Ron Johnson

Dstone001: You won't find any expression of terroir in Napa Valley. Those wines are winemaker manipulated fruit bombs. Not all, but most. As for the Niebaum Coppola site, it made mediocre wines before and it makes mediocre wines today. No change that I see.

Second the Popeyes. Amazingly, it is actually spicy. Hard to believe for any product that is marketed and sold to the masses. I remember eating a Wendy's Spicy Chicken sandwich and thinking, "who is going to think that this is spicy, an infant?" Popeyes also serves some creole mustard concoction that is quite good for dipping hunks of the spicy chicken. Hmmmm, maybe for dinner tonight . . .

Here you go: Buy a pork shoulder Rub with mix of granulated garlic, salt, pepper, paprika, oregano, thyme, cayenne, and any other spices you are particularly fond of until well-coated. Light coals and when all white and at low heat push to one side of the grill. Place pork shoulder on other side of grill with metal pan underneath to catch drippings (there will be a lot). Make sure that your fire never gets above 265 degrees. Cook with lid on the grill at all times, except when adding coals or woodchips. Periodically sprinkle hardwood chips that have soaked in water over the coals (this creates smoke and that means flavor), adding new coals when heat fall below 200 degrees. Cook in this manner for at least five hours if heat is closer to 265, or 8 hours if heat is closer to 210. Spice rub should form a dark crust on the outside, if it gets too black too early, then your fire is too hot. Let sit for half hour after taking off grill. With carving fork and tongs tear the meat away from the roast discarding gristle and any internal fat that hasn't melted. Serve meat on a platter with slaw and sauce on the side. Make sandwich by putting meat and sauce on a good quality bun and topping with slaw.

Terroir is far from an overrated concept in wine. In fact, it is one of the most important concepts. It is the expression of terroir that is so sorely lacking in New World wines. Over-extracted, too tannic, highly concentrated fruit bombs may get high scores from Parker and the Wine Spectator, but they will never compare to a grand cru chablis that showcases the chalky terrain in which its grapes were cultivated or a lush Cote Rotie that exemplifies the steeo hillside vineyard from which it was produced. It is terroir that makes wine so different from other products. I agree that beer can be an amazingly diverse and interesting product. I further believe that the Belgian ales are some of the best in the world, but I do not agree that beer encompasses the same complexity and range of flavors and smells that one gets from wine.

It isn't even close. Wine has made the bigger contribution. I also disagree with your statement that the differences in wine are less interesting because they are so subtle. I find the differences between an Alsatian riesling and a NZ sauvignon blanc anything but subtle. I recognize that making good beer is a craft, but making good wine is an art. Another important distinction between the two is the importance of the terroir and the grapes themselves. I have never seen a "single vineyard" beer. Similarly, I don't believe that hops, which are grown anew each year, are able to communicate the terroir like grapes whose vines may have been producing fruit in that vineyard for more than sixty years from the same vines. Personally, I am a huge fan of bourbon whiskey and find it to be a very complex and interesting spirit, however, I acknowledge that it is an inferior beverage to wine in terms of complexity and cultural sigificance. Good topic. Cheers!

I took no offense from your comments. In fact, I agree.

Liza: You mean that there is more than one serving in a box of Kraft Mac & Cheese? Oops.

Katherine: She drinks both I believe, so that makes her a gin-swilling idiot as well. I should have been more specific. Tommy: I was waiting for you to take offense. At least someone out there is championing the cause for inebriation. Cheers!

As I have stated previously, I live in Louisville, Ky. A town that is provincial by most standards, but certainly blessed with a thriving cultural scene, especially for a city of its size. There are a core of about 10 to 12 very good restaurants here. By "very good" I mean restaurants that I believe would garner 2 stars on the NYTimes scale. Perhaps there are one or two that would fair slightly better. There are no four star restaurants here. I think that if you dined at the right places here, you would be pleasantly surprised. However, they are no comparison to the best that NYC has to offer. As for relying on a subcommunity of friends and local food lovers as you state, we are lucky to have a forum for just such a purpose. It can be found at Louisvillehotbytes.com. If you would like to find out more about the culinary scene in a smaller city in the South, I encourage you to check it out sometime. Robin Garr, an individual who is widely known in the wine community as a critic, taster, and writer, makes his home in Louisville and hosts the forum. When our newspaper was owned by the Bingham family (and consistently ranked in the top ten papers in the country) and journalistic standards meant something, Mr. Garr was the wine writer and food critic. Now that our paper is owned by a large corporation and the only standard is the bottom-line, we now have a vodka swilling idiot reviewing our restaurants. Her lack of knowledge of food in general is only trumped by her outright ignorance of wine and her aforementioned habit of having a martini to begin a review. A habit which, incidentally, is annoyingly described in great detail in each of her columns. Alas, I believe you are most correct when you state that although she is failing in an objective manner, her readership doesn't care.

Certainly sarcasm and disdain were not unexpected reactions to my post. However, my purpose was to not to appear naive or sanctimonious regarding the profession and its standards or apparent lack therof. Rather, my point was to discern whether this reviewer was failing in some objective manner. She has already failed miserably in the subjective. Where is the Fat Guy's response? I would like to know if he ever drinks a glass of chilled straight vodka just before tasting food for a review?

Kentucky definitely has been a major contributor to Southern cuisine, not to mention bourbon whiskey. I live in Louisville, Ky and have travelled throughout the state enjoying great country ham, fried chicken, barbecue in Western Kentucky. I have also toured two of the best bourbon distilleries: Maker's Mark and Woodford Reserve. I also lived in Memphis, TN for several years and can vouch for the cuisine of Mississippi. They say that Memphis is the armpit of Tennessee but the capital of Mississippi. The City Grocery in Oxford is excellent, as is the Hollywood Cafe in N. Miss.

