[The Ubiquity of the Miniburger in DC DelMarVa]

seriously though, i don't get it. they are little burgers. what's the big deal?....it's a fad and it will fade away.

I'm not so sure--but that's because I see the plate of miniburgers as really part of a much larger movement of chefs and restaurateurs reacting to how we the customer have said we really want to eat sometimes or most times: we want the option to have our own little bites of things, plates to pass around, rather than full meals of Nebuchadnezzar-sized entrees we're too stuffed or palate-fatigued to finish anyway. Granted, at the higher end we've had tasting menu options in a few places around town--but not nearly as many or as affordably-priced ones as we should have had for a food town of this market size--it's only recently we've had more than a few. The typical DC chef wants the typical conservative DC diner sheep to go the typical app/entree routine. It's easier that way to keep check averages high.

The typical DC chef also realizes for a certain group of potential diners they'll have to "appear" to compete with chains on price--which can offer a lower price point on lesser quality, usually. They need a price point option to get people into the door--and then hopefully have the quality and value to keep them returning.

Enlightened foodies have wanted to be able to go someplace and have the equivalent of 3-4 appetizers--if we wanted to--rather than be slotted into the one app/one big entree routine--and we've sought it out here and around the country much longer than that dumb recent article by Shoffner in the Washingtonian mag implied. Miniburgers reveal just how far this notion has gained critical mass. Sometimes we (the customer) want an interesting varied meal and the $25 check average of a Jaleo--but not only when we're at Jaleo--and that puts pressure on these other places to adapt and give it to us. (Or not give it to us--and then we'll go elsewhere when we're in that mood.) That's why I think you've seen more and more mid-to-high end places adopt their own version of the Jaleo/Zaytinya/Oyamel tapas/mezze/Cafe Atlantico "dim sum" little plates/bar menu concept--from a Palena to a Bistrot Lepic to Eve to any number of other examples: in their own ways they're reacting to their customers expressed desire to eat in a way that also makes good business sense and contributes to their bottom line.

Sometimes we want to gorge on a big juicy sloppy Nebuchadnezzar all to ourselves, with grease streaming down our forearms that we don't care about while we're in the Nebuchadnezzar Zone or even notice until we're done.

I hope good mini-burgers don't fade away because we're more empowered as diners when we have more options--when more restaurateurs feel compelled to act on our concerns--and when there is more competition in the marketplace for our dining dollar.

And yes, nadya, some modern diners might not be burger Luddites and also be open-minded enough to appreciate AND enjoy a deconstructed hamburger as well--what you've described very accurately is just sissy-poo. Not that I'm against sissy-poo, but sissy-poo isn't what might be labelled deconstruction or even a creative re-interpretation. (One man's sissy-poo is another's refinement, by the way.) On the deconstructed front, I think what you might see sooner is something like ketchup deconstructed--with all the ingredients and sugar and spices of ketchup pulled out and recombined with more immediate textures or contrasts or intensities--perhaps presented as an amuse or soup--and if done well would sing to you as ketchup--just a ketchup like you've never quite tasted before nor thought you could even appreciate in isolation before. That's if it's done well and fits in the context of the meal. That sensory experience just might help you go back and re-taste traditional ketchups differently or appreciate a homemade ketchup more. All that will ultimately matter--be it mini burger or deconstructed miniburger, ketchup or deconstructed ketchup--is that it is good.

[Fatal Flaw: Red Wines Served At Room Temperature]

unless they're going to decide to build a new space to store the wine (which is highly doubtful). I'm wondering what those here in the restaurant industry think is the appropriate diner response to the warm red wine problem. Is refusing glasses of wine that are too warm acceptable?

I'm in the restaurant industry, though I don't think it's up to the restaurant industry to determine what's appropriate here--reasonable and aware diners, like those we have here at eG, will determine what action restaurateurs take.

I think each establishment will then determine what their response will be--the red wine too warm issue is just like the perfunctory desserts that are an afterthought issue: until a sufficient number of core diners at a given restaurant speak up and say--"it's really to bad you don't take a little better care of your red wines" or "we love your food, but it's really too bad you don't make more of an effort with dessert"--and go elsewhere--the situation won't change because you haven't given said restaurateur enough incentive to change.

Why would you doubt that new spaces or new wine cooling mechanisms would be installed by concerned chef/owners around town? They're in the customer service business--and if they hear from their loyal customers (and from reasonable outspoken public advocates like Don) that their red wines are too warm, guess what, most will take corrective action. You think, say, a Michael Landrumm, who puts together a very good very reasonably-priced list likes reading little jabs about his red wines sitting out a room temperature and will ignore that? No, he won't--and if more of his customers ordered a good red and then asked for a bucket of ice to chill it down a bit--you think he wouldn't figure out that just maybe he should do something about it? He would, because he cares.

I think you'll see more owners try to store their wines better and serve their reds slightly cooler--and I think here in DC you're already seeing the effects of this--you're seeing more chef/owners try, they're building separate, cool storage rooms, they're putting in adjustable temperature controlled storage units at the bar, etc. They're making an effort. It's up to us to support that.

As a diner, why not ask before you actually order a red by the glass whether those reds are just sitting out on the counter or whether they'll be poured at 66 or so? Then make a decision whether to order by the glass or try the chilling a bottle down on some ice. Though if red wines are cooked sitting in a back room which is way too warm anyway, the ice bucket trick isn't going to help much. I should say, though, I've enjoyed many good wines with food that were not at the supposed "ideal" temperature--just like restaurants are organic things, so too are food and wine interactions not so clear, with set rules. It's always going to be personal and it's always going to be subjective, and its still going to have to work on your palate. Temperature is but one factor of many.

[Non-stick Cookie Sheets]

Never used them, sorry I can't help Richard. Plain old sheetpans, silpats and parchment for me.

[GE Profile Gas Range -- worth buying?]

Everything Marlene just relayed about convection ovens may or may not apply, depending on the model you choose, or may apply to a greater degree, again depending on the model you choose. An oven is a tool, a tool you have to learn how to use.

Type of fan, whether there is a third heating element back there with the fan, whether the unit is regular 110V or 22OV, will all affect how your oven bakes. But bake it will, regardless. Bus, it was only the first model I mentioned that needed that new line, the one I ended up with is 110. Plus your skill level, confidence, how much you actually understand about what you're doing, are big big variables whether ovens at this level will really make a dramatic "performance" difference for you. Any oven, not just convection, requires that you learn how to use it--learn what it can do for you, how you can best take advantage of it, you can't go into it blind. Just remember more even heat, more evenly distributed, usually slightly faster baking, usually a "drier" bake (i.e. things dry out more quickly because of the air movement--think pate a choux--very nice profiteroles in a convection oven, no need to do the propping the oven door open truc)--but every oven, from a $400 one to a $4K one, is gonna have its quirks, weird spots, and every cook figures out ways to deal with them to get the results they desire: stuff like cooking on double sheet pans, weighing down your parchment paper so it doesn't fly up and into what you're cooking, cooking your custards (creme caramel, creme brulee) covered in plastic wrap, some pastry chefs cook their creme brulees in a convection precisely because they don't have to use a water bath--the little ramekins cook just fine, slowly, gently and evenly due to the re-circulating air that the water bath isn't necessary. Most pros who cook with convection on the job reduce time and temp across the board versus radiant the first time they try something in convection--and then make little mental adjustments after that first trial. But then the true pro stuff is powerful, with two fan speeds, as anyone who has ever opened oven doors and felt that blast of air can attest. The prosumer stuff, frankly, isn't so dramatic. A good oven is a good oven, but only a good cook can cook with it. Use Marlene's excellent advice as a starting off point.

That shallow learning curve andiesenji mentioned is very apt, but it actually applies to every oven and every new oven owner, and not just those with a duel fuel or convection one.

[Milk chocolate]

Wendy, you owe it to yourself to try many many different chocolate brands, can you imagine a halfway decent chef anywhere in this country who hasn't tried all the different meat vendors available to him, sought out farms, free range chicken varieties, Niman Ranch pork vs. other pork, olive oils, whatever--these are what we create and combine with. So if you feel you haven't worked with enough chocolates yet, get cracking. Make it happen.

There's all kinds of chocolate knowledge, it's good to gather from all perspectives: growers, buyers, books, from reading manufacturer's literature about their products, to those selling it, promoting it, tasting it, and then from those actually having the chops to transform it, having the skills and palate and experience to produce and provoke something with it as an ingredient. Big big differences in degree and perception and knowledge.

How something tastes to each of us is going to be different, especially when heated or combined, and it has little to do with what a flavor "profile" might be going in--the real action is going to take place very personally, very individually, within our palates as perceivers and creators--and within our framework for integrating other ingredients and then processing these tastes, flavors, notes. Variability in recipe, conching, milk powder, malt, caramel, high or low cacao percentages, waxiness or meltability, sugar, vanilla, all affect how something works, how something tastes in use, how we might cover some aspect up or choose to bring some aspect out, and it does so in very unique and personal ways, so much so it renders most sensory guidance on this, frankly, a distraction. The experts and the manufacturers don't want you to read this, but that's just the way it is.

Performance-wise, how something tempers and covers, now that's not subjective, that can be quanitifed and qualified through the scientific method, through trial. That's like a lab experiment, variables can be eliminated and it can be replicated.

But how any one of us reacts to the taste of, say Valrhona's Jivara, and the value and creative worth we ascribe to it, will vary. And that's a good thing.

