Wilfrid

Speaking of Harvester, is Andy Lynes on holiday? I used to be in the thrall of KFC when I lived in the UK. Out here in the States, the chicken comes with mashed potatoes or soggy home fries instead of the skinny chips, and there is a risk of something Americans call "gravy" - so I've finally grown out of it. I liked the Wimpy bender when I was about nine years old, which I think is forgiveable. The last Wimpy I ate, about ten years ago, prompted projectile vomiting. I doubt I will ever eat another.

Steve: 1. If you define "liberal" to mean "had good food", find someone else to discuss with. If you define it to mean distribution of wealth, Britain was at all levels more prosperous than France in the second half of the eighteenth century. If you define it to mean distribution of information, read what I said about freedom of the press. 2. Let me explain very slowly. It is precisely my point that many major developments in French cuisine had taken place BEFORE 1870, but you will find nobody to argue that France was a liberal society before 1870 (and it wasn't all that liberal after that date). And of course French gastronomy was great AFTER 1870. It's your argument that the development/expansion/achievement of greatness has something to do with France being a liberal society. If you can't explain why, why not stop pushing the theory?

I'd be interested to know if there are particular books about food, or writers, which you would cite as inspirations or as touchstones for quality. Thanks.

I'd just like to mention that France gave women the vote in 1945. Very effing big and generous and liberal of them. Adam: as I see it, I am the teacher, and Steve is the kid at the back of the class who is still asking questions about last week's lesson.

More on the braising, please, Helena. How long did you bathe the sausages in beer? Low temperature, I presume. Any other ingredients to flavor the beer? Thanks as always.

Yeah, Marco Pierre White used to do this in the UK - when he could afford to. Extremely annoying for the reader, who would thumb back and forth through the book, wondering why he couldn't find an MPW restaurant. List!

Any news on Rodriguez's plan to open a grand old-Havana style restaurant in Manhattan? I haven't heard a thing for months.

Just wanted to comment on Marcus's post. I think, to be fair, that UP sweeten their dishes using techniques other than the addition of sugar, but I would agree that I have had too many sweet dishes in one meal on more than one occasion.

The flaw in Fat Bloke's argument lies, surely, in a point Professor Plotnicki made earlier. No-one objects if someone takes a table at Daniel for a couple of hours and drinks nothing but water. Plenty of people take meals without wine. Even some eGulleters, sad to say. Now, sure, if everyone did it, restaurants would have to re-think their business plans - very sad, but I don't draw the inference that everyone ought to order wine with their meal. Food is quite different, because you simply would not be permitted to take a table at Daniel for a couple of hours and dismiss the menu with a shrug. And everybody knows that.

Don't worry, Adam, everyone's saying it except Steve. Wilfrid, believe it or not, is going to research what interests Wilfrid. or to put it more constructively - Steve, why not just buy the Mennell book. He deals with, not all, but most of your questions. As you've just framed it, I thought I'd answered it: all the evidence I have reviewed suggests that French cuisine in the broadest sense (including cassoulet) entered England via the following route - Regency court and a small number of fashionable nobles (1820s) > London hotels and private clubs (1840s) > fashionable restaurants (1860s) > more moderate restaurants (1880s). I see no separate, parallel route by which cuisine grand-mere made its way across the channel. I am assuming that the more modest French establishments which opened in the wake of the Cafe Royals served more modest food. But I may well be wrong - the arrival of that kind of French cooking might well be a much later development. Remember that Curnonsky and others worked quite hard to rehabilitate rustic French cooking in France itself in the first half of the twentieth century. The challenge is to find some descriptions of Soho bistros from the turn of the century. Now, the cellars of the London Library have stacks of that stuff, but I'm in the wrong country right now. Finally, can we put to the sword, once and for all, this nonsense about the French eating better than the British because of the "liberalization" of French society from 1870 onwards. Deny if you will, Professor Plotnicki, that you got the 1870 date from an earlier post of mine which indicated that the Emperor Napoleon III, who had ruled as a dictator, had begun to lift some restrictions on civil liberties around that time. Some freedom of the press was permitted, and - later - freedom of assembly. Nevertheless, the early Presidents of the republic, such as MacMahon, was scarcely liberal figures. In Britain, on the other hand, such civil liberties had largely been secured in the 1820s. Suffrage steadily increased from 1830 onwards. Steve, you need to demonstrate two things, or withdraw your theory: 1. France was a significantly more liberal society than Britain in the period 1870-1914. 2. French gastronomy (however you want to define it) significantly improved after 1870. Good luck.

