docsconz

Yes, unless one's height relative to the table is such one is then performing a bizarro mix of a Laurie Anderson piece and the mating dance of the Blue Footed Boobie as one bobs one's head about and tries to judge height and distance and angle to get it right. I believe we'll simply have to agree to disagree; you may not find it awkward, I find having to angle myself at such a cant that my boss can tell what style of bra I'm wearing to be awkward in the old-fashioned sense of the word. For that matter, had it been my father in law, uncles, or heaven forfend grandfather, it would have been equally awkward. ← I very much enjoy the various serving pieces at Alinea. While I haven't found the wire to be awkward, I will take your word that you did. The easy solution for not wanting to bend towards it for whatever reason, I think would be to pick it up and bring the piece to your mouth.

I too think the wine pairings are a must. I have dined there three times (all documented on this thread) and each time I have had wine pairings. They have been uniformly superb and never have I had mis-match. I can't imagine doing the tour choosing one or two bottles to go with everything. The only way I would consider not doing the pairings would be if I was there with about seven other wine drinkers and we wanted to order a bottle for every two or three courses. With that you can get sufficient vinous variety to match the variety of food on your plate (or antiplate)(or wire, etc.)

"Umami" ain't no bad word. It is a Japanese term for "meatiness", a taste characteristic in addition to the usual salty, sweet, tart and bitter. It is a very good thing. I am not aware of any U.S. laws singling out the production of goose foie gras rather than duck, although that doesn't mean they don't exist. I think one of the reasons duck foie gras is more popular is that the byproducts of the production (i.e. the rest of the duck) is more popular in the U.S. than goose, although I can't say why. Goose or duck fat are both very tasty, but the foie gras fat is different from either. It is actually a little richer and morre delicate with a more distinctive flavor.

I, for one, will look forward to it. By the way, Welcome to eGullet and good luck with your interview!

May I please make clear that Ms. Hale is NOT the person who didn't know what "star anise" (or "butter poached lobster" or a "vanilla chai emulsion") was? That's a completely different example posted by someone else in this thread. Just want to keep everything tidy. Ms. Hale has taken enough grief without being thrown someone else's. ← I think you owe Ms. Hale a dinner - complete with foie gras

Foie gras is not thed easiest thing to prepare if you have never done so - especially if you haven't ever eaten it before. My suggestion would be to try some made by someone who does it well. Then you will know its true culinary value. It is rich, creamy and full of umami. Due to its richness it tends to go well with sweet and acidic accompaniments - various fruit preparations are common. Enjoy!

Your bias may be heavy, but at least it is no longer total. I can see where you are coming from. I wouldn't expect the greatest possible meal unless I had outside reason to such as a trusted recommendation. I have, however, had some truly outstanding meals at new restaurants suc as at Alinea and The Inn at Erlowest when matt Secich was there. Sometimes the gamble itself is fun.

I think this is a good adjunct to Fat Guy's rule, which I think as he expanded upon above makes more sense as there rae times when going to a new restaurant is very attractive.

Blue Egg Farm isn't a test site for Monsanto by any chance?

Proper seasoning of food is probably one of the most difficult things to master as one is preparing food for many different palates. It will be impossible to please everyone, though I agree that it is easier to add salt than take it away. I also find that the more salt I use, the more I need to use. It is rare for me though to find oversalted food, but when I do, I consider the dish as ruined.

Great topic! I tend to agree with you. Without first year or early patronage no new restaurant would ever get to one year. Besides, if it is a place or a chef I am interested in, I want to get a sense of it. I will be more likely to cut a new restaurant some slack and not expect perfection unless the opening has been particularly haughty and full of attitude like Del Posto was.

Thank you so much for posting this Fuchsia. I did read that article and although I couldn't recall the details and where I had read it, it was this experience I had in the back of my mind as I have been discoursing through this thread and prior to it. I find the whole matter fascinating. I would imagine that this phenomenon is not limited to westerners with non-westernized Chinese food or Chinese with western food. I would think that even within these broader cultural contexts and with other Asian and African cultures we would find the same things.

