mogsob

It takes all of 2 seconds to peel garlic if you pound the clove first with the palm of your hand on the cutting board. Personally, I never use a press, as I like to cook thinly sliced garlic in just about everything (perhaps it's due to watching the Godfather too many times). I find that I can control the cooking better with sliced as opposed to minced garlic. My wife, on the other hand, always uses a garlic press (the Zyliss version). I can taste no difference in garlic flavor. To each their own!

I love Scotland and I hate golf, so there. And I disagree on the quality of the food in Scotland. We planned well, and ate well as a result. I highly recommend staying at Wolsey Lodges during your trip -- we ate well at all of them. Karen Brown's travel guides are also very good for Scotland -- where possible we stayed in farmhouses where we could eat also. Also, the Good Pub guide was invaluable, and steered us to many excellent pubs where we ate, drank, and slept when a good farmhouse was unavailable.

Blondie, do you have any evidence of this. It seems to me that a lot of smokers only smoke at the bar, while nonsmokers are drinking.

In Edinburgh, Dubh Prais served up a memorable meal, complete with a fantastic haggis made with an oat casing. In Glasgow, we had 2 fantastic meals at Stavaigin and Stavaigin 2 (related, but very different -- the latter is more experimental). We also enjoyed a few meals at the Babbity Bowster pub (where we stayed). I would not recommend the B&B in Edinburgh were we stayed -- I would suggest looking for someplace in New Town.

Martin, you are so wrong. There are precious few restaurants that even had a non-smoking section prior to the mandatory NYC law -- and where they did, they were the worst seats in the house. Restaurant and bar owners are myopic in many ways. They see how many people smoke in their restaurants and figure that if they banned smoking, they would lose those covers. They never account for the non-smokers who stay at home rather than endure the smoke, or the extra non-smokers who would fill the void. Indeed, the noise from the restaurant community in opposition to the mandatory non-smoking section law was deafening -- they all, by in large, said it would put them out of business. Of course, the opposite was true. Restaurant owners will always cater to those customers they have, and unless a bunch of non-smokers tell them that they are never coming back if they continue to permit smoking, restaurant owners will continue to cater to smokers needs first.

I agree that both stars (or toques) and numerical ratings are bogus, just like Parker ratings are limited in their utility. Like wine, restaurants need to do certain things well, regardless of aspirations. Pleasing ambiance, good service, food prepared correctly, interesting dishes, interesting wine list etc. And these factors vary in both substance and importance person to person. For me, new and interesting dishes are not as important as the actual precision in cooking technique. Others I know prefer restaurant where the highs are much higher, accepting the inconsistencies in the kitchen. It's just a matter of taste.

What really gets me is that smokers believe that they have some intrinsic right to smoke in public. Well, you don't, and this law is but the first step in making the world outside of our homes completely smoke free. I firmly believe that smoking in public is tantamount to a civil battery when second hand smoke comes into contact with a nonsmoker who has not consented to having smoke blown over them. It is the same thing if I took an airhorn and blew it in your ear at close range -- and that IS an actionable tort. And, btw, if you don't think that 99% of bars and restaurants permit smoking, just look at a Zagat guide from the early 1990s before the non-smoking section became law to see how many restaurants were non-smoking. Don't even start on bars -- I can't think of one that bans smoking voluntarily. Smoking is an activity that affects all others around the smoker in a way that eating, drinking, and talking do not. It deserves to be banned in all public spaces.

A few points here: 1. Restaurants, legally, are public places. You would think everyone would have learned that from the civil rights era. The government has every right to regulate the conduct of that business. I'm sure you don't object to restaurants being subject to city, state, and federal health codes, do you? 2. Given the choice, 99% of restaurant owners and bars would permit smoking. Thus, without regulations, the choice for nonsmokers is either to endure second hand smoke or not to eat out. That is not a choice -- it is exclusionary conduct that the city has rightly condemned. 3. To be a cigar bar under the law, you must establish that a significant percentage of your income is derived from the sale of cigars. Few non-cigar bars will be able to make that showing. This is a great law. One that was sorely overdue, and one that should be enacted everywhere without exception. A question for the smokers who are opposed to the law -- what's so difficult about getting your fix at home before or after eating?

I'm in Paris for several weeks each year and love French service and Parisians in general. But Lipp is a different thing altogether. First, you are ignored at the door. Then, at the table. Then, the food arives cold. I've eaten at dozens of brasseries and cafes in Paris and have never been so rudely dismissed as at Lipp (and it was only 1/4 full at that). I also object to the notice on the menu stating, in English, that a salad is not a meal. This is a brasserie, and you should be able to eat what you want.

Back to the original question . . . Once, at Gramercy Tavern, the sommelier alerted me that the wine was a bit oxidized. He said that he would of course take it back, but allowed me to taste it (1) for educational purposes, and (2) because he said that the flavor was interesting and we might want to keep it. The flavor was interesting -- perhaps distinctive would be the better term -- and we sent it back.

I agree. A very good vintage, and currently drinking better than any of those you list.

