docsconz

Carpenter and Main in Norwich is good. There are a number of good restaurants in the area, though hanover itself is pretty much lacking in good fine dining. Nearby Woodstock and Queechee probably have the highest concentration of fine dining restaurants in the area. I posted some recent experiences here. Good luck!

Good news. My part of NENY was spared as well despite warnings. A frost this late could create havoc. The general warning here is not to plant frost sensitive plants until after Memorial Day, though.

Ditto. When I was 25, I was in Medical School and lucky if I went anywhere or ate anything outside of the neighborhood where I went to school. It didn't get much better when I did my residency, but over the last 15 years, I have had (some) means and motive. Now with 1 son in college and another about to start, my discretionary budget is severely reduced. I am leveraging my available time and have started a secondary business centered around my blog and food writing and photography with the hope of offsetting expenses and eventually making a profit. I don't know if the latter will ever come to pass, especially in this economy, but I am trying my best. My regular work can be very intense when I am there, but leaves me with significant time to unwind which I have applied to this area since I joined eGullet in 2003 when it was still just eGullet.com.

Um... No. Actually, none of them is a factual statement. They are all statements of opinion. And, more to the point, they convey the sense of "my choices and priorities are better than your choices and priorities." Sorry, I didn't read your original statement closely enough. I typed my reply in haste this morning. Yes, I see they're all statements of opinion. And to expand on my other point, that if those statements cause you to feel put upon, well, some people might react negatively, while some people might listen to you, and of those that listen, they might choose to use your information as they see fit depending on other factors. So people perceive AW as condescending. So what? Do they really think she talks like that all the time to everyone she encounters? Even the people who she works with? That's....interesting. I feel as if her critics want her to be the perfect media figure for the foodie community. Not going to happen. Look... I don't find Alice particularly condescending, because I agree with many of the things she says. However, the fact of the matter is that when she makes a statement that other people can reasonably interpret as saying that her ideas and priorities are more important and correct than their ideas and priorities, and when the statement conveys the flavor of "if only you would just improve yourself, you would be more like me and see that I'm right and you're wrong" . . . well, people are going to find that condescending. And you know what? That is pretty much the dictionary definition of condescending to someone. Whether or not you think it's....interesting that some people may find Alice Waters condescending is really not germane. Neither is it germane how she speaks to her colleagues, co-workers and peers. Indeed, part of "talking down to people" is that you don't condescend to the people you consider equals. Members of the peerage don't condescend to one another, they condescend to the peasants -- to their "lessers." Who cares how Alice Waters is perceived by the staff at Chez Panisse? So, what is germane is exactly how Alice Waters message is reasonably perceived by someone who owns a $100 pair of running shoes but doesn't spend $6 a bunch on heirloom grapes. Yes... some people might listen to her and some people might not be turned off by the way she expresses her message. I'm just explaining how it is also reasonable for some other people to find it condescending as a way of explaining what some are calling a "backlash," and also suggesting that she might reach more people if she changed her modes of expression a bit. I think of Alice Waters a bit like a kind of "sustainable/slocal/organic Martha Stewart" -- which is to say that, like Martha, she's holding herself up as an example of a person that everyone should strive to be emulate, like a kind of quasi-messianic foodie. And as Martha and others have found out, when circumstances -- be they economics, publicity, whatever -- go against this sort of public figure, so can public opinion. And the next thing you know, they're calling for Barabbas. ← Well stated, Sam, nevertheless, it is important to separate a backlash for the person from the ideas as some seem unable to do.

