Busboy

Recipes here.

Week 2 of the new and improved food section, this week introducing the beer column and featuring a "Worth the Trip" that might be news to somebody. More interesting, retired-chef David Hagedorn shows up again, this time teaching us how to cook brunch. Not quite as bitchy as his Washington Post debut -- explaining why customers suck -- but a bit supercilious, shall we say, nonetheless. My wife was gleeful about the rutabaga article, she'd been trying to foist those things on me for years. I've personally always thought that if the oils Soviet Union had designed vegetables they'd have designed the rutabaga -- kind of the 4-door Lada of tubers. But if Patrick Connell says to buy a hundred-pound bag, I'm gonna...no I'm not. It seems like the articles -- as opposed to the new features -- are showing a little more shimmer these last two weeks. Even Hagedorn makes a good read. The new features? I'm still liking them more in theory than in practice (I wasn't blown away by the beer guy, but he's off to a decent start), but I'm still liking them. Looking better every week.

as though a Virginian like yourself knows anything about the Alabama 'cue FFB was discussing. Best stick with country ham, my friend.

In addition to Yankees being unable to write about southern food, I'd like to point out that white people have nothing to add to any conversation about black food, culture, history or society (and vice-versa); men writing about women is pointless; women writing about men is absurd; the Franco-American divide is well-chronicled and it's probably best that we don't even think about one another; BOH's opinions regarding FOH are feckless, FOH observations of BOH are jejune; while living inside the Beltway I noticed that provincial criticisms of our ways was borderline farcicle, while living outside the Beltway it occurred to me that those back inside had an alarmingly insular and myopic view. And don't even get me started on Californians, New Yorkers and farm-state peasants, each of which group inhabits a kind of socio-geodesic dome that so refracts information coming in, that their occasional journeys beyond the glass are no more real than Alice's. In fact, unless you've spent a lifetime gazing at, and are possibly genetically related to, the navel, demographic group or brisket about which you are tempted to write, don't bother -- you're only fooling yourself.

"expanded features and new topics for the growing number of readers who care about wine, beer, restaurants and home entertainment." I liked the section today, with its sous vide and "death by chocolate" pieces. The new features...wait and see. I'm not sure adding another clipping to Palena's vast stash of free publicity with a "Worth the Trip" wet kiss for their French Fry platter added much to the dialogue. And I have a deep distrust of wine-tasting panels stocked with amateurs,it just adds another layer of confusion to the whole thing. In a Sauvignon Blanc tasting, the Post critic Ben Gilberti picked the '02 Carbonnieux 1st, one of the panelist ranked it last, three others put it somewhere in between. One tasted apple, one tasted cantelope and one tasted mold. This kind of analysis doesn't make my trips to the wine shop any easier. It also reminds me of the (annoying) New York Times panels. I think the Post has a good enough Food Section that even the appearance of following in the Times' footsteps detracts. That being said, change is good, I volunteer for the wine panel, and I suggest the Nam Sod at the P Street Sala Thai for the next "Worth the Trip." I'm also looking forward to the beer column and the home entertaining feature -- hoping to everyone from elegant embassy wives to vegan anarchist gay couples giving guidance on "menus, recipes and wine-paring." Any other comments?

My wife turned me on to wine -- her father was a liquor distributor and back in the day used to serve Clos de Mouches as the house wine. I was a beer swiller. I'm going to start a thread on this someday, but one thing that pisses me off is how ridiculously expensive an "impressive" wine is today. In my youth, a swell pair of Italian loafers (to go back to the thread subtitle) was twice as expensive as a good Barolo. Now, the equation is reversed, a "super Tuscan" is twice as expensive as the shoes. That being said, if you want to impress a date or a client, the key isn't how expensive the wine is, it's how deep into the jargon you can get with the sommelier without getting lost. Anybody can order a $100 Chardonnay. It's being able to work the phrase "malolactic fermentation" into the conversation that makes you look cool. What is malolactic fermentation, anyway?

You can use it to keep people out of the kitchen. Also to open a can of beer if you accidently break that little ring-y thing off (use the "heel" of the blade).

That's why I never go to Cafe Milano any more.

