macrosan

Those must have been the longest five seconds of your life, Peter

OK, I promised to post the results of the Tayyabian Wine-tasting Panel so I will. But what a disappointing crowd they were. Everyone was so intent on enjoying the food and drinking the wine that they paid scant attention to my very clear instructions that they were required to produce a report on the stuff. Humph. You just can't get the staff any more ... So out of a total of 18 people at the New Tayyab in Whitechapel, only 5 people expressed a view on the wine. The votes were as follows: Australian Shiraz - ONE pro Alsatian Riesling - ONE anti Alsatian Gewurtztraminer - ONE anti, TWO pro Spanish Ribera de Duego - TWO pro So thank you all for your help. I personally liked the Gewurtztraminer as a patio wine (what I would love to drink sitting on my patio on a warm summer evening) but felt it wasn't a complement to the food. My choice was the Ribera de Duego (red) found by Simon Majumdar at Oddbins ! At risk of taking up a lot of space in this thread, I thought you might be interested in the pre-set menu we were served (notes from Tony Finch) :- Sizzling tandoori dishes on the hot griddle marinated lamb chops (technically mutton I think) chicken tikka sikhi kebabs tandoori fish - not salmon. I think it's coley they use There were also pakoras. Curries: the lamb shank dish is called Nihari and in some Pakistani recipes it calls for shin of beef to be used. Actually the sauce on Tuesday was thinner than usual. It is usually more concentrated. Brain Masala - They did this for us specially. It's not normally on the menu. Dry Meat - this is the only curry they use ghee in. The curry house name for it is Boona Gosht Kerala Dahl - the bitter gourds are keralas Bindis - okra.I don't know what they call this dish There were several types of bread. [including] ghee parathas and tandoori rotis. To finish there were various sweets from their sweet centre next door. Something we didn't have but which if you're organized you can order in advance is Raan- a whole marinated leg of lamb which is slow roasted for hours and which is decidedly NOT served pink. It was amusing towards the end of the meal to hear Simon (a Bengali) and Fahro (definitely not a Bengali) arguing about not only the correct pronunciation of the names of dishes, but even the names of the dishes themselves

These guys always impress the heck out of me. Would I be right in assuming that the guy had probably never actually tasted this particular wine before, but was still capable of identifying it ? I've never seen a wine-taster at work live, but I have seen a tea taster perform the same kind of magic.

Yeah. but first you have to get me convicted of something By the way, I'm not sure risotteria is a real word, but if it were then it would be pronounced with the emphasis on the second I and not on the E. I hope this makes the whole thing more contentious

I quote from Speak Italian and know Italy by Gianni Rosa because it's the only Italian language teaching book I have at home. "Como ==> O is in off or scot ... never as in pole or bone" That says that I was wrong in saying that if a word ends with O then that O is pronounced as in toe. However, I suspect that the longer O sound I have heard spoken is probably a result of slurring the ending into the next word. It's quite difficult not to. I can easily say vino with a short O at the end, but I find when I say vino rosso then the O at the end of vino does tend naturally to lengthen. But strictly speaking, that is incorrect pronunciation. That seems pretty clear then Going back to risotto I can think of no etymological basis for pronouncing this with a long O. We all know that Americans tend to do this, and often sound long vowels where neither the original language nor Standard English pronunciation would stipulate that. But then that's American English, not Standard English. And both forms of English have many dialects. Some of the vowel sounds of Bostonian dialect don't appear in any manual of any language ! However, given that variety, I think it is quite wrong to suggest that any pronunciation of a foreign word in it's source language form can possibly be incorrect and to suggest that it is an affectation is frankly as foolish as suggesting that pronouncing valet with an audible T is an affectation.

Nawww, that would be "thee" Peter, they're all talking about us all the time. It's just that they're not including you in their conversation. Never forget the bad things Michael Winner has to put up with, like being escorted around by nubile twenty-something-year-olds, and .... hmmm... can I get back to you on this ?