There are plenty of changes to industrial agriculture that would be welcome from a sustainability perspective, though I'd be reluctant to embrace anything that increases the price of food for poor people unless it's based on a real cost-benefit analysis as opposed to precautionary-principle mumbo jumbo. But let's ask what locavores like Alice Waters are really advocating. I think we should be clear on that, so as not to be setting up any straw men. My understanding is that the Alice Waters vision for the world involves local, small-scale agriculture providing for 100% (or 90+% if you allow for the chocolate and other probably imported items in use at Chez Panisse) of our food supply. This is simply impossible without large-scale reorganization of society. A substantial percentage of the world's population would need to be compelled to either: 1-labor in the fields, 2-become vegetarian, or 3-die. Or, most likely, a combination of the three. ← Is there anyway of supplying Mexico City or Beijing with enough pork that would fit into this local small scale model (Waters et al) of agriculture? Are there realistic models for this? If not then what is the population cut off for a city to feed itself from local small scale agriculture? Many population centres are not located in areas that are suitable for large scale production of any model, what happens to these? ← If Mexico City is relying on industrial pork, that is a relatively recent phenomenon. One of the problems with industrial agriculture is that it is pushing many small farmers out of business in countries like Mexico, further contributing to urban congestion and illegal immigration.

Well then where are his LED flicker lights made? Charlestown, Mass? Okay, then where was the plastic for the LED lights made, Quincy? The recharger - Cambridge? And all the other tiny little parts inside? How can anyone calculate which light source has the better "carbon footprint" without a p.H.D. in something I can't pronounce? Also, something I found trivial from the post: "[Taranta's wine list] even boasts of a wine from Chile that is so eco-friendly that it is certified to be carbon-neutral in its delivery." How can this be? Was the plane that flew it here certified to not have fuel in it? Or did someone walk the wine here from Chile? ← The candles are likely made in China as well, but they need be purchased once and last for a very long time. The candles don't last very long and need to be purchased over and over again. You already don't give much credence to the idea of carbon offsets. i believe that is where the winery gets their "carbon-neutral" certification from.

Ok, gfron1, I'll bite I make a decent living, but have my expenses, etc. and can't afford an unlimited travel or dining budget. For me it is a question of priorities and philosophy. I have seen too many people work hard and save all their lives for a retirement that never comes or if if it does come, it doesn't last or they can't enjoy it. I believe that while one shouldn't forget to think about the future, neither should one forget the present. When one is older, often the most valuable things one has are memories. Food, family and travel are priorities for me, so I spend more than I should on those things. I am also fortunate that my job allows for a lot of time off.

From here: The Ethics Code Thingie ← Thanks. Missed that.

The issue with real candles is that they are made and shipped from China with a high carbon footprint. Rechargeable LED flicker candles are very long-lived and use little energy resulting in a lower carbon footprint. The safety issue is not a small factor either. The flicker LEDs are pretty darn good and romantic as well. I suppose that if one can find a good source of locally made candles, the carbon footprint advantage may disappear, even if the economic advantages don't.

A little blurb from Zagat blog on green restaurants.

While there are hardcore locavores who advocate eating nothing but locally produced and raised food, I'm not sure that Alice Waters is one of them. That is not to say that she doesn't advocate eating locally grown and raised food when possible nor does it mean that she doesn't not advocate more local food production. She clearly does advocate for both of those things, but I never got a sense of radical exclusivity. Even if she does, that is not what Slow food is all about, though it does support and encourage locavorism when possible.

To take Rob's dessert analysis re trendiness a little further, bad modern desserts are not necessarily bad because of they are modern, but because not everyone can pull them off or have good creative sensibilities. Is that any different than the fact that not every pastry chef makes classic desserts as well as others? Those who do pull off modern desserts make desserts that are really noteworthy not just for their novelty, but also because they are delicious. To me something truly creative and delicious is the epitome of fine dining whether it be in the savory or the sweet realms.

I also don't personally care if a comp is disclosed so long as the assessment is honest and accurate. A lot of people, however, do care. They feel betrayed if they've read someone's assessment of a product or service, and it then comes to light that there was a comp involved. They see it as dishonest. So the code reflects that. In addition, the disclosure requirement may, it is hoped, help keep authors extra honest. ← I wasn't debating the code, but Dave's ethical dichotomy. I simply added my own opinion with an example. It is reasonably clear how to sign on to the code, but should one sign on and the code change, how does one sign off if that person is no longer in agreement with it?

