butterscotch

i like the idea of an industry group forming a code of ethics. it seems the legal community is pretty useless when it comes to protecting creative folk, particularly if, as is often the case, there are no deep pockets involved.

there are technicians is every field who can copy just about anything, so by that reasoning nothing created is ever unique?

Hot Cross buns.... hate them, don't know where they are from, sorry! but i have to say i love your version of the birds nest. that looks really yummy.

i was thinking more like maggie the cats. that's some good stuff.

i've been wondering the same thing. i think most people feel it's okay if it's one thing on the menu and credited to the originator. of course then it must be done well. and it's doubtful any chef would make up a menu with others chefs names on every other dish, that would be embarrassing. so, doing the right thing would tend to prevent the kind of situation that occured here. i also think if you are going to take others' work and tweak it, appropriate aknowledgements should be made in interviews, press releases, etc- where ever the chance arrives to describe the cuisine it would be only fair to cite inspiration somewhere people who cared to know could easily find it. i think the major courtesy is not to falsely compete for the same customer, or steal another chef's thunder by presenting new, not well known works to the same market- thus increasing the possibility of confusion. By the same token, i think it's okay to use a published recipe as is- with attribution- because it's out there, the chef has chosen to share it for PR value instead of making it a "secret recipe" , and now anyone can make it. But of course it's not nearly as exciting for the same reasons. and fat guy, it's occured to me that this chef might have put himself in a postion where plagerism felt all but necessary by biting off more than he could handle. i seem to recall he had commited to an extrodinarily large menu, to be changed quite often. i think it could be possible he had intended to only use those dishes as a jumping off point, and was overwhelmed by the goals set, time contraints, etc. it could also be a bit of insecurity after all the attention or a temporary burnout. i'm just thinking out loud here. for me, the most interesting part of this is the why? and i still just don't get it.

and how would you propose we we verify he was not copying from less famous sources at all before the trip to the US? because i'm not sure what you are claiming is the least bit relevant if we can't. i have a hard time believing things suddenly took such a strange and unoriginal turn at Interludes because of one trip. but hey, i'm cynical, and i believe this is an issue of character. everyone claims it's a first infraction when they get busted, and most try and minimize the situation that they are not totally drunk (or totally copying) when they most obviously are. and very often when people get away with things... well, they get bolder. that's human nature 101. but if his menu was so much more original back then when he received awards, why would he sabotage himself like this? to go from not copying anything without credit ever to doing so for most of the menu.... such a huge sudden leap, it makes no sense at all to me. i've never had much insight into the motivations of people who do things i regard as sleazy, so i couldn't begin to speculate. but it seems like there's still a lot of puzzle pieces missing here. I think it is important to note that all awards and accolades were received or decided well before his trip to the US. This is not a statement of defence, but a statement of fact. Speculate from it what you will. ←

yes i agree it's pretty immoral too, and i learned that from my parents as well. very good call. that said, lots of people teach their kids that everything is theirs for the taking. from what i know of human nature, i would be really suprised if this plagerism sprang up suddenly, realigning his moral compass like that ... it makes no sense to me at all, being that he was so succesful already. if it did suddenly happen on his trip to the US, then it's even more facinating to me. i don't know how anyone can backtrack and find evidence that the menu was any more creative before his trip to america or not. i'd find it really interesting to know. i don't pretend to have the kind of knowledge or resources to verify this, and i'm not sure it would be possible without having old menus or photos from interludes and knowing a great deal about chefs' dishes at better places in austrailia, possibly the UK (where another dish was said to be from) wherever else this chef had staged at or visited. it's possible things could have been copied from books as well. i'm not sure if anyone here knows the whole story, right now it seems to be a mystery. Not just foolish, but if it is a direct case of copying and no attribution, it is also immoral and independently wrong whether or not one is caught. I think I learned this distinction as a child when my parents taught me that it was wrong to cheat or lie independent of being caught or even if I felt the ends justified the means. I think it is important to note that all awards and accolades were received or decided well before his trip to the US. This is not a statement of defence, but a statement of fact. Speculate from it what you will. ← I'm glad that the chef received awards before this incident and that you also pointed it out here. Perhaps it will aid, in some measure, in rebuilding his reputation and more concretely, it may indicate that he has the means to independently and creatively make his own way in this field. ←

yes, it would be foolish to copy someone famous' work. and i guess if this guy didn't get all these awards and press coverage....if he was just a so-so copyist, no one would ever have known. either way, he sort of ends up in the same... not so great place. it has a certain elegance.

weren't you saying way back when that it was wrong to call this copying plagerism because that only applied to academic work- a building on of ideas, research knowledge etc, specifically in academia? other people pointed out to you after that that plagerism applies to literature and creative works as well, as it seemed you had been ignoring that ripping off creative work was also a no no. At any rate, creativity didn't figure into your explaination of why plagerism is wrong. here again you argue that creative (visual and aural) works deserve less protection than other work? why is it less deserving in particular? Ummm... you're attributing to me a position I have never taken.. where does this idea that nonfiction is special come from? ←