So you are saying Parker does not understand: "tradition. finesse, elegance"????? Have you any first hand evidence to support this? Can you cite something from his book or notes for eg --that would support these sweeping claims? also Please explain what exactly finesse and elegance are and what they have to do with tradition? These terms are tossed around quite a bit. Also--I would love for you to explain which wineries do not want Parker around. as well as your comment that he is "not welcome" in Burgundy. Lastly, It is ultimately amusing that all this silliness and innuendo and gossip are of interest to anyone. Especially anyone who really loves wine. Parker is a wine writer and critic, if he not one's cup of tea--then one shouldn't subscribe or certainly be bothered by anything Parker writes. Really? What's the fuss? More importantly--why is of concern to anyone who doesn't subscribe to Parker that they have to run him down even take the time to "jump in"??? I would really love to know why these people care? ← Love him, hate him or anywhere in between, it should be no surprise why people care. Robert Parker is the most influential wine critic on the planet, possibly ever. His ratings or the ratings from the WA have an inordinate influence on the price of wine and more importantly the kinds of wines produced aiming to "please the Parker palate" or at least what is often perceived as such rightly or wrongly. For that a lot of people resent Parker, especially those who make wines that don't generally fit that perceived profile. Frankly, as a buyer I would be very happy if my favorite wines did not get good scores from him, although my ego might suffer a little bit Of course, you already know all this, but I thought I would supply an answer to your question anyway. I am not being sarcastic, John. You obviously have a very extensive knowledge of wine and the wine world and I believe your question is a rhetorical one.

I think for many Americans texture is important, especially if it is with an unfamiliar ingredient. I think most people regardless of their culture prefer the familiar to the unknown. So while the texture may be the same as with something familiar, in a new context it becomes threatening. Americans do have an aversion to fish bones, as it is drummed in at an early age that fish bones can be dangerous and something to watch out for. Clearly it is not the bones per se as we seem to have no problem with chicken bones or ribs . I think the premise of this thread is interesting not just to explore what Chinese eat that Westerners tend not to but the reverse as well. What is strange and unpalatable to most Chinese that westerners take as a matter of course?

So I won't ask about your favorite foods! Thanks for answering, Ben and others. I guess that the timeframe of palate develoment is not different between cultures. It is just the food they are trained to eat and enjoy, the acquired tastes are different between cultures. That is what I had thought. Admittedly the small sample of this discussion is not a scientific study, but it does make sense.

Sneakeater, i think you hit one of the main problems of Mexican Food not just in NYC, but in most of the US on the head. One other issue that shouldn't be a problem in the DF is the quality of strictly Mexican ingredients. They may be available in NY, but not at the same level of quality as in Mexico. Sandoval may or may not do a great job at his restaurant in Mexico City, but it is more likely that he will there for all the above reasons. Nice summary, Sneakeater!