I look forward to receiving my eGullet study grant. Thanks, Lizziee, that all seems correct, and your observation about the change from Latin to the vernacular is clearly important. And it was the style of public eating which developed post-Revolution which was imported to England, and other Europeanm countries, apparently along with professional French chefs and French menus.

Martini, yeah? Don't stir it. Shake it about a bit. Bash an olive in there. Pukkah! I got a license to kill people, yeah?

An excellent point, which hadn't occurred to me. So the response to a restaurant which declines BYO is to say, "But it's okay if I don't drink any wine?" Can't argue with that. I accept what you say about BYO being a special breed - I think that's likely true. But I am still surprised more people don't do it, just in reaction to restaurant mark-ups. But since I haven't done it myself...

Ooh look, there's Plotters on the thread just below. Maybe he's coming this way.

That is about the most unpleasant mental visual impression I have yet received even from this duck-penis-ridden and kitten-plagued site. Thank you. If we synchronized our watches, we could all post at exactly the same time. I'm sure that would help clarify things.

Yeah, he's avoiding the French cuisine thread too. He's a beaten man (some chance).

Tommy's right. { } Let's say the cost of a bottle of wine, to be shared between two, is $60 ( set it low, because the higher it is, the more obvious it is that Tommy's right). For Steve's original assertion (which I suspect he didn't intend to be picked apart like this, but anyway) to be true, the BYO couple would typically have to spend more than $30 a head more than the wine list couple. That would indeed entail an extra entree, all things being equal. Tasting menus are unlikely to cost $30 more per head than a la carte, indeed they are frequently a less expensive option. The BYO couple may indeed be more serious eaters, but they are going to find it hard to reflect that consistently by spending on food. This is what you wanted addressed, right Tommy?

Mustard and olives. Of course, of course. Trying to think of something original, but I seem to have always liked everything I like now. Loved spicy food at first encounter. Ditto smelly French cheese. I guess olive oil, as an uncooked condiment, would have been unpleasant to me as a child, not that I was offered any. Chicken fat - schmaltz - spread on bread. Nice, but since I hated beef lard on bread as a child, I suspect I would have loathed schmaltz too. Not that I was ever offered any. Oh, anchovies I guess. Whisky. That took some work.

Thick cut. Soft. Floppy. Cuttable with a knife (it doesn't shatter). Chewy rind. It's the way I was raised.

No, I am not saying that. One question at a time, please, and don't forget to raise your hand. For some easy introductory reading on rationing, try this. Also, for a reference to rationing in the First World War, often forgotten, click here. Britain was at war from 1914-1918. It entered an economic depression in the 1920s, and didn't emerge until the next war - the Jarrow Hunger March took place in 1936. The war lasted, of course, until 1945, but food rationing continued until 1952. That's almost forty years of problems with food supply and distribution; enough to have an effect, I would say. If you have an alternative, and better, explanation, fire away. And this will tell you about the British oyster industry. A curious story, but I suppose the BBC are a fairly reliable source.

Your final question has been answered repeatedly. What is it you don't understand about two world wars, neither of which significantly affected the French food industry or agriculture ? As to your more interesting question about French cuisine below the level of Escoffier, I haven't yet found any evidence that such food travelled internationally in advance of haute cuisine. It seems to have been the other way around. Kettner's, opened by Auguste Kettner (formerly chef to Napoleon III) in the 1860s, was the first French restaurant in Soho, and a glamorous place it was. Now, by the turn of the century, Soho was London's center for inexpensive French (and indeed Italian) dining, and I expect you'd have found dishes there which at least derived from French "cuisine paysanne". But the upscale places seem to have led the way. If anyone believes this is wrong, I'd be very interested to hear. One thing struck me when I was doing some research. There was an earlier influx of French immigrants into London - the Huguenots - but while they left some marks on London culture, I haven't found any reference to them introducing French food. But this is way before there were such things as "restaurants", so i guess they probably just ate it at home.

Dat true, dat (as Tommy would say).

It's quite revealing to review what eGulleteers regard as "simple food pleasures". Can I put in a bid for a glass of champagne and a digestive biscuit?

Thanks for the clarification, Southern Girl. I have been seated as a solo-diner at Jean-Georges in the past, and I hope they continue to make tables available to "one-tops". I find the waitstaff usually relax when I ask for a glass of champagne as a prelude to further negotiations.

Toushay! BTW, this is not directed at you Adam, as I salute your omniscience, but I have gained the impression from a number of threads that there are some out there who think the French disposed of their monarchy and aristocracy in 1789. Can I just confirm that the monarchy was restored after Napoleon, and persisted for quite a bit of the nineteenth century. As for the aristocracy, there were toffs a-plenty right through to the twentieth century. Open up any chapter of Proust. Just while we're setting things straight...