SethG

Monday night: Shrimp risotto with baby spinach & basil, and mesclun salad with a simple vinaigrette.

Anyone interested in slamming or defending Sandra Lee should also check out this thread: Amanda Slaps Sandra Lee

Pan, I think the counterargument would posit that the New York Times speaks with one voice, at least in theory, and that the public should assume that the paper's opinion of a particular restaurant remains the same until the paper chooses to change its position. At that time, the paper will inform readers through a review or other article. But until then, it would be redundant for the paper to inform readers that Lespinasse (for instance) is still good. The readers should know that by the paper's silence on the issue. I'm not saying that this is my argument, although it appeals to me as a lawyer. We see courts maintain this fiction all the time. Different judges are expected not to speak on issues of settled law, maintaining the fiction that each "court" remains the same even as all its personnel change.

Two more for me last week: Patricia Wells At Home in Provence, and (if it counts) Ruth Reichl, Comfort Me With Apples.

laurel, your multi-course meals always amaze, but that lobster souffle.... I gotta get that Steingarten article and get to work! How was it paired with sashimi? Anyway, I forgot to post last Monday, then went out of town. Last Monday (Dec. 29): Sauteed cod wrapped in pancetta (a Patricia Wells recipe that suspiciously resembles Mamster's Pancetta Embossed Chicken-- who should get credit? Mamster, call your lawyer!); asparagus braised in butter; and creamy olive oil and parmesan potato puree (which tasted mostly just like good, creamy mashed potatoes; nothing wrong with that, but I had expected more olive to come through in the taste). Then I went out of town and only cooked one Spanish tortilla before my return. Last night (Sunday), I finally got back to my stove, and made: a chicken with red onions and white wine fricassee from Paula Wolfert's Southwest France book. I also braised some more asparagus, since the stuff leftover from last Monday was still, unaccountably, good. And I made couscous. Oh, almost forgot! For Sunday night I also made dacquoise, a classic French dessert comprised of a layer of mocha buttercream sandwiched between two layers of baked almond meringue. Aside from the fact that I had to use the stand mixer three times during the course of this recipe (meaning I had to wash the parts twice), this was a lot of fun to make and tremendous fun to eat. The recipe I used was from Ruth Reichl's second book, at the end of the chapter about her torrid ten-day liason in Paris.

Congrats, Jaymes! That's wonderful.

I may be wading beyond my depth here, but as a regular reader of the NY Times food section (and sometime eater at the establishments reviewed) it seemed to me that Grimes made it his mission to reverse the grade inflation that he felt existed at the paper before this arrival. Where Reichl could almost casually award three stars to a restaurant like Soho's Barolo, even while describing the food as inconsistent at best, Grimes could rave about the quality of the food at an establishment and then award one or two stars, implicitly arguing that this is nothing to be ashamed of. His review of Amma is a recent example of this-- I would not have been at all surprised to see another critic award at least three stars based on the superlative terms used to describe the food there. This practice marked him early on as a sourpuss in my view. And he always seemed to prefer traditional formality to fun. But after a while, I came to see his approach as more rigorous and consistent than Reichl's, and therefore a bit refreshing. On the subject of keeping up: what if he visited Lespinasse, found that nothing of significance had happened since Reichl's review, and decided he agreed with Reichl? Did he have an obligation to inform his readers, or could he simply let her review stand?

Thank you all for your help. You've given me just what I wanted: a number of choices at a variety of price points.

And while we're asking questions, how much are they likely to set me back? And what do you folks who know think of California Viogniers? Are they comparable to the French ones?

I hate it when that happens. Thanks for the blog, Kristen It's been very entertaining.

Sorry, I was out of town for a few days. marie-louise, you know I'm interested. If I don't hear from y'all in a week or so, I'm proposing another menu.

So many of the above ideas are also goals of mine. But more than anything I'd like to feel that I've really arrived at a sort of repertoire. Not to say that I want to make the same dishes on the same days every week. Rather, I'd like to be in a place where I plan ahead the week's menus knowing that there are several meals that will make it into the rotation, along with a few new ideas and projects. There's comfort in falling back on things you love, rather than experimenting every day. Or maybe I should be realistic. I resolve to plan ahead for at least one week's menus this year.

I had a cheap California Viognier recently, and I thought it was very tasty. Caveat: I don't know anything. But I enjoyed it, oak and all. I've never tried a real Viognier from France. I'd like to, but I don't know where to start. Anyone want to steer me toward something? Something reasonable, available in NYC, and maybe something that's a splurge? Are there any reasonably priced Viogniers that are worth the trouble? Thanks, and sorry if this has been done to death before. I couldn't find more than the odd mention here and there of this variety.

May I request that everyone who has an heirloom recipe please post such recipe to the recipe archive and provide a link here in this thread? I have no such recipes, but I'd like to acquire as many as I can!

This sounds a little naughty.