Again, a total misrepresentation of what happened. It was not merely a creative process or technique in this case. Copying vebatim has nothing in common with a creative exchange of ideas, in fact it's the opposite of creative. Nobody has a problem with the kind of evolution you cite, but: Did you see the set of photos on the first page? Did you read the near identical menu descriptions? No one knew Van Gogh when he was alive, do you think these chef's dishes are as famous a s Sunflowers are? In Australia? So this chef assumed "everyone knew" all these dishes were copied? Do you think the people who gave him awards and called him innovative knew that the majority of his menu copied other chefs? Do you think he would have received those accolades if he gave the credit that most here think he should have? And you're very right, it costs to be creative. That's part of the reason some don't bother trying.

why is it any crazier to protect an artwork than it is to protect "nonfiction"? work is work, original is original. do you think that anything creative is fair game to be immediately appropriated, even in a commercial setting? i'm not suggesting law enforcement here, just calling a hack a hack is enough for me. Do you mean to say that you think that culinary dishes (and all derivatives therefrom) should be the property of their creator and his heirs for his lifetime plus 70 years? Or (more likely) of the company that employed the creator, for 95 years? That is the regime under which fine aural and visual arts are protected today. It's quite crazy, but it is what we've voted for ourselves through our fine elected representatives, so we have to live with it. ←

wow, that's a lot of toasters! i have an old hot plate/ toaster combo called the breakfaster. it does not make the best toast though. i find it hard to get rid off because i love the name. the breakfaster.

any have a particular fave from the grateful palate selection? i'm pretty thrilled with Nueskes, but i do like thin slices myself. yeah, i had some today....

wow! that was amazing to see! thanks so much for sharing the pics with us. my gosh it looks like it was one incredible evening.

in the same way people were saying if they went to interlude and found out so much of the menu was copied (uncredited) they'd think it's uncool... well, i sorta feel the same way about trying to copy the painting. especially since the painting is there to "fit in" with the apartment. that's about as "uncool" as it gets. but the story is damned amusing. That brings to mind that years ago I was enlisted to help create some Ellsworth Kelly inspired artwork to fit in a friend's very modernist apartment. Even though Kelly's art was very simple- fields of color juxtaposed a la Rothko, circles of one color imposed on another, etc... the real thing always looked much better than anything we could hack together. It was an amusing adventure in failing to succeed at something apparently quite simple. A really well executed simple dish is often as delicious (or more so) than the most complicated. The skill that makes a simple dish delicious is the same one that makes a complicated project interesting to eat. If somebody is lacking that skill, it won't matter what their food looks like... it won't taste right. If it does taste right, then good for them, they've added one more delicious thing to the world. ←

i can't see any royalties working out unless you somehow figure out a way to patent and control a very specific process. i WISH i could have done that with dugout smashed bagels. oh well. i think the only incentives to not pilfer dishes is the scorn and potential loss of prestige. it occured to me that since most of us agree giving credit is a big issue, dish names could be hyphenated, like children so often are these days. silly or fairer? aside from the issues of ingredients and cooking process that slkinsey has so thoughtfully raised, how do proximity and timing factor in? obviously a place across the street copying your new best dish will hurt, but.... is it really more okay if you're in another hemisphere? country? city? is there a length of time or event that allows you to skip the credit, such as: recipe is published? chef makes it on 10 TV shows? restruant closes? chef dies? these are the things i'm most curious about.

we should all be so lucky that the only fallout from our transgressions would be for people to discuss them. i merely pointed out no one was defending this man for what he actually did. i thought that after 7 or so pages, it needed to be said at least once. sorry we're not crashing chairs over each others head in order to amuse you, but really there is no coordinated or persistant effort occuring here. there's just a lot of random wrangling with issues of ethics and the nature of inspiration. interesting to some, but not to others, obviously. you're welcome to move on to a discussion that you find more worthwhile at any time, or get back to the TV if that suits you.

i think a lie of omission is still a lie. but this was more than that. claiming he didn't copy but was inspired by.... or that he shared these dishes with staff... implying they didn't also go on the menu. i'm tempted now to send this in to the ethicist at the NYT, LOL. the word mincing in this case is worse in some ways than someone i know, telling his fiance there is no legal prostitution IN Las Vegas, because at least that is 100% true. intent matters, and what i see is a clear pattern to deceive, again and again, hoping people get the wrong impression. to me, it's just as dishonest, and i respect it even less, because a liar will take a gamble, sink or swim... when this sort of sneaky stuff is revealed, they always blame the victim for getting the wrong impression. the word weasel comes to mind. that cookie sounds really good, btw. and yes, i think the baker should have named it after who he took it from. that would be good form. and to be honest, i don't think he should be selling it in the same neighborhood as the original either. (often small retailers review their purchases with a vendor to make sure people in their neighborhood don't have the same merchandise because it's bad for everyone) but calling adding a store bought crushed cookie to a stock flavor of ice cream a recipe? no, it's pretty much just another topping/ mix in. carvel had a version of this over 30 years ago, which is probably before E+B's, right? it's kind of like when i asked my local chocolatier to cover some potato chips for me many years ago (he thought i was insane, but his policy was to dip anything to order), combining two very common ingredients is something that's going on anyway in living rooms across the country, nothing to feel guilty about at all. i do feel a tinge of guilt for being really curious about the cookies (are they the biscotti variation i'm imagining?) , and thinking that the scraps (in my mind the baker uses round cutters) would be amazing mixed in ice cream. hmmm, now for that recipe, i'd have to give you credit.

