MobyP

It would certainly be controversial in the case of playwrights who had been trained in writing for theatre - the only successful one of whom I could mention (who also roundly and publicly rejected the education) was Sarah Cane. But her writing could hardly be called Literary (capital L). Playwrights who were trained in something else entirely and decided to become playwrights - well, that's the norm. But until recently, there was even less mentoring in this country for writing than there has been for cooking. I don't suggest that Meades prefers their approach because they were at university (was he actually at school with Rowley Leigh? I'm told they are friends). I'll take him at his word - a plate of good food is just that. Though it seems hardly a coincidence that they were the ones doing the cooking and creating the dining scene when Meades was making a name for himself, and so played a part in creating what he would come to think of as a successful restaurant. A successful cuisine. But the terms by which he discriminates between those he approves of and those he doesn't seems to have something of a social and cultural tinge to it which I find a little distasteful. He just happens to like the cuisine which just happens to come from university graduates. He just happens to disapprove of those successful chefs who just happen to be working or lower-middle class. You know, it just doesn't add up to much past the obvious. If there are finer subtleties to his argument, he buried them beneath this parade of disapproval. There may be a serious argument to be had over the food on the plate, but you'd never know it by reading him.

They had better. I'm running out of ways to convince Kate that she's consuming jet fuel with all those American apples and that South African veg.

I definitely got out of the wrong side of bed this morning. Must've stepped on a thumb tack before slipping on a banana peel, drinking a glass of sour milk, all before switching on my computer and reading Mr Meades. I rarely engage in unnecessarry name calling. Is it that he's "challenging my tastes and values?" No, I can't think that he's engaged any of them. It's that he's using a very tall pedastal to discredit that which he so clearly knows little about ("all 1, 2, or 3 star michelin cooking is X while my preference is Y"). Let me clariffy what I said about stars. I am not entirely blind or deaf to their value, but I know from experience that it doesn't come close to guaranteeing me a quality of food. Equally, I've seen brilliant street theatre by a Polish troup on stilts, and stunning productions in the West End - but is all Street Theatre brilliant, and does that discredit West End productions? No - of course not. And anyone who says so deserves to get roundly slapped for saying it - especially if they're a former theatre critic. If you want to make the argument about politics (and you could with theatre or food), then make it about politics - instead of obscuring it behind a slipshod veil of aesthetic criticism negating one as devoid of value, and the other as somehow worthy.

Very nice, Allan.

France has a stronger tradition of mentorship. ← France also has a stronger culture, of which gastronomy is but a part. I realize that Moby's rabid response is the de rigeur liberal reaction, but despite his neologisms, and his apparent lack of research into French kitchen culture Meades does make an important point. ← C'mon Dirk. If I was implying what you inferred, the accusation would at least be of a "de rigeur reactionary" - erm - reaction. It would be Meades' 'dual strain' all cuisines are subjectively equal that would be de rigeur liberal. But I wasn't. So it wasn't. So I'm not. But he still is. A plate of hand rolled tagliolini in Parma, or a dish of Langoustines in L'Ambroisie - I'm an equal opportunities food snob. I don't care about stars. It - the food - just has to be fantastic. The point is that Meades' sweeping discrediting of a whole movement of French cuisine based on their choice of accreditation is an act of bigotry. His cultural and educational dismissal of a generation of chefs (having dismissed said accreditation) is an act of chauvenism.