That's because taste is and always will be subjective, so too will media perception. I happen to love the Valrhona "Jivara" milk chocolate Wendy, always have, is that the Valrhona milk you tried? I like eating it plain and I like using it. But then I appreciate a lot of other milk chocolates for their subtle and not-so-subtle differences as well. What is it about the Jivara you don't like, what are you basing your sub-par assessment of it on? Plain, in a mousse, a ganache, a glaze, with what other flavors? Take Neil's comment: "the E Guittard is more mildly flavored and lets the flavor of the fillings come through better." That's right, it's also much less expensive than Valrhona or Cluizel, and some chocolatiers would take the other approach, choosing a chocolate to use, and pairing with a more subtle filling flavor or no filling flavor, just so the flavor of the chocolate comes through better. Different strokes for different folks--and likely different profit margins. But this is a good example of a "rule" I too have heard used that isn't a rule at all--it's nothing more than preference, subjectivity, based on individual experience. Make your own rules.

At the moment, I'm using the Jivara in one of my current desserts--the "Cafe de olla" from Oyamel, Colleen and I just came back from Disneyworld where we did it for 800 people, the component I make with it is a creamy milk chocolate-espresso flan, which I then pour flat into a wide bowl about 1/4" deep to set up. I first developed the dessert around the Cluizel 45% milk chocolate, but switched early on for price and availability reasons, Dairyland was doing a shitty job delivering the quantity I needed and their salesman was, well, a typical clueless salesman, so then I adjusted my recipe accordingly to make the switch--and started bringing Valrhona in from another distributor and another salesman. These are both above the 40% cacao content level, the Valrhona more creamy and sweet, and of the two I enjoy eating the Cluizel out of hand, as pure chocolate, much more. As we all know, however, desserts and bon bons are not one pure ingredient eaten and assessed out of hand.

In this dessert, I'm balancing the milk chocolate primarily with espresso (from Chiapas grown beans, City roast) and also with a melange of other flavors: piloncillo, anise, allspice, clove, almond, some Valrhona cocoa powder and salt--so the milk chocolate is there but it's used in such a way that it adds up to something else entirely. In this dish, the way it is plated and eaten, you can take one spoonful of flan by itself, another of flan with the cacao-almond crumble, a third with some flan, crumble and piloncillo-spice syrup, and fourth a spoonful of flan, crumble, syrup and a bit of anise ice cream, and fifth, if you are dextrous, all those with a bit of Kahlua gelatin to boot. And with each bite the milk chocolate figures differently into the taste equation, including being occluded. This also breaks a few of the dumb "rules" I've heard over time from supposed experts--the milk chocolate is not strong enough to be a good match with coffee rule, the desserts should have no more than 3 main flavors rule, you should be able to taste the chocolate at all times.

No, no, no--the milk chocolate is what I want it to be and the dessert is what I want it to be (and also, of course, what my chef friend Jose Andres wants it to be!)

The E. Guittard milk chocolate is cheaper and tastes sweeter to me, it's a 38%, and I've used it in other things. Could I make it work in this dessert? Sure. I personally don't care for its texture when eaten plain, but that has little if nothing to do with how I'd make it work in a dessert application. For the price it is a typically too sweet but serviceable milk chocolate, nothing more, nothing less, unless you make it more. I think the tip expressed earlier by aidensnd about adding x percent of a dark chocolate to a milk chocolate based recipe is a good one, and something I've done at times for years. I also have always liked the flavor of the El Rey milk, eaten out of hand and used in ganache and desserts, it's a 45% and maybe my favorite all-around milk, but their distribution problems in my market proved problematic for me. Esprit des alpes has one really nice milk in their line as well, which is very Swiss-styled, as do many other manufacturers.

Confectionary applications, thin shells of couverture, are a different animal completely from a dessert or pastry application--and how you perceive a chocolate and why you choose a chocolate will always defy any broad generalization, like "Valrhona" this or "Callebaut" that. Go with your palate and experience and have the confidence in yourself as a creator that you can taste something blind--and then imagine what might go well with it. As you swallow it and the flavor changes at the end, what else might be good there? Licorice? Rosemary? Lemon? You never know. That's because we're all unique creators, with unique approaches and palates and creative processes. That doesn't show up on paper, that isn't something you can read, and that certainly isn't anything that can be conveyed. That's something you do and feel.

Wendy, in the case of the E. Guittard 61%, I'm glad you've finally gotten some experience tempering and working with it, on eG a few of us been preaching its value as a great tasting great performing couverture for years now. But there's no reason why you shouldn't also be getting equally thin shells with any roughly comparable performing couverture--say the Cacao Noel or the Esprit des Alpes 63% Garnet.

By the way, I'm lucky in that my active relationship working with really good chocolate goes back a bit, and after actively conducting side-by-side blind tastings of good chocolate for maybe 10 years, before some of those riding the current awareness bandwagon realized there was something even worth climbing onto, I'm coming to the increasing realization that that process--evaluating a chocolate bar as one might evaluate a bottle of wine--while very easy for the amateur or dilletante to hone in on--is actually over-rated and unimportant once you get past a certain entry level hurdle: do it often enough with the same chocolates and you'll realize that how you taste, how you perceive, will be affected by the order, number, age and storage of the chocolates you select--the temperature, time of day, your mood, what else you've eaten, etc. Your perceptions will change and change back. Do it often enough, you'll become able to recognize Jivara from Cluizel from El Rey from Guittard just from the texture and mouthfeel, you won't even have to fully taste it, to identify it--but so what? What's that gotten you? Once you discover that for yourself--hey, all these pretty good chocolates are different and here's how they are different to me, it's like you've stepped up to the plate and realize you're gonna have to hit a curve or a fastball or a slider and that each pitcher is gonna throw it to you a little differently--you still have to hit it, you still have to do something with it. In the case of a chocolate, you apply heat or cold, you add cream or butter or yolks or cinnamon to it, you layer flavor, you apply more techniques learned over time--in short you transform it. And that's the really valuable knowledge.

I'm sure if you spent some time with the Jivara, Wendy, and tried it in a few things, you'd find something you adore it in--even if you may not actually enjoy eating it out of hand. Also realize milk chocolate spoils readily, and is especially mistreated in retail situations. Make sure you're working from a fresh sample from a reliable vendor. And don't lose one bit of sleep over the fact that you may prefer other milk chocolates--there are plenty fo excellent ones out there, and plenty of ways to adapt to the one you have on hand.

[GE Profile Gas Range -- worth buying?]

If I had seen that range I would have given it serious consideration too--the problem near us is that all the Lowe's have cut back on the number and quality of gas ranges they carry, and both Home Depot and Lowes have stopped offering installation on gas ranges. I'm guessing this has to do with liability or insurance. Still, this seems like a serious contender especially at that price even when you add the cost of a plumber's visit to hook it up.

[GE Profile Gas Range -- worth buying?]

Amy, maybe I'm coming at this from a different perspective than you, but two years of free repairs under warranty on a maybe $500 appliance is a pretty sweet deal, from any manufacturer, given our current consumer climate. That was built into the price, that's what you paid for, the 8 days is irrelevant and just bad luck. If I called Apple up one year and one day after my Powerbook purchase, when my one year warranty expired I'd have to pay for any repair--I also had the option to buy 2 years of extended Applecare coverage and all this was very clear pre-purchase. As a consumer, this is a part of any buying decision--what you buy, how you pay, who you buy from, who actually provides and services the warranty--and it's always a roll of the dice. (Waiting two weeks for service on a built in appliace, though, seems uncharacteristic and would have irked me as well.)

It's off-topic here, but I bought a floor model stainless Maytag dishwasher from Home Depot for $279 ($779 suggested retail I think) with just a one year warranty. I'm hoping if anything is wrong it will reveal itself quickly, but mentally I treated this purchase as disposable--if anything goes wrong 2 or 3 years down the road I'll probably just replace it with another $300 or so dishwasher. Sad, but that's the era we live and cook in.

Granted, too, there are patterns and problems which can reveal themselves over time--maybe even generalizations of a brand which hold true across multiple product lines--that's one reason why the thousands of user comments a Consumer Reports documents over time, as well as user comments on discussion forums, are valuable on one level. They'd track those spontaneous appliance fires which Susan mentioned and bring recalls or suspicions under more scrutiny.

At least with the case of this GE Profile range I couldn't find much that would negate a prospective purchase, except from the GE-hating upscale DCS, Monogram, Dacor and Viking crowd; in fact, I found the opposite: historically, Consumer Reports has rather strongly recommended the GE Profile gas ranges as very good performers over time, and rather strongly questioned the value and repair records of several of these other pro "style" ranges. Bargain-priced Frigidaire ranges also pop up as recommended as well.

trillium--no "additional" ventilation, no hood, in this renovation go round. Mine clearly is not an informed opinion through hands on experience with multiple hoods in multiple kitchens. In parent's and friend's kitchens, higher end (expensive) powerful ones which vent outside work really well, underpowered self circulating ones are absolutely worthless. (I'm betting there is a knowledgeable gray area in between--Dave?) That's one of our gambles, why we went with a souped-up but regular freestanding household appliance like the GE Profile. The way our condo is laid out, just to the right of our stove there's a very powerful ventilation shaft opening which runs up and out through the 10 floors of our building. I have no idea what its CFM power would be by current standards, but let's just say we're "hoping" it is sufficient enough to keep the normal cooking steam/smoke/particles at least in place and not spread to set off the smoke alarms in the rest of the condo. So far, over 3 months of use, it is. We also didn't want to incur the expense of insulating in this corner, or add any shielding to the walls. However, the 15K power burner on the Profile is on the right front burner location, which in our kitchen is next to this wall/shaft. I'd prefer it if the power burner were front left, but that's just because of my space. We have an IKEA Akurum wall cabinet above the range, and we're prepared to hide something cheap and under-powered like this:

http://www.frigidaire.com/products/cooking...d_GLHV30T4K.asp

inside the cabinet, which we could easily duct into the ventilation shaft, if it's borne out we need more safety-wise. We'd lose one shelf within the cab in the process. Nothing else that I've seen would work in our very tight space. We're 3 months in, we'll know more after 6-9 months in our new space.

