menon1971

You are getting closer! The real issue is much more elemental as you astutely note. Life is very complex for example there are many known carcinogens and poisons that occur naturally in many foods we eat--in many basic fruits and vegetables. There are genes--heredity. there is the environment. Science does not have many of the answers as to why some people are healthy and some are sick and some live a long time and others do not. Not long ago we were told that butter is bad so we ate margarine now we are told margarine is bad and natural butter is better. Bran? remember the fiber fad? There are recent studies that show bran has little or no impact on things we were once told that it did. We feed mice humongeous amounts of substances in completely unnatural environments and when the mice get sick we declare Ah HA! --another substance is regulated or banned. (incidently and ironically, mice and rats seem to be impervious to just about anything in more natural environments--we can't seem to get rid of them). I for one, am uncomfortable with government banning anything. I am a bit more comfortable with regulating. We happen to have taste buds--certain things provide pleasure. Some of these things have consequences. In our quest for utopia we are moving toward a pleasureless existence. I believe that we should be informed and make our own decisions. All these "bans" seem to follow a pattern. We must ban something to save someone else. Children, animals, stupid people who can't fend for themselves. --it's always about someone or something else--not ourselves! I prefer we be informed and take care of our own lives and our children and our animals. Regulations are fine--regulations that actually achieve intended consequences and respect the rights of adults to chose. No one wants the government in our bedrooms--should they be in our kitchens? The same arguments used against cigarettes can be used against alcohol. Against many things we get pleasure from. Those who think it is fine to ban or regulate out of existence tobacco should be ready to give up liquor, wine and beer. Fast food? It is not as big a leap from trans fats to a hamburger as you may think! Amazingly, with all the so called bad things we indulge ourselves with, we are living longer than ever. We have been ingesting trans fats (and worse) for many many years. I thought we were literally killing ourselves with food and pollution--somehow life seems to go on! So in our attempts to live longer and healthier will we be living better? ← It is funny, because I usually find myself at odds with JohnL, although I am sure that he is a fine bloke. He raises an interesting point, one that is more of a question for me than a declaration. It seems that through the human genome project we find that biologically there is no such thing as race, thus illegitimizing the discrimination that race theory has engendered and currently proffers. However, it seems that isolated gene pools develop similar traits -- certain physical features, etc. Could one of these evolutionary features be the ability to metabolize indigenous fats, like, say those of the Inuits, the southwestern French, those who survive on diets almost entirely made up of reindeer meat, etc. I am not sure that there is an answer to this question, but it could explain why some groups drink like fish or eat sausage at every meal and still make it to at least seventy and others not so much. Food for thought..............

Is Kudzu natural?

Hmmmph!! Coming into this discussion late. I wish they would have told me that when I was growing up in Virginia in the 50's and 60's. Never knew I was living in a Mid Atlantic State. As far as I knew, I was born and raised Southern... When I was a child and in the hospital for a prolonged time, my very southern grandparents made and brought me a sweet potato pie every single week. When I got out, Sunday dinners at their house, were the typical groaning board..with at least fried chicken and a ham anchoring the table. And to also relate this to the holiday season, at Christmas, we had fruitcakes and wine jelly with boiled custard on the wine jelly. Never saw the wine jelly and boiled custard out of the South... Maybe this is tradition in other parts of the country, but I really associate this with the South: we went visting in the afternoon, on Christmas. Visited almost everyone we knew...taking presents.staying for punch or eggnog... I associate Virginia with a "genteel" south...at least in Richmond, where I grew up. I may get some flack for this. I come from an old, old Virginia family (Dabney) and this is what I encountered. Christine ← Virginius? If so, lovely man. Met him while an intern at the Virginia Historical Society.

Thanks for the link and the post! I thought this was a brilliant piece. We have seen a rise in awareness of ecology, health, food and its impact on our health and well being etc. This is good. However, the awareness is often achieved at a price. It is often achieved via scare tactics. Eat this or that and get sick and/or die. The end of the world is at hand if we don't do this or that. It is often achieved by demonization of one entity or another. So and so corporation is out to kill us for profits. People read a book or see a movie and accept ideas and "facts" as presented. We feel good because we are "aware"and "enlightened" we wear ribbons and act "righteously." So the corporations are evil capitalists and the people who "expose" their evil ways making millions from their books and films are what?--righteous capitalists? What we all too often do not do is think, seek out opposing views, listen to the other side and most of all apply healthy skepticism and common sense. We certainly do not consider the consequences of our actions. We ban pesticides to save animals and as a result people die from diseases. We decide a certain type of farm is good and sacrifice woodlands and forests. We shun technology and people continue to starve. We use science to make a point and ignore it if the facts point elsewhere and we still don't seem to be able to accept the fact that science is often unsure, imprecise and sometimes wrong. So what are we left with? our sense of compassion for others, our skepticism, our common sense. There are no easy answers. We need to think and consider the consequences of what we do. To look at all sides of each issue and not just accept what we are told because it sounds good or pushes the right buttons. Problems can be better dealt with rationally not emotionally. Books like Pollan's should be food for thought not the "bible." The Economist piece should be viewed as just as enlightening. Now let the thinking begin! ← I agree with the tenor of what you are saying, but I still think we should go with our best practical and ethical arguments and not just say that all opinions are equal just because a group of people hold them. Also, I don't care a fig for common sense, that gets us into enough trouble. Slavery was justified by common sense. I want good sense. It strikes me as good sense to look at the way workers are treated, at how our agricultural methods affect both supply and quality of food and long term harm to our environment, and who benefits from what and at what cost.