The pleasures of ostentatiousness have nothing to do with it - as I doubt there's little which is actually pleasurable. The effect of ostentatiousness however is like the effect of publicity - bums on seats. In this Ramsay is the master. Wareing has occasionally dabbled (under the master's eye). But Blumenthal? As to the article, with the exception of the first sentence, I haven't read such invidious, tendentious bullshit in years. Half of the first page is indistinguishable babble, the likes of which I haven't heard since I visited my great-gran in a home. (""Football is democratised, so should we look forward to commentators who believe that roasting is a method of cooking?" I mean what is he talking about? Football is democratised? No it isn't. "Roasting is a method of cooking" - erm - what am I missing here? Or are we mixing our metaphors along with our lithium?) He then descends into sort of post-colonial pre-modern blather, bemoaning the loss the educated Elizabeth David-reading amateur. Of course, this is someone who's used to the Rowley Leigh/Alistair Little paradigm - just popped down from punting along the fucking river Cam to open a restaurant where you can find real duck confit like what those illiterate non-punting froggy peasants make - none of your bourgeois Nouvelle mousse-pounding rubbish (although that too, if your Rowley)! This is authentic!* I mean who is this idiot writing for? The fact that he discriminates between the four chefs in the book based on who's had an education (no offence Shaun, but I wouldn't want Meades in your corner), is mind boggling. "To become a chef in Britain demands a greater self-discipline, a steelier will, a more determined bloody-mindedness, the thickest of skins." What? Does he honestly purport to know the first fucking thing about working in a French kitchen? Or succeeding in France as a chef? Go speak to Louisa. (From her blog) "my sister Annie tells me that Gordon Ramsay's Boiling Point just started running in the States. She's worried that I get yelled at like that in my kitchen. Not quite - French kitchens are even more extreme." How does he think French Chefs are formed? Skimming stock with one hand whilst reading Baudelaire with the other? Or read 'The Perfectionist' - kids placed in kitchens as teenagers, and forced to shovel coal for the beginning of their apprenticeships. Educational drop-outs, misfits, homeless kids, or (just as likely) a tradesman's kid taking over daddy's little Auberge and, several years and much back-breaking work later (voila!), turning it into a success. "One is reminded (Oh, is one?) of sportspeople whose devotion to one pusuit (sic) at the expense of all others renders them inarticulate... insouciant - as though the price of success has been a sort of eletive autism." (For one's information, apart from poor spelling (which the sub-editor should have caught) he's making up words here - "eletive" is in no part of the Oxford English Dictionary (another autistic trait, Mr. Meade - making up new words?) I don't doubt there are cultural differences betwen France and England - and as FaustianBargain points out below, the mentoring system in France is something we don't have here. And I don't doubt that the UK requires a diffferent psychological profile to succeed in this country than does France. I just don't think Meades knows much about it beyond his anachronistic and somewhat bizarrely shallow prejudices. *BTW - Alistair Little and Rowley Leigh's contributions have been tremendous, but I don't think it was because they had previously gotten themselves an education.

Only if he's using it to sell his restaurant, or as a container in which to marinate his Rabbit - something for which hat's are remarkably useful, imparting a certain je ne sais chapeau quoi.

This is news? ← This is a useful comment?

The thing that has changed the most in my cooking is precisely this. I now have a freezer full of stocks, most reduced to demi or glaces for storage space. Chicken stock I replenish every 2 -3 months or so - usually buying around 10-15 pounds of bones. I used to include chicken feet or a trotter for body, but I found I prefer the simpler, purer version. I end up with around 10 - 12 litres of stock, which I reduce down to approximate 3 or so cups. Veal stock lasts longer - probably 4 months - as it has more body and so I need less. A I always strain and reduce any left over braising liquids, as they work very well for sauces. As someone mentioned up thread, this book is great for inspiration on how to use components, as much as anything else. Having come across a copy of the Spoon book, I far prefer this one.

"Alba white truffle, poached egg, ragout of calf's feet, foie gras, mushroom & shallot 25.00" Now that's what I call breakfast.

The bacon and egg icecream at the Fat Duck is excellent, but is part of the wider dish Bux mentions - tomato jam, french toast - you're supposed to put a bit of everything in your mouth simultaneously. I really loved it. Although you start with the texture of ice cream, the flavours of smoked bacon and scrambled eggs come through so clearly, you almost feel as if you have the texture of those items as well. Same for his sardines on buttered toast sorbet.

Look, for food as good as theirs, I'd be on my knees begging if I thought it would do any good. And who knows? It might.

[old fuddy duddy]Is it me, or does there never seem to be enough sauce? This fella seems to give you enough sauce though![/old fuddy duddy]

MG is not the destination, it's the means of delivery. Actually, in several interviews Heston B has now said that he's not a fan of the term, but that he acknowledges his relationship to the movement. This movement has nothing to do with a culinary style, but rather a series of academic studies - initiated by Nikolas Kurti, and later popularised by those such as Herve This - delving into the physical and bio-chemical reactions of foodstuffs under different circumstances. The application of this term as related to a food movement is only something used by the press as a tag, and so misappropriated by the public as a style of preparation. Which is to say: you can use all of the principles as outlined by the various MG studies, and come up with an end result that you would otherwise call Nouvelle Cuisine. Keller uses MG information, as does Ducasse (in most of his restaurants). Neither could accurately be called a part of the MG movement. No, but we've all decided to blame you. I'm sure you'll understand (it was my turn last week). Are you saying it isn't a pigeon hole and it is a style of cooking. Too many double negatives. There is no MG doctrine. If there was, it certainly wouldn't be this one. A good cook is a good cook. A bad cook is my mother-in-law. Someone who suspends a piece of protein in a vacuum at 58 degrees centigrade for 3 days is trying to alter the internal structure of the collagen to the strands of muscle fibre. See the difference? You don't mean this. The idea that the best chefs in the world (be they influenced by MG or not) spend less time trying to source the best ingredients, or having done so, wish to obfuscate their importance - well, I can't think of a single one. Are there many? Are there any? Have the papers been told? Heston is as obsessive over his ingredients as any other 3 star chef. He doesn't do a 'Keller' - listing the farm, farmer, field, and last meal of each ingredient on the plate, but few people do - and many are just as fatigued with that sort of presentation.