Don't get me wrong. I think it is great to have a before dinner cocktail or aperitif such as a Negroni. However, I just think that a restaurant critic has a different mission than the average joe. Whereas my only reason to dine out is to have a good time, a restaurant critic is supposedly there to accurately taste the food, discern the quality of the ingredients and judge the level of skill in the kitchen. It seems that slugging back a martini would only detract from one's ability to do so.

In my hometown our local restaurant critic has an annoying habit of judging a place largely by its ability to make a martini to her liking. Occassionally she branches out to manhattans, gibsons, and the like. However, my quibble isn't so much with this idiosyncracy that I find largely irrelevant to the jugding the merits of the restaurant, but the fact that she is seriously impairing her palate BEFORE she begins to taste the food. To make matters worse, she also attempts to describe the taste of her chosen wine for the evening immediately after torching her taste buds with glass of vodka. My questions are: 1) Is this proper behavior for a professional restaurant critic who is employed by the city's largest paper and has a significant impact on the restaurant business? 2) Despite the enjoyment factor brought about by a pre-dinner cocktail (especially a cocktail as high in alcohol as a martini), does it actually impair one's ability to taste food and wine? 3) If it doesn't impair the ability to taste in a general sense, does it impair the ability to taste subtle nuances in both food and wine? 4) Is there any journalistic code of ethics or rules for restaurant critics, and if so, would this be a violation. For me this is a real problem. It would be akin to finding out that Robert Parker gargled with Listerine just prior to rating wines blind. Any thoughts or comments on this are much appreciated. I am considering a letter to the editor on this, but want to be as well informed as possible beforehand.

I see your point. Thanks for the clarification. After enduring the hordes of tourists that invade my fair city for Derby every year, I do feel your pain. The restaurants that cater to tourists do "dumb down" their food for that week every year. However, tourism is a necessary evil, especially in places like NYC and Paris. However, as long as we can continue to keep Gramercy Tavern a secret I think we will be fine ;). As for my state, I don't think tourists even go to the parts of Kentucky where one would find a proper country ham. However, I would be willing to divulge that secret to anyone on this board.

Too many people from Arkansas? Please tell me your are joking. As a Kentuckian who dines in your city regularly I find that comment troublesome. I apologize if I ruin your dining experience in a given restaurant simply because I am not local. I do eat at GT every time I am in the city. I always find it superb, but I eat there because of the quality of the food (Mr. Colicchio) and the quality of the experience (Mr. Meyer). Not because I feel more comfortable amidst other tourists (aka people from Arkansas). I am curious, what is it about our presence that lowers your esteem for Danny Meyer establishments? ####, I even wore shoes during my last visit!

Still wine instead of bubbley 1990 Chapoutier Hermitage 1990 Ogier Cote Rotie 1995 Gruad Larose 1997 Guado al Tasso 1990 Ducru Beaucaillou and whatever anyone else scrounges up from their cellar

Fatguy: Well what do you think now in light of today's review by Grimes. I mean he essentially has done exactly what you predicted would happen. Are you the restaurant version of Nostradamus? I was thinking about playing the lotto this week . . .

While I have yet to put together a financing package that would enable me to afford a meal at ADNY, I have had serious doubts about some of the criticism that it received shortly after opening. Surely, I thought, this must be Sheraton's, Grimes', etc. way of making sure that Mr. Ducasse pays his dues in NYC. Why else would they take pot shots at his new joint and cry foul over seemingly meaningless affectations. However, without having the chance to eat there yet, I am in no position to do anything other than speculate. But, it does seem to me that Mr. Grimes' review smacks of a "I told you so" smugness. As if Grimes can now give his four star stamp of approval because Ducasse listened to him and changed the things that bothered him to begin with. Generally, I find Grimes doing a fine job as restaurant reviewer and critic du jour, and I am not starting this topic to insult him. However, I would like to know how those of you who had the opportunity to dine at ADNY feel about the apparent about face of this review. cheers

In other words, while there is a correlation between wine consumption and good health, there is not causation.

True, some fruit flavors are found in certain types of sparkling wine, and your mention of grapefruit is an apt example.

"Dry" refers to the residual sugar in the wine. "Fruity" refers to the flavor of the wine. The two are not mutually exclusive, but most Americans are so used to drinking wine that tastes like wood that when they taste wine that tastes like fruit they say it tastes sweet. This phenomena drives me crazy. A wine can be bone-dry and have great fruit flavor. Unfortunately, most American chardonnay, which is the most consumed noble varietal of white wine in the U.S., is made to taste like: a) Sawdust; b) Campfire; c) Pledge furniture polish; or d) all of the above. However, this has little to do with champagne or methode champenoise sparkling wine because these are rarely made to taste of fruit, but usually toast, chocolate, cream, and other flavors.

DNPIM: Do Not Put In Mouth Personally, I think it should be on the warning label affixed to thes boxes of plonk.

Box wine? For the love of God: DNPIM!!!!

Windows on the World Wine Course by Kevin Zraly is quite good. Also Andrea Immer's Great Wine Made Simple is good for novices and intermediates. I also keep a copy of the Oxford Companion to Wine for more encyclopedic reading. Finally, Hugh Johnson's Pocket Wine Book is a great companion to have while browsing the bins at your wine shop. I am currently read Frank Prial's Decantations and am finding it rather dull. Its just a collection of his wine columns from the Times. cheers

The pressure cooker method espoused by Alton Brown is for people who need to make a relatively small amount of stock in a short time for a specific purpose such as soup. I do not recommend this method for general stock making. After all it freezes well, and if you are going to go to the trouble to make stock you might as well make a lot.