Wilfrid

He's assuming he's the guest of honor.

Er, well I can think of one.

There are some useful tips for home made water on the cooking thread this afternoon.

Oh yes, I am only saying things which Barthes and Eco in particular have said much more elegantly. And I may be wrong in emphasizing the current importance of gastronomic codes - I just have the feeling that there has been an explosion of awareness the supra-functional aspects of gastronomy in NY and London since the 1980s.

If so, they would have a lousy record collection. Have you looked at the charts? So much for your experts. Let me try to explain carefully, so you see where you're wrong. When I say that we are in a period of history when gastronomic codes offer one way in which we can make statements about ourselves - both intentionally and unintentionally - I am not restricting my claim to making fashion statements. On the contrary, I mean to speak much more broadly. For example, if there was someone on the New York forum who advocated the virtues of The Leopard and Le Veau D'Or, they would certainly be telling us a lot about themselves beyond their taste in food; and they certainly wouldn't be telling us they were fashionable. So I think focussing on the "hits" - the fashionable, the successful, the popular, the terrific - is misleading as far as my original contention is concerned. But let's talk about the "hits" for a moment, in order to deal again with the tenet of Plotnickiism which calls for an elite to make a disinterested determination of quality which is then expressed (although not always, you fairly say) as popularity in the market-place. Two obvious flaws with this theory. First: many, many things - not aberrant examples, but many, many things become popular, trendy, fashionable, even cool, despite being crap. We could have fun on an off-topic thread making a list of them. So either your elite don't know their potatoes, or they play their part in the process only sporadically. Second: you seek to take your elite out of society and out of history by having them base their ruminations on a pure, dispassionate concern for excellence. As if the elite are not making statements about themselves when they give some product or other their imprimatur. That's in your head. And let me tell you that, as a journalist and as an under-labourer in the music and 'youth culture' fields, I have met few tastemakers who did not have making a statement about themselves as their paramount aim. Apply that last one to food writers if you like. It fits.

C-c-c-contradiction in terms. Must dash.

So many things about New York seem designed to make us compulsive-obsessive. Which is distressing for those of us who were compulsive-obsessive to start off with. I await the next installment with bated breath.

I am all in favor of capons. Anyone wants to cook one at home might contact The French Butcher on Second Avenue between 22 and 23, who often has them (at a price). Good to know they are showing up on menus. Cabby, does "chlorophyll-laden" sauce mean green sauce? They do like green sauces at Blue Hill, don't they?

And with regard to your wine question, the Capital has a sommelier who is not frightened of offering inexpensive bottles. We drank a Viognier there this summer at a giveaway price. Nineteen quid according to my report.

I am constantly reminded how far short of thoroughness and accuracy my reports fall. But then I am also constantly reminded of the fact that no-ones paying me to do this.

I absolutely agree that there's nothing unique to restaurants here. What I would say is that we are living in a period where restaurant-going has become a highly visible and much discussed form of conspicuous consumption (no pejorative intended). This has been the case in other countries and at other times, but I would venture the opinion that the last twenty years has seen dining out become a passtime of unprecedented significance in London and New York - the two cities I've lived in for the past fifteen years. Sticking to those two cities, I would go further and say that, for the first time, a complex set of gastronomic codes (related not only to dining out but to food attitudes in general) have become sufficiently widely shared and understood that it has been for the first time possible to send a message about yourself by announcing what you eat, where you eat and what you think about eating. Just as it has been possible for a much longer time to send such messages by how one dresses. I am sort of shuffling JD's original message around, and pointing to the mssages we send to others about restaurants rather than the messages restaurants send to us. But I do think it's something enormously important and often overlooked in our discussions here: as if preference for French haute cuisine over Italian regional cooking, for example, rested on a disinterested analysis of techniques and ingredients rather than being, in one aspect at least, an expression of an intricate set of social beliefs.

I wonder if there is some specific association with Louisiana. Emeril Lugasse makes it in an episode of Emeril Live which I must have seen four of five times I'd be concerned about the birds drying out during the long cooking period.

Well that's good news. Personally, I had never come across one in an office before. I wonder why the espresso in so many restaurants is so disappointing, given what you say. But please, do ignore my digression...

Is Vic there?

I'm sorry, I thought it was obvious from the context that I was not talking about a Gaggia-type esprsso maker, but an automated machine - the kind which delivers your beverage in a little plastic cup. Viscous might be a better word than oily - a good espresso should have better mouthfeel than hot water - and yes it had a crema. It was amazingly good. Maybe it was the beans.

Oh I see.

You can do better than that.

I think we make a whole series of statements when we choose to dine at a restaurant (or to discuss having done so), whether intentionally or otherwise, so I don't think we need to exclude one such statement in favor of others. (Still trying not to be sidetracked into British food, but we'll get there if you keep taking vague sideswipes, Steve. Slow braised oxtail in red wine, with onions, carrots, bacon; stewed neck of lamb with barley; soulful as anything, I would contend.)

Peter and Gavin, seriously, I think you're right. I think we all reveal a lot about ourselves when discussing our tastes here on eGullet, not necessarily intentionally.

Please don't let me derail this into a British food debate. The original point deserves better. (Of course, if ignorance is bliss, Steve P.'s perpetual cheerful smile is readily explained. Can't resist it sometimes )

Oh, I was ignoring you because of your gender. Actually, I can't be much help. The steaks were being paraded around on huge sabres, and they didn't appear to be butter-drenched - but it probably would've drained off anyway. The "eggy coating" - I know I'm hopeless, but around the edge of the filet was a sort of sticky, yellowish glaze, which tasted delicious. It struck me as eggy, but it might have been some kind of manioc preparation, or anything really. In my defence, this was a business lunch surrounded by clients speaking three different languages, so although I brought the subject back to the food as often as I could, it wasn't the time to do a full-scale Cabrales-approved analysis of the menu and interrogation of the kitchen staff. Sorry.

i'm wondering if there's an overall approach. What's your concern? If you're concerned that I'm not up to the task of organizing this aspect of the evening, perhaps you'd like to do it? i can assure you that your organizational skills are not in question. Hip flask, Tommy. Just to be safe.

The coat was just a random example, and I am referring to something far more complex than a "fashion statement". I'll think about how to explain it better. Thanks for pointing me at the other threads. I do, believe it or not, read threads sometimes without intervening, but I may have missed some of the E Bulli discussion. I am sorry you remain ignorant about British gastronomy.

JD, I think you have touched on something which I feel has been lacking from many eGullet discussions, which is that choosing to dine in certain restaurants is a way of saying something about yourself which goes far beyond expressing a taste for a certain type of cuisine. It is pretty well accepted now that consumption - in the broad sense - has an important symbolic dimension. If I wear a Burberry overcoat, it signifies something beyond my wanting to stay warm. That's a simple example, but of course the symbolic dimension can become extremely complex. Part of the restaurant's message (if it's coherent) is surely that it will fulfil, confirm and reinforce the statement the customer wants to make when they choose to dine there. I think you bring that out in some of your examples, but perhaps I can go further (when I have time). As a postscript, let me shoulder again my weary burden of carping at hyperbolic condemnations of traditional British food. You don't cite a classic British restaurant, so I wonder which (if any) you have in mind. Wilton's? The Ivy? J. Sheekeys'? Your description doesn't do them justice. There are lousy classic British restaurants too, but of course there are lousy French ones.

Coming out of left field here, I was staggered in Brazil to be offered a cup of coffee from a machine which was a thick, oily shot of some of the best espresso I can remember drinking. It can be done! Unofrtunately, it didn't seem appropriate to walk out of my meeting in order to examine the coffee machine, so I don't have details.