The question you are seeking a solution for should NOT be structured around ONLY the Chinese and their implied weird and exotic food pecadilloes. The question is cultural, generational and geographic. You eat what others of your peer group eat. People, including the Chinese, can and do adapt because we are not hardwired to prefer only certain types of foods. In fact maybe we are more adventuresome in our approach to food than most ethnic groups as I believe that coming from a civilization that is cursed with a history of great famines, we had to adapt or perish. A common question coming from the Chinese upon encountering a new plant or animal is "Is that good to eat??" The ensuing conversation would be a discussion on what way is best to cook the creature or plant. Gawd, I learned to love mature cheeses, didn't I?? I would even approach a hot dog once in a while ...on the verge of starvation. ← The question is centered around China and its food compared to the "west" because much of what is eaten in either place is very different from the other. There is no implication of weirdness or "exotic food pecadillos". Your explanation about the expansiveness of palates in China makes some sense and can certainly be extended beyond China. Many European culinary traditions enjoy eating many things that most Americans would gag over such as most forms of offal. I am sure that is true in other parts of the world too. However, it is your statement that you "Learned to love mature cheeses' that I find particularly interesting and getting to the crux of the question. By the fact that you said you learned to love them, I take it that there was a bit of an experience curve to it and that it did not happen all at once. The same would be true for most Americans and possibly Europeans when it comes to mature cheeses. They are an acquired taste. Even your statement about the hot dog addresses the question and confirms the observation that often what is routine in one culinary culture is alien to another. I am not looking to ascertain which cuisine is "superior." or any other subjective value comparisons. As a non-Chinese American with an interest in Chinese cuisine and a desire to know more and understand it better, I am curious as to how far these differences extend. I know that the differences can be overcome and different cultures can approximate an understanding of others with effort. I also know that China is a very large country with many distinct regional and ethnic traditions and that what may apply to one tradition does not necessarily apply to others. Obviously this is a very complex question, but to the extent that generalizations may be valid, I think it is an interesting one.

I don't follow you. I don't think anyone dissed anything. I wasn't the one who separated technique out in an arbitrary fashion, you did. That is what i respectfully disagreed with. As for "tastes great" and generalizations about French haute cuisine, I don't know exactly where your info comes from but to me it crosses the line of confusing subjective opinion and objective fact and that is when i step away, before the circular discourse starts. We must not be following each other's reasoning and words in the way each apparently has intended them. My point was, as Mikeb19 understood, is that there are good and bad practitioners of just about any style of cuisine and even a solid foundation in fundamental technique is no guarantee of a good meal as the creative concepts used can be distorted or off-base (to any given palate) regardless of the skill and technique used. I had an unenjoyable meal at Pierre Gagnaire even though the skill, technique and creativity were all quite apparent. I mentioned French haute cuisine as an example of a cuisine, that at least in France, puts a premium on creativity. Michelin rewards restaurants not just for great technique, which should be a given at that level, but also for creativity and style. Obviously some do it better or more consistently than others. Hypermodernism is a movement. It is not a specific cuisine or style although most chefs who would be considered as hypermodern share a few traits. Among them, as I understand and see the movement, are: -Technical creativity - stretching of creative boundaries by using new techniques and combinations of ingredients -Science - an interest in and understanding of the science of food preparation as a guide to development and use of new techniques and flavor and textural development - so-called "Molecular Gastronomy" -Aesthetic creativity - stretching the boundaries of aesthetic presentation and often the ergonomics of eating. The best of these chefs have succeeded in defining their own styles. -Tradition. The best of the hypermoderns, IMO, don't eschew tradition. They use it as a basis and jumping off point for their cuisine. Ferran Adria told me that his cooking is based on traditional Catalan cuisine. Obviously he has taken it in new and different directions, but it still infuses his culinary thought. Wylie Dufresne's work uses the varied culinary traditions of NYC for his framework. His "Pickled calf's tongue, fried mayonnaise,onion streusel" is a classic example of that. -Wit and whimsy. This may not be a universal trait, but I find that it is common amongst at least my favorite practitioners. The aforementioned fried mayonnaise, is an example of that as are many of the culinary "trompe l'oiel" type presentations such as Wylie's Carrot-coconut "sunnyside up" -Taste, Flavor and Texture. These are major components for any chef or cuisine and no less so for these chefs. Sometimes the flavors aimed for are familiar, but with different textures or presentations. Sometimes the flavors are totally unique and novel. While they may not always hit the mark for deliciousness, the best practitioners do a remarkable amount of the time. Some chefs may look for shock value. While that may be avant-garde, it is not necessarily a hypermodern trait. -Ingredients. The best practitioners use the best ingredients they can get. Why should they be any different than any other top chef? Unusual ingredients are common, but not necessary. The fancier the restaurant, the more likely these will come into play. Obviously a number of traits pertinent to the hypermodern kitchen are common with any good kitchen. This has obviously gone beyond addressing the quote above, but I wanted to define, hopefully a bit more clearly, what I at least am referring to when I am talking about "hypermodern cuisine" For any given restaurant this is clearly true in that they must find a critical mass of patrons to be financially viable. So long as that is met it is not necessary to have widespread recognition or acceptance.

