchais, of folies-du-jour fame, the one who kept getting into trouble, the one fictionalized by Feuchtwanger, who in turn is remembered bitterly among some Russian intellectuals today for helping to "sell" Stalin to the West, just as Orwell is remembered for doing the opposite? (This is from memory, and late at night too.) That Beaumarchais was, after all, a professional dramatist.

"Could pressure? I understand there are precedents. Some of them close to home. [1] I have to mention here for anyone patient and interested that "don't even tell you what grapes are involved" is partly a US prejudice and not only that, it is historically a recent one. I believe that until Schoonmaker and Lichine "sold" the idea of the formerly casual "varietal" naming (as they called it) starting in the 1930s, even US wineries often didn't tell you what grapes were involved. Also, even in the US, if you studied fine wines in depth, any time until the last decade or two, you likely still heard about the rest of the world. In that event, you learned also that in some wine regions the grape varieties are key information; in many others they are implicit and the location is the focus, and the soul; in yet others varieties are blended. This can be hard to explain to people convinced of a rigid notion that grape variety is the key. We had a thread some time ago in another and very old wine forum, where one (stubborn and evidently fairly young and self-described Californian) contributor, while acknowledging that he was not very experienced with wine, still insisted that the grape content was the main thing he needed to know. (He was not interested in experienced opinion that differed with this -- as an example, for the varietal-blend Rhône wines where, it could be reasonably argued, grape varieties were truly not what he needed to know and could even be distracting.) Here we can see perhaps, once again, that wine is a human subject. -- Max [1] "Although a wide variety of phylloxera-resistant hybrid rootstock had been in use prior to Prohibition, [uC Davis] began its own research. Winemaking had been re-invented, why not re-invent viticulture as well? . . . Rootstock crosses ... were tested. Because none of these academics had any personal or cultural memory of the [European phylloxera] disaster of the 1870s, some of the hybrids included non-resistant Vitis vinifera crossed with resistant American stock. One such was AxR [Aramon x Rupestris], a cross already found by Europeans to be inadequately resistant. In early field tests, . . . yields were higher. The University seemed to have found its very own all-purpose rootstock, one not in use in Europe, where cultural memory of the devastation of the 1870s was still present, and where there had been no break in the empirical tradition. . . . By the nineties, seventy percent of vineyards in Napa and Sonoma were grafted on AxR rootstock The stage was set for disaster. . . . The first recognized outbreaks appeared in the early 1980s . . .the University, with some reservations, continued to recommend AxR right up until 1988. It appears clear that over the next ten years or so, the majority of vineyards in Napa and Sonoma will have to be replanted. . . . [Ridge's own plantings remained on a traditional, phylloxera-resistant, Saint George rootstock.] We were not on the "cutting edge" as defined by the University. We deliberately looked to the techniques of pre-Prohibition California, techniques virtually identical to those used for centuries to make the finest European wines. We were not impressed with the simple, clean, fruity wines produced by "modern techniques." Why, we reasoned, would the academics know anything more about fine-grape-growing than they did about fine winemaking?" -- Paul Draper, "Ridge Report," January 1993.

By the way, the considerable restaurant news lately from New Orleans included that the Ruth's Chris chain mentioned upthread has now abandoned its corporate HQ site in nearby Metairie. The chain originated as Ruth Fertel’s single restaurant in New Orleans -- still very good when I first ate there in 1990.