Be interesting to see if it develops its own personality, or ends up being just another chain bar in a city with too many of those.

In previous auctions for other groups, my six-to-eight person full dinners have pulled about a couple hundred bucks in winning bids. I was a little regretful that they didn't go for more, but that was a function of a live auction run by enthusiastic amateurs as opposed to experienced auctioneers, and it really didn't *bug* me--I just felt sorry that the organization in question didn't benefit quite as much as I hoped it would. What the heck. ← I always take it personally when my meals don't get the price I think they deserve. But I'm thin-skinned that way. One other consideration: cleanup. I try not to wreck the kitchen so badly that I can't get out in a reasonable period of time and I don't leave a mess. That's one reason to try to press an assistant into the effort: being able to clean (or serve) while the next course is cooking.

MizD -- My wife and I -- after donationg a delicious but endless 7-course haute cuisine dinner (bought by someone we didn't like ) Have settled in on french Bistro dinners. Not as creative as some of the themes you've picked, but it gives you and your guests a lot of leeway, it can be vaguely romantic and a lot of the heavy lifting can be done in advance. It's also a chance to throw a lot of courses at folks, which makes them feel like they're getting their money's worth (hors d'oevres, cheese, extended dessert, salad, whatever). Plus we cook the stuff pretty good. We also put on chef's jackets that my FIL bought us as presents, lay the service on thick and bring one special bottle of wine -- usually a sauterne. Monovano -- We pay for the food ourselves, I think that's part of the bargain. Our dinners have gone for between $250-350, but our school is not nearly as wealthy as others in the area. They people definitely get their money's worth. As I posted above, what we really do is a three-course meal, with all the extra add-ons that, hopefully, make it into an event.

Can you give a a hint about what "reasonably-priced higher end" adds up to? I'd consider Marcel's, or maybe ask if the back room at Restaurant Nora is available (a nice space). And, of course, there are steakhouses galore. What do you think they will want to eat?

Another food porn addict snared!

I'm meeting clients in Boston and I need three distinctly different types of reccomendations for them and for myself. Near the Four Seasons helps, but I will also be doing some time in the vicinity of Harvard Square. The three asks are: 1) Spectacularly luxurious. Food is not the object here. Flawless and virtually obsequious service is. The food should be good, but the service needs be perfect. Price is no object. 2) Good food, hip atmosphere. Moderate-high price OK. Experimental food OK. Near nightlife for appropriate for 30-something Europeans really OK. 3) Excellent food, mid-high price in an atmosphere that's more restaurant than club. A place where you don't have to yell to be heard. Any and all types of cusine welcome (this is the recco for me). Finally, if there are any good low-rent joints not too far from the 4 Seasons -- from ethnic to greays spoon, feel free to chime in. Thanks.

We find ours in Asian and Latin markets.

I'd like to see more places selling well-prepared food at affordable prices. There are far more upscale restaurants than I have the time or the money to explore. What I can't find --outside of bars, chains and ethnic restaurants -- is a place where my wife and I can eat a good meal and have a bottle of wine for less than $100. Last night we went to a good, "affordable" Italian place near our house for small plates and wine -- admittedly a good deal of wine -- and dropped $147. How about a $25 3-course menu and a half-liter of drinkable house wine for $10 (we'll take two, please)? I'm happy to work from a limited menu, in a room that is less-than-spectacularly designed. I don't mind if there's no "buzz" and the service is a little slow (as long as it's competent). I just don't want to have to blow the budget to get a decent meal on a Wednesday night.

Last time I asked for salt at such a place, the waiter came over with a salt grinder (!), dusted me and then whisked the grinder away. Winning the salt war may be more difficult than we had thought.

Not to mention Jeremiah Tower.

Chocolate mousse. Actually, kids (mine anyway) like cooking anything they like to eat. They like measuring and breaking eggs and getting their hands dirty and they like playing with knives. (When my kids wanted to help, I said it was fine but they might cut or burn themselves and that was part of cooking -- we're the Klutz family -- and they shouldn't whine too much if they did). Anything that undergoes major transformations or involves heavy equipment is a bonus: whipped cream, rising bread dough, egg whites etc. But, bottom line, if they like to eat it, they'll like cooking it. Be sure to let them taste and adjust the salt and so on.

