butterscotch

hey, i'd still love to hear about the tastes because honestly, that's what matters the most to me. i'm dying to hear about the new menu, too. anybody? will? got any butterscotch/ toffee/ caramel/ brickle on there for me? it's the perfect flavor for autumn, you know. just saying.

can you point out the constructive part because um, i'm not seeing it. i didn't get much of an idea of the food at all. flavor doesn't seem to figure into it too much. all i learned from that was that you seem to be easily, perhaps perpetually bored, and have a strong preference for another chef you like to promote.

Seth! Thank you thank you thank you! Your post alone is as good as any of the threads I have seen here.

Hmmm, I've had this grape starter recipe for a while and never tried it, now y'all have me thinking.... The easy grape starter is this: get some red grapes from the market. Put them into a large plastic or glass (preferred) container, smash them slightly, add equal amounts of flour and water mixed together (I do a pint of each) and cover the container. Do not look inside and especially do not sniff the contents for a week. After the week is up, strain the liquid through a sieve to remove all the grape skins and seeds. Use a cup of starter as a cup of liquid ingredients in your bread recipe and replace that cup with half a cup of water and half a cup of flour. That's how you keep a starter going, you feed it. If a starter starts to smell bad, it is bad. Discard it quickly, because you won't like either the bread it makes or what it eventually mutates into.

i know he writes about the meal in more detail in one of his books, but i'm not sure if it's complete. nervous and giddy, yes! and wearing a sports jacket. it was like prom night for tony.

i remember being introduced to these at the tiny old bar in the Algonquin Hotel. David indeed "annointed" the drink with orange flower water. i can't recall how he actually did this, but it was not mixed in, it was the final touch. maybe just sprinkle a few drops and swirl it through the foam?

i was thinking that's part of the reason that the salad for dinner thing has shifted over to become an at home thing- witness the endless bags of premixed greens available. you can control the type and amount of dressing, (and the heavy dressings did get a lot of bad press 10 years ago) and toss it. you can use your own really good dressing. plus, i do think the increasing availability of premixed green salad combos has taken some of the luster off going out for one. maybe it's just me, but i want to order something i can't / won't make at home.

it's what you put on penne. and that's the only one my friend buys on her trips out to trader joes too. and nuts, everybody gets their nuts there.

i looked at the website- the flavors look so intriguing. how are the lavender? i always like candied violets, i wonder if it's similar. i will have to go there soon, i love that they do free refills on the confit when you dine there.

ling, stock up on the dark chocolate truffles. soooo good, they astound me every time! the flavor is so deep. i remember liking a caramel a lot too, and covered almonds and these little pailettes with raisins and nuts (like a chunky!)... but IMHO, nothing compares to their truffles, especially the dark ones. i still think they are the best to be found in NYC. and, they always brag about how they are flown in every day from Paris, so yeah go ahead and order from the NYC store, they're very fresh. i'll be curious to hear what you think after that fab chocolate party you attended.

why thank you for the tip, sote. i have to add them to my "to do" list. always room for chocolate on the list!

wow. i really enjoyed Pegu. it's a nice atmosphere, dark, quiet, cozy feeling but spacious, nice jazz plays in the backround, and very pleasant service. i met a small group of friends, and they gave us a very comfortable table. we had so many tasty drinks it's hard to keep track of- the tantric sidecar, something with pear and a whiff of spice, and earl grey martini, the pineapple pisco sour and some sort of negroni. there were others, but it's hard to remember them all- i was catching up with friends i hadn't seen in any months, so we weren't focusing on the drinks. when i go again, i'll sit at the bar and pay attention. dark as it was, i still noticed that the drinks had lovely garnishes. they also had the most amazing aromas, i've never noticed cocktails smelling so good before- especially the pisco. how do they do it? i want to do that. wow! between 9:30 and 1 ish, it got quite crowded, especially for a tuesday. the bar was full before 11, and most of the tables were gone by midnight. aside from spurts of rowdiness from one group at the bar (which felt really out of place) the vibe was mellow and grown up- all too rare for a lounge in nyc. we all enjoyed it a great deal. i am going back again soon.

oh good. i'm going there in a little while and we do want to talk. tks for the reassurance.

love le maison , jacque torres and marie belle? no wait a minute.. they sell at lunettes et choclat in ny and make wonderful mexican hot chocolate. very artful and fashiony presentation and fascinating flavors.