And I fully realize I might be singing a different tune about our GE Profile gas range if I ever have to deal with their customer service department--to date I can only speak to its performance. And Dave, I'll agree completely with you, I'll have zero patience with poor QA and electronic control failures, and this is one area where there might be some variability between models as you go up the line. So far, we love our controls on the JGB920.

[GE Profile Gas Range -- worth buying?]

Bus, we tried to put the top of the line "prosumer" GE Profile freestanding duel fuel in our kitchen 3 months ago--it was the gas burner/electric convection oven model J2B915 in stainless. Got a great price on it new--$927 Best Buy price-matching Home Depot including delivery. Problem was, it had this kickass convection oven with a very powerful fan which required a 240V line. That caused quite a stir in our condo, so long story short, back it went, swapped out for the gas convection oven model JGB920. The gas model is what I termed on another thread a "pretend" convection oven, it has a small fan which does a nice job recirculating the air but not to the extent that a true convection oven would do with a third heating element behind a very powerful fan.

So this is the model I'm familiar with, the one we've put through its paces, and pretend convection oven or not this unit kicks some serious butt performance-wise. We love it. Very big self-cleaning oven, gets to temp quickly, very powerful 15K burner--though we don't wok, sealed burner surface kind of recessed which catches every spill, cleans up easily, tough level continuous cast iron grates, and a warming drawer with separate temp control that we haven't even used yet. I expect to use it to hold tempered chocolate at some point. You might not like the oven controls, all digital, very visible with nice touch sensitivity but all on glass in the back, and yes, sometimes, a pot or two obscures the timer button or the oven light button and you have to move something out of the way. Still, it's nice to see the oven temp count upward once you set it.

I had checked out the GE-hating comments on that website previously linked to, when we did our research, seemed mostly to come from the "I'm spending $4K and up on my stove" crowd, which I wasn't going to spend. (I also wasn't prepared to deal with the increased ventilation costs I'd have to incur to accomodate one of those models.) Just to be sure I did do one Rosengarten-pimp style test--his timed 6 quart of 60 degree water brought to a boil covered--and this GE Profile's 15K power burner knocked it out in 14 minutes and 30 seconds, as compared to his winning high end range, the Blue Star, whose 18,000-BTU burner took "only" 17 minutes and 50 seconds to bring the water to a boil.

I can't really vouch for its reliability yet, nor for GE's customer service, haven't had it long enough. (There are a lot of makes and models within any one appliance category, and I have no hands-on experience with any of them, no horror stories to share about my former dishwasher or refrigerator, not that any former experience would necessarily apply to any current make or model anyway.) That Frigidaire model Joe linked to seems comparable spec-wise to the Profile and it is definitely the better value-priced option in stainless--big 5 cu. ft. oven--power burner--continuous grates. But specs are just that, specs. I considered that model as well and I've seen it for as low as $479 at the Sears Appliance Outlet in Potomac Mills. I didn't think it appeared to have the same build quality as the GE, for lack of a better word, and my wife and I preferred the "look" of the Profile. The Frigidaire grates seemed shiny, less attractive and cheaper than the real deal Profile grates, though I am sure there will be people who prefer the "look" of the Frigidaire, especially its stainless front and handles. Those handles are sweet. I've seen those handles on their whole line of very affordable stainless appliances and I run my hand along them and sigh every time.

It's too bad the GE slide-in versions of these Profiles are so exponentially more expensive, they're nice units that might work better in some applications where a freestanding unit would not.

After we purchased our range for $927 I've seen the same models, scratched and dented, available at that Sears Outlet fluctuating between $769-$859. When they have a big sale, or accumulate too many units of one type, they'll usually knock one down ever further. Good bargains on these high end GE Profiles can be had here. They also have a lot of the Kitchenaid slide-ins on the floor as well.

[GE Profile Gas Range -- worth buying?]

Bus--link us to the model on the GE appliance site that you're considering, ok?

[Young & Hungry, by Todd Kliman]

This is why most chefs I know don't care about eGullet and the other food websites like it.

Interesting comment this, on several levels.

In addition to local food discussion, show me another "food website" Mark that also has anything remotely like the eGCI or any special feature in print or online with the depth and originality of our Alinea project subforum with Grant Achatz and his team here:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showforum=163

Grant, a Beard award-winner, gets it. In time, others will.

Next month, do you know who's in the eGullet.org "house" for several days of very public discussion, on a level I haven't seen conducted anywhere else, in any language? That's right, Ferran Adria, who has probably been on the receiving end of more hackneyed commentary on eGullet than any other chef in the world. He "cares" about eGullet, he gets it. In time, others will. Oh, and that .org thing, that's the real deal, that means we're publicly and privately accountable now, that we're continuing to evolve into a diverse culinary not-for-profit service organization--a 501( c )3--that also means, for anyone who cares to read around more, that we've moved way way past any of those "food websites" you may be talking about.

Still, your statement rings partially true for me even though we don't have the same circle of chef friends, but maybe it's a little more accurate to say local chefs:

1) aren't willing to admit publicly yet that they care about eGullet;

2) haven't figured out yet how to process that one dumb comment from that one anonymous twentysomething which rankles their ego, and which they vastly over-emphasize the importance of; or

3) haven't realized that they have a responsibility to join in this process somehow, that this is a "community" not just a series of isolated anonymous folks. This is where Don's comment of user anonymity holds sway for our future--because that responsibility cuts both ways. Many diners are still under-aware, and many chefs and restaurateurs are still stuck in an adversarial or protective mode--rather than realizing this is a community which needs their voice, which already has the voice of some of their colleagues. But we don't only need the voice of an outsider, not just for a few days of a Q&A, and not just to dash off an "editorial reply" or publicist's comment as you'd find in a Sietsema online chat. That kind of response is appropriate there, it's less appropriate here.

We're entering the next phase of eGullet.org here in DC, when more of the chefs around town realize this has been their public community all along, too, that many of their peers nationally are already here, that we have an international reach beyond the confines of the Beltway and that we all have a responsibility to raise public awareness ourselves--not grumble privately or anonymously after the fact--and instead of contacting people privately, communicating their dissatisfaction via backchannels or grumbling that "eGullet" should do something about it--as if "eGullet" was somehow their watchdog--they'll realize that if they care, the opportunity to do something about it, to raise awareness and effect change, is right here before them.

If Todd doesn't realize it yet, he won't continue to get a free pass as a food writer or critic either, as he largely has to date as the new kid on the critical block with serious wordsmithing skills. No matter how talented a writer, if he lets the typical agenda of the free weekly papers creep in, if he politicizes his prose or passes an unfair moral or value judgment about food off on us, he'll come under scrutiny like any other food pro around town. Stuff gets in print in ways it shouldn't, just like dishes go out of our kitchens sometimes we'd like to take back upon reflection. Todd will be compared fairly and at times unfairly to Tom Sietsema, yet Todd isn't a critic like Tom and doesn't visit the restaurants he writes about 3+ times like Sietsema does; I hope, and I bet you he hopes, his positions will be discussed, praised, or challenged very publicly and very quickly after he's written something--that comes with the territory and it comes with being a member of this community. And at times the public dissatisfaction might be shared by other members--right out in the open for all to see and for all to make up their own minds about. That's because intelligent people can disagree, respectfully.

It may be a slow process, but it's inevitable foodies and food lovers of all persuasions will gather here in greater numbers. Some food pros have already realized there's something special going on here, just as some food writers have. We're all richer because of the interplay and diversity. It'll continue to be this unique, evolving mix.

[Dave the Cook's Kitchen Reno On the Cheap]

First off, man, Arne, you do some nice work with a lot of little value-added touches. It's a privilege and honor. Bruce, no less a hearty welcome to you.

You level the base and then put the cabinets on top. Commercial cabinets are made in 2 pieces. The base that gets leveled and the cabinets that go on top. Otherwise you go crazy with 26 foot runs of cabinets

I wish I had an option of a 26' run of cabinets to deal with. Would that I be so lucky, but probably the first thing I'd do with 26' is compartmentalize it and segment it, because I'm difficult that way. There's also no doubt the legs I'm talking about work better in certain situations--like in my small kitchen. I wouldn't trust adjustable legs like the IKEA or Blum on a freestanding island. Second, now might be the time to 1) get a bit into the differences between framed and frameless cabinets--Dave has framed cabs, in this country by far the most popular and the kind I've seen Home Depot and Lowes sell and install--and 2) explore some of the differences between complete DIY'ers and renovations done with at least some "professional" help, either in the design stage or in the implementation stage. Ladderboxes, shims, shaving and scribing will be beyond many DIY'ers and likely to add to the frustration quotient. (Don't come down on me too hard Bruce, I mean no disrespect.)

If you read around the web you'll find that many pros in the contracting trades disparage IKEA kitchen cabs, they doubt their quality or durability at that price, and more than a few, I suspect, have no direct hands-on experience with this style of cab or with the adaptability of IKEA and the value it represents, nor have they read the very positive Consumer Reports recent assessment of IKEA kitchens. The IKEA cabs are frameless, a more European-styled approach to kitchens. What does this mean? Upper cabs are "hung" on one long suspension rail, it's quite easy to hang and plumb a run of uppers with this system, especially if you're working alone, as I was.

