Dave the Cook

I had a similar question a few years ago. The result was this bit of education.

Despite the fact that this: has been my personal motto for many years, I didn't pick my ten bottles in that way.I based my choices on the largest number of cocktails I like that could be made from the list of ingredients. Mr. Wondrich (and now I) have stated our criteria. The options haven't been more clear since freshman philosophy class (or maybe Star Trek: the Wrath of Khan). How did the rest of you decide?

I don't have any specific recommendations, but generally, I think on-the-rocks drinks fare better. We almost always batch (adding 25% water) for our cocktail classes, and I'm consistently disappointed in those served up -- they're cloying, when they're not dull. I finally realized that they weren't cold enough --the refrigerator just can't match the temperature of a shaken drink served immediately (hence the rocks suggestion). The freezers where we teach are always too full to accommodate a pitcher, so I haven't tried what seems to be the obvious solution.

white rum (Flor de Cana) dark rum (if I can only have one, I'll pick something that's not necessarily the best at anything, but plays well with most everybody -- Bacardi 8) gin (Beefeater, ditto the dark rum) rye (Rittenhouse 100) Applejack (the 80 is a little more versatile, but I'd take either) Cointreau Maraschino sweet vermouth Angostura bitters Orange bitters (Regan's) If you decide that the bitters don't count towards the ten, I'd add: Herbsaint Lillet

I also found it disappointing, especially coming on the heels of the bloated In Defense of Food. I wonder how much televised food he actually watched. Emeril has only the sensible Essence of Emeril and Mario (except for the occasional Iron Chef America appearance) isn't on the Food Network anymore. He makes a categorical error by tossing Rachael Ray into the same boat as Sandra Lee. Shows like Good Eats, America's Test Kitchen, reruns of Jacques and Julia, that Steve Raichlen grill show (whatever it's called) and yes, even 30 Minute Meals are good examples of people who love to cook earnestly teaching other people how to do it. I feel pretty safe in saying that's as much, if not more "instructional" food television as has ever been on, and the audience watching it is probably as big, if not bigger. Food entertainment didn't replace tutorial as Pollan suggests. It's additional. Besides, correlation isn't causation. Pollan never makes a solid case that people are trading in kitchen time for time in front of the TV watching people cook and eat.

Nor did I, but that's viral marketing for you -- which is probably why I'm an unemployed marketeer these days. That single tweet filled up the first three nights: sixty seats.

Blais has a new limited-time project in the works: in association with Billy Cole (cooking lately at Manresa and the gone-too-soon Element) and a couple of players to be named later, he'll be heading up a three-nights-a-week private-reservation spot at a tiny two-level space in hard-core downtown Atlanta. Four courses, prix-fixe, in the $75 to $95 range. (Sorry for all the hyphens.)

I'm not sure there is one. Every model I'm aware of that runs on 110V has a burner of 10 to 12 inches. I don't know the dimensions of your vessel, but 20-gallon pots are usually about 18 inches in diameter. You could only apply heat to 45% of the pot bottom.

You should get out more, dude. There are bars in San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and Atlanta (just to name cities I've been to personally) that operate at the New York level. As a single example, Zig Zag was serving Last Words before Pegu Club opened (no offense to Audrey, whom I adore). Another: Restaurant Eugene in Atlanta offers a Friday Night Flight -- three courses matched to three cocktails, most of which are custom-made for the food, which is selected on Thursday according to market availability.

Oddly enough, Leventhal's suggestions were remarkably similar to those I had read somewhere else. Where, oh where, did I read them??? ← I don't recall any such book suggesting that one should buy a round for the kitchen or overtip the maitre d', or that one should simply buy a restaurant's friendship. (I'm sure such a strategy could work; I'm also sure it's unnecessary.)

I'll be interested to hear reports, especially on the sugar addition. I've always refrained from sugar with chicken because of the "lunch meat" exception.

That's what I'd do, too. Most of the time expended in ceviche prep is the waiting. Cutting up fish, squeezing citrus and measuring salt and such is minimal.

I think there are two issues: food safety and good service. For the first, I wouldn't worry. The pickling should provide a large margin of safety -- for anything that acid and salt would affect (note that there are some things that only cooking will handle, but we're talking specifically about uncooked food). For the second, I'd worry about the effects of a brine even after the brine is removed. Draining will slow down osmosis at the macro level, but won't necessarily halt protein denaturing. So you'll maintain the moisturization and flavoring effects, but the interior of the fish might continue to unravel and become mushy. One thing to consider is that salt brines aren't very effective above 35 F: maybe you could hold at 40F (or below 25 or so F), which might slow down mush development.

Hi Dave, interesting recipe. I always thought that tamarind was a key element of worcestershire sauce. ← Tamarind is traditional; I wouldn't call it essential. The proof is in the making: the linked recipe produces something that is easily recognized as Worcestershire sauce. So I conclude that tamarind is used mostly for its sourness, which in Emeril's original recipe is provided by vinegar (the number one ingredient in most, if not all, commerical Worcestershires) and lemon. The basics of the sauce, to me, are sharpness (from souring agents), smoky sweetness (from the Steen's syrup) and whatever word you use to describe the flavor that anchovies add. The lemon zest underscores the citrus notes, which along with the Steen's syrup (commercial preparations use molasses) gives this version of the sauce a unique twist. Having said that, I've been working with tamarind, but haven't nailed the proportions yet.