it was a game, TV- not real life. in one fell swoop of a bender, they got to party down + rattle her cage big time. to me, that's some very efficient multitasking.

you got that right. a lot of people dislike tiff because we have suffered working under clueless egomaniacs just like her. she has a lot to learn from harold. instead of learning anything at all about accepting responsibility for her behavior or treating people with respect, she used her lesson in "duality" as a gimmick for her menu. it's funny to me that was part of her downfall.... she'd be happy as a clam and feel vindicated with her sneaky cut throat BS if she won. i'm sure she'll get job offers from those who share her lack of values. i hope they keep her away from the customers though.

the recipe for beef is pretty different than the original, look on the bravo site... and they acknowledged the concept came from miguel. harold put miguel and lee anne's names on the written menu before his own. he was smart and above board using his coworkers talents and giving them credit personally and professionally. a team effort was required and he got a great one. tiff took the desert idea only because she was desperate. she should have given some credit to dave, but she pretended it was her idea, when it was dave's recipe and idea both. maybe she had a garnish idea, but like a lot of dave's cooking-- they loved the taste of it. dave won more challenges than tiff or harold, people consistently loved his food. i have a feeling with dave's dish, her contribution was plating it. she seemed a little obsessed with the plating. she had no trust for her the others in the kitchen. but that's what happens when you're a liar and a, dare i say it? snake! sss ssssss!

ok, let me see if i have it now... you are of the opinion that copyrights were never intended to be extended to creative folk in the first place. (although they do serve that purpose now, let's just ignore that, becaue you'd prefer they didn't) and that copyright law should be rolled back to cover only those items that can be reproduced technologically, because those reproduced by craftspeople are somehow different? is that the distinction you are making? why is this distinction so relevant? some original work is darned easy to copy, is it less okay if it takes less skill? it's such novel concept, i can't say i'm slapping myself at all that i couldn't see it.

actually the fashion industry has been tanking in this country for many years. except for the high end luxury market (which is supported by sales of trademarked purses and perfumes) profits across the board, are down. people spend their disposable on gagetry these days, not fashion, and less and less innovation is happening in america. the industry is in a situation where any low end retailer can have the Paris couture "looks" in their store well before said design house will. and now the CFDA is lobbying for copyright protection for designs. (you can search back a few pages where i linked an article) this is largely because retailers have begun to "create" their own product and buy directly from overseas, bypassing design houses entirely. and by create, i do mean purchasing or photographing other people's designs and yes, asking the manufacturer to copy them. many retail operations produce clothing from start to finish these days without anyone at all claiming to be a designer. so technology as well as time and cost concerns have worked to eliminate real design across 90% of marketplace. being seen as derivitive is a real concern only for the few, the proud, and the seriously expensive. i think there maybe a mistaken impression from all the Bravo programming that the business is thriving, but the reality isn't quite as glamourous or profitable as all that. I do agree enforcing any sort of IP rights is going to take a great deal of cooperation and assistance form the industry. I am not sure how much the legal system can assist, but it's interesting to watch the speculation.