The argument is: 1. Most production of goods like coffee takes place in large plantations; this is unlikely to change 2. Most workers who grow and harvest coffee are employed by these plantations 3. Fairtrade schemes are not open to large plantations - only to small cooperatives 4. Therefore paying higher prices for Fairtrade coffee will bring no benefits to the majority of coffee plantation workers If coffee plantation workers could simply leave jobs on plantations and go to work for higher-paying, Fairtrade-endorsed cooperatives, then wages might rise on large plantations too. But I suspect the coffee plantation labour market doesn't work that way. ← The flaw in the argument is the first premise, that things are inevitable because they exist. Existence does not imply immutability, desirability, or defensibility. Plantation labor (at least in Central and South America) essentially operates the way that mining towns were run in this country.

Why is it that when we disagree with something we often dismiss the offending ideas as part of one ideology or another? This ignores the fact that the ideas we embrace are ideological. It all depends upon which side you are on! ← Ideologies tend to be dogmatic, outside of the bounds of argument or evidence.

I'll read the article (after I grade this stack of term papers), but I am still unclear how purchasing from plantations helps impoverished farm laborers; this is kind of like suggesting that buying products from sweatshops is beneficial to those workers.

The sturdy Dandelion arrives at any greens fight lickety-split dressed up with bacon and slivered onions. Having pushed up through tough rocky soil, a sidewalk crack or the aggravating neighbors yard where the everyday killing of Dandelions is rampant and seen as a given Right, Dandelion is a tough street-fighter sort. Arugula, on the other hand, pulls up in a Porsche. Delicately, the door is opened and Arugula steps out. A scent of the finest balsamic vinaigrette wafts out and a tiny sliver of exotic mushroom is worn tilted sideways on the head. Arugula has been coddled in the neat fields of Organic Snootyville Farm, where even the dogs talk to the plants to assure happy growth. Which one you gonna bet on? ← I see your point. My money's on the weed. So I guess we can gender almost everything if we just try.

How do the corporate farm workers get nothing? They just shut down harvests? They pay them less, as if that is possible? I think some data would be helpful here, because this smacks of Cato Institute-esque ideology. There is a larger question here: what are the physical and social consequences for modifying the way the world grows, distributes, and consumes its foodstuffs and the consequences for not modifying the former. Who is "we," by the way?

I love stinky cheese. Love it, love it, love it. But, a few years back I purchased a soft cheese at Whole Foods that could best be described as tasting like electric feet -- funky and acidic. I had to had to gargle with a glass of Sancerre for 15 minutes just to survive.

My question primarily deals with perception in American society, e.g., whether one would be viewed as more of less masculine or feminine if they ordered a particular item, but you have raised an interesting point. Most European languages make the distinctions, as in Latin, but they do not necessarily correspond to how masculinity and femininity are socially constructed and perceived in society.

A female friend of mine once made the comment "what kind of man orders salad for lunch" after a lunch date had. It is interesting what social expectations lurk behind even the most urbane/progressive facades. Where, stereotypically, do foods fall on the masculine/feminine continuum and why? For instance are braised veal shanks less masculine than steak; are scallops more feminine than lobster; are certain vegetables more one than the other, e.g., is there a pecking order (no pun intended) to salad greens -- my arugula can kick your dandelion's ass?

I had a similar reaction to her huge-grinning-airbrushed to the point of being cartoonish head. I backed away slowly so as to not aggravate it.

A little levity: Does any recall the commercial of the 1990s where someone presents some insipid bottle of mass produced CA merlot and one of the other guests says "merlot, I love merlot" to which the presenter replies "who doesn't." I think this is the kind of wine to which Miles was referring, the kind that is designed for people who really don't like red wine and order it in lieu of diet soda. Most of the worlds great grape varietals can be used to make every think from the banal to the sublime: red zin, gamay, petit syrah, etc.

