The Camille

Olney did in fact sue the author in question, the once-famous Richard Nelson, in the mid-1980s and, I believe, won, setting a legal precedent of sorts. The strange part was that Nelson (if my memory is not too foggy) passed off the French recipe as an example of American Regional Cuisine, something that Nelson did much to popularize. Actually, I found an excellent discussion of the case in the site of Daniel Rogov, the food critic for Ha`aretz. Was tempted to plagarize it (har har) but instead will provide a link (look about 3/4 way down the page). More on Olney - another site that mentions the lawsuit: Olney's million dollar brussel sprout recipe According to Rogov, Nelson had 'lifted' 39 recipes from Olney. But the case was made based on the similarity of writing style in describing the recipe procedure - I doubt the duplication of ingredients or (completely restyled) procedure alone would have been enough basis for the suit: Regarding journo standards: Some info about plagiarism, copyright, and recipe acknowledgement from: The Guild of Food Writers (the professional association of food writers and broadcasters in the UK).

FG: I know there is a distinction, but I'm not sure how you apply ethics to plagiarism in certain cases. For example: If I publish a recipe that includes a standard bechamel sauce as one of the components, and list the ingredients and steps for it therein - is attribution necessary? The Olney/chicken stuffing example is similar, no? I just think unethical is a bit too strong a term for something this grey. If no law protects it, then what defines the standards?

As someone explained earlier, Olney would have had no legal leg to stand on, because it's not illegal to copy someone's recipe without attribution if you put it in your own words. It's just unethical. Unethical? So any subsequently published recipe that calls for placing stuffing under the skin of a chicken is unethical? And was Olney really the first person to do this? Or the first published example? Do you know how many published recipes contain identical lists of ingredients or specific processes? Are they all (minus one, I guess) unethical? How many recipes are so unique in this regard that they would pass your ethics standard? As far as I know, formulas and processes are not protected by copyright law. To obtain legal rights you would need to secure a patent (lawyers please correct me if I'm wrong). I've always understood this to mean that the 'ingredients and steps' portion of a published recipe are not copyright-able. Only the 'creative expression' (the 'in your own words' part) is something that can be copyright infringed, or plagiarised. You do not need to alter the list of ingredients (by omission or amount) in order to avoid copyright infringement. Is this incorrect?

I know what you mean. It's more applicable to low-end menu pricing, isn't it.... But then, when is the .95 price point a good idea? Does $23.95 sound more 'genteel'? If so, why? (that was the jist of my question - my lack of clarity there)

I'm with Holly too - it works, however annoying it might be to some people. But .95 isn't the way to go, if you go there. All price points should end in .99 Multiply the number of items you sell annually that end in .95 by four cents -- that's the impact this change could have on your annual income. In volume sales, it can be a significant amount, with the same psychological benefit as the .95.... So .95 makes no sense at all. Am I missing something?

How many items would you have at any given meal made at home for your daily meal? I think in order to fully appreciate any cuisine, you have to follow the traditional pattern of dining. Part of the appeal of 'Indian food' is the accompaniments, and the order/variety of courses. So I usually go all the way with that idea, depending on the regional food I'm serving/ordering. Go out to restaurants? At least twice a week. In NYC - you know the deal. In London - still much to explore, and so much more on offer. Any particular items you like to eat more often? Not really; I like most of what I've experienced so far. I'm trying to develop a better discernment of the different regional styles of food, at the moment. If you are non-Indian, could you tell us how often you prepare an Indian meal or even inspired by India meal? I've become so attuned to the cuisine that I'm probably always inspired by it now. Refined spicing routines, progressive menu planning, and providing more 'condiments' are what come to mind. Do you have or know kids that follow a similar pattern to yours in regards to Indian food? My nephews/nieces/cousins. So far, so good.... What Indian foods do these kids find most appealing to them? Have they grown up outside of India and eating Indian food? As with most children - the 'fun' foods are a safe bet. Snacks, breads, and desserts. In this way they develop a taste for the spicing routines without realising it. My nephew, in particular, loves nimki, will now only eat fresh made flatbreads and frybreads, and is crazy about coconut chutney, galebi, and (my poor version of) sandesh. Hopefully, the main dishes will follow, as his palate matures....

Hey, we posted the same thought at the same time - make a wish! You're right about the difference - I think it's something to do with the processing of grits (lime?) - probably someone on here will know more. Also, full germ v. de-germinated makes a big difference when you're trying to use cornmeal for making a bread starter - but that's going a bit off topic....