I haven't. But I did try the salmon cooked in a "potato case," and it was great. I would've done that yesterday if I weren't making the soup with potatoes. [Moderator note: The original Improving my cooking skills topic became too large for our servers to handle efficiently, so we've divided it up; the following part of this discussion is here: Improving my cooking skills (2004)]

Okay, I made the salmon etc. last night. Everything came out reasonably well. I made Julia's leek & potato soup-- it was wonderful, and so simple. I opted to just mash the big pieces of potato with a fork in the soup pot, keeping the soup chunky and rustic. I served it with sprinkled-on parsley and a dollop of sour cream in each bowl. I think it was the most satisfying part of the meal and it was literally a half-hour's work. The artichokes took more time, but I was able to do the prep on the artichokes and make the mushroom stuffing in the afternoon. Jacques says you can stuff them and set them in the fridge until you're ready to heat them, but I liked the taste of both the artichokes and the mushrooms better before they were stored. They were only stored for a couple hours, but I thought they lost something. Or am I crazy? I got compliments on the artichokes, but I was disappointed in them. I also thought they gave the meal an air of stodginess-- sort of like what I imagine our parents' French cuisine was, long ago. And I'm not so sure what you get out of artichokes is worth the effort you have to invest. The fish was fine, but I think I prefer to broil salmon. I made snapper en papillote a couple months ago, and I think I preferred it to salmon done with this technique. Also, I don't know what's wrong with me, but I had to keep popping it back in the oven-- I think I had to cook the fillets for 20 minutes before they were cooked through. And I made a simple loaf of "batard" bread. I realized when it was time to put it in the oven that I'd forgotten to leave time for a second rise. But it was too late, so I just shaped it and baked it, and it was probably squatter and denser than it should have been, but it was still very nice. It was a reminder that, as Laurie Colwin says, you can make bread conform to your schedule rather than letting it control you, and it will still enrich your life! How about you guys?

Saturday night: Had a couple friends over. Served: leek & potato soup; salmon fillets cooked en papillote with tomato; artichoke bottoms stuffed with mushrooms; and rice pilaf. And I baked a loaf of bread-- I messed it up but it was still good. I planned to make a souffle for dessert but said "enough already" at the last minute.

Tonight's dinner (Friday) should have been perfect. I was going to make this rustic ham and cheese tart (courtesy James Villas) and serve it with a mesclun salad and vinaigrette. But then I saw this big bin of chestnuts and remembered that Villas has a recipe for chestnut soup. And I'd never worked with chestnuts and it seemed seasonal, so I said why not. NEVER again. Chestnuts are a major league pain in the ass, big time. Peeling them took forever, and several of my fingers are still in pain from the jabbing they endured while trying to get the shells off those stupid nuts. And I'd forgotten how creamy this particular soup is. The cream/milk watered down the flavor too much (in my opinion), and it was just too much richness when paired with the tart. The tart was wonderful, but it would have been better without the soup, and earlier too! Bummer. It could have been a light, easy meal.

People who have saved for a special night out aren't going to be happy about seeing a toddler seated next to them. It's going to detract from their evening, because enough parents have been inconsiderate enough to bring ill-behaved children to fancy restaurants. A group of businessmen can be controlled by a restaurant before they get drunk and disorderly, and if the restaurant fails at exercising this control, the restaurant should take some blame for the situation. But the restaurant can't do much about the toddler once he or she is in the door. Again, I'm not talking about your average restaurant. I'm talking about very expensive, fancy restaurants. And I'm not talking about pre-pubescent but mature kids who can be dressed up and told about how special a place is, etc. I'm talking about toddlers.

Okay, Bialetti. Any other good brands? Anybody have any experience with the pots on this page, for instance? Thanks for all the advice, as always. Edited because I'm stupid.

As a bad amatuer musician, I completely agree that children must be introduced to music as early and as often as possible, and I never meant to suggest otherwise. There are many concert settings designed with children in mind or held in places (i.e., outdoors) appropriate for children of any age. When I made reference to the "concert hall," I meant to evoke more formal concert settings. The concert I was remembering was a piano recital at Carnegie Hall. There was a young child who behaved remarkably, even astonishingly well. But he still fidgeted throughout the first half of the show, and often whispered this or that to his mother. These were distractions from Maurizio Pollini's wonderful performance, and I'll never get that performance back. Sorry for the off-topic chat.

People without children often feel they have to tread lightly on this topic, because they fear they'll seem insensitive. But since I have two small children, I feel no such trepidation. You shouldn't bring really small kids to premium restaurants like Daniel in New York, or Mark's place in D.C. You just shouldn't do it. Other diners have likely reserved a lot of money for a special night out, and they don't want to hear your kid screaming, even for a second. They don't need the stress of WORRYING that your kid might start behaving badly and ruin their special night. It isn't fair to them. If you can afford a night at such a restaurant, you can afford a babysitter. And if you can't leave your kid with a sitter, there are numerous-- hundreds, thousands, it doesn't matter where you live-- of places you can eat that are very nice and are known to be family-friendly. I also think Bux's example may be the one exception to the rule I outlined above. Very small infants-- I mean less than four months old-- often sleep for long stretches of the day. During such times, I believe it might be acceptable for a parent to bring the child to a premium establishment for lunch or a very early dinner. But even then, I wouldn't begrudge any super-fancy restaurant the right to say "sorry, no infants." Restaurants have no reason to trust what parents say about their kids' behavior. There seems to be a creeping permissiveness towards children (and I mean real youngsters, not 10 or 12 year-olds) in places like high-end restaurants, movie theaters, even (as I saw once, to my extreme displeasure) in concert halls. I have no patience for this phenomenon. Parents with young kids are deprived of certain entertainments they once took for granted. This has always been true. With time, freedom returns. In the meantime, there are many ways to seek entertainment and good eating without spoiling others' pleasure.

Okay, I'm sold! I've been eyeing Moka makers for years, and I think I'm going to march into Broadway Panhandler and buy one. Questions: 1. Okay, Stainless Steel is the way to go. Any particular maker? Anybody have an opinion of the right size for optimum coffee? 2. How do you feel about New York City tap water? I think it's better than most bottled water, and I filter it. What do you think?

You didn't mention it, Jack, but I see you've got some Dulce de Membrillo in your "middle" photo there! How do you keep that stuff around the house? I made a big batch a couple weeks ago and it was gone in seconds. (The answer, obviously, is to make so many wonderful things that no one thing gets all the attention.) Marry Christmas, and thanks again for your blog.