Framelss base cabs don't come in two parts with a single base that gets levelled like what you'd buy at a Home Depot. There are also differences between framed and framless cabs pertaining to functionality, efficiency and usable space--in frameless cabs like IKEA the doors are the exact width of the cab, hinge internally, and drawers extend right to the sides of the cabs, rather than have their widths restricted by a framed front piece, which tends to knock off a few inches on either side--in short I think that translates into wider, more efficient pullouts with frameless cabs, but I don't have enough experience to go into much further detail. (Arne, from your gallery it seems you also put in frameless cabs in some spots, not just framed--no?)

This isn't as cut and dried as I'm making it sound--pros and DIY'ers can weigh in here pro and con--but you usually lose an inch or two in the rear of frameless cabs with pullout drawers--and I'd rather lose it there if I had to lose it somewhere--than pullout a bunch of way-too-narrow drawers. I think it's a personal choice and up to everyone to figure out where they want their space, their reach and efficiency, and where they're willing to lose some--and also, as usual, there's the question of how much you're willing to spend. I think this is also where the real pros earn their money.

But, one of the reasons IKEA kitchens have been so successful for the somewhat handy complete DIY'ers, why after going through the process I now worship at their church, begins with their choice of frameless cabs, and the fact that homeowners don't have to go the professional contractor/installer route and don't have to deal with ladder boxes and bases--unless they choose to. In my case, I didn't have any choice anyway--they may have 900 different styles of stained and painted wood, but try walking into a Home Depot and asking to see their selection of cabinet doors and drawer fronts in stainless or aluminum or glass or red acrylic or...

Using legs means that dust & crap can get underneath your cabinets ... getting a broom in there can be a pain.

True, but legs would help in wet and/or damp environments, in fully-tiled kitchens of serious cooks who planned to wetmop anyway, they help prevent mildew, they allow moisture from your dishwasher to disperse more readily rather than collect and seep into walls, substrates, etc. The snap on toekicks are pretty easy to pop off and then back on if you went that route (we didn't.) In big kitchens that newfangled Swiffer wet jet can be wielded amazingly well and in our case of a very small galley kitchen, no one is ever in a position to see under them except our cats. Because of our tight quarters, and my well-honed ability to attract and retain cooking related "crap," we tried to extract from our space as much extra/hidden/overlooked storage space as possible for this crap--without compromising visual aesthetics. It's another reason why we liked IKEA base cabs with Capita legs: that quickly and easily created a space (roughly 5" H x 46" W x 26" D) for hotel pans and the really-more-than-we-actually-would-ever-need number of sheetpans we own, slid underneath, out of the way. They had to go somewhere in our condo, might as well have been in this "found" space.

That worked for us, but what about the peninsula that is going to become your culinary center, your statement of harmonic form and function? Fact is you have those now white framed HD/Lowes-style cabs in the rest of your kitchen, you have those framed bases everywhere, aesthetically you may have to continue in that vein. But with Akurum, 4-6 Capita legs and say a $100 IKEA countertop, you could get away very cheaply--just a collection of open cabinets secured to themselves, with shelves, all facing out, no drawers or doors. And if you went that route, you do have an alternative to a full ladderbox that is more sturdy than just legs alone, though likely less ideal than a ladderbox with recessed toekicks anchored to the floor.

Secure your base cabs to the wall resting on a rear support ledger--a neat procedure I picked up from perusing the website of a general contractor who specializes in installing and customizing IKEA kitchens: it's a strip of wood which you level and attach to the back wall, at just the right working height for your connected island cabs, which in turn supports and levels them, no way your island base cabs or outer legs would shift as you shifted weight around inside them or as you dropped a heavy countertop on them, and if you upgraded to solid surface countertop later you'd already know you could drop it down and it wouldn't crack from being slightly out of square. But you have to be able to drill into that back wall (you might prefer to drill into the wall rather than your kitchen floor) and you have to like the "look" with legs pressed up against that wall/window or add toekicks with clips. (Seeing the legs works in our space because we had stainless elsewhere and a kind of industrial contemporary aesthetic going on overall anyway.) I used that rear ledger technique with front legs in our space--rather than legs alone--for a 70" straight run of Corian with a seamless sink because I wanted to make extra-special sure our warranty was honored and our base cabinet support stayed level and square over time. I can't imagine an easier installation. The clock is ticking, I like it so far, it wasn't the least bit frustrating or difficult to do myself and eventually I'll find out whether we should have gone with a ladder box instead.

[Dave the Cook's Kitchen Reno On the Cheap]

But I wonder what you did about the heights. These cabinets are 30-3/8 inches high

Legs, you have two choices--the stainless steel "Capita" legs which are adjustable and quite nice--they come in 3 different sizes, you screw them into the bottom of the akurum--we used the shortest, which I think is 4-5 inches, in our kitchen since everything is stainless in there. 4 Capita legs would not be enough for a substantial island. We did not put a front piece of wood over them--I'm forgetting the technical term for that, plinth maybe?--we wanted to see them not hide them, hiding them would be heavy-seeming in a small space (and not give our cats some private crawl space should they want to hide out. One of cats loves the little space in the back of the dishwasher.) But what I'd also recommend for a heavy say 39" by 60" island is you try to find some of the old-style "Numerar" leg sets--they've been discontinued but you can still find them at some stores on clearance sale for 9.99 a set. They are aluminum, have round, squat, adjustable aluminum legs, and they go together differently than the Capita--they sit on a rectangular or square frame of aluminum with visible side rails--and kind of snap into place. They were designed to be modular--so you could mix and match different cabinet widths as you saw fit--so say two 30" base cabinets or four 15" base cabinets.

I found mine at the College Park IKEA and once I found out they were discontinued, and the new version was complete crap, (it's square) I bought several sets in different lengths, they were maybe $50 to $70+ per set and on sale for $9.99 But what I discovered was since they were all aluminum, I didn't have to live with the fixed lengths and widths--I could custom cut my own with a nice hacksaw. Which we did, so the two akurum kitchen cabinet/red abstrakt door/gray numerar laminate countertop units we built (for the tv, stereo and storage) which were completely custom--are also on custom legs and frames. We liked the aluminum of the numerar better here than the capita--it matched the numerar gray countertops beautifully. Both would be sturdy enough for your island, the Capita would give you the most flexibility when it came to height. (We don't consider either of these two custom units "work" units so the Numerar isn't a problem height-wise.)

But whether you go this "leg" route or not, or pursue something more permanent i.e. resting on a platform secured to the floor, will depend on whether your island will butt up against that carport wall and whether you can secure it to that wall--and I'm not sure if your design and space will allow this. Laminate has more flexibility than solid surface, say, Corian, Corian has to be on something completely solid. perfectly level and square and never ever move or flex. With laminate, you could secure all the Akurum to each other, then secure that back side of the Akurum to that carport wall, attach the laminate to the Akurum, use the Capita legs, and be all set. Your work zone will be standing at the island facing that wall, any motion or force you'd have would be into that wall.

I found it most encouraging that you and Colleen own a disappointing mixer

We won it at a pastry competition and it was that new model K-aid released. It's in storage, we use two K5A workhorses that are older, better, back when K-aid meant something, when it meant your mixer lasted a lifetime.

New IKEA Numerar laminate for your entire kitchen, the island and your small sink-side counter, would cost you, maybe, $160. And you'd likely live with it for years and not want to replace it with more premium/luxury stuff. Especially if you liked the red. (oooh, red.)

I've got the undercabinet lighting already, and I'll install it next weekend. i've located the proper fluorescent bulbs, and I'll replace them soon. What did you do for task lighting?

Nothing. Our space in the kitchen is only 10' by 8', so we upgraded the single ceiling fixture and we put maybe 8 undercabinet lights in that space to illuminate all our white Corian out the wazoo. (We put the freestanding airy modern IKEA bedroom storage system called Stolmen (aluminum adjustable posts and white shelves) in our kitchen and you can put lighting under that as well. I'm blanking on the undercabinet halogen units I picked but they were 20W per strip, nice Italian-made, I think called Halyosa from IKEA:

http://www.ikea-usa.com/webapp/wcs/stores/...productId=18698

On the pro kitchen design sites halogen gets a bad rap, but we love these units, they all linked together easily, we don't have anything in the bottom-most shelves that might potentially get too warm--we have things like bowls, plates, glasses, espresso cups, our digital scale, on those bottom shelves so they're easily accessible to and from the work counters and the dishwasher. Since we shopped IKEA As-is, over time, I accumulated all 8 for maybe an average price of $10 each. We didn't put track, pendant or task lighting in this go round--why? Because this second renovation phase was not our ultimate renovation--we couldn't afford our ultimate renovation for a while longer--the third phase will involve construction, keeping everything from Phase 2 but knocking down the 10" foot length of wall, or some portion thereof, to "open" up the kitchen a bit, we'll add an "L" island aspect to the now-suddenly-exposed straight run of Corian on that side, we'll have to do some serious electrical work since that wall has electrical lines and outlets in it, and then we'll put up some sort of sliding, modular glass wall system. Real good task lighting will happen then, since that whole space will change once it gets opened up. And hopefully I'll learn much more about it by then as well. As I did my research I really didn't process any of that advanced lighting info because I knew it had to wait until Phase 3.

[A Chat with Cesare Lanfranconi]

I'd like to follow up on something laniloa mentioned--and wonder if you'd share your thoughts on budget-conscious dining. Because cooking with the seasons and foraging out the best local and imported ingredients is usually much more expensive than the casual diner realizes, especially within the context of fine dining, white tablecloths and a very stylish interior space. Yet sometimes a little of a very expensive ingredient can go a long way. I wonder if you'd be willing to share any strategies you've developed that help you stay accessible to these budget diners, that help you stay within their reach and yet remain profitable?