Thanks for the information. I find it interesting that in my home state of VA only 60% are Southern identified, but 82% think they live in the South. This parallels my own experience. I think I understand quite a bit about Southern culture although I am not Southern identified. This to me begs an anthropological question: does one have to be Southern in identity or Southern in experience to understand southern food at a cultural level?

No rumor, Kendra, fish delivered "in situ", guests no longer welcome there. Lol... ← I had a friend who used to do prep and dish washing at MZ. One night a drunken patron got into it with Ed about the wait and Ed decked him. MZ is great, (one of the few places I have ever seen sweetbreads in Richmond) and I was glad to see Full Kee get a mention in an earlier post. Earlier in the year I had a nice meal at Juleps in Shockoe Bottom.

A tale of two tacos: the first was chicarones with salsa verde -- congealed and gelatinous, it lit me up like a blast furnace (sorry for the graphic detail); the send was a mushy, slightly artificial/off tasting chicken taco eaten at the Denver airport. The salsa tasted like the chicken as did the guacamole -- I hate to think of the cross contamination that could have led to this.

I have seen ugly French, German, American diners, but Americans in my experience seem more over the top when ugly. However, while living in DC I saw quite a few privileged (usually drunken) foreign "diplomats" acting quite badly. Intimacy aside, I have had the unfortunate experience of having (usually drunk, once again) people, whose behavior let's say would have been more appropriate for a sporting event, spoil the tranquility of fine dining with friends and family. Regarding tipping I really see three different categories: 1. If the service is simply phoned in, e.g., entrees arrive at different times, the server is rarely available of ignores the table, etc. = 10% 2. The service is minimally competent, but the server seems cheeky, burdened, or disinterested, and every action seems laborious = 15% 3. 20% = competent, smooth, water glasses are filled, I am occasionally asked if everything is ok, I am informed of kitchen back ups, etc. -- this not that much to ask for. I, however, always tend to tip 20% in diners and other places where the wait staff works hard for less money due to the relative inexpensiveness of meals. Fine dining wait staff, however, need to put in some effort to get 20% on a $200+ meal.

I have the All Clad saucier in question and it is great for sauteeing garlic, etc. However, the Cuisinart should do a similar job. It sounds like you will not be using it to make egg bound sauces or similar items that might benefit from the distributive properties of a fully clad piece. No goo on mine, but I do not do a lot of deep frying.

Colonial Dunsboro? I got the skinny on the CW show this weekend. The chef in questions has two assistants who are members of the Historic Foodways staff, and they prepare a meal for the rest of the kitchen staff in one of the colonial kitchens. I do not know about any theme music, however. Being the FN I suspect that it is rather cheesy, and not in a good way (think Velveeta rather than aged cheddar).

What was your family food culture when you were growing up? middle class America meets Julia Child Was meal time important? Yes, and where I received much of my education. Was cooking important? Yes and no. When it was Mom and Dad took the times and really put something together, but most of the time it was utilitarian, but good. What were the penalties for putting elbows on the table? It was expected that at formal meals that elbows would not be on the table. Who cooked in the family? Mom during the week, and often Dad (and Mom) on Sundays and holidays. Dad is more instinctual mom is more recipe oriented. Were restaurant meals common, or for special occassions? Special occasions and when traveling. However, I usually ate at restaurants with my grandparents at least twice a month. Did children have a "kiddy table" when guests were over? No. The most we every hosted for meals was twelve (tight fit). When did you get that first sip of wine? Believe it or not it was the day of Di and Charles' wedding. I was ten, we were in Cambridge, and everyone was drinking "buck fizzes" (mimosas). Was there a pre-meal prayer? Only Sundays and holidays. Was there a rotating menu (e.g., meatloaf every Thursday)? No, but I do remember a lot of beef stroganoff, homemade mac and cheese, and chicken with sherry sauce. How much of your family culture is being replicated in your present-day family life? I live alone, so not that much. However, it all comes back when I am with my parents. I tend to be a little more complicated in my cooking when compared to my folks, but we like food equally.

Kind of simple I admit, but I think it works well: cut into medallions, sauteed in brown butter, capers, lemon juice to finish.

I have it on good authority that they filmed an episode in the colonial kitchens at Colonial Williamsburg. Giant boiled pudding anyone?

I think this is spot on, but I would use 2 tablespoons of vinegar (red wine, sherry or tarragon).

Now that the NYT has blessed it (sort of) I suspect that Weeniecello, and variations thereof, will become the drink of urbane sophisticates everywhere. However, Hebrew National might be too pedestrian. Perhaps a nice artisinal saucisson or sopressata.... I'd try it with the weenies, regardless.