Erm. Worcestershire sauce. I've made some modifications since posting that recipe, and I'm happy to discuss.

The Roosevelt just opened with a new bar. The bar attached to MiLa (at the Renaissance Pere Marquette) is overseen by Chris McMillan. Then there's where Chris used to work, the Ritz-Carlton. Also, the Swizzle Stick, in Loew's on Poydras Street. That should keep you busy for tonight, anyway.

That's what I was thinking, but neither was one of the original choices.

Is that true even in, say, Vancouver?

If you're going to be working mostly in the United States, there's no contest: Spanish. I don't agree that high-end cooking = French cooking. That might have been true 10 years ago, but today, while many French terms are still employed, it's highly arguable that French cuisine rules. Regardless, if you hang around good kitchens, you'll pick up culinary French whether you want to or not. They wrote it down first, so they got to name pretty much everything.

Maybe. But I would totally eat that.

Packaged with damp toast and a wrinkled tomato?

I just got a press release from Union Square Hospitality Group about this event, and I'm a little puzzled. But first, I note that the week is now almost three weeks, from 13 July to 31 July. I suppose they're just trying to get people out and spending money, but it seems to me that they're risking overexposure, if not outright boredom. Here's what I don't get: the release talks about what Gramercy Tavern, Union Square Cafe and Eleven Madison Park will be doing during Restaurant Week -- and they don't actually seem to be participating. Each restaurant will be running a $24 lunch special with $1 going to City Harvest. Each store will do this for five weekdays, rotating through the duration of Restaurant Week (although, if I'm reading it right, Gramercy Tavern, scheduled for 13-17 July, is booked, taking it out of the rotation). If that's not confusing enough, the release concludes by saying the Tabla and Bread Bar (lunch only), Blue Smoke (lunch and dinner) and the Modern's Bar Room (dinner only) "will be officially participating in Restaurant Week." So it looks to me like USHG is backing away from Restaurant Week by taking its most prominent stores out of play. Any ideas on why that would be?

I've taught a few cocktail classes, but they've not been hands-on affairs, and the knowledge transferred has been only the most basic stuff. Having said that, I do have some suggestions: At a seminar I attended a couple of years ago, Dale DeGroff taught a "tasting" technique that really opened my eyes. We had seven different bottlings to taste, each represented by a half-ounce pour in a small plastic cup, and when I took my seat, I was sure that I was in for palate fatigue, gustatory confusion and slight inebriation. Here's what he told us to do: put your nose and mouth over the sample and breathe through your mouth. Unless you clamp your nose, you'll still get significant sensory input, and you won't burn your nose hairs with the alcohol. It also gives your tongue a small dose of ethanol, so it gets gently tempered for the onslaught to come. What that means is that you don't need to ingest so much alcohol to register the differences in brands, ages, etc. (It also reminds you how much aroma matters.) The only improvement I could suggest is a piece of paper with a checklist for each spirit, so students can note their impressions immediately; I'd include common descriptors and a few blank lines. Don't underestimate the impression that a full-strength cocktail can have on a newb. A few years back, a friend asked me to create a drink for a party she was giving. I came up with a combination of reposado tequila, spiced syrup and lemon juice topped with hard cider: maybe a touch more alcoholic than a Tom Collins. She took the recipe home for testing and reported back the next day: It was great, but man, was it strong! Now, she regularly has a Friday lunch accompanied by a typical Tex-Mex frozen Margarita (with the requisite shot of Chambord or Midori), so she's not averse to alcohol. But if your students have similar experience, a real Margarita (or Aviation or Sidecar) will be a big boozy surprise. Ice: start big. If you can't enlist a local Kold-Draft equipped bar to pony up, then use those big-ass silicone molds and make your own giant cubes. For the day-of, use an insulated cooler with a perforated hotel pan (so the melt drips off; water just makes ice melt faster). If you can't find a perfed pan, get one of those expandable mesh sink strainers to hold your ice in the cooler. Just get the water off the ice as quickly as possible.

I agree. While I don't doubt McWilliams credentials or the validity of his sources, my earlier point was that I would have preferred to have been presented a more balanced piece--something I think he would have achieved through a first-hand experience in speaking with the farmer's and even better, a trip to the farm to add that balance to the piece. The mass consumer, (not necessarily the informed consumer that visits these forums), could come away after reading McWilliams piece as an indictment of any hog-farming practice that labels their products as "free-range," and that's what concerns me--the confusion that it potentially adds for the consumer searching for answers to an already confusing issue. ← A writer doesn't have a responsibility to be "balanced," if "balanced" means diluting the facts he's trying to present. Regardless, the quotes in my previous post demonstrate that McWilliams has a sober view of factory farming and the relative merits of the free-range alternative. Let's look at who's really "confusing" the issue: From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: and and From ABC News: From the New York Times: Those quotes sum up the common perception of free-range practice -- one that's overly simplified and ignorant of reality. In other words, the only reason they're not confusing is because the public doesn't have the whole story. I wouldn't call McWilliams' article confusing. I'd call it enlightening.

Who or what, for example? Nowhere in the article does he say that questionable practices are universal. He also takes some pains to elevate "free-range" above factory farming, starting with: Then: and That's not how I read what Janet wrote, especially since she used the words "ideally" and "complex."