Welcome to eGullet, Lowblow. Do you work in the UK, France, the US?

Exceptional pics, FB.

Welcome. I find that grating allows it to melt faster and more evenly (allowing me to get said item to wife and prevent onset of medical condition (Cheesumsandwichitis Withdrawlatium - a viscious bugger of a disease)).

That fish stall... no ice... no cold storage... that's beyond the beyond (unless it's 20 minutes off a day boat).

Well done Ori. Sorry you didn't win.

The toasted cheese at borough uses Poilane, chopped spring onions (I think this is green or salad onions in the US), and that cheddar. Very easy to do. Two slices of bread, butter lightly the outside. Great large amount of cheddar on unbuttered side, springle some finely chopped spring onions, place other piece of bread to make sandwich. Heat a cast iron pan, and place sandwich on hot surface (no oil needed). I place another small cast iron pan on sandwich to help cooking and give that nice 'squooshed' effect. After a minute, flip sandwich - which has become lovely, brown, crispy and buttery on one side - until other side is same. Wrap in a paper towel, and eat while hot. As I'm always in Borough too early for the sandwich man, we've made this the Sat morning ritual upon my return.

Sorry Suzi - didn't mean to lead you astray. My opinion on the list is that it would have been terribly up to date - oh, about 2 years ago (possibly with the odd exception). Having Slater review restaurants is absurd. The man doesn't like any food preparation more complicated than the perfect pig which, while ambling merrily in a field, happened to skid in a puddle of Ligurian oil, and go flying onto a barbecue (presumably after synchronistically having it's spine severed by a sprig of rosemary, thus obfuscating any possible pain it might otherwise have to endure.) Kill 'em. Slather 'em with sauce, and cook 'em till they stop squealing, that's what I say.

Obviously Disney World and Epcott Center in Florida are the best places in the world to eat. Possibly ever. Of All time. Anywhere. Until the crack of doom.

Is it expensive? Not the book, but the ingredient cost of the recipes you tried at home. cost/yield? ← No - but it all depends on how you approach what you're doing. In the case of the veal jus, I had four pounds of veal shoulder - one of the cheapest cuts of the animal. The other ingredients are veg, water, and a little veal stock (made from bones - even less expensive than shoulder). (And by the way, once I had siphoned off the jus, I had the makings of a great veal stew for dinner - so it paid for itself twice.) But placing truffles as an inhibition to this kind of cooking is ridiculous. If I want to do a duck dish, I can buy a supermarket duck for 5 pounds sterling. But for fuck's sake, it's going to taste like a five pound duck. If I do my research, and find a duck hand raised, organic and free-range, it's going to cost me a lot more. Now for a thousand bucks - which one do you think will taste better? For me, the point of getting into food is to find the best ingredients possible - not buying the most expensive for the sake of them being the most expensive - but the best for what you can afford. I can go and buy a chicken reared in Bresse for around 24 pounds. Alternatively, and with some work, I can start to research alternatives, and I discovered (along with many others) a chicken raised in England under the Label Anglais tag, which is less than half the price (around 10 pounds), and equals the Bresse bird in flavour (according to all of the Michelin 3 star restaurants in this country). But the point is not the price - the point is the looking. The discovery. Finding the best you can, and doing the best you can with it.

I'm surprised you would braise a lamb that young (shame on you!). You'll have Artusi hopping in his grave! That wild boar looks like it has a good fat content. The stuff I was getting in the US was darker, leaner, and less attractive (if diced meat can in any way be described as attractive - which, let's face it, it can). Can't wait to see how yours turns out.

Welcome to eGullet, CD, and thanks for the post. You seem uncommonly well informed.