Sneakeater

FWIW, I'm pretty sure I know what you mean. I've never really been able to put my finger on it (much less articulate it), either. I think part of my coming to like WD-50 was my getting used to it. (I keep saying "it" because I can't come up with a word for the taste/flavor element I'm/we're talking about.)

This is the justification for McDonald's in Paris. Feh.

I live within three blocks of TWO supermarkets that sell Fage Total Greek. I know this isn't helpful. But I enjoyed saying it.

If it's any consolation, you can't order what we here call Korean barbecue for one in most places in New York, either.

Let's be honest. Nobody in New York thinks of Noho as having anything to do with Chinatown. No one would open anything in Noho called "Chinatown" because they think it refers to its location.

Except that it ISN'T located in or near Chinatown.

They must've read Portnoy's Complaint.

This is as absurd as the councilman's argument that uses smoking as an example of government intrusion. Eating foie gras or any animal part of alleged questionable production isnt against the law in America. Smoking Marijuana which is an Illegal substance is. Breaking the law isnt "protected " by the constitution... You dont need to be Alan Dershowitz to figure that out. It continues to confound me why these patently ridiculous analogies continue to pop up. ← I'm not gonna get into a protracted constitutional law argument (especially with a layperson), but as soon as that regulation is passed, eating (or rather serving) foie gras becomes illegal. I'm sorry. You're just wrong. There's nothing in the Constitution that gives you a right to sell things that are produced legally. It's just not in there. Unless you've actually studied constitutional law, don't call these arguments "patently ridiculous". (I'm sorry if that sounds snobby, but I "continue" to be "confounded" by half-baked constitutional arguements made by people who haven't studied the field.) (I'm sorry if that sounds argumentative, but same caveat.)

If the foie gras law is found unconstitutional, then I'd feel pretty safe violating the hat law as a test case.

Entirely new menu. Frankly, as a reading/ordering document, it isn't as appealing as the initial menu, on which just about every dish (or assemblage) virtually leaped off the page as something that seemed great. The items on this menu didn't seem to me as immediately attractive. OTOH, I had the "red" plate, and it was GREAT. My dining companion (a first-time visitor) was thrilled with his dessert, a modification of the "There's Something About Chocolate" plate (modified because they'd sold out of one item on it). I would note, though, that I'll bet the reason the "There's Something About Chocolate" plate sold out that day was because it is, to me, by far the most immediately appealing thing on the menu. It used to be that all the plates and glasses looked great right off the bat. I don't mean that as a criticism, since I loved what I had and I'm sure I'd pretty much love everything. Just a comment. Will, of course, remains a genius.

Well, you could say they'll now be doubling. Although I think the market won't be saturated so long as the existing ones are in different neighborhoods. Indeed, last night a friend and I walked over to Room 4 Dessert (which wasn't particularly convenient) when we found that Chikalicious (which would have been) was closed. So I guess the market isn't saturated yet.

If laws like that are found to be unconstitutional, I'll eat my hat. There is no more of a protected "right" to eat foie gras than there is to smoke marijuana. Not every stupid or even offensive law is unconstitutional. Not even every very stupid or even offensive law.

I guess, till then, we have the mushrooms at Yakitori Totto.

I'm not sure they're dipped in egg. There isn't that much of a crust. Maybe it's batter. OK, I guess batter would have egg in it.

When you open your tapas place, I'll rush right over.

OK. Seriously. They're deviled eggs that are then fried with some sort of breading or crust.

They're deviled eggs. But they're fried. I want one RIGHT NOW. Hope that helped.

The first thing to say about these regulations is that they're different from the retarded movement to ban foie gras. These are an attempt to address actual health concerns, not an instance of political pandering. The problem with regs like these is that they have to be universally applicable. So they end up overregulating the careful because they have to lump the careful together with the careless. It's the same thing with the sou vide regs. Everybody got up in arms over what they perceived as a baseless governmental limitation on creativity. But the point is that it is only at this early point that sou vide cooking (by which I mean "housemade" sou vide cooking -- not heating pre-made foods manufactured in bulk) is done only by the kind of sophisticated and careful kitchens that you can trust implicitly. If the method catches on, you can expect that very soon it will spread to the kind of mid-level restaurants that can't afford to be as careful as, say, Shea Gallante. And that type of kitchen has to be heavily regulated when it deals with something that could potentially be harmful to consumers. But, unfortunate as it is for us, you can't exempt high-priced restaurants from the regs. It would seem (well, more than that, it would be) unfair. Same for house-curing. I'm sure the people at Il Bucco were very careful. But they have to be subject to the same regs as people who can't be depended on to be as careful. (And, as bad as I feel for them about what happened, if they knew the regs were in place, would it have killed them to keep the curing rooms a few degrees cooler?) I don't know enough to know whether the meat-curing regs need to be tweaked. But I think reflexive opposition to them is misplaced.

This is a place that even I think would be terrible to go to alone.

I think in a way the db burger actually did db Bistro Moderne a disservice. When the place opened, the burger got all the attention (as it was no doubt intended to do). But I think it distracted people from the rest of the menu. Which was a pity, because especially under its now-departed original executive chef, db Bistro was (and, actually, remains) one of my favorite places. And not for the burger. But I think the burger prevented people from taking it seriously for what it was.

How long do any fads last? Who can tell?

Although I do think steakhouses in New York are kind of a fad right now. Obviously, steakhouses will always be an important part of the New York dining scene, and there will always be several successful ones. But I don't think it will always be as many as are opening now. (I think the fad is part of the same thing that has caused the martini fad and the cocktail revival.)

First visit. I think this place is terrific. I can see how people who are really familiar with Japanese cuisine might think it's deracinated, but as someone who isn't, I just appreciate the top-quality ingredients. Since it was my first time and I don't know when I'll be able to get in again,* I pigged out: 1. Fried sweatbreads 2. Asparagus with poached egg 3. Pork neck ramen Everything was great. As has been observed, this place is in no way cheap. _______________________________________________________ * I went yesterday (Sunday 5/14). I passed by at about 5:15. They were to open for dinner at 5:30. There was no throng forming outside, indeed no sign at all of an impending crowd. I strolled on, returning at about 5:45. The place was packed, with a big crowd waiting outside. I was able to be seated immediately only because I was alone.

Forgive me if this is being argumentative, but to my mind, I'm not sure I see what there'd be to explain. Wouldn't it just mean that you didn't feel like cooking that night?

I usually read a book until my food comes, and then concentrate on the food (and, probably, eat too fast). I often ask if I can hold onto the wine list after ordering, and study that.