macrosan

Nice report, people. Of course Andy will tell you off for not tagging it onto the other Ramsay thread, and quite right too Obviously the menu is the same for lunch and dinner, but I can now reveal the difference between the two. At lunch they don't give you as many amuses and you don't get the "Caramel truffles, strawberry ice cream in white chocolate and orange and almond paste finaciers" (I think we just had a few fancy petits fours ?)

I'm with Simon on this. If I'd seen the healdine "Chefs gather for a party and "Oscar" ceremony" in my paper, I would not have bothered to read it. More important than that, I would begrudge space being taken up in my newspaper (which I purchase for money) that I would rather see devoted to news, or to readers' letters, or whatever other functions I might believe a newspaper serves. But most important of all, I don't like being "drawn" to read about it by a headline on eGullet. Oh no, I think the event itself is great, so I disagree with Simon on this one. (Well thank goodness for that, at least it shows I retain some common sense). Good industry get-togethers are in my experience of enormous value to the industry in generating new ideas and disseminating best practice.

No argument about that, Matthew. And indeed I see nothing wrong with an industry bash where all those terrific people get together to meet and to chew over topics of mutual interest. My complaint (and it really is only a very mild whimper) is that media people should suppose that people outside the industry might want to read about it. The media are the first to explain to us all that they perform an important public service, that they should enjoy immunity from certain laws to which the rest of have to subscribe, and they go on endlessly about the "freedom of the press". This sort of event does that self-perception no good. Incidentally, the old saw (repeated here) that "any publicity is good publicity" reduces the industry to the level of Max Clifford and his like, which I find sad. Ignoring the proven factual nonsense of the claim, what concerns me more is the total lack of any sense of values that the statement displays. I love the restaurant industry, and I'm just a customer. I really think less of a restaurateur who believes I'll be attracted to his establishment by a report of £46,000 bill, or by a manufactured publicity stunt like having someone slap a celebrity's face at dinner, or by coming number 23 in an unqualified "best of" list. Of course that's just me, and of course in the context of restaurants I know it's pretty harmless. The good news is that nothing has (yet) irked me any more than this today

I'll own up to having eaten at those three of the top ten in the last six months. I am entirely comfortable with the relative positions of the first two, even though I would have no hesitation in reversing their numbers. But Gramercy Tavern, although I love the restaurant and its food, cannot possibly appear in the same group in my opinion. The problem must start with Matthews' statement that "300 food critics nominated their top 5 restaurants ". This leaves enough holes to bury the waste products of the civilized world. Which 300 critics ? How were they selected and by whom ? What was their brief ? What is meant by "their top 5 restaurants, in other words "best at what" ? Then who counted the votes ? How were the scores weighted ? OK OK, I'm just being cynical. We all know that these awards are designed by their organizers to hype the industry, and to provide PR and press exposure for the "winners". If this hadn't been posted on eGullet, I wouldn't have bothered to read it in the paper. But then it was posted on eGullet .....

That'll be last night's date, then

Presumably that's first-class

Craig, you're the guy that's supposed to give us the answers, we can all ask the f***ing questions. It can't be the customers, can it ? Sure, if they don't know what real espresso tastes like, maybe they'll complain less; although frankly, given some of the espresso I've had in the USA, you don't need much experience to know it's crap. But the reality is that there is nothing difficult about making espresso. You just need to buy the right beans and make it fresh every time. My daughters do that with their little £40 aluminium espresso makers in their kitchens at home, and it's fine. My best guess is that the restaurants simply don't clean out the espresso machines often enough. And shouldn't this be in the New York Forum although I have indeed had similarly awful espresso on occasion in Italy.

I found your post hugely encouraging, Woody. It still amazes me when I hear people describing the prejudices to which gays have been subjected, and I should know better. Until I read your post, I wasn't thinking in terms of restaurants actually refusing to serve gays, or even treating gays as second-class customers; I was concentrating more on my perception that gays simply preferred to be in each others' company. But in fact I'm delighted to hear that the defensive need for "gay restaurants" seems to have disappeared. Incidentally, my concern would not be with being "refused service" but just with being made to feel unwelcome (which is in my view worse than a simple, but at least frank, refusal). You've set my mind at rest, and maybe I'll go back and try that restaurant in Bleecker .....

