Steve Plotnicki

Wilfrid - Sure they are both in business. I ate at Antica Tratorria de le Pesa (which they affectionately call "dela Pesa") a few years ago. It's sort of like a Pete's Tavern type of place but with good, wholesome Milanese tratorria food. I think I had a veal stew for dinner after some risotto. But in that environment I think you would notice the similarity to southern Austrian and German cuisine. I mean starting with a Veal Milanese which is nothing more then Schnitzel. If I lived in Milan I'm sure I would eat there all the time. They also had a really good and reasonably priced wine list with wines from Gaja, Giacosa etc. Bux - Just because I formed an opinion based on experience doesn't mean it isn't right. And when I say "immigrants," I am limiting my comment to European immigrants and not including Chinese etc. And when I say "starch," I don't mean starch in all of it's forms, I mean starch in the form of a course that revolves around starch whether it be a Minestre or an Entree. Jaybee - Cool your jets. I'm not advocating not discussing risotto, I'm just commenting on people not being realistic as to how popular it could have become. Everybody who like risotto wants to say that "if they just did this, or if they just marketed it that way instead, it would be more popular." Well I think they tried all of that already and it didn't catch on the way they hoped it would. And the reason it didn't catch on has to do with the people eating the food, not the people selling it.

Why does everybody want to argue "shoulda, coulda, woulda?" It hasn't and there are probably loads of reasons why. But if it did, which course in the meal is it supposed to replace? In the French dining strategy there is no starch course per se. And in the Italian dining strategy there is pasta to compete with. So I'm not sure where there is an opening for risotto? And as to "elite" Northern Italian restaurants, I think that the only place in Italy that is fanatical about risotto is Lombardy where they grow the rice. In all the other regions that surround Lombardy, risotto competes for diner's attention with pasta and polenta. In fact the types of Northern Italian restaurants that open in NYC aren't really Milanese in style, but some sort of conglomeration of the "Northern Italian style" along with what could be termed "continental cuisine." A true Milanese tratorria is very Germanic in style. If you went to one of the old ones like da Berti or dela Pesa, the menu is full of things like goulash, stuffed cabbage, and other items that wouldn't be immediately recognizeable as Italian cuisine.

Well it isn't like the food industry didn't try to promote risotto into being a big thing. And the audience for risotto grew but I don't think to the extent they hoped for. I think risotto has a snotty air to it. It's what those elite, blond haired, Northern Italians eat. It's not the same type of soul food that spaghetti and meatballs are. Which is where the problem lies if you ask me. Personally, I think a good seafood risotto is one of the world's great creations. But I think most of the other risottos are boring. I find that they don't have enough flavor for my personal taste. Another risotto that I find much merit in is the Riso al Salto that they serve in Milan. It's leftover risotto Milanese that they fry in a pan with butter and grated cheese and serve it in pancake form. It is the personification of the phrase al dente and is packed with flavor.

Fat Guy - You should know that my opinions and prejudices on topics like these have been formed by trying to sell people popular culture for the last 20 years. Selling them food, of which I've done a bit as well, isn't all that different. And if you ask anyone in any industry who sells people culture why people buy things, they will simply tell you that people either like it or they don't. For things like slick fixtures etc. to have a huge impact, the item has to be popular to begin with. I'm not sure risotto in this country has ever reached a level of popularity where it could be propelled into the same category as pizza or pasta. My best guess as to why that is the case is because immigrants to America came from predominantly wheat growing nations and the starch in their meal was wheat and not rice. And if you just look at the Italian immigrantswho came to the U.S., they are predominantly from the south of Italy where pasta was king. I also think that risotto is labor intensive in a way that pasta isn't and that deters people from making it at home very often. I think paella suffers from the same prejudices that risotto suffers from. Because considering how easy it is to make, and considering how we Americans usually like those one dish meals, it never caught on here in a big way.

I just think that risotto isn't all that popular to begin with. If people were flocking to eat risotto like they flock to eat pasta, I'm sure business would have been better regardless of design. Considering they are on the block that started the brick oven pizza craze (John's) and the cheap pasta place craze (Cucina Stagionale if my memory recalls) it is perfectly situated to catch on. But it didn't. And I think that says more about the underlying product then then whether they do a good or bad job of it.