Gavin, a great idea and a truly worthy pursuit. A gobal suggestion -- you should distinguish between restaurants that are historically important for (1) themselves (i.e., the first French/Chinese/Indian/Italian restaurants), (2) the type of food they serve, but not necessarily for themselves (e.g., an eel, mash and pie house), and (3) the people who ate there. Covering all three categories may be difficult to achieve. A couple of specific suggestions. What about the English restaurant? Rules, Wheeler's, Green's, Wilton's, Bentley's, Sweetings, George & Vulture, Simpson's Tavern, Simpsons in the Strand etc. Also, the great historic hotel restaurants, like the Dorechester Grill Room, Savoy Grill Room etc. I would also recommend Monkey's in Chelsea for traditional English game, like roast mallard with bread sauce. As for pubs, breakfast at the Fox and Anchor, lunch at Ye Olde Cheshire Cheese, dinner at The Grenadier for historic value. Happy Eating!

I think those folks over in Brussels have had a few too many. There are significant sovereign immunity issues here that will prevent US States from being subject to an EC complaint. Personally, the EC should thank their stars that NY and other East Coast states make it near impossible to directly import wine from California. If that anticompetitive law were to be scrapped, the sales of French and Italian wine would likely suffer.

I agree with Beachfan -- go to either shop and put yourself in their hands. In a pinch, a properly aged Livarot is hard to beat on the stinky end.

Outside of decor and history, Brasserie Lipp is pretty darn easy to beat. The place is packed to the gills with midwestern American refugees, the waiters set new standards for rudeness, and, despite your recommendation, do not allow you to simply eat a salad for lunch -- it says so right on the menu. Contrary to public opinion, the best restaurants in France set the standard for hospitality. Lipp fails on all accounts. Avoid.

Our favorite wine glasses are a set of very high quality crystal Alsatian wine glasses (the small bulb at the top with the green stems) we found in Paris. Perfect for riesling and other german varietals.

Morning fun: Me: I'd like a large caffe latte please: S: Uh, do you mean grande? Me: What's grande? S: This (showing cup). Me: What's that (pointing to the venti cup). S: A venti. Me: What's venti? S: Twenty ounces. Me: Ounces? S: Yes. Me: How many ounces in the grande? S: I don't know. Me: Ok, I'll just have the large. Good fun on a grey day.

Can't say I second La Coupole -- pretty grim food there. You are much better off next door at Le Dome, which is a great seafood restaurant in addition to being one of the prettiest brasseries in town. Balzar in the 5th is another great traditional brasserie.

Chambers has a very nice Loire list indeed. I am particularly fond of the Alliet Chinon VV, although the last vintage I've had of that bottling was the 1999. It is generally one of the best red wine values around. Chambers is a bit expensive for this bottle, which goes for less than $15 here in London (about 11 quid). Nonetheless, IMHO it drinks like a $40 bottle.

Steve P. -- polenta w/ wild mushrooms is a must. Likely to become the chef's signature dish. I'm intersted to hear your thoughts on the wine list. It has been quite a while since I've seen a list like that -- I recognized a scant few bottles.

Pardon me for asking, but what more do you want from a restaurant. L'Impero is a very comfortable restaurant, has a very good and well-informed staff, serves very good food, and has an excellent and interesting wine list. I would eat there any day over Babbo, which was uniformly awful when I went (terrible service and several dishes that were poorly prepared). L'Impero, by contrast to many restaurants in NY, generally hits the mark. Does it have great aspirations? No. Is it haute cuisine? No. Is it Italian? No. L'Impero is simply good, and very reasonably priced for what you get. BTW, it does not surprise me one bit that rm was a disappointment. Oceana, in my opinion, was always overrated in the same way Babbo is today -- the kitchen was just not capable of preparing its dishes correctly on a consistent basis. The fact that it, probably, hit some high notes now and then is no excuse. To use a baseball analogy -- a top professional kitchen should be a .400 doubles hitter, not a .250 hitter who gets 40 HRs or so a season.

Depends upon what you consider "cheap eats." Zaika Bazaar is very good, and Bouchee is also acceptable. But the best cheap eats are at the Anglesea Arms, which has a separate dining room.

Well, I for one, love D'Chez Eau. One of the friendliest bistros in town, and in my mind one of the best as well. As Steve P. intimated, it is only for the VERY HUNGRY! I usually skip the salad cart (the waiter will slice off some sausage regardless) and get a light starter instead (like snails). Then, their wonderful rack of lamb -- the full rack with pots of veggies and potatoes. A nice Vieux Telegraphe off of a very good wine list usually fits the bill. Followed by cheese -- they will leave the entire cheese tray at your table. Then the endless dessert cart and bowls of chocolate mousse, ice cream (with various toppings), and cakes. By the dozen. Good eating here!

I just love going into Starbucks and asking for a large coffee. Good times indeed.

Akiko -- glad you enjoyed La Rosetta. I agree that it is by far the standout restaurant in Rome. I'll be there later this spring to have a very late night meal of antipasti crudo, dessert and coffee. And a bottle from that great wine list!