taken out of context? everything i read from the chef's mouth conflicts in some sense from reality: am i reading this wrong if i got the idea he shared these copycat dishes only with staff, and not the public? am i reading this wrong if i get the idea that it was HOW he gave credit was the problem, not IF he gave credit? and well, just using the word thoughtfully to describe what was going on kitchen is pretty darn funny. i would say he thoughtfully chose his words to allow others to get the wrong impression, with his menu, and repeatedly in interviews. and the quote where he says "i guess i did something wrong..." with an insight like that, forgive me if i don't think this will haunt him for very long. he's sorry he got caught is all. ←

Patrick, I bet you'd know this. what would be the net effect of replacing butter with margerine in a chocolate chip recipe? i'm looking to replicate a crispy lacy edge, a bit reminisent of a florentine without getting to far from a classic chewy/ crispy bottom chocolate chip. i usually butter the sheet heavily with salted butter to get a bit of the salty buttery thing on the bottom. someone recently told me that margerine is the secret, but i can't bring myslef to bake that way. i'm thinking i'm going to try a recipe that's 1/3 florentine 2/3 toll house.... but i thought i'd ask, since we are on butter substitutes. tia.

i have yet to see one person defend what the resturant in question had done without misrepresenting and minimizing what was done. it was not one technique, one recipe, it was many. as much as 2/3 of the total menu. and it was certainly not "borrowing" (if the originator is not loaning or sharing) nor being "inspired by" nor is it an "interpetive work" when it is copied exactly, and more than one item- it would be more acurate to say "duplicated works" . i want to see what actually happened here defended for once, because it truly has not been. the closest anyone has come has been to make excuses such as "australia is far, it won't hurt the business", "they didn't intend to steal" and "everybody does it". so far we have excuses, misrepresentations of the case at hand, digressions about patent law and the nature of plagerism and hypotheticals that get us off tangent. i want to hear how or why anyone thinks what actually did happen in this situation is ethically okay. so far, i don't think anyones weighed in without a hypothetical scenario.

if you are also fond of bacon, it would be a nice treat to place an order for both with Nueskes. it's pork heaven, i tell ya.

the only butter substitute i've ever liked for any purpose was that powder- Butter Buds for Hot Buttered Rum. I'm sorry, I know it's not baking, but it was really really good, better than the real thing I thought. I haven't seem Butter Buds in ages.

you need to keep the point down and trust the suction. just don't squeeze the bulb and you'll be fine. (unless it didn't suck well in the first place. in which case.... just use it quickly and often!) it may dribble a bit, but it's not designed to take the liquid across the room. it's designed to move the liquid around within the pan, so if you are putting it in a cup, take the cup to the pan. once you've made the baster level, the liquid will slosh around, it gets clumsy and unpredictable, with air bubbles in the tube and whatnot. i know this only because i used to play with the baster pretty often when i was a kid. i used it to add the water to my little scale models of venice.

i still don't understand where WF has deceptive practices, do you think marketing to appeal to values is somehow immoral? i'm aware that organic standards are eroding, but the hazards of chemical farming have been well documented. Look up the South American rose indusry, or what's been happening to the gulf of Mexico because of nitrogen run off from our corn belt. I know lots of people- including those on a budget- who are willing to spend more for less chemicals and for things that support a diverse local economy. If WF believes that this helps them PR wise, that it is good for their business, and it works, why isn't that okay? As far as I've read Walmart's idea of good business is not to pay a cent more than they are forced to, to anyone. Large companies are concerned about the low minimum wage because it's hurting their own sales figures, they are requesting the government raise that wage, but would they ever do that themselves? no, it's not their policy to spend a penny they don't have to. and please, don't even use the phrase obeying the law, or good citizens when they lobby and have exceptions to labor laws written specifically for for them and local government ends up picking up the tab for their employees' health care. you listed the "PR" aspect to WF way of business and walmart being criticised as if they had nothing to do with each other. i think that WF is who it is as a reaction to places like walmart, who have contributed to the demise of the middle class in this country. it is a place for educated middle class and affluent people to, in effect, vote with their pocketbooks. the more good efforts are rewarded, the more likely it is that other companies will see that there is more to business than price. As far as the claims made below being a grey area- never heard the nice salesperson bit- Nordstroms used that- and it was true and it worked damn well for them. It was policy to be damned helpful, go the extra yard- without ever pushing the customer at all, and it worked. There was nothing grey about it. But the percentage of crops bought locally and studies on the vitamin content of organic produce as well as the measurable effects of chemicals on our enviornment are not so hard to find, in black and white no less. Can Walmart claim in black and white to have the best tomato? Howso? That's not black and white, price is, but quality, not so much.