Well if you buy the answer that it's all in the taste, rather than the definition being a function of the technique, fine. Some people (including the owner) seem to have a different definition. But let's not get hung up on definitions. The stuff there tastes pretty good. I'm surprised it didn't catch on to a greater extent because I know the owner had plans to open other branches around the city.

Hey my info comes right from the owner of the place who explained it to me on opening day. The "not real" was his bit, not my comment. If he hadn't said that to me, I probably wouldn't have known the difference.

Well if you define "real" risotto as some guy stirring five cups of chicken stock into the rice in a steady motion, so what you end up with is a certain texture and richness to the rice, then one wouldn't call this real risotto. But you and I would recognize it as risotto since we are in the U.S. and not Milan. But don't take my comments in a way to turn you off the place. It's a great concept and the food is good, and especially good for takeout.

No from what I understand it's the same shortcut method that they use to make risotto in other places. It's not like they have all these guys on hand stirring it constantly to make it perfect.

I actually happened to walk by the day they opened and I had lunch there. I think it's a great place although they aren't really making real risotto there. But a perfect place for a casual lunch, especially by yourself. They allow BYO as well for something like $8.

Sandra - Yes natural casings. Here's a link to their newsletter. Juslt click on "What's on the Grill." Niman Ranch

I have been loving the Fearless Franks from Niman Ranch which I have been buying at Citarella. Best commercial dog I've had.

I've had the Lobel's Porterhouse and it is quite good. But I don't recall it tasting the same as Luger's. I don't think they age it the same way. Something that hasn't been raised are the quality of rib lamb chops. Good quality rib lamb chops that aren't too gamey aren't easy to find. Lobel's for some reason doesn't carry rib lamb chops with a big eye. They carry what one would call a fancy rack. I've found that Eli's Marketplace has the best rib lamb chops with Citarella a close second. Throw some double thick suckers on the grill and they are a joy to eat.

My sister-in-law happens to be over for the holidays and she lives in Montclair. She says you guys have shitty taste. But she also says that the best places to eat are; Epernay on Park Street which is a French bistro Dimitri's on Bloomfield Avenue which is a Greek/Middle Eastern place. She says of the places already listed that Deja Vu is good but she hates Blue Sky. She says the rest are pretty ordinary.

Fat Guy - You mean you can prove through emperical evidence that Luger's gets better steaks than other places? Oh my god. I thought it was all just a matter of opinion. Facts about steak? Golly.

Matthew - 1995 Bordeauxs are drinking really well right now so I'm sure you can drink the Chateau D'Armailhac now if you want to. I've had a few recent experiences with 1995 Lynch Bages and it was drinking great. But I would say a wine of that breed will be at it's peak between 2005-2008. As for the Jaboulet, I haven't had it. I've had the La Chapelle from that vintage and given where that wine was at the time I'd say 2004-2006. Can t help you with the Aussies.

Good work Mr. Nick. Next time you're going to have to take me with you. Who is this Mrs. Nick person anyway?

Just to add to this, one can't take too lightly the fact that the Formans go to the market themselves and pick out the meat. Just doing that alone probably raises the quality level between 25%-50%. Not going to the market yourself can have grave consequences, even for a pisher like me. I always go hand pick my steaks myself. Even at a place like Lobel's when the odds are the steaks are going to be good no matter what. There's a huge difference between getting a good steak and getting a great steak. And to get a great steak, my experience is that you have to go see it with your own eyes at the source.

Fat Guy - It was Henry Strauss who posts here as Hank who used to run a large NYC meat wholesaler and who used to sell to Luger's. According to Henry, the only way Luger's would do business with you is if you gave them first shot at choosing meat. If he knew he had a shipment coming that would meet their standards, he would call Luger's and one of the Forman sisters would come down with the stamp. Quite often they would come and buy very little because it wasn't up to their standard. The reason the wholesalers were willing to do this was the prestige of being able to sell Luger's. As it is today, it has been considered the best steakhouse in the U.S. for decades and if you were a wholesaler who could honestly say they sold them, it raised your stock in the eyes of the other steakhouses who would want to copy Lugers. I also hear that The Palm has tremendous buying power in the market and on days that they buy heavy they sometimes can clean out the market and move prices all by themselves. They also get special treatment because they are so huge. As for aged rib steaks, according to my old friend Mark Straussman at Campagna, the best ones come from DeBragga & Spitler. At least that was the case about 5 years ago. I understand Les Halles buys D & B meat, at least they used to at that time. So maybe our pal Bourdain can shed some light on this. I would imagine that S & W gets them from D & B or a place like that.