Yes, many restaurants are terrible. I don't think I've eaten a single good meal that someone else has made me in a very long time....(includes some highly rated restaurants - how they got their rating I'll never know, because the food sucked) That's why I'm opening my own restaurant in the next couple years (hopefully next year), but that's another story... Hypermodern food isn't taking off in NY because New Yorkers are not easily impressed. From what I've heard (from inside the kitchens) of 'hypermodern' places in NY, theres not much to be impressed about... And you're right when you say some people are good at it, and some aren't. Goes for anything in life. Most of the top places in NY and elsewhere are French, because most of the best chefs are French-trained (not my opinion, just my observations). ← The part I highlighted in bold is where we disagree. Many hypermodern techniques have been incorporated into mainstream and successful high end restaurants as have many aesthetic components. The difference is that the hypermodernists continue to push the creative envelope and don't always play it safe. By its very nature, this type of vanguard or "avant-garde" is always greeted with skepticism until it has slipped into the very fabric of a culture. There was a day when Impressionist painting was considered outrageous or technical gimmickry, yet it now is the epitome of conservative taste.

My sense is that for the mature Chinese palate that is largely true - at least for foods from within their tradition. Is that the case at all ages? When are certain more strongly flavored foods introduced to children? How do most Chinese adapt to non-Chinese cuisines? I trust that their is little that they would be squeamish about eating from an ingredient POV, but what about flavor or textural profiles? What kinds of things will most Chinese from China as opposed to ethnic Chinese who were raised in Western culture not eat?

I think you missed my point, although I may not have made it very well with my last sentence being especially confusing. What I meant was that the statement itself is extreme. Perhaps David Kinch is the best chef in the US right now. I am not arguing against that possibility or denigrating Chef Kinch in any way. However, I believe that such an absolute statement about any chef is absurd, even if he may the one whose work in your experience you most appreciate. I won't belabor this point as I think it is now largely a matter of expression and semantics. I just wanted to clarify my original statement. Hopefully I have done so, but if I haven't I will leave off this line of discussion.

Superb posts, U.E. Thanks for the education. Unfortunately, I am only acquainted with Chinese food as served in NA and Europe (to a lesser extent), which I enjoy.It is fascinating to see the food you so beautifully photographed and so eloquently described.

I very much enjoyed my meal at Pujol. I will have to remember to try and record it. Thanks for the heads up!

Apples and Oranges. It doesn't work. One can't compare a cuisine based on tradition, history, culture, the arts, sustainablity, terroir, and the ingrained sensibilty of the peoples and what their cuisine means to them to a movement or trend whose only common denominator is an emphasis on technique and the need to create. ← Why not? Quality is quality and can be seen and not seen with many different styles or traditions. If someone is using good ingredients and creative techniques with creative combinations that look and taste great and are fun to boot, why should that be classified with someone who is using creative techniques and either not using them well or with poor ingredients or poorly conceived dishes? Why should that be any different than someone doing the same thing with techniques taken from the classic French lexicon for example? French haute cuisine also puts a premium on creativity but perhaps with less of an emphasis on new techniques. Use of those techniques even if done with technical skill is still no guarantee of a successful dish. I think separating out technique is an arbitrarycriterion for dissing a whole style of cooking. Some are good at it and some aren't. I stand by my statement.

Interesting, but is it true? I find it difficult to believe that there aren't foods that are highly regarded in Chinese culinary circles that aren't acquired tastes and that all Chinese kids eat all kinds of Chinese foods equally. If so, what is the secret?