So, here's your chance to offer your advice for the budget conscious diner, who appreciates very good food, but who wants Tosca to be more than just a once a year/special occasion restaurant, and tell them how can they come away with a lower check average yet still dine well in your hands. Can they still experience Cesare and the glories of what you do at Tosca yet not spend $30 for an entree? I think you do a very special pre-theater, perhaps you could talk about how you offer such quality at that price, and how else you reach out to this diner? Is it possible to walk in and dine affordably at your bar?

And a few "budget" related followups:

1) did your restaurant suffer at all post 9/11 when it seemed diners more openly embraced "American" comfort food and when there were fewer expense account diners travelling to DC? Did you as a restaurateur make any changes to adapt and are any of those changes still in effect?

2) I've also noticed you particpate in the various Restaurant Weeks which have been held, and for more than a few people that is likely their first time dining at Tosca. Have you found it a successful recruiting tool over time, meaning you've tracked and developed loyal customers, or is it more a short term way to fill seats and get new diners into Tosca who haven't yet been?

3) Do you feel under any pressure to offer smaller dishes, to do something like the under $10 Palena front room option? Or would something like that inherently go against the tenets and tradition of dining which you've built your restaurant around?

4) How valuable has your membership in CIRA proven to your bottom line? Has that helped you stay competitive, stay in business?

Thanks for joining us.

[EPCOT Food and Wine Festival]

Not sure Tony, Susan, if you have or have not gone to Epcot yet, but we just returned from our weekend down there. Besides the Sweet Sunday event, which was not that heavily promoted in advance, there wasn't anything that struck me as "remarkably" different, though the big Saturday Party for the Senses event seemed bigger, maybe 800+ people instead of 6-700? I had so many exceptional dishes on my night, which was october 16th, the favorite of which was by Ximena Mariscal from the Maricu Centro de Artes Culinarias in Mexico: huitlacoche and filet mignon tucked inside a crepe with corn souffle and chile poblano sauce. Hiro Sone's cod (Terra, Napa) was also excellent, so, too was John Mailk's dish (33 Liberty, Greenville, SC) and Melissa Kelly's fish and chips (Primo, Rockland, Maine.) I'm sure there were other excellent dishes which we didn't have a chance to try, since we did a dessert this year with an ice cream and a couple of a la minute components, we couldn't walk around as much.

However, bigger doesn't necessarily mean worse--they must have hired a designer this year because the space was extremely well laid-out, there was exceptional flow, more seating in smaller, more organic and intimate groupings, it was more colorful and beautiful, several acts from Cirque du Soleil performed throughout the evening in a central stage. From our perspective as pastry chefs they also improved our lot--they split us into two dessert areas with brand new stations, one at either end of the space, instead of like last year huddling us all together in a cramped circle, and they also moved us to the side of the space which had all the refrigerators, instead of placing us on the opposite wall, which made it much easier to get another 100 desserts when we needed them. (We have some pictures, which I haven't seen yet.)

My feeling remains unchanged: that while sampling piecemeal from the booths outside is nice, and fighting to snag a free seat in an occasional demo can be nice, the better experience is to focus around the Party for the Senses, where you can talk with the chefs, sample the dishes which appeal to you, watch them cook, explore wines, and my recommendation is not to go outside to see the fireworks that night--go another evening--that night stay inside the pavilion and use that extra 30 minutes or so to pursue more food and wine pairings. Party for the Senses is really special, it's a value-priced bargain culinarily-speaking and it amazes me that the folks in Central Florida food media don't seem to appreciate it properly. But then they don't seem to even appreciate how good on-property restaurants like California Grill and Le Cellier are nor how consummate and professional many of the Disney FOH/BOH teams are, either, so maybe there's still a not-so subtle Disney bias thing at work.

We ate out all over the parks (one of the nice visiting chef perks are coupons, which take care of food; we pay full price for all wine) and this time we ate twice each at our usual suspects, California Grill, Flying Fish and Le Cellier. None have lost a step, with the Grill clearly ahead, but if anything Le Cellier has moved solidly alongside Flying Fish. (The night we ate at Le Cellier, when the chefs allowed us to sneak in at 9:30 despite the fact that they take their last seating at 9PM, they had had 600 covers on the books for that evening, a Saturday, which began with a 4PM first seating. I can't tell you how impressive it is to do that kind of volume, and yet provide that kind of care and attention to each dish, for the price they charge.) Now that we've been guests for a few years in a row, the thing we've realized over time is there are deep rosters of talented unknown people who work their butts off--and they're still in place or move say from the Grill to Le Cellier or vice versa, still on the lines, still folding that free-form lasagne just so before it goes to the pass. We now know their faces, their efficient body language, from years past--old professional colleagues who have served us incredibly well in the past and continue to do so, none of whom will ever rise beyond this station or ever become a great chef or a celebrity chef themselves. But central floridians and all those who visit annually, like us, are very fortunate they remain there, just doing their thing as if it were their first week on the job. (Not that this commitment is necessarily uniform or consistent, we had disappointing lunches in the Morocco restaurant and the English pub restaurant, which I think was called Rose & Crown.)

If any eGulleteer goes to the remaining weeks of the Food & Wine festival, my tip is to make reservations for the Ca Grill on at least one night and ask specifically to sit at the chef's counter--those two seats will be your ticket inside a still great restaurant. Not the 4 seats at the sushi counter, the 2 seats at the chef's counter. You'll see what I mean. Oh, and the two new sushi dishes at the Grill are very nice: an eel roll called, I think, Snake in the grass, and also the tuna in three different styles dish.

My vote for most pleasurable and surreal experience at Epcot Food and Wine goes to sipping a glass of Inniskillin Okanagan Vidal Icewine from a plastic cup while watching a fantastic fireworks and laser show. Now that's living!

Inniskillin, it turned out, sponsored our pastry chef Sweet Sunday event, which I didn't know far enough in advance. As a result, not a single one of my desserts (two of them were chocolate-based) that night went with the wine. So my group appreciated the wine on its own, an incredible liquid dessert in a glass, and then moved on to the plated desserts. Tony, if you did Sweet Sunday on the 3rd, was that Roland Mesnier? I'm interested in feedback about this new concept and also if others found their PFTS enjoyable...the festival is longer this year, there are so many different chefs flying in for a short time and then leaving, the demos probably varied a bit as anything in life, the best one can really offer is a snapshot of what their little part of the festival was like, so I hope everyone else's was as good as ours.

[Is there an upscale restaurant in South Carolina]

I have no idea if Greenville qualifies as in the middle of nowhere, or whether this guy's restaurant would qualify as upscale physically or aesthetically, based on standards you're trying to apply, but I cooked with a chef named John Malik down at Disneyworld this weekend and his dish--sweet potato blini with smoked pork, green tomato chutney, apple cider sauce and creme fraiche--was a special dish, a standout dish at the event, it wasn't something that could be labelled sophisticated, simple or subversive, yet it was all three. It was also great. His restaurant is named 33 Liberty, more info here:

http://www.33liberty.com/

Based on my brief encounter with John at Epcot, this guy is worth a detour because he's a passionate advocate of his craft. The restaurant sounds charming, too: 7 tables, very reasonably priced on its surface, eclectic and interesting wines including some of my favorites, likely on par with other understated gems of a place like Django in Philly or Hugo's in Portland, which those of us in the know knew about before they were outed nationally. It seems John has white tablecloths. I didn't find an actual dinner at 33 Liberty ever discussed on Chowhound, though that's not surprising, nor who could blame me what with having to load and reload the entire archive of posts back to 1998 everytime. On eG I found only one eG comment by Lan4Dawg who said he liked it immensely and also that William McKinney has mentioned it a few times in other eG South Carolina assessment threads, but no real reports of actual delicious dishes, no assessments of what it was like to actually sit at John's chef table, no comments about the very reasonably-priced wine lists, nor how fortunate anyone felt after having a 5 course menu for $50 there in a 7 table restaurant in this supposed culinary also-ran of a town. That's too bad, because if local restaurateurs and independent chefs who aim higher and hit higher marks for individuality and appeal are not appreciated by enough locals, if their virtues are not regularly and specifically extolled in print and on eG, no one wins.

I wish he was cooking closer to Washington, DC so I could just swing by to eat my way through his weekly changing menus.

[Troubleshooting Tempering]

Thanks Sebastian for that excellent contribution as well--but just to give an example of what I mean about "potential" conflicts in advice--which can be confusing to a beginner--I'm gonna take your comment about never using a glass bowl, Sebastian, and provide a counter argument FOR using a glass bowl: some pastry and chocolate pros prefer using a glass bowl precisely because it does "seem" to hold heat better than plastic--and as a result they learn to take this effect into consideration when they are directly warming it in the microwave, they pull it out x seconds sooner, and then use the fact that their glass bowl retains heat a bit to their advantage--they can work with it longer before having to either re-warm in the microwave or add warm chocolate to it.

As long as you understand the principles of tempering, or in this case, how you are retaining temper as you directly warm tempered chocolate--both the glass and plastic bowl approaches are valid. I don't actually direct warm in glass, I use plastic just like Sebastian--and when I've taught vocational classes I've preached plastic as well--but I know why some pros opt to use glass. The key is that they adapt their sensitivity and timing to glass whereas Sebastian and I adapt to plastic. From the perspective of a teacher, I'm with Sebastian on this--beginners should use plastic, the heat is more easily quantifiable--but then make up your own mind once you get some proficiency.

[chocolate garnish for wedding cake]

There's actually a nice picture of the rose that Ewald teaches in his class made up of these petals here:

http://www.notterschool.com/gallery.php

white chocolate petals, tips brushed in red.