Here's the eG Bouchon thread. For what it's worth, if I was cooking mostly for myself I'd choose Bouchon over TFL, as the recipe's are generally at least somewhat simpler and homier, and they tend more towards things that can be eaten as leftovers. It's blue-jean cooking, while TFL tends more to formal wear.

The short answer, as Sam said, is that you can cook a pizza that will make you weep with joy at home. The long answer is here, the eGullet thread about how to do just that, featuring the accumulated wisdom of many a dedicated home cook.

I couldn't disagree more the bold part above. Correlation does not imply causation. Napster existed; the record industry made less money. To say that Napster caused the record industry to make less money would require some actual evidence, which is (debatably) sadly lacking. Other factors in a decline of recorded music sales are far more plausible (ie, fewer 'good' albums released, excessive CD prices, entertainment dollars going elsewhere (DVDs, cable, games). But getting back to books, I think they can survive long-term - they're still here long after the advent of public libraries and photocopiers, just as music and movies have survived many hysterically-stated 'threats' to their continued existence. ← Actually, as far as I can tell, CDs are no more ridiculously expensive now than they were in 1999 and popular music is no more wretchedly awful (generally speaking) now than it was in 1999. Billions of songs have been downloaded over that time, to say that this has had no impact on sales is sheer nonesense: I know serious and less serious music people who haven't actually paid for an album in years. The factors you point to are even more subjective and less verifiable than those the record industry points to. The movie industry survived DVD and video because people pay to rent or buy them, not because they give content away free on-line. The situations are not at all the same. I'm sure free on-line cookbooks won't kill off the hard-copy version. But it makes no sense to pretend that if free versions are available, a non-trivial number of potential customers won't choose that option.

Last time we were in Paris we dined at a lovely white-linen tablecloth place in the 7th, Clos des Gourmands. As he was pouring the wine, the waiter extended the bottle towards my then-15-year-old son, with that twinkle servers of certain age will get when they're offering a "taboo" treat. Much to the waiter's surprise, and mine, my son just said "non." Apparently he's adopted.

The Napster analogy is interesting because, despite what people would like to believe, Napster and its bastard children have had a very damaging effect on the record industry. According to the RIAA, revenues fell from $15 billion to $12 billion between 1999 and 2004. Unit sales are down 8% ytd from 2004. I'm not going to carry any water for the music industry, but to pretend that -- as someone did upthread -- that the evidence to date supports a "Napster is good for the business" interpretation is plain wrong. On the cookbooks, I think they might be a little different from, say, a novel or a CD. Cookbooks have utilitarian side to them. Admittedly, utilitarianism isn't what's fueling the unchecked spread of 11-pound, lavishly illustrated, poetically annotated and exorbitantly priced cookbooks -- maybe people really would rather put them on the coffee table than cook with them. But, where I need a paperback novel that goes with me on the bus, to the john, on camping trips, the front porch and my bed, I can live with a cookbook that just stays in my computer. In fact, given the choice between a hard copy of, for example, The French Laundry Cookbook and a reasonably good free bootleg on line, I'd be sorely tempted to go with the latter edition. Free, portable, takes up no space, the binding never rips out, the pages don't get stuck together, and you can print out the recipe and tape it above the counter while you're cooking. Since Ruhleman and Keller are alll about the craft, I'm sure they wouldn't mind.

I disagree with the premise. It implies that there was some golden age of restaurant dining in the United States that never actually existed. The growth of chains is not necessarily reflective of a "dumbing down" so much as a rising affluence and two-income families, meaning that we eat out way more often than we used to, and population growth in the sub- and ex-burbs, where there were few places to eat, period. Chains are not so much driving mom-n-pop places out of business, as filling a void. Independent restaurants have always come and gone, it's a tough business. In addition, many of them suck; their disappearance is a loss in terms of nostalgia, not dining. Many of the good ones hold on (to be reviewed by Holly). And, for every diner and independent Kountry Kitchen or Lou's Seafood Shack being driven out of business, two Asian joints and one hipster place open up, all with food as good, or better, than what was lost.