I remember waiting in line to be seated at a restaurant in Bleecker Street in the West Village, with my wife, when suddenly I became aware that she was the only woman in the line. When I looked inside I could only see maybe two women out of the 40 or so people sitting at tables. She noticed too, because she said to me "We'll be waiting for ever, let's go somewhere else" and off we went. I was later told by gay friends that this place was generally considered a "gay restaurant" and almost entirely frequented by men. There's specialization for you !!! Those friends told me there was another similar place (frequented by men and women) nearby in the West Village. I have never been sure whether heterosexuals are totally welcome in such places including bars) or whether I would be viewed with a degree of suspicion or hostility. So I have to confess I tend to avoid them once I know where they are, simply because I prefer to know I'm welcome. Presumably, if a bar or restaurant proclaims itself as a gay establishment, that would mean that non-gays aren't welcome.

I just read in The Sunday Times that some insurance companies in the UK ahve announced that they will not pay for healthcare resulting from contracting SARS in the WHO "listed" cities and countries. I have never had much time for the insurance industry, but this is just mind-blowing. At the same time, they also say they won't pay out for cancellation fees if people simply decide not to go to "unlisted" places. They're terrific at collecting premiums, it seems, but not so keen to take any risk of having to pay out. I am just shcoked and angry.

Now what is the sense of that ? It's before someone gets the right answer that we need Charlene to pass it on, surely ? Surely, surely. Quo Vadis ? (and I'm not asking where you're going for the weekend

Would that be the Golden Mongoose Curry House in Peckham High Street ? Oh shit no ... it has to be in the UK, doesn't it ! What an idiot.

Hey, no professionals allowed to enter. Get back to the kitchen, Lynes ...and see my reply to your ramping thread in the UK Forum

What a great idea The clue, of course, is in the sic Mainly to get myself posted out of being a new memebr, I'm gonna give this a try. Somehow the style of at least two of the courses, and the prices, and the mis-spelling, and the dessert "baked to order" reminds me of .... St John ? OK, who's next ?

As I was sitting here looking at my watch, and waiting for the end of Passover in just a few hours, I smelled this thread floating to the top of the board. Eight days of matzo does that to a person. It heightens your awareness of all those wonderful things in life that you start to take for granted ... ... maybe that's one of the reasons for Passover

You got audio on your eGullet, Varmint ? Awww shoot, now y'got me feelin plumb ornery. How much extra do you have to pay for that ? Of course the real problem for us Euros is that all of the above is true If there were ever a vote for an accurately representative American dish, it would surely go to "waffles with bacon and maple syrup" or maybe just "pizza with ice cream and salad". But ever true to the European spirit of Voltaire, I will defend to the death their right to eat it. ...well, maybe not quite to the death, but as long as the principle is clear. Thank you.

Thom, it's just fine this side of the river. Prices are low and generosity of spirit comes free and with everything. A bit like Manchester, I do believe

Some very interesting points in this thread. I love that the US Navy gives guidance to its people on eating in Italy I have to say that I disagree with some of the strictures placed by Craig and Peter on practices such as drinking wine with pizza, or drinking wine without a meal (incidentally I absolutely deny that even Italians would agree with that !!!) or eating salad with pizza. Sure, this may be the custom in Italy, and I don't say they're wrong. In which case why should they say that anyone else would be wrong in not following their custom ? That smacks of elitism (down, Rover, down ) Some such customs, or "rules", derive from an understanding of what goes with what, what brings out the best in certain foods, and so on. It makes sense for the uninitiated to observe these customs because in that way they are likely to have the best eating experience. So indeed I could accept that salad and pizza just don't go well together, and the combination is likely to make the pizza seem too bland and heavy, and the hot cheese might spoil the flavour of the salad ingredients. Other customs are just that --- customs whose origins are lost in the distant past, and which no-one could adequately explain in logical terms. I don't understand the problem of wine with pizza. Sure you wouldn't drink a fine wine with pizza, but a rich, coarse country wine goes perfectly with it in my view. Indeed, I find fizzy drinks (beer or soft drinks) actually spoil the pizza because they bloat your stomach and overpower any subtlety of flavour in the pizza. So I always drink wine with pizza in Italy I am entirely in favour of keeping all those customs, because they help to build and maintain tradition and diversity, and they add to the whole cultural experience of eating. All I maintain is that keeping the customs is a choice for each individual, and it is wrong that those who do keep them should sneer at those who don't, or that there should be any suggestion of right and wrong in these matters.