[Troubleshooting Tempering]

It helps to learn how to temper from a good teacher, someone who knows how to temper inside and out. Are you being taught in school or are you trying to do this on your own?

Why do you need to temper for a glaze? If I recall that Bugat book, he was doing mostly 25 year old stuff, and I think his Clichy was what everyone else calls an Opera cake--thin jaconde layers, coffee buttercream, ganache and a glaze. This glaze doesn't have to be tempered, in fact, many/most modern French pastry chefs who still do this cake do so without tempering the chocolate because it cuts cleaner when this glaze isn't tempered--and a good Opera requires that you hot knife it cleanly. Most good French pastry chefs "foot" their Opera cakes as well--spreading a very thin layer of tempered chocolate or pate a glacer on the bottom cake surface--again, so it rests cleanly. Everyone has their own pet recipe for this type of Opera glaze--and they usually involve adding some percentage of oil, butter, corn syrup, pure pate (100% unsweetened chocolate in paste form) and/or pate a glacer. So basically what I'm telling you is, at this point in your development, you don't have to get hung up on the tempering part to glaze an Opera cake well.

But, just for your future tempering sake, Bugat recycles the standard temperature ranges--but those ranges themselves don't actually help you temper successfully and certainly don't help you understand why you're doing what you're doing. The dipping into bowls of cold water and hot water aren't often used anymore, but that is a perfectly valid method. And yes different chocolates have different sensibilities--some are more flexible and forgiving than others--but at this point that will just distract you--you have to know how to temper first to appreciate that. (I don't recall the Bo instructions. His upper temp range of 90 is a little low--you won't get the shine at 90 that you'll get if you learn to work, mold and dip one or two degrees warmer.)

Are you using Guittard or an E. Guittard, like the 61% or 72%? We temper the 61 and 72 E. Guittard all the time, it tempers easily and well and their temps hold at right about 92-93 (meaning if you are in temper you shouldn't re-warm over 92-93; also, tempered chocolate doesn't "lose" its temper when it cools down to 86, it just gets thick and slightly less workable (less fluid) you just have to re-warm it and as long as you don't mistakenly warm it over 92 you'll still be in temper.) Much discussed on eG. If you wanted tempered chocolate, and are using the E. Guittard pistoles, just microwave them for 20 seconds at a time, stirring after each time. Stop while there are still some unmelted lumps in the bowl, stir to melt the rest, check for temper. This is called direct warming--you started with tempered chocolate and didn't raise the temperature of it beyond 92 at any time so you will still be "in" temper. Hope this helps somewhat--also realize there are a lot of different methods, different instructors, cookbook writers even get into the act sometimes, some say it is easy, some preach the science of it, some just do it, some like Alice Medrich have spent a career talking around it, but one thing is certain: all are likely at one time or another to conflict a bit or disagree a bit--the important thing as a smart, evolving professional pastry student like yourself is that you soak all this up, keep asking questions, point out conflicts, try to solve them, become able to temper under all conditions and using a variety of methods--and eventually let your thin, crisp, shiny work speak for itself. It will likely be frustrating but that isn't necessarily bad.

Oh, and don't use wooden utensils with chocolate, like Bugat recommends. Use a rubber statula.

[Dave the Cook's Kitchen Reno On the Cheap]

Dave, we had already done one bare-bones bottom-line somehow-achieve-minimal-functionality upgrade like you're undertaking and we made many of the same choices: painted all the walls white but left the old crappy floor tile in place, kept the old laminate countertops with the big st. st. sink but put a better faucet in to accommodate our water needs (you already seem to have at least a decent faucet) we did the exact same thing Shaw and others recommended and which you did with the outdated framed wooden cabs, painting them all completely white--putting some of the doors back, leaving some off for open storage of plates and other stuff we wanted quick access to--as long as these are not above or next to the stove you'll be fine grease/dirt accumulation-wise, put up the pegboard with hooks for all of our hand tools and pots, added two of those IKEA potlid racks, installed a much better natural fluorescent ceiling fixture as per Steven's suggestion, a big Metro shelving unit natch and a butcher block piece for cutting. Kept the old crappy but still functioning gas stove and the less old but still functioning dishwasher but had to buy a new basic all white decidely not chi-chi refrigerator and install a sink disposal. Total price for all this, including appliance delivery and a plumber's visit to install the new disposal plus put in two water shutoff valves that actually worked, we spent maybe $1200. That lasted a year, maybe two. Was it worth doing? Most definitely yes, it helped us decide what we really wanted and why.

Some decisions we made which have been discussed on this thread--we put our microwave (and a small excellent commercial convection oven, which we both had and didn't have to buy) on Metro shelving rather than over the stove or on the countertop. We use both of these a lot. There's a lot you could do with that open over-the-stove space that an ugly-ass too-expensive built-in too-big-anyway appliance would detract from. Put it where you'll use it comfortably within reach and within your usage zones. In our case that was in the slim metro shelving unit next to the fridge, because it sat in there perfectly flush, and all we had to do was turn around from the sink side to get at it or open the fridge door and reach up and to the left to put something in it.

There's also nothing worse than those weak-ass pretend vents which vent nowhere. No range hood is better than an under-powered one which supposedly recycles. Rip it out, hang pots, lids, tools, lighting instead. This space would be a nice area for you to put in some good under cabinet lighting as well if you found it for a price within your budget--and if you are keeping that black stove for a while, and manage to create some pot storage elsewhere and are a little artsy, some nice lighting here coupled with some nice colorful (usually Italian) backsplash tiles and a black shelf supporting a few dramatic red glass vases could refocus your guest's eyes here and keep them off everywhere else. Especially if you painted other tiles, including all those floral motif ones, red as well. This could be done cheaply with a big aesthetic bang.

We lived with that for a while and then this Summer did a more fully realized renovation ourselves over 3 months, a complete overhaul gutting the entire space, changing what we hated aesthetically about the old space (wood, overmount stainless sink, perception of age, framed cabinets and their corresponding inefficiency, general claustrophobic feeling, poor light) getting rid of absolutely every cabinet and appliance and keeping only the white fridge, but even that we moved out of our 10' by 8" kitchen and built it into a pantry just outside the formal kitchen space. We went white, aluminum, stainless steel and glass, creating a very clean, sanitary, bright, smooth, sleek space, with new tiled floor, new and used countertop surfaces of white Corian, one side with a matching white seamless sink, the opposite side a straight run, we also made one island work station topped with a 36" x 26" white/gray/black flecked granite piece which we got at a remnant price, upper cabs have aluminum and glass doors, lower cabs have stainless drawers and shelves, bought a new stove, dishwasher and wine storage unit, also all stainless. No Metro shelving and no wood anywhere, not even a cutting board. Mostly IKEA. But even this we did with a serious eye out for bargains at every step of the way. I talked a little about it on Mayhaw Man's renovation thread--I got a lot from IKEA during 75% off box sales or already assembled in As-is at deep discount, as they were breaking down their display kitchens to change them. I got most of my cabs, drawers, drawer fronts, doors and under cabinet halogens this way, plus I got really lucky with two serious runs of Corian, maybe 3K worth, for $10 each, any stains buffed right back to perfect white in a few minutes.

(By the way, I too coveted that LG microwave with built-in toaster someone mentioned from the minute I saw it at BB but our st. st. one was just fine.)

Now, if I could have done the first el-cheapo upgrade over again, I would have replaced all my old cheap laminate countertops with new IKEA laminate--you can easily do this yourself--laminate has come a long way and the IKEA stuff from France (Numerar) is really exceptional and cheap, much better than the laminates at Home Depot, even if you pay full price for it. It would have improved the space tremendously. We liked it so much we incorporated it into our most-recent overhaul, just not in the formal kitchen areas: we put it into a few kitchen extension "lab" spaces if you will, storage and work spaces which flow out either end of the 10' x 8' formal kitchen space--one piece of kitchen countertop became the top of a low audio-video/storage unit we designed and built from IKEA kitchen stuff and another length became the top of a counter height storage unit we built, also from IKEA kitchen stuff--in our case we paired the Numerar aluminum gray effect countertop with their new line of red acrylic Abstrakt door and drawer fronts, which are made in Italy, just like all the cool red furniture seems to be (page 190 of the 2005 US catalog.)

But back to you, if, unlike me, you like wood as a countertop, that IKEA Pronomen wood countertop halland recommended you slap on top of that now-used-elsewhere-chest is a nice piece and his is a nice idea--especially for the price. The Numerar wood is also great for the price. You could buy these cheaply in their As-is room, if you were near an IKEA, but new they are reasonably priced anyway. (They'd also work well as disposable cutting boards or lengths set on top of existing countertops, which you could throw out and replace when necessary.) Very long perfectly fine 26" wide sections of these Pronomen and Numerar countertops are frequently available for $20 in As-is. If you didn't like your "old" countertops after seeing them and working on them beneath your now white painted cabs--change them. It's cheap to do so, you can do it yourself, put the old sink right into a new countertop, because that's the surface you will be looking at most often when you are "in" your space.

That Varde base cabinet you considered for your A island worktable is really nice--very sturdy--in As-is for as low as $100--but it has one flaw--it has a shitty fibreboard backing tacked on--use it only if you can place it up against a wall or back something else against it--like other IKEA shelving or Metro shelving. But, after looking at your space, you might want to consider using a Varde as a base for an island, remove its top piece or not, and slap down something about as long but slightly wider--say 39" minimum--which would allow people to sit on stools on the B wall side of this A piece.

That would allow you to get rid of your B piece altogether, which would now be redundant. I also wouldn't put something in the C space either, leave it open. The problem with putting anything there is it is not a work zone, it's not where you're gonna be, where you'll want to reach for any gadget, etc. Granted that wheeled Sears toolbox is another way to get red into the space and granted you could always wheel that into your space and wheel it back. But it's still gonna stick out there and take up room.

