Andrew Fenton

Why sad and nauseating? It isn't PBS; they've always had ads. And I bet that viewers of the Food Network eat at Mickey D's way more than they (or most eGulleteers) would like to admit. If this is real, I suspect that Reefpimp is right, and that somebody in the production booth was having a larf. If McD's paid money for this... well, mainly it shows that their marketing wing have come down with a bad case of what's known in psychological circles as "being idiots": subliminal advertising doesn't work.

Wow, I can only imagine the squealing (no pun intended) that would result if somebody killed and butchered a hog in the Reading Terminal Market. Now that would get some publicity. Which is always a good thing. Personally, I'd like to see the application of molecular gastronomy to scrapple. I mean, everybody has been eating sous-vide'd scrapple for years now; it's pretty much a cliche. But where are the scrapple foams, the compressed air infused with scrapple essence? We've gotta take it to the next level.

There's a good thread about pre-salting from this fall. It includes a link to the Zuni Cafe recipe. Which is really good.

So where would you recommend looking, V?

Glad to see this thread revived. About three years ago, I read it and decided to upgrade to a Kuhn Rikon. In many ways, it's an ideal can opener: * it leaves a nice round edge on the can. No jagged points or a sharp edge, so you can reuse the can; * it's pretty fast; * the little built-in set of pliers is handy for other things; and * it looks really cool. But there are also drawbacks: * there's a little bit of a learning curve. It took me a couple of minutes of fooling with it to figure out how it worked. I gave one to my mom, and she gave up; * sometimes after you cut off the lid, it remains stuck. It takes a second to peel it off; and * it feels like it's starting to get a little dull. My feeling is that a $25 can opener ought to last pretty much forever.

or, you know, "tuna fish."

Bien sur, monsieur-- zat is what zee potted plant in zee corner is for, non? That cracks me up-- I've had French people go to the can at my house, for sure. I think somebody was maybe having a little joke at your expense...

well, it is the middle of winter, after all... Anyway, I'm a big fan of good frozen vegetables. Has anybody mentioned those haricots verts from Trader Joe's? Because they're awfully good. Peas, too. The season for fresh peas is so short that most of the year, the frozen kind are a lot better.

Vice President Hubert Humphrey attended Dr. King's funeral in place of the president; Before becoming vice president, Humphrey was senator from Minnesota; Minnesota is a major center of lutefisk consumption.

Why on earth would that be rude? She didn't order the amuse, and since she doesn't eat foie gras, she sent it back. Seems entirely appropriate to me.

This is why China is the greatest nation in the world: Stamps released in China to celebrate the Year of the Pig taste like sweet-and-sour pork. That is *so* much better than those Skinny Elvis stamps that tasted like... er, never mind. Edit: you can use one to mail one of these edible postcards made out of squid!

And on this we agree. I'd encourage all restaurants-- given the very real constraints of time, etc.-- to think about the ethics of their food, and have that discussion with their employees. (Of course, most restaurants won't have that discussion, for a variety of reasons. But that's another issue.)

Let me cite you: If you're serious about this, it's tantamount to picking a fight. But I'll assume that you meant it in a general context, and not in the specific case at hand. Of course, in the overwhelming majority of cases (and in the case that opened the thread), there isn't a policy: the restaurant serves foie gras because it tastes good, and whether or not the owner and chef have looked into the ethics of it, they haven't formulated anything like official restaurant policy, one that has been communicated to the staff. Nor should they, necessarily. But I'll repeat what I said before: in the absence of an official policy, it's not the job of the person taking reservations to formulate one. They should let the customer discuss it with a manager. (And to be clear: none of this is meant as criticism of Meredith380, who as far as I can tell, acted with aplomb in a difficult situation.)

I stand by my statement. I've seen enough foie gras debates on this website to know that while each side believes that their case is based on cold, steely logic, in reality that case is often as much about emotions, a priori assumptions, or political biases. If that weren't the case, then there wouldn't be disagreement among the many educated, intelligent folks who make up the eGullet membership. But that's not relevant to this thread, and I'll let it lie. No. There are plenty of times and places when it's appropriate to stand up for your beliefs, even if you piss people off. At work, in a service industry? That's not one of them. It's about being classy. And picking fights with customers isn't classy. The appropriate thing to do would be to let the person rant, hang up politely, and go rant on eGullet.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. As I see it, it is NEVER appropriate for an employee in a service industry to lecture-- especially lecture passive-aggressively-- a potential customer. Ever. Even if they aren't dining with you that time, even if they will probably never come back. It's tacky, it's not your job, and it runs the risk of biting you in the ass. If the owner or manager wants to lecture somebody, fine. He or she is in a better position to do so-- though it's still tacky.

I'm going to disagree with this for a couple of reasons. First, because when it comes to an emotional subject like foie gras, one person's "facts" are another person's ideology. But more importantly, even a polite version of this statement runs the risk of turning into an argument. It's not worth it to argue with a stranger over the phone. This is doubly true for an employee: it's not your place to argue about this kind of restaurant policy, let alone about issues of culinary ethics. If the caller wants to discuss this, take their number and tell the manager or owner to call them back. (Or, more likely, not call them back.) But the best response is to just say, "we're sorry that you won't be eating with us" and hang up.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have achieved consensus.

more exotic en francais?? Peut-etre... it struck me as the menu equivalent of staring at two mirrors facing one another. whoa. trippy.

Oh yeah. And I've seen a sign reading: SOUP OF THE DAY: Soup Du Jour

Actually, I'd say that the real atrocity there is combining French with Italian: it ought to be puttanesca di mare. Puttanesca doesn't mean "whore". It's an adjective; the noun is "puttana". And it's totally normal to use just the adjective to describe a dish: you might talk about a bolognese, or when it comes to steak, a Fiorentina. So there's no problem with a puttanesca di mare.

Well, I *wuv* Capaneus. So there you go!

I could no more disagree with this sentiment than I could march in the Anti-Puppies-and-Kittens celebration, held annually in the city of Evilsville. We're all looking for that Great Good Place. But I kinda don't buy the idea that there's something about the Philadelphia BYOB model that's inherently better at providing that ideal, or even a simulacrum of it, than lots of other models. Especially when most of those BYOBs are following a trend, not setting one. So I'll stick to my guns: I'd prefer more Roman or Sicilian or Emiliana or Provençal or Austrian restaurants in this city. Because that would be more interesting than what we've got.

Pedro, I realize that there's a wider context to your comments-- and for what it's worth, I agree with most of what you said. (I also think that complaining about the PALCB will have about as much effect as complaining about the sun rising in the east.) But I want to drag this, kicking and screaming, back to the article, and attempt a point of clarification. As I read White's article, "BYOB" doesn't refer to any restaurant without a liquor license, but a particular subset, described right at the beginning: "BYOB" is a pretty handy shorthand for that stereotype; it's one that most of us use and recognize. As far as I can tell, White is referring to that stereotype (as was I). White's point isn't anything about the sale of alcohol in Pennsylvania, it's about a stagnation that has followed the growth of this style of restaurant over the last five or so years. And wkl raises a good point. The PALCB doesn't control the number of liquor licenses in Philadelphia; there are also lots of liquor license-free restaurants in New Jersey.

Yes, I often cook this way, especially with Swiss chard. Saute a little onion, add the rinsed, damp chard, steam away, add balsamic at the end. Good stuff.

as would french. why is caribou the only non-fancy french place in town? More non-fancy French? Yep, that'd be good. Though to be fair, there's Pif (for now, anyway) and St. Tropez (where I've never eaten). I know that lots of people pooh-poohed Blue Angel, but I liked it best of the Starr joints, and miss it...