I too had a good meal at Alexander's some weeks ago (after earlier note above on SV steakhouses). Only one visit so far, which doesn't give very deep insight of course [1]. The layout of the place is painstaking, the front staff I met were all obvious veterans and knew their business. A steak (nominal focus of the meal) was of high quality by the standards of the others I mentioned above; it had unusual, colorful flavor-accent garnishes, a departure from the simple service common in steakhouses. The comfort-foody side-dish offerings -- tried several, took leftovers home -- these dishes were much cited by two good local dining critics I'd researched (Himmel and Holbrook) -- were interesting but I thought tended to unnecessary fattiness, just as one critic had complained. Unusually knowledgeable wine buyer, this was evident from the wine list which featured some wines that are wine-geek favorites but untrumpeted; at least one example (De Meric "Sous Bois") of the small-house Champagnes now increasingly imported, in numbers, directly to California. These can be outstanding values as well as individualistic. Some of them outdo the big labels in blind tastings and are also cheaper -- see K and L Wines for a good selection, Gary Westby is Champagne buyer there, has aggressively sought out the small houses. Sorry for this long digression: we'd just done a blind tasting of these small-house Champagnes in a co-operative wine group I'm in; Gary Westby kindly joined us and led the discussion; I had the notes in hand at the steakhouse. It was good to see a restaurant featuring these and other good-value wines. A moderately priced dryish (QbA) German riesling went well, as expected, with the heirloom tomato salad and the macaroni-and-cheese. This salad was a high point, unusual, stylish layout; very fresh and ripe. Note 1: Three visits to Spencer's in SJ (mentioned above) were purely positive, the next two had off notes that didn't surface earlier. Still many high points in my experiences. The apple pie has been consistent, and they corrected me: the many apples are all fresh, not dried. The style of pie made there gives a deep dry-fruit result instead of the more familiar, shallower, saucy style of US apple pies.

Good to hear from you TAPrice! Good article, quoting Boswell, Vasquezes, others. (During the crisis the Vasquezes were helping to organize relief, and feeding people, according to the Marisol mailing list at the time.) FYI, Fitzmorris (longtime restaurant critic in town) also has maintained an Online List of Open Restaurants since September. He mentions updating it daily, and spending much time on the phone with restaurateurs for this in recent weeks. -- Max

I'm adding this to the existing Uncle Frank's thread, for continuity. John S. posted a separate note about an SJ Mercury News article on Uncle Frank's. Note also that an earlier and much larger article, linked below, was the cover story in the entertainment tabloid Metro (Sept. 28), Uncle Frank's likeness beaming from its cover for a week throughout silicon valley. Story by the capable Stett Holbrook who has written some penetrating food articles in that paper. (Cover title "BBQ: The Taste of America.")* It details Frank Bell's history and childhood near the Louisiana-Texas border, the restaurant's move from East PA, the obstacles, the eternal "just two more weeks" to official opening. Holbrook seems to know a little about regional US BBQ styles also, locating Frank's in regional context. (It's true that if you compare the vinegar-based chopped-pork BBQ of the Carolinas for instance, you might see little connection to the tomato-sauced briskets elsewhere.) http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09...uncle-0539.html Recently in the local newsgroup ba.food there was a mention of Uncle Frank's running out of supplies and closing for the weekend. Seems like word is out. * Holbrook, I have to ask in case you see this -- since you did ack reading eGullet, in another article p. 43 of the same issue -- whether the subtitle on the Sept. 28 Uncle Frank cover story alluded to the Hesses' provocative 1970s book The Taste of America.

When I got interested in fine wines I found that what Bordeaux-type wines were really "about" was what they developed into when properly aged. Most of them were made with that in mind. Luckily then (30 years ago) there was no shortage of serious wine enthusiasts in my region (SF bay area) or wines on the market (including wines with bottle age -- later retailing trends hadn't yet taken hold, you'd routinely find 10-plus-year-old Bordeaux still on the market). I was able to experience (especially through enthusiasts' cellars) mature-Cabernet characters -- chocolate, coffee, delicate herbs; minty and other scents. Those are what I like. Some of the serious California cabs, especially, had phenomenal potential for development. It became a habit to taste the younger cab-type wines with an eye to where they were aimed, what they might become. People new to wine who complained that they did not want to wait for wines to age, or that they didn't have easy access to good mature wines, forgot such arguments after experiencing what good mature wines were about. (That was also before some of the later style trends, and the push for making wines to be drunk young. Also before I got distracted from Bordeaux-type wines by Burgundies. Though unlike some people I know, I still enjoy the former.)

