Steve Plotnicki

Craig - Funny you should ask that question as I am writing this from Amsterdam after having spent the morning in the Rijksmuseum. If Rembrandt and Pollack are arable I do not know how to do it. But there were loads of Dutch painters we saw today that didn't have technique as good as Rembrandt's and I don't think it was subjective at all. Or how about Vermeer? He might have had better technique then Rembrandt but he didn't paint dramatic paintings, i.e., didn't apply his technique in a way that would make him as well known as Rembrandt. Bux - Well I said that didn't I? I said "applied in a certain way." I think we get sidetracked when we hold up too very disparate things and say aha, see, its all subjective because they cannot be compared. Because someone much smarter then I could find the common deniminator between Rembrandt and Pollack and theorize why one had better technique. But I think that is a different task then comparing the complexity of natural juices versus enhanced etc. It's like the person who says they are content eating the perfect peach (okay it's Robert S.) As good as the perfect peach is, it is not dessert. Yes you can eat a peach for dessert but when I say dessert, I am defining it as something that is prepared by a dessert/pastry chef. A peach is a peach is a peach and when I go into a fine restaurant, I do not expect to be served a bowl of peachs and a knife. I can do that at home. When I eat out, I want to see technique applied to the appropriate item. Of course this doesn't describe every meal.

Craig - Are you in the wine trade? If so, what do you do?

Robert S - I'm glad I could teach you sometyhing there Craig - Well I don't see how you can disagree with me and then say number 2. Great art is a function of great technique applied in a special way, or it's a matter of opinion. I do not see how it can be both?

It used to be better. It got heavier for some reason and I find the clientele stodgy as well.

Gee I'll let Jaybee spot Goulet. I'll stick with Lucy Liu. And you're welcome Stellabella. Just let us know the next time you're going to be in town.

Wilfrid - It isn't. As long as you are clear about what you are measuring, it isn't really problematic. Most of the disputes we have around here are about defining parameters. Once we agree on the parameters, the rest of the convesation goes pretty smoothly. For instance, it wouldn't be very controversial for me to say that symphonies are more complex pieces of music then nursery school songs. Nor would it be for me to say that the Night Watch is better then the oil painting of the Wailing Wall that many Jews have in their apartment. It's also not a matter of just compexity. It's a matter of complex and good. Good is the underlying theme for great art. It's in the implication of complex. In fact I believe that if something was complex but not good, someone would go out of their way and say it was bad. Finally, the differrnces between Pot au Feu and a Boiled Dinner are the same as a Navarin and an Irish Stew. One tastes good and one doesn't .

Well that is just another way of restating the Boiled Beef dinner Pot au Feu comparison. And when you say excellence, that takes into consideration all sorts of things like how good a job somebody did. It's the example of the perfect peach versus....... Yes we agree, a peach grown under perfect conditions in the perfect microclimate is better then a less then perfect peach gussied up with great technique. That is why, to make the blanket statement I made, you really need to put everything on the same continuum. And when you compare a nursery rhyme to a symphony, they are compared based on how great a musical statement they have made, not whether they are particularly successful at their statement. So it doesn't matter how popular Mary had a Little Lamb is, it will never be "as good" a piece of music as Beethoven's 5th. And I think you would have a hard time finding someone who could make the argument that it is from an analytical perspective that has to do with the music itself. All the arguments will be external like how pervasive the song is in our culture. So in general, symphonies are "better" pieces of music then nursery rhymes, with pieces of music being the operative phrase here. And do you not sing the Rite of Spring to babies? I used to sing it to the twins all of the time. They had this puzzled look on their faces.

Actually I should have been clearer. Sure you could get it in a bistro that is casual. And possibly a braserie. But as soon as you get into the restaurant category, it's more likely then not that the place will be formal. Or at least have formal airs.