Deke - I'm not saying you have to prefer Luger, but I am saying that you have to notice that they age their steaks a certain way plus cook them a certain way as well. That is not a subjective thing. The steaks taste of those processes. That's why the measure is akin to a scientific measure. We are not measuring how much you like the process (which most people love by the way,) but whether it has affected the taste of the steak or not.

I'm stuck trying to figure out the difference between taste and good taste. I assume when Robert said taste that was code for "good taste." Because obviously bad taste isn't something he would think a chef should have.

"Like LXT, I don't recognize a distinction between intellectual and non-intellectual deliciousness, because anything above the level of banana pudding requires some degree of training to "get." I knew if I asked you to explain it my life would be easier. The definition of delicious in the context we are using it is, the word people use to explain the emotion they experienced when they visted Robuchon. Whether it's the right word or not, I have no opinion on. But it is the word that is used after people eat meals that they like so I feel like I am on firm ground using it here . So once again, the issue isn't whether people could find this kind of cooking delcicious, the issue is will they? And given the current environment of cuisine, and looking at it in the context of all cuisine, and given what people say about it, I have certain doubts. But my doubts will be assuaged when people come back from eating there and tell me their meal was delicious, i.e., they loved the way it tasted on a sensual level, not the way it made them think about the meal. You can't intelectualize sensuality.

No cross-examination. What's the point of defining delicious. Do you believe that there is a disagreement about the word delicious?

"For whom exactly are Robuchon's mashed potatos a metaphor, and for what?" For the people who liked eating them. And the metaphor is some statement about their lives. What the exact metaphor is, and will it have a lasting impact on culture, I'm not getting into that one but I think Whiting is close. But these are all things that history will prove out. But one can't argue with their short term relevence because you still hear of Robuchon's disciples serving them. I think to focus on that particular item, which I only used as an example because their fame has transcended being eaten by fanatic diners, is a mistake. The issue is that all things artistic that we take to in a big way are a reflection of ourselves. But some things are a reflection that become indelibly etched in our culture. And some things are temporary and fleeting. And Robert B. makes the excellent point that once upon a time Archie Shepp and Albert Ayler were extremely relevent to fans of jazz. But over time people came to realize that what they reflected was something that wasn't permanent in our culture. They just were a product of an "institutional vaccum" at the time. Bux - We are most certainly searching for insight. The sceptics among us keep asking how the Adrias of the world are going to be famous in the long term when people like you aren't saying on eGullet that your meal there was the most delicious meal you ever had? So far, nobody seems to have an answer for that question other than what I will encapsulate as "delicious doesn't matter. Intensity of flavor, interesting texture, contrasting temperatures, that makes the meal interesting to the extent where delicious, as we old timers define it, isn't as important as it used to be." Now I might have gotten it wrong but that's how it sounds to me. And I say nonsense to that. The issue always was, is now, and always will be who makes the most delicious food. And until you tell me that Adria makes the most delicious food in the world, you can't convinve me his techniques will last in the long term. Unless of course, somebody incorporates the technique into food that is drop dead delicious.

" So there's only one potato dish in the pantheon of haute cuisine greats, and that's Robuchon's pureed potatoes? I thought there were about thirty different potato dishes in that category" Fat Guy - You have identified what I believe is the right issue but you are focusing on the what I believe is the wrong aspect of it. Of course there are 30 great potato dishes. Unfortunately Adria's foamed potatoes aren't considered to be one of them. That is by diners that is. Chefs might very well think they should be included and possibly be number one. But for diners, they probably don't even make the top 100. Now you can make every argument in the world why that is. People have been brought up to expect potatoes in a starchy context, the publicity for the style of cooking hasn't been as good as the French haute cuisine machine's publicity, the Costa Brava is less traveled and less well known then other regions and thereare no hotels there, etc. I say that none of those things are the reason why. I say it's simpler than that. I say the food doesn't strike the same natural chord as the 30 other potato dishes. And I'm not making a judgement about potato foam when I say that, I'm making an observation about what is reported about the meals there. But then I also go on to say that for Adria's (generic) technique to be of lasting importance, somebody is going to have to correct that. Technical and intelectual arguments, as compelling as they might be, will not overcome a diner's preference for something that moves him on an emotional level.