Many people do. Everyone did in fact, in the US anyway, before the current score fashion established itself over the 1980s. (To anyone who was not buying wines before those scores -- I'm obliged to mention this, because I've seen people form astounding notions about history they didn't experience -- the number of wines to choose from appeared just as overwhelming as today.) Consumers reading the group of US wine newsletters popular in the pre-score days (I was one of them, and I still have the newsletters) saw word commentaries and broad rankings like "recommended" and "highly recommended." Robert Parker, ever since he joined that newsletter community and introduced the 100-point score, has been among the most emphatic in urging consumers to rely on commentary and their own palates, more than scores. Consumers, also, seem consistently to turn less to scores and to critics in general, as their experience grows (here I mean past maybe a decade or more of serious interest, not a year or two). It helps if they have wine-experienced friends, tasting groups, or trusted merchants, all of which can be golden information sources. Many US wine consumers, including the majority I know personally, don't read numerical criticism, except to note its secondary effects: buzz (suddenly the population who'd heard of "Pavie" jumped 10-fold when it got 100 points) and prices (ditto, similar ratio). This all answers the question above: Yes, people can certainly live without those scores! They always have. Quod erat faciendum. I've seen worse!

My previous remark about wine producers, which was serious and well supported though I don't know if publicly, genuinely wasn't specifically about Parker. (You make some good general points John, but it was a more general issue, also i am not one of those people who claims to know Parker's "style.") Here's my contribution to the issue, as crisply as I can: Since I know of producers who say privately that they pursue styles to win critics' point scores; and these producers have serious money on the line; then they must have target styles in mind. I don't know what those styles are, because I haven't asked, nor have I an expert picture of the critics' preferences if any. But like most people posting comments online, I don't have big money on it either. If I see someone who does, and bets on point-correlated styles, that seems to me to demonstrate that some people believe in it to an extent beyond just talk. (I'd be interested to know how well these approaches have paid off, surely a key question, and a confidential one.) -- Max

I've known of US winery owners who remarked privately their goal, tending sometimes to obsession, of producing wine for point scores (not just Parker's, of course). In one case where a talented winemaker parted ways with the owner, I believe it was over that issue.

That's a good point, ludja, and it may relate to the way they get their coffee. There's a US "foodservice" tradition of specialty firms providing coffee machines and then furnishing the beans regularly -- roughly like how firms sell/lease office copiers and then provide paper for them. One of the respected local independent coffee roasters (who buys good beans, traveling to Latin America and so on to check them out) was telling me how such a local firm can supply beans to restaurants at prices that meet what the coffee-machine sales reps charge, and provide fresh-roasted 'varietal" beans as well as blends. It's pleasant to find quality coffee after dinner. Some parts of the world seem to have that ritual down pretty well. (I've also found a good standard of coffee, with a particular twist sometimes for local taste, but anyway a high standard of flavor, around New Orleans in the past.)

Thanks for the recent reports. I've run into a number of complaints lately about service. The sharpest was on the Squires wine site, an SF restaurants thread, where two brothers from different parts of the state rendezvoused there and dined with family, and had a complaint about the owner-manager which they said got worse when they phoned him next day. Didn't have any such complaints in my own few visits there but it was some years ago, also generally at uncrowded times (a usual preference). I liked Keller's willingness to put something homey on the menu, with a twist. Like baekeoffe (sp.?), or macaroni-and-sheese with lobster. Served en casserole on black glass plate, with the lobster shell and the head with antennae, sitting there looking at you. Almost Japanese. It's in Keller's cookbook from the restaurant.

Now to be serious for a moment, that idiom truly is ambiguous, viewed from a long focus. It might even be a little bit of a test phrase or shibboleth. With due respect for both, if you tested it out you could find "The Other Keller" implying one thing to newer SF diners abuzz about what's current and hip, but something else to longterm locals who are used to SF's traditional "Keller." Yes, that's the sort of thing you see in SF proper (in contrast to its suburbs) and it is a good vignette of both of them: the restaurant, and Willie Brown.