Craig - This is a complex subjext. If you read Baphie's great post on the history of food criticism in my recent food criticism thread, that would make a good foundation for the rest of my argument. But in it's simplest form, on paper, a pot au feu is a more complex dish then a boiled beef dinner. Of course there are crappy POF's and terrific BBD's. But that has to do with relativity and nothing to do with evaluating technique and complexity. As many of us have often used as an example to show this, the melody of Mary Had a Little Lamb is a catchy one but not a complex one. The opening theme of the Rite of Spring on the other hand is complex. What makes one complex and the other simple is not a matter of opinion as much as an evalutaion of the various techniques they each employ to make their statements. I think Cabrales has this right. There really shouldn't be that much of a dispute as to what is delicious or not. Pretty much everyone agrees. But my personal opinion is that people vary from the norm for reasons of personal preference or inability to taste certain things properly. Take a simple thing like a steak. 90% of the people agree on what makes a great NY strip but there are 10% who do not like a char crust. How should we characterize that 10%. Should we look at that statistic and say aha it's all a matter of opinion or should we say they are not representative because they have a bias.? On my flight to London last night, the German girl sitting across the aisle from me was telling me how good her in-flight lamb medallions were. Should we accept her opinion as legitimate? Of course not. They were bad no matter how you slice it. Jonathan - Well without getting into a lineup of people who were there and what they wore, I was really comparing Jerome, or countless other restaurants on the Cote, to any of the restaurants in other beach resort areas like the Hamptons. There is a formalness in France that doesn't exist in the U.S. unless you are at one of those classic hotels like the Greenbriar. And part of that is who is dining there. I remember being at La Chaumiere and the women were all wearing Channel outfits with brassy jewelry. And I think the cuisine matches the clientel and that it trends towards more formal with more formal service. If you want sauteed Foie gras in France, getting it in a place that is casual without tuxuedoed waiters is near impossible. And by the way, you are not allowed to wear wool slacks in the Hamptons when you go out to dinner. Even in the winter .

Robert - Morrel's in Easthampton ran across a case of older Arbois a few years back and I bought a few bottles. The stuff was like Vick's sough syrup. It was so mentholated. Perfect to drink with foods that had herb crusts. Or after brushing your teeth.

John Coltrane if what is important to you is creativity. I mean the guy created an entire language on his instrument that generations of tenor sax players copied and were influenced by. Itzhak Pearlman if you consider the grandness of the art he performs. I mean we can jigger the entire thing around by changing adjectives and their inferences can't we? So it isn't really that controversial a statement to say that a culinary culture that enhances natural juices so as to make them more luscious and complex is more refined, elegant, applies a greater level of technique, or even "better" then a cuisine that relies simply on natural juice. That's sort of like saying naive artists paint as good as Picasso. There is superior technique and inferior technique so of course there have to be superior cuisines. A New England Boiled Beef dinner is an inferior version of Pot au Feu. And there are dozens of French dishes that are superior to American counterparts.Is it not a superior cuisine? Of course none of this stops you from enjoying a New England Boiled Beef dinner. But it's sort of like Twinkies. You grow up thinking it's good.

Do you mean NYC or Philly?

And what does that make the person who finds joy in promoting food to the non-obsessed?

No we were seated at a twospot along the left wall (facing in) at almost the halfway mark. Were you there last Sunday night?

I have so much to say on this topic, but it will have to wait until I get to the UK tomorrow

I believe that is pronounced Jen-teels Market. And that generation of people who got dressed up to make themselves feel good is almost gone now. Very old world.

Did you read Baphie's post in the Haute Cuisine thread on the history of food criticism? It is related to the question you raised here.

Let's see. I was not a fan of the Romorantin. If you like esoteric white wines like Arbois, this could be a wine for you. I found it so tight, and with an off taste, I didn't finish my glass. But it could be that 15 years from now it will bloom into something special. But I don't think I will ever like it as it was too herbal for me. The 1989 Ogier was super though. And I had a bottle of it a few years back and was disappointed as I thought it was diluted. But this one really popped out of the glass. And the Leflaive is a terrific wine for a village wine. Perfectly mature. One of the Captains at Taillevent turned me onto about 5 years ago as a wine that is perfectly ready to drink as well as offering great value for a white Burg. I have gone through almost 2 1/2 cases since then and it has been my "go to" white Burg since then. I thought the wine would be dead by now but it is still kicking and I would buy another case as I only have a few bottles left. The '69 Leroy Echezeaux was good but nothing more. Coffee and cherry flavors but relatively weak for a '69. But then again, old Burgundy is old Burgundy and it doesn't suck.

Well that's not the debate. The debate is pan juices versus enriched pan juices. It doesn't matter what they are enriched with. Butter, wine, demi-glace, stock, etc. No one is doubting that natural pan juices can't be delicious. But the proffer is that enriched pan juices are generally more refined because that is the purpose of adding the additional ingredients to the natural juices.

Ali must have been in Seventh Heaven with you "ladies" there.

What a nice idea.

Yes Stefany vetted everything we did. She would grab my arm before I was able to put the fork in my mouth to make sure it had the right amount of food on it. And before I could talk to the waiter, she had to clear what I was going to say. Her husband is such a lucky fellow.

One of Charlie's Angels was in the house. The white Burg was a 1990 Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet Clavoillon and the other wine was a 1989 Michel Ogier Cote Rotie. Both drank really well. But I thought the restaurant wasn't firing on all cylinders last night. The best dishes were the mackeral and the beef (what kind of steak did they call it again?) But the company was definitely three star.

When you can't argue the facts you argue character.

I hate to diagree with you again but, I am sure what they served at various Mah Jong games was even worse then what they served at your Carbibbean night.