Nope, it's pronounced as in Ross - oe Only if you've pronounced rosso correctly Of course it isn't, it's what I said in my post, which is Toss-cah-nah Ron, let's wait for a real Italian to come along and tell us. Of course I allow for the fact that Italian has as many dialect as America, and for all I know there may be a village near Brindisi where they do in fact speak Italian with an American accent (as in Rowsoe) but I donta tinka so

No Ron, you're wrong. The normal pronunciation of the letter "o" in Italian is a short "o", in other words exactly as in "toss". When an "o" appears at the end of a word, it's always a long "o" as in "toe". Offhand, I can't think of a single exception to these rules, although my Italian wouldn't be extensive enough to do so. You're wrong about Toscana. That is pronounced with a short "o". Grosso has one of each, so it's pronounced "grossoe".

Since this thread has been taken over by the Department of Corrections (eGullet State) it is only proper that I point out that this is the Ashkenazi version of this well-known Biblical parable. According to Sephardi usage, the role of God's assistant is played by none other than the Archangel Gabriel. I find the Sephardi opinion of greater merit, and am thinking of converting...

That's a terrific review, full of detail, and with sufficient comment to make it interesting and thought-provoking while maintaining what certainly sounds like a reasonable and fair position. My only visit to Le Bernardin was very enjoyable. I found all the food excellent, and I loved the room. I must say I found the service a bit on the starchy side for my own preference, but very correct. I'l be interested to hear others' views on your notes about those few service failures. I agree with your assessment of the price. I didn't have the tasting menu, but I remember thinking the place was expensive -- not unacceptably, but my overall reaction was not that I had got really good value. Thanks again for that review, Chop. Good material there

OK Steve, either you use that as your signature line, or I will I enjoyed the review. Is "Kobe tuna" simply a marketing attempt to rank their tuna alongside "Kobe beef" in terms of exclusivity and price ? I've never heard of it before. Your comments on creating a "unified" dish out of separate ingredients (or rather Fresh's failure to do so) are interesting. There are times when I want this, but other times when I enjoy a variety of contrasting textures and flavors in the elements of a dish. I suppose the classic example of contrast is the marriage of beef with English mustard or horseradish. But you're obviously right in that when an accompaniment (say a vegetable) doesn't "match" a main ingredient, it certainly shows up, but I wonder if that is one of those "acquired taste" issues. I remember having squab with beetroot at Babbo, and at first taste reacted strongly against it; but after a couple of mouthfuls, I found it to be an excellent match. I'll have to ponder that....

Oh no, not another opportunity for a Plotti-post, surely Jason, where have you been all this thread ?

Well I guess it would be quite a trek to Gramercy Tavern and the French Laundry Hey, I've just noticed something strange. When you quote someone, the time printed in your post is their local time, not your own. Ain't that cute ?

Any particular Chianti, David ? I've been looking for something to drink copiously

I have dined at Babbo's three times (all at the bar) and on those visits drunk 4 different red wines, not one of which I had ever heard of before, but each of which I thoroughly enjoyed. Allowing that I am no wine buff, and therefore may simply be easily pleased, nevertheless do you consider that "unknown" wines can be as great as the famous wines ? Do you see it as part of your mission to "persuade" people to sample new wines ? Incidentally, three of the four wines I tasted were Sicilian and (again repeating that I am no connoisseur) I found them particularly fine.

I noted this yesterday. I don't understand the mindset of newspaper editors (is that an oxymoron?) so I don't know if this is officially a promotion or demotion. But purely visually, I suspect the latter. His "column" is indeed exactly as Simon described it --- buried in the inky bits on the back page of a newsprint section that I never read I am desperately trying to remain confident that Simon's comment about the "much needed pages on fashion" is an example of sarcasm, although having seen his snappy outfits a few times, I am slightly dubious. Peter, it cannot be true that many, if any, people on this site hate Michael Winner A few people (excluding me incidentally) have adverse views on his critical capacity, but that falls far short of hatred. I think you're getting him mixed up with him of the stuttering initial, AA Gill I thought you were cruising to Vigo !!!!!!

Shana tova to everyone. Anyone got some good recipes for Yom Kippur ?