I'll add that I personally don't care if a comp is disclosed so long as the assessment is honest and accurate. Now I don't know for a fact whether or not David Rosengarten was comped on items he used to evaluate for his newsletter, though I suspect that he was. Though his writing couldn't have sounded more like a shill, the products he recommended that I tried were always excellent and generally as great as he claimed. That is all that I felt mattered.

I get the distinction between the stories but don't agree with the ethical difference. The winemaker was offering you a sample. If you like it, why not write about it? if you don't you can either still write that you don't like it or ignore it. The ethical problem would be if you solicited the wine with a promise to write about it. The quid pro quo element is an essential one when it comes to this issue. Frankly, I don't care if someone is comped or not so long as the writer provides an honest assessment.

That is a possibility though certainly not a given. Another possibility is that a failure in large scale monoclonal industrial agriculture could lead to massive famine and starvation. Failures could be due to any number of reasons including for example pesticide resistant insects, viruses,etc. perhaps the greatest advantage of small scale agriculture is a greater preservation of biodiversity making those large scale die-offs more unlikely. It is sheer hubris to think that science can and will stay a step ahead of any eventuality. The more narrowly we focus our food supply (that is what large-scale industrial agriculture does), the more likely we will be subject to some catastrophic occurrence, not to mention the more likely it becomes that we lose valuable food items from a gustatory point of view, which is a separate point.

Ultimately, I think that it is important for someone to be transparent about their experience and how they operate, whether it be posting on eGullet forums, a personal blog or a paid piece of journalism. I think that it is ultimately unimportant whether there has been disclosure on whether a specific dish or even a specific meal has been comped so long as it is readily apparent that the writer accepts comps (or freebies). This perhaps applies more to a personal blog than it does to a forum like eGullet's, since the forums contain a wider variety of people posting on specific topics resulting in less obvious transparency based upon a knowledge of who that poster is and how that poster operates. A blog is different because the blogger has an opportunity to state how that blogger operates and it is easier to discern patterns over smaller sample sizes.

One thing that hasn't necessarily been considered is the pressure on a restaurant when they know that a reviewer like Bruni is in the house, whether he is supposed to be anonymous or not. I could imagine rather than getting a better meal because of the knowledge, the reviewer may get a decidedly worse meal than the average Joe because of the additional nerves both in FOH & BOH. Not everyone responds with improved performance in these circumstances. Holly's point may allow the restaurant to take a deep breath and better show what they are capable of. The reviewer can supplement his own direct experience with anonymous dining from a corps of trusted sidekicks to assess the day to day variability of a restaurant as well as the general approach to the average customer.

As I've mentioned before in other threads, "organic" doesn't necessarily mean any of these things. An organic farmer can practice intensive, non-sustainable agriculture and use any number of pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers, etc. so long as those things are all "organic." In the United States, for example, an organic farmer can use copper sulfate. Copper sulfate has been banned in Europe because it is a permanent soil contaminant that has high toxicity for both humans and fish. But it is organic. Similarly, as pointed out in this article at Huffington Post: Personally, I have always felt that small farmer was far more important than organic, although I recognize that boutique small farmers will never be able to grow enough food to feed this country, and that we need to figure out ways to do large-scale industrial farming and raising of livestock in a more responsible and ethical way. I think that some of this can be a matter of cutting Alice some slack because she's preaching to the choir, and in this instance you're the choir. To a certain extent, she's preaching to the choir to me as well, and I don't find her personally all that annoying to me, but putting myself into someone else's shoes, I can understand how she might be to them. I have some experience with this sort of thing myself. I am a lifelong performer and consumer of classical music, and I believe that our society would be a lot better if the arts were a larger part of our educational curriculum and everyday lives. I also believe that, as a culture, the popular music and art that most of us consume is pablum, and not only reflective of but contributing to, in a vicious cycle, the dumbing-down of our society and our cultural lives. At the same time, I recognize that, as much as I believe it would make our society better for people to listen to Radiohead less and Benjamin Britten more, I'm not going to accomplish much by telling people that if they stopped spending so much money on Nikes and start spending on tickets to the Metropolitan Opera, they would figure out that Kanye West (or whoever) is crap, and would improve their cultural lives -- despite the fact that I actually believe this is true. And, believe me, I could easily make some "Alice Waters-style" comments about the musical listening choices of most of the people who participate in these forums that would make you feel like I was talking down to you and turn you all off to my message just as much as Waters can with the way she expresses her message sometimes. Meanwhile, plenty of my like-minded colleagues in the world of classical music wouldn't see any reason why people might be turned off at my plainspoken statement of something that is not only self-evident but also aimed at "helping these people be better." ← Beautifully thought and written response as usual, Sam, the difference between your music analogy and food is that everyone has to eat to live, but not everyone has to listen to music to live.