So, my amateur design recommendation is you'd be better off to focus most of your remaining attention and money on that A space, slap together a large sturdy island work surface that does not move at all, with cabinets and drawers underneath to hold all your pots, pans, sheetrays, gadget/tool crap--but which would still be accessible in your stove work zone. Leave an overhang on the B side and people could sit there, looking inward toward the kitchen where you will be working, if not on the island than near the stove. If you are working on an eGCI lesson, that's where your photographer could set up and shoot your dish or step--on that island. Perhaps you could measure and design an island which would allow you to wheel and store the red Sears toolbox under it flush--you'd still see the red--but it wouldn't stick out taking up physical space, as it would if parked at C. And, making A into a multi-use island still keeps the rationale to cut the pass-through view space-opening hole in B's wall--now, later, whenever.

I have this Varde unit in one of those extended kitchen lab/dining room areas:

http://www.ikea-usa.com/webapp/wcs/stores/...110*10255*10257

But to make it work and match our dining table I had to rip off its very nice wood/butcher block top piece (the same as on the $399 Varde base cab you were considering) and replace it with a stainless steel table top. Now that piece rocks along with our dining room table, which has a matching stainless top, and with our current kitchen and lab spaces. (Both of those wood tables with stainless tops were from the Pottery Barn furniture outlet, cheap.)

Cheaper than the Varde as a partial base for your A island would be mixing and matching Akurum base cabs--back to back, back to side--and then securing a Numerar countertop to it. They make a wider piece that is not the standard 26" wide just for this purpose. You could have any combination of pull-outs, reach-ins, or open shelves underneath. This island could be built very reasonably, it also could be built in stages--meaning you add various doors and drawers in stages, as you could afford more, as how you will work there becomes more apparent to you: leave the stove side of the island open for pots, pans, sheetrays; put the pullout drawers underneath where you think you'll stand and work at the island, put items for long term storage underneath on the B side where you'll have the stools and won't likely want to reach down into often, etc.

In addition to what you've already achieved, I think if the bulk of your remaining budget this time went toward the creation on this island, and you replaced your other countertop pieces with the same surface (IKEA has a Numerar laminate color called "sand effect red" you might like) you could live and work in this space just fine until you could budget enough to upgrade the appliances. Pick up a small remnant piece of granite and one of wood, and you have a pastry board and cutting board which you can move all over your kitchen as needed. That's really all I'd try to do at this stage and budget.

But, should you stay in this space, and you get the urge to upgrade again, you could easily slap a nice full size Corian or granite countertop onto this existing IKEA island cabinetry, whichever look and surface feel you liked better. We like each a lot for different reasons. (You can also dream about this really really nice Italian composite stone surface called Quarella, which has a nice red color option "gemme rubino", if you go higher-end later and want to stay with red countertops. It's just starting to come into the US.) But you may like your red laminate so much you won't want to upgrade. You could even change door fronts as the color scheme of your kitchen evolved in this next phase--that's a nice advantage of those frameless white IKEA Akurum cabinets. And doing it this way means you could upgrade this space in stages, and not have to throw out or give away what you've already done. IKEA comes to Atlanta in the summer of 2005, in the meantime you could drive to TX or DC or have stuff shipped.

Oh, our knives are on magnetic strips and I have a red Kitchenaid piece o crap I could let you have for the right price. It's one of the newer style, wider flatter bowl models and I hate everything about it, so we've rarely used it.

[chocolate garnish for wedding cake]

There is a technique of forming flower petals by scraping a round cookie cutter over a soft block of chocolate.

It turns out that's how this was done, Wendy, round metal cutter scraping down a soft block of milk chocolate. And the actual Martha instructions in this issue are very well-written. But this is like a lot of other things when it comes to real chocolate work--you read something and it seems doable--and then you actually try to do it and you get hung up--it's better when you have someone there to show you just how to hold the cutter, at just what angle to scrape, just how much to warm the block, etc. When I first was shown this technique, it was in an Ewald Notter class maybe 7-8 years ago, we did it with Carma white chocolate, and I remember not getting very good curls/petals on my own until he actually came around to our station and I could see his wrists, and see up close just what he did. Milk is softer and easier.

[Petits Fours]

Petits fours are a very tough category to find done well--very labor intensive, they require a lot of skill, and it is harder to do that very fine small work well. For these reasons, plus lack of demand, plus they tend to dry out more quickly, plus "most" customers looking at their 12" croissant which costs $2.99 and then looking askance at a little 1" piece of something at close to the same price, pfs seem expensive. It's also a broad category--it includes those little fondant covered cakes, (which I don't think I've ever had one whose taste matched its appearance except when my teacher in pastry school made them, Mark Ramsdell,) but it also includes chocolates, bon bons, little mini-souffles, tiny fruit tartlets, Ann Amernick's justly famous caramels are considered petits fours, a tiny one inch square of Opera cake would be a petits four (you could cut those up yourself from a regular 3-4" opera cake), those incredible paper thin tuiles and macaroons Michel Richard does at Citronelle--yup, you got it, petits fours. Most small cookies are legitimately considered petits fours--they're usually called "petits four sec," as in sec=dry--and really, really good cookies are a treat, and a rarity.

Outside of restaurants, the petits fours I can vouch for are the macaroons and chocolates at Wegmans and Ann's caramels. I bet anything else Ann did small and sold in her shop would be excellent. I haven't been to Patisserie Poupon in a while but I bet he'd do some nice petits fours for you if you asked. I think what you're most likely to see around town are mini-desserts, say 3", rather than pfs.

[chocolate garnish for wedding cake]

I don't recall that particular cake, Theone, but I've seen other cakes by Wendy with modelling chocolate decor so this was likely modelling chocolate as well, so ditto what bkeith said. That's your first hurdle--modelling chocolate or trying to do the petals in tempered chocolate (how to do it in tempered would qualify as a really advanced technique.) Modelling would certainly be easier, and instead of making it yourself you could buy it commercially--there are several very good brands, some softer than others, I personally like the Cacao-Barry modelling chocolates.

You could make the petals themselves several ways, an alternative to a cutter is just squishing one of your squintillion balls at a time between two sheets of plastic film, which gives you the added advantage of being able to squish out a nice thin clean edge. Everyone finds their own way to do this quickly, at their given quality level, because roses are so popular. There are nice two-sided silicone gum paste presses on the market to vein rose petals but that might be a step you don't choose to do and this veining is often not seen or appreciated.

It takes a while, and the right season, for petals like this to air dry a bit to hold their shape. Ste them in something or on something to keep a curve.

[Autumn Mushroom and Wine Festival]

I attended one of these French embassy dinners back when I was writing for Food Arts. It's really a beautiful space, all the chefs huddled behind and off to the side with their trams plating on card tables, great French champagne flowed freely that night (very free in my case because my seat there was comped as media) I remember liking Michel Richard's dish and David Guas's dessert a whole lot and being very impressed overall. All the chefs worked really, really hard. The crowd was older, very well-dressed, very haute to match the cuisine, except for the other chefs and writers I bumped into. I recall sitting next to Xavier Deshayes, who I hadn't yet met and really enjoyed talking to him. (He was cooking up some great work in that crappy small kitchen of Senses at this time. Would that he do that kind of cooking somewhere around town again. He was also very well-dressed.)

However, thanks to the link above, I now realize this dinner was put on by a non-profit organization, one working "to defend and preserve certain traditions of quality inherent to the French Culinary Art" and that "in order to protect these fundamentals the use and learning of specific techniques must be encouraged through the promotion and teaching of their values." Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but I feel a little clueless not knowing that at the time. And with all the James Beard House business being discussed on eGullet and elsewhere, I'm now piqued, in retrospect, if you will.

From the website:

"Our association is a small but very unique professional association based in Washington, DC area. The membership is varied but has always regrouped individuals concerned about the evolution of the techniques use in the food service industry.  The members are working together to defend and preserve certain traditions of quality inherent to the French Culinary Art. We believe that in order to protect these fundamentals the use and learning of specific techniques must be encourage through the promotion and teaching of their values."

and

"The FICS is an exclusive membership association. The board of directors approves applications for new members. Their deliberations and votes are secret and strictly confidential."

Reading further on the website we learn it costs $50 annually to be a member of this small non-profit, unique, exclusive, at times secret but at-all-times-confidential association, should your application be "approved." Tickets to these events are sold to the general public, and there's also a membership fee which entitles you to a discount if you'd like to attend an event. At this point I'm imagining two fat guys and two terribly slim guys sitting smoking cigars and swirling Courvoisier in a back room somewhere, speaking French of course, reviewing my imaginary application saying "he went to L'Academie but heeez not French enough, his desserts have no soul, he deconstructs, he foams, application denied." Which actually would be all fine and good so far, I think groups, even non-profit ones, get to define their membership. But if you are the inquiring type, then it gets a little more murky.

There isn't much specific information on the site about how FICS defends and preserves and protects and promotes beyond these paid events. Scholarships are mentioned, but what portion of the proceeds or revenue of these events goes toward scholarships? Does only the silent auction portion benefit scholarships, rather than the full admission price as well? What parts of these are tax deductible? Are the chefs and sponsors donating their time and product or being reimbursed for their expenses--and how much of this goes toward scholarships and how much goes toward operating expenses, cigars and Courvoisier?