Sorry Glyn, that was an instant leap of my connective neural thingummyjigs We had just indirectly referred (in my mind) to the recent "discovery" of the satiety gene, and many of us can already hear the cash registers ringing at the pharmaceutical companies Having said that, my own view is that drugs which significantly affect hormones should ideally undergo 20-year clinical trials, but I also recognize that the cost of this would likely prohibit research. Hormonal biology is not a well-enough understood science (in my opinion) for such drugs to be used except in the treatment of threatening diseases. Hormone replacement treatment was not such a case for most women for whom it was prescribed, and the adverse effects of HRT are now starting to show themselves (20 years later ?). I certainly feel that such drugs should not be used to "tinker" with a person's appetite unless that person has a threatening appetite disorder which cannot be treated in any other way.

Well, my first choice is that they don't release products operating at genetic level until and unless there is absolute scientific agreement that all the fundamentals are understood, and that all the inter-relational and long-term effects are at least identified. My second choice would be 20 year clinical trials.

OK, if there's a prize for the most credible answer, I'll give it a try Rosengarten ? Now that is German for "rose garden" (of course, of course), which is Country & Western rhyming slang for "I beg your pardon" (courtesy of Lynn Anderson) so "David Rosegarten" is a cunning cover name for an apologetic German (see the connection? German...Luger...) stooge, a sleeper inserted into the media by Peter Luger himself, no doubt, as long ago as 1887 for just this eventuality. Rumors start to circulate about a drop in quality, and up pops the sleeper to write "I beg your pardon....I never promised you a Rosengarten....but those steaks are as great as ever ....". Simple, really, when you have a total command of the German language and C&W Rhyming Slang.

LOL, and also the safety and efficacy of the science of tampering with one part of the human body, then waiting 20 years or so to see if it might just have an adverse effect on another

This is what the mathematicians call trivially true. True but of little interest. The real question is why people eat more than they need. . Actually, I don't believe that is the real question for people who want to lose weight. The real question for them is "What can I reasonably do to lose weight?". Your question may be of interest to scientists, but until they can agree on the fundamental science (and they're a million miles away from it right now, as many of the posts in this thread make clear) then the biological cause of over-eating is simply esoteric. If more people simply accepted my "trivially true" statement as exactly that, then maybe they would stop hunting for the magic cures, and the many corporations willing to peddle them. Let me make quite clear that I do not categorize Atkins or Weight Watchers as quack remedies, becaause I just don't know anything about them. If they do work then that's great for those who use them and are happy with the results. But I still tend to the view that a successful Weight Watcher would quite likely have succeeded with a cheaper and more natural do-it-yourself diet.

Allowing for that exceptional, tiny proportion of people with glandular and similar problems, the fact is remarkably simple. The more you eat, and the less you exercise, the more weight you will put on. And vice versa. Anyone who loses weight via Weight Watchers or Atkins or Dr Shmo's Lowfat Diet or Granny Feigele's Eatasmuchasyoucan Diet could almost certainly have achieved the same results without spending a lot of money on these fancy diets. Because any diet relies above all else on a person's motivation and self-discipline, and if you have both of those then you can lose weight on your own (with a little bit of free education). Each proprietary diet that comes on the market has to establish a Uniques Selling Proposition to make it "new" and "different" from its competitors, so we goet low-carbohydrate doets and high-carbohydrate diets, low-fat diets and high-fat diets, low-protein diets and high-protein diets. The obvious fact is they can't all be right except to the extent of what they have in common, and that is that under all of these diets you eat less than you used to. I don't know if any of them is healthy long-term. I fall back on a common-sense position, which is that human beings are designed as, and have through several hundred thousand years of evolution existed as, omnivores, and until I see true scientific research that indicates otherwise, I shall eat what my body tells me it wants. In other words, whatever I enjoy eating, and as much as I enjoy eating

The reality of any business, particularly one that embodies special "technical" skills or the need for continuous innovation, is that it needs a number of people with complementary skills to run it. These people are normally called the Board of Directors, and each one concentrates on his own special expertise while they all collaborate in producing overall business strategy. A skilled chef who was also a skilled personnel manager, customer service manager, designer, financial controller and marketer would indeed be a rarity. So whilst I have sympathy for the concept of the chef supreme who also controls all other aspects of the business, I can't believe the result would be satisfactory overall. A good restaurant requires balance. The food cannot be subsumed to financial (or other) demands, but nor can the reverse be the case.

I'd say creativity, presentation and consistency in that sequence.