That's interesting, because I have also found that Greek grilled fish is terrific. It may not "have to be Greek" but I do think the Southern Europeans have a unique method of grilling fish. The style seems to be very similar in Cyprus, Malta, Italy, Spain and so on. As to whether it tastes different at sunset ....

I have to admit I've never eaten a Greek main course dish that I've been crazy about But I'm a big fan of their starters, and at most Greek restauarants I've been to I just order lots of those and make a meal of them. Just like Spanish tapas. My favorite is dolmades (fried vine leaves stuffed with rice and minced lamb). I love their salads, particularly with those fabulous kalamata olives. I can eat houmous and tzatziki with pitta bread all night long. I've had deep-fried anchovies with yoghourt that was blissful. There is something wonderfully relaxing about sitting at an open air restaurant on a warm evening, nibbling at dozens of different dishes laid out on the table, sipping at a glass of wine ....

All kosher wine is kosher for Passover. That's just because it has no form of leaven in it. Kosher wine in practice falls into two categories. There is kiddush wine (what Clerkenwellian referred to as sacramental wine) and there is wine wine Now kiddush wine is your Palwin's No. X type stuff. It's red, it's sweet and it's pretty yucky. For those who want to know, Palwin's No 11 is the best of a pretty bad bunch The other wine is just regular wine, except that it's supervised to ensure it contains no forbidden ingredients. There are other regulations regarding no work being done on Sabbath, and fields being left fallow every seven years, and various other biblical regulations, which also apply to the manufacturers of all types of kosher food. You will find many well-reputed chateaux in France which produce kosher wine, including Rothschild, and some of them are pretty good. You can get just about any variety of wine in kosher form. There is one religious regulation which applies uniquely to wine, and that is the option to make the wine mevushal which means "boiled". In practice, this means the wine is heated briefly just enough to make bubbles appear. The reason for this regulation is obscure, and there is not total agreement as to why it exists, nor about whether it is necessary. Given that these days it is accepted that wine producers no longer use animal blood or gelatin or other "foreign" agents in making their wine, most Jews (apart from the stringently observant) would aver that all wine is "kosher". I think that yeast is used in some wines, so these would still not be "kosher for Passover". As a matter of standard practice, only strictly kosher wine would be used for sacramental purrposes. Overall, Tony, as far as table wine is concerned, regular wine would be considered as kosher as milk, fruit juice, and so on. Which means that ultra-observant Jews would always insist on supervised kosher products, but the rest of us are quite content with the "real" stuff

I can't believe you really thought that, Tony. Get out a bit more, old chap Tsk tsk. Surely youn know that some wine makers have used animal blood, or gelatine, in their wine. No ? You also know perfectly well that kashrut has nothing whatsoever to do with "a Rabbi saying a mumbled prayer" over any food. It is to do with supervision, ensuring that all the regulations of kashrut are properly observed. There is nothing inherently inferior about kosher food as a result of its kashrut. Also, kosher foods do not necessarily cost more than non-kosher --- go have a look at prices in New York where volumes of usage are high. Whilst observant Jews will apptreciate your worrying about the prices they pay for kosher food, the good news is that at least you don't have to "put up with it" and no-one wopuld wish you to do so.

Soryy, Clerky, but I have to disagree with your two of your opinions Actually, most kosher wine is French, and some of it is quite reasonable wine. The main reason kosher wine is expensive is the low volume distribution, not in the cost of supervision. Almost by definition, very orthodox Jews will never have drunk anything but kosher wine, and very little of that (since drinking table wine is not very strong in the Jewish tradition). So I guess there's not much value in pointing out that they don't know how bad it is, since it's not the most surprising news of the century Incidentally, the best Israeli wines in my experience come from Yarden, and I would describe most of their whites as "drinkable". I'm afraid that's the best you're likely to get for the next few millenia

Hopleaf, both the content, and the methods of access, of material suited to print and website are quite different. In-depth "study" material can't satisfactorily be read off a PC screen, and repetitive and selective access can't be satisfactorily achieved through print. The overall content of a magazine and its website may be virtually identical, but its presentation in the two places will be substantially different. Many 'serious' readers will welcome the same material in both formats, and will pay extra for the facility. To return this thread to its specific food-related origin, it would be interesting to ponder how many people here would eb willing to pay a subscription at eGullet. I'm not suggesting there is any comparison to be drawn between eGullet and a magazine, but it does address the question of whtehr people are in principle willing to pay for internet material, and willing to pay for their leisure activities.

No, that shows that they did have cheese. Or at least they perceived they had cheese