For the purposes of polenta, I think the key point is the grade of the grind (coarse v. fine). Ever try to make a decent polenta with fine ground cornmeal? Not very good, in my opinion. My grandmother used to sub grits when she couldn't get the proper grind of cornmeal (back in the day). Not the same taste, exactly, but a better approximation of the texture she was after. The same holds true for other 'flours or meals' (chickpea or gram being the one I'm experimenting with right now). I'll post my version of panizza/farinata/panelles once I've made the final adjustments. Basically, the fine ground of most available chickpea flour is the reason the recipe hasn't translated as well when outside Italy. I'm experimenting with grinding my own - something I've just realised my grandmother had done all along. Would be interested in others' opinions/experiences about this....

Hey, you forgot marrow spoons.

What do you mean? Eventually... or right after eating that way? Just wondering, as a natural left-hander (who had a hard time of it when visiting points East). BTW, I do know the reasoning behind it, but I'll leave the explanation, if necessary, for you....

You mean the Fat Guy could have been the heir to the Styrofoam Cup fortune? That's amazing - sounds like an inspiration for a Seinfeld episode. FG should write about that.... elyse: All my non-essentials are in London (I'm in NY, at the moment). But one of my cousins is supposedly working on an 'improved' version (she's got the last surviving prototype) - if I get a pic I'll upload to this thread. It's really ingenius in its simplicity, but it's like Ellen said about the spork - it doesn't add to your eating pleasure. I think it's enjoyable to 'slurp' up the stray strands of spaghetti. Plus, with the super efficient 'cutting action', you're left with a lot of tiny bits on your plate to deal with.... Re Thai customs: Don't they (sometimes) use sticky rice made into balls to scoop up food?

Fast food restaurant patrons very often eat with something called a spork. A combination spoon/fork thingie. It has fan websites and everything. There's also something called a floon.... I actually hold patent rights to an eating utensil my Grandfather invented. It was never marketed, or even named - we just called it "Nanu's spaghetti spoon". It's not really a spoon, though. It looks like a cross between one of those pasta grabbers and a honey twirler thingie (not sure what that's called, either). We used to eat spaghetti with them all the time; my Grandfather made quite a few prototype sets, in various mediums (metal, ceramic, wood). It twirls the spaghetti into a perfect bite sized portion, and then (and here is the best part!) the sharp grabby protrusion bits cut off the excess. No batteries needed, no moving parts. I never realised how weird that was until I read this thread. I wonder how many people design and craft their own customised eating utensils? There must be others....

I've read a fair bit of your work. Maybe I'll go back for second read and see if I can spot examples of 'tailor' v. 'nature' (sort of a free writing lesson for me). Thanks for answering my pesky questions, too. David, if you can't be considered 'established' as a food writer, then I'm really Annette Funicello. But isn't 'passion' an expression of ego? Not that I disagree with what mamster says about the general move to informal style, which might be another topic altogether, in that it has positive and negative repercussions. But is egoism a negative? (mamster - not implying you're saying that, just not sure) There is a glut of writers and writing out there. Part of the immediacy and identification of the informal style gives the reader the idea that, "Hey, I can probably write too!". Not to be elitist about it - maybe they can, and they should certainly try, if they're interested. And of course they need to appreciate that writing is not just a passion, but a craft. But I'd like to think that the only point behind the newbie third person writing rule is: It develops craft. And craft will help you to better express your ego in an appropriate (or entertaining) style. I don't think it should be taught as if the goal is the elimination of ego, because I think all writing is ego-driven, or probably should be. Interesting. I'm trying to figure a way to argue that 'fallible' is only possible if you've got a well developed ego. Please stop me if I'm wrong.... I also don't see it as a question of "Who the hell should care what I think?" One of the challenges of writing is making people care what you think. Isn't that the passion that precedes the passion for the subject? I don't see how that can be done, in any style, venue, or pov narrative, without being ego-driven. Craft is just the means to that end. Is this not applicable to non-fic writing? (Obviously, not referring to hard news or technical writing, although....) Thanks for the story. A photo sig is the ultimate, eh? But don't you miss those letters, faxes and phone calls? E-mails just aren't as satisfying, imo....

Craig, They're even better than rabbit cacciatore Edit: Never follow animal acts, kid acts, or 9/11 nostalgia anecdotes - but I know what you mean - me too.

I'd agree. But that's the sticky bit, isn't it? What interests me is how much of the 'I' in non-fiction, is fiction. It seems the current style of first person non-fiction writing is really pseudo-non-fiction. Or fiction presented as non-fiction. Not disingenuous in terms of the food, but in the characterisation behind the 'I'. (Note: I don't have a problem with that, just wondering how you non-fic guys see it)