MatthewB

Flights from NYC to GR are inexpensive.

Nothing other than the souffle & that's in his biography. I'll pull Complete Techniques this evening & come with some ideas. Would probably be fun to discuss with you. How's that sound?

I picked up the same barley malt at a local health food store. Hadn't used it yet though. Much of my free time is being devoted to this weekend's Heartland gathering, so it will be at least a week before I'm back to some of this. However, I did do the original Plum Torte this Sunday. Yum!

And disappointed that you & yours won't be with us.

I missed humor. My bad. As far as equipment, I've a WSM & I plan on picking up more lump charcoal later this week. (I've also a Weber 22.5" kettle grill.) I've thermometers & whatever else we'd need. If you can tell me what you want, I should have it. If not, either pack yours or I'll try to pick up whatever. My plan is to begin smoking first thing Saturday AM, hang out tending that all day, & trying to remain sober enough for the evening activities.

Cool. You plan on assisting with the smoking Saturday? I could also braise some lamb shanks, etc. if we're concerned about enough meat.

Looking forward to this weekend! I think everything is more or less under control. Friday's dinner is planned. Saturday's party will feature meat & wine. (Of course, we'll also have a bit of booze & non-alcoholic beverages available.) Other than meat & wine, I'm a bit unsure what we're going to end up with. I'm going with the flow but if anyone wants to definitively make sure we've more than those two, please post or let me know via PM. (I've planning on some starters from Nero.) Anything else that anyone would me to attend to while I've a chance?

Yes, thanks very very much. I'll be making this Sunday morning.

FG, it's your site, your ball, & your rules. And I will abide by your rules. (Even when I disagree.)

Sorry Matthew but you can't run away from what's in black and white. Bayless's contradictory statments have been extensively documented on this thread, are here for all to see, and do not bear repeating. Yet you continue to deny what's in plain sight. Last time I confronted you, this is what happened: FG, thanks but this bait isn't very appealing. I'll pass. Now we're right back to square one: you denying everybody's claims without making or defending any of your own. That's not what a debate is about, Matthew. How about having enough respect for your fellow eGulleters to actually make an argument, or at least having enough respect for us to stay out of an argument when you say you will? Sorry, FG, that's not the way debate works. Once someone can legitimately establish the claim of hyprocrisy, then I'll attempt to refute it. But there's nothing to refute. The Emperor has no clothes. (Though you hold an opinion to the contrary.) I'm more interested in debate founded in generally accepted philosophical principles of argumentation rather than debate that's decided via rhetoric. And, I'm not really sure about your claim that I'm being disrespectful. But I respect your right to hold your opinions.

Matthew, you've already been offered the opportunity to refute the claim of hypocrisy and you've refused. Now you're back denying it even though you can't or won't answer the arguments. Make a choice: either explain why Bayless's ideological history is compatible with his current sellout views, or stop embarrassing yourself by repeating a point you refuse to support. Right back at you. I haven't seen anyone--including you--actually *establish* the claim of hypocrisy. Lots of accusations. Lots of grand claims. Lots of rhetoric. But no establishment. None. Not sure who exactly should be embarassed, but I'll not decide that for others.

In other words, Rick Bayless disagrees with Rick Bayless, and FG is pointing out what a hypocrite sellout Rick Bayless is. In addition, FG disagrees with Rick Bayless and thinks the "salsa" of which Rick Bayless speaks so highly is so awful that there are really only two possibilities: that Rick Bayless is lying, or has no taste. Rick Bayless doesn't disagree with Rick Bayless. But go on.

In other words, FG disagrees with Rick Bayless. Not sure about anything more than that.

I mean that if and when BK customers start demanding organic food, many of the folks who sneer at BK will be sneering at organic food. Or new sneering targets will emerge.

Thirty years ago most people weren't sure how to spell organic. Now it's a fast growing (in some places, the fastest growing) segment of the food market right across North America. If BK customers started demanding organic food, you can bet BK would find a way to deliver. And if they couldn't, their customers would go to a fast food joint that could. You mean "organic" is an emerging rationalized economic market?

Paula, Thanks so much for this Q&A as well as your regular good-natured self on eGullet discussion boards. Quick question . . . I believe you had a "New Age Plum Torte" recipe in the original run of Eating Well magazine. Alas, I've lost that recipe. Internet searches have turned up nothing. Any chance of the recipe?

The bastard loaves turned out ok but I wished it was a bit sweeter. (I did the white bread recipe but used 1/2 wheat flour. ) I was going to do white bread yesterday but ended up working on clearing the back 40 instead.

I hardly think my invocation of fundamentalism degenerated this thread. I think the degeneration may have occurred much much earlier. A couple of points . . . First, I haven't seen anyone mention--let alone defend--relativism in this thread until you mentioned it in your question that I've quoted. (And I hardly think that the opposite of fundamentalism is relativism.) Second, my point is that Rick Bayless is being held to certain norms concerning food & its uses. What I haven't seen is a switch from the actual norms that Mr. Bayless espouses to a cogent rationale for the application of said norms. Once again, norms & the application of norms of two quite different things. Of course, none of the above may matter. Perhaps this thread is simply self-reflexive & somehow therapeutic for those who feel betrayed.

One comes up with fundamentalism via the definition that I quoted which notes, "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views." If one takes, for example, the Chef's Collaborative Mission & Principles and then extrapolates those norms into specific applications in order to judge Rick Bayless, well . . . that's a form of food fundamentalism. Fundamentalism typically confuses moral norms with the application of said norms. That's why "judgment" is such a tricky & subtle process.

Looks like we're starting to pull together the meat portion of our Saturday evening meal. Anyone have any input as to the rest of the meal? Gualojote provided the excellent suggestion that folks head off to the farmer's market in the AM & that we put together some dishes from those purchases. Will this be enough or should we also have some pre-planned dishes other than the meat?

Ahhhh, you've sold-out too.

Some might argue that some of such principles are here. Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views." And fire grill heretics into confession? Nah. Just create long threads on eGullet denouncing them. Kinda like the stereotypical "Wednesday morning church-ladies coffee-time." Sure, why not. I get a penny a click for every thing linked from the Weekend Update. Because we don't have anything better or more positive to do?

Some might argue that some of such principles are here. Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views." And fire grill heretics into confession? Nah. Just create long threads on eGullet denouncing them. Kinda like the stereotypical "Wednesday morning church-ladies coffee-time."

Some might argue that some of such principles are here. Following the notion of fundamentalism, one would need to extend the principles via "rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views."

One dictionary definition of fundamentalism is: We're all familar with religious fundamentalism. But how might "food fundamentalism" manifest itself? I'm convinced that "food fundamentalism" exists.