In Ireland copying books was how the bibles were made and school library stocked, the authors were credited, it was not - as much as you hate the word in this thread- plagerism, and so I'm not sure the relevance here. Applying ancient laws to very different circumstances seems off point. So you were just joking or something about the replicator, and understanding it's quite possible to copy a dish or many other things without one? That whole arguement was just a joke? I guess you could have used one of these. It seems clear now that you're in favour of choosing yourself which creative endevours are worthy- and chefs and choreographers, according to your post, need not apply. It seems pretty arbitrary, and downright hostile to the artists you'd choose to exclude. Although claiming so more than once, you've yet to explain to anyone why it hinders creativity or good business by protecting the work of creative folk. Should it just be easier for anyone to just steal anyone else's ideas? because it truly seems that this is what you are in favor of here. I have to agree with Steve, to create such a hostile enviornment for creative people will dissuade many from choosing it as a profession and diminish our culture. Soon enough there won't be much out there worth being "inspired by" let alone stealing. No one wants the stupid cookie, or for you to determine what's a "needed reward" or not, they simply want to keep the rights to what they created. They want to actually be able to profit from their labor if possible without unfair (and skipping the R+D and creative parts IS very unfair) competition for a while, because that's the appropriate reward. It's not an unreasonable request that's going to impact commerce, competing businesses are not somehow owed a piece of this new creation. That's an absurd notion. It would just encourage them to skip their own R+D and so discourage creativity. And yeah, I'd say it was immoral to say just because someone is capable of stealing your creation, it's okay. That's not setting any sort of bar at all. Just because I can't cook it, or you can't paint it, doesn't meant there aren't loads of talentless hacks that can. Skills and creative talent are two compeletly different things, it's a mistake to confuse or equate the two . No. What I'm saying is that copyright law only came into existence at all when mechanical replication became widespread. Before that, there was no copyright (unless you're in some part of Ireland, maybe, and that still doesn't make sense, since Ireland was the famous homeland of scrivener monks who copied books generation after generation, preserving lots of early literature through the Dark Ages... not much creative literature was generated, but plenty of copying). It wasn't necessary, because only truly skilled artisans could make copies of anything, not just some schmoe with some movable type and a printing press. Maybe in your world I am just stupid and amoral, but I firmly believe that if somebody invests in gaining the skills to hand-make an exact replica of something, that is a good thing and should not be punished, like you are so intent on. So, I have no problems at all with somebody hand-making a copy of something. The passing it off as an original, I do have problems with. And they are problems that are dealt with by trademark law, not copyright law. Copyright is a hugely punitive area of the law today. You don't seem to understand that. You don't have to do a damn thing to prove any damage to yourself and the statute says that you're entitled to at least $30K and the attorneys fees needed to get your judgment. That turns copyright litigation into an extortion racket, see, for example, the tactics behind the recent rash of RIAA lawsuits. You certainly don't deserve a cookie today for your hostile attitude. I see no backfiring anywhere except in your perceptions. Cookie was simple shorthand for unneeded reward. Not everybody needs a cookie, but everybody would like a cookie... until it turns out that you need an army of lawyers who will eat most of your cookie in the process of getting it for you. ←

so you are saying only visual arts that can be "replicated" are protected? are you sure about this because i never saw this stipulated before? you mean a person can't go out, buy supplies, and make an amazingly difficult to tell from the original copy because they're very skilled- and if they did and tried to pass it off as an original it wouldn't be a problem? it seems to me you're not really grasping what copying is as far as this discussion goes. and the cookie thing, the only thing i'm getting from that analogy is an snide attempt to make creative people look somehow childish. if that's your intent, it's sorta backfired.

Steve, Is there an industry organization that you envision possibly assisting in this effort? When it comes down to deciding on what exactly is infringement, I'd imagine the experience of seasoned industry professionals would be invaluable. They could also be useful perhaps to assist in arbitration. Could you imagine them willing to get involved in ethical disputes, or do you think this would conflict with their normal aims (which would, i imagine be more along the lines of promoting the industry)? A similar movement is afoot in the fashion industry. (I'm thinking this is a result of retailers more and more becoming their own maufacturers- copying form designers instead of buying from them.) I'm wondering if there will be any lessons to be learned there. There are similarities, are you using the same materials/ ingredients and the same process to put them together for the same looking end result....well, then there you are, copying. The CFDA (Council of Fashion Designers of America) is involved. There's a bit about it in this Slate article. Says fashion may be the last creative business to board the bus for "Lawyerville". Maybe, maybe not. http://www.slate.com/id/2137954/?nav=tap3

the way i see it bubble, is that your dining room is not a commercial enterprise and not attempting to compete in any sense with the places whose recipes your using. you are hired to feed those people as best you can, not choke everybody with exhaust fumes (how do you do that, anyway?) and you're doing that the best way you can. you're not pretending your submarine is the hip new creative epicenter of the food world and gassing off on how YOU devised these recipes, are you? i hope not, because i have a feeling those on the sub don't have much personal choice in who to patronize.

i wish it wasn't the case steve, but i have been ripped off, i know quite a few people who have been ripped off, photographers, illustrators, etc. and it happens basically because you'd have to loads of time and money just to get what was due you in the first place, a larger paycheck. companies take your work and pretty much do whatever they want with it all the time. i think it's awful, but the system itself is pretty hostile to creative people, and i doubt chefs would fare any better. I hope it never happens that you (and all the other people on this topic who so casually stereotype and insult the legal profession) someday create something and need a lawyer to protect your interests. I do, however, know dozens of people who have been in that situation. In 100% of cases, they change their tunes as soon as they realize a lawyer is the only person in the world who can help them. ←

if your competitors need to take from your work or "wreck their business" are they really your peers? should creative works just be given away, for anyone to copy immediately for any purpose? it seems to be your suggestion they deserve no protection whatsoever. is that right?