There's nothing specific on the website about the criteria for these scholarships, who determines the recipients, nor about how many have been distributed, who has received them, whether they've been based on financial need, talent, employment, etc. Based on the chefs and sponsors assembled and the ticket prices of these events, I imagine a lot of young, worthy and/or financially disadvantaged people, certainly a few women and minorities, have been going to French cooking schools on these scholarships, most likely locally here at L'Academie, but then I have an active imagination sometimes. I couldn't actually find anything specific on the site about what the "culinary scholarship fund of the FIC" has done. Anyone know? My sincere hope is I just didn't look hard enough, and that many young cooks around town have been able to go to school who wouldn't have been able to otherwise.

I did find this kicker, though: one of the benefits of this $50 membership is "the possibility to participate in the association scholarship program for education and professional development."

Hmm...

[Why So Few Women Are Great Chefs ...]

I'm glad to see chefette, my wife, expand this already amazing, incredibly civil thread a little bit further, and she took it into some areas I too thought weren't being touched on--namely the perception of greatness past some sort of quantifiable and/or inherent understanding of cooking or the ability to cook--the food media's role in establishing greatness either in an historical sense or in the modern sense of the term. I've read this all the way through in one sitting and am glad I did. As a reasoned, thought-provoking and historical article, Daniel, I think you've succeeded valiantly--but that success only goes so far; I'm afraid it stops short with:

"Nor has there been great progress in our own, more "enlightened times". While it is true that more women have entered the lower ranks of the profession (sous-chefs, conditores, dessert chefs), there has precious little increase in France, England, the United States or Israel in the ranks of women who have risen to the top of the chefs' profession."

You drop that there, which I guess helps eG because it's left for us to pick up here, but I think it hurts the impact and cohesiveness of your piece overall--if you were going to state that I think you had to make of the case for its validity. That struck me as a decades-old assumption, unsubstantiated--and also wrong--at least as far as the United States is concerned. I think we have seen a substantial increase in the ranks of women who have risen to the top of the chefs' profession--or are at least on their way, way past the levels of sous chef and pastry chefs. I also think that doesn't necessarily correlate with greatness.

A thought before I forget, as an example of reverse mentoring, father/daughter, doesn't Arzak of Spain, a michelin 3 star, have his daughter at the helm now?

On or about page 4 it was mentioned that diners may play a role in this--preferring perhaps to shake a man's hand after a meal or revere a male chef, and I think you also have to ask how much of chef-worship has not been gender-blind but been male worship? In the simplistic way there are fans of male rock stars and boy bands and different fans of all girl bands, with a little overlap of course when it came to Chrissie Hynde and Blondie--are we gender blind when it comes to those we elevate to greatness? And no matter how I try, I keep coming back to media--it's the hardest influence on greatness to assess and hardest to track, as a working pastry chef I think it plays an outsized role in how "greatness" is codified and perceived, as each and every one of chefette's five points play--of her 5, the networking/mentoring and to some extent the connections/schmoozing angle was very well-discussed on this thread. It's why women started doing for other women only relatively recently. If you can't open the doors yourself, if the opportunities didn't exist historically, you need some help and I suspect like many on this thread that we've only just begun to see the payoff of these doors opening.

Some other random thoughts this exchange provoked in me, at least in this modern US era and what's happening to modern food:

1) there's more of a premium to get on the celebrity chef track earlier and at a younger age or self-select out of the fast media-schmoozing track--and I think men and women equally slot themselves accordingly, men and women equally and consciously decide whether to pursue the appearance of "greatness." This is the learning how to play the game angle and it is apart from actually cooking--and many male chefs just don't have the patience or tools to play this game. We've talked previously on eG about the tendency of women culinary students and young cooks to allow themselves to be slotted in pastry--stereotyped into pastry--and the ramifications of such a choice. The quantifiable result without drawing any inference: most of the nominees for and all of the James Beard best pastry chef winners in recent years have been women;

2) I believe the physically demanding job argument keeps as many men out of the regular restaurant kitchen as it does women. I know it's one factor amongst several which keeps me from ever being the fulltime pastry chef of a single restaurant--and that's my choice regardless of its effect on my perceived pretty-goodness within my local city and nationally;

3) how many great food writers or influential editors are men or women? is there (or was there) a causal relationship with the chefs they promote, champion and elevate? (not cookbook writers, but food writers, critics and the media chroniclers of chef greatness?) Does this, or a sense of political correctness, help explain why certain cities may seem to be more or less female chef-friendly? Seems to me at least as much speculation should be devoted to those professionals who write about chefs and chef greatness as to those chefs pursuing a path toward greatness, or not;

4) how many women are nominated for and subsequently win Beard awards and has the supposed gender imbalance changed at all over time? is there a causal relationship which can be traced, since only the previous winners receive ballots to vote in the years after they've won--can any aspect of this supposed greatness imbalance be somewhat self-perpetuating?

5) I'd suggest perhaps it is now equally as hard for a male to become a great chef--the tables have been more levelled--though it's still a very small circle of greatness depending on how you define it and how the media defines it. The current "great" ones want to stay atop the mountain as long as they can and aren't in any hurry to cede space at the table. Depending on how I draw my own parameters for chef greatness my list could only be two deep: Adria and Ducasse. But if I draw my parameters differently, I could make the case that Emeril is the "greatest" chef ever.

This weekend chefette and I had dinner twice at the California Grill in Disneyworld, a very special restaurant, and we sat at the chef's counter peering into the open kitchen just feet away, the late 20's/early 30's chef at the pass for our first dinner there last week exuded complete competence, calm and control--she just happened to be a woman surrounded by men at all the hot line, saute, grill and fry stations; to our left Yoshie the head sushi chef there is female, an older woman, early 50's probably, and has been the head sushi chef (and a woman) since the restaurant opened--female sous chefs are well represented elsewhere on property: there's also a female sous at the property's second best restaurant currently--Le Cellier in Canada/Epcot--where we ate twice also. None of these female chefs will ever be perceived as "great" in the wider scheme of things media or social or historical or even in the narrower Disney chain of command externally-promotable sense, none of the male chefs working with them those nights (nor the two male executive chefs--Brian Piasecki and John State) will be perceived as "great" either; yet they and their teams were just that--great--depending on how you want to define it. There's is a sustained excellence, a consummate excellence, if not greatness, in the face of difficult odds in a challenging workplace that also occurs daily all over the country that you rarely hear about and rarely read about.

My wife and I had just cooked for 800 people at a Disneyworld gala that weekend. 5 of the 8 pastry chefs invited were female; I counted 5 female chefs of the 24 chefs invited. That's 10 of 32, not that that necessarily matters. The single best dish of the night, the only clearly "great" dish to my palate and sensibility, was by a woman, not that that matters, Ximena Mariscal of the Maricu Centro de Artes Culinarias of Mexico, it was "Cuitlacoche and filet mignon crepes with corn souffle and chile poblano sauce."

Yet of the 32 total chef professionals showcased, only 3 would probably rate according to the national food media as "great" albeit for different mixes of reasons --Roberto Donna of Galileo in DC, Hiro Sone of Terra in Napa and Melissa Kelly of Primo in Rockland, Maine. So in that grouping gender-wise it is 1 in 3.

Just thinking out loud, maybe that balance is correct, maybe men and women are making their own choices and per capita this is how the numbers will continue to shake out. From an historical and sociological perspective I do think it is valid to explore why so few women "are great chefs," because in Europe there was a system you had to come up through, but in the US currently perhaps the answers have a lot more to do with the "mechanisms," as Boris A astutely suggests, like 1) the relationship between greatness and celebrity, 2) the perception of greatness by the media and its influence on us 3) the very definitions a chef, writer, diner chooses to determine greatness in a chef. And those are some pretty big hurdles to get past or even agree on--though in your last post Daniel you do a "great" job attempting to flesh those out more.

[Oyamel Cocina Mexicana in Penn Quarter]

I'm sorry I didn't answer this sooner, but yes, I'm helping Jose and his (very talented) team by creating and coordinating the Oyamel desserts, and we've been training in the space, making adjustments for the space (which is very tight) and they'll be all set by the weekend. I'll be "in the house" for the Benefit evenings on the 12th and 13th (but not the 14th) if anyone wants to come support the causes and try them. The 14th I fly down to Disneyworld to cook for 800 people. Like my work for Jose at Zaytinya, which was a 2003 James Beard Foundation best new restaurant nominee nationally and is a current Sietsema three-star in the Post, look for similarly crafted and priced desserts at Oyamel which re-work traditional concepts or are designed to showcase Mexican ingredients in new ways: hoja santa leaf, hibiscus, mole poblano, cajeta, almonds, canela-infused chocolate all figure prominently--my personal favorite right now (it changes every day) is the "Cafe de la Olla"--the Mexican spiced strong coffee drink which we've re-interpreted as a plated dessert: milk chocolate-espresso flan spread thin across a shallow bowl, topped with Kahlua gelatin, piloncillo-spice syrup, some chocolate-almond crumble and a scoop of aniseed ice cream. (This is less about the chocolate to me, which just happens to be the wonderful Valrhona "Jivara," and more about the balance between the coffee, from Chiapas-grown beans, the earthiness of the raw sugar and the spices--anise, clove and allspice. The deep dark chocolate lover's dessert will likely be the mole caliente, a warm chocolate cake (made from 72% E. Guittard extra bittersweet) with a crema of mole poblano, some canela-infused hot chocolate drizzled around it and then "sprinkled" with sea salt, roasted peanut, dried corn and cacao nibs.)

The ice cream and sorbets we're making will include selections like cajeta caramel, margarita, yogurt-lime, there will always be a tangy fruit sorbet option like the passionfruit currently, several desserts will have a key frozen component, and I hope what we accomplish here proves as interesting and strong as our Zaytinya dessert efforts have.

Oh, and I can't stop eating the oxtail tacos. You've been warned.