I think that it is important for restaurants to share ideas about how to be environmentally and fiscally responsible. Your request for how restaurants find uses for scraps certainly fits into that category. I know that one of the things they do at Taranta, for example, is to use scraps of good quality foods to fix their staff meals. Alex Talbot and Aki Kamozawa have used the normally discarded parsly stems to create sauces and other things. I agree that efficient utilization of product is another useful and laudable category of being green.

Actually, it was first trans-fats and now salt.

It is too bad the New York Times Corp is under such financial pressure, because it would be a very interesting exercise for them to take both approaches and see how they do over time. I'm not really aware of anyone doing it quite the way Holly describes. The closest that I can think of is John Mariani, but he is quite controversial.

These aren't really the right times for a new 4* to be anointed even if one existed, which is all the more unlikely because of the investment necessary to achieve the traditional trappings. The only way one can be designated is by changing the paradigm, which I don't really see happening, because the implications for too many other restaurants are too great. He might like to "go out with a blaze of glory," but he will have to stretch to do it, given the constraints that he has already put upon himself. Marea may be the one wild card, depending upon how well it lives up to its hype. Another option for Bruni would be to take away a star from a current 4*, though I think that is just as unlikely as finding another 4*.

Very good point, Boris. bringing a good pizza to Barcelona is a lot different than going in and trying to open a pizzeria in Naples. Actually the lack of a mention of Naples in their quest is the one thing that has me flummoxed about the situation. Why wouldn't they go there to learn?

Leaving aside whether it's an illusion (I do not think it is), that is more-or-less the standard not just at the Times, but at many major publications that review restaurants. ← I used the term illusion because too many restaurants were aware when Bruni or other food critics are in the house so they generally don't dine anonymously anyway. That may not necessarily be the case for a blogger or the critic of a smaller publication. I'm not sure that it makes a huge difference anyway. ← The conventional wisdom is that Bruni was recognized around 2/3rds of the time. If you figure that he visited each restaurant at least 3 times before reviewing, it means that the average restaurant had one truly anonymous visit. Of course, that encompasses a wide range, from places like Katz's deli, where he may have been anonymous every time; to places like Daniel or Le Bernardin, where he may never have been.Even the 2/3rds figure (or whatever the percentage is) means that at some point during the visit he eventually was recognized. It is not necessarily the instant he walks in the door, and in most cases they probably do not know in advance that he is coming. Bruni once wrote that during his meals, he often senses a moment, as if a bell had been rung, when everything changes—the moment when they suddenly figure out who he is. I would say, therefore, that at most restaurants, some portion of his overall experience occurs before he is recognized. And therefore, he is able to fulfill the objective of anonymity, which is to write about how the restaurant treats its non-critic guests. ← Good points, but that was probably more likely to be true earlier in his tenure than recently. It may also be more likely that he may not have been recognized so frequently in more established restaurants that may not have been looking out for him, but then how often did he write about those restaurants? However, I seriously doubt, in the last year or two especially, that he was not very quickly recognized in any new, previously unreviewed restaurants that would definitely have been looking out for him.