slkinsey
-
Posts
11,151 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by slkinsey
-
-
* I'd probably be happier if they did give credit so that what they were doing came onto my radar screen through speedy media coverage... but if they did so, they might be in for quite some trademark litigation, as they're using the famous names of others to draw customers to themselves.
This brings up an interesting point. Not everyone would necessarily be pleased to be formally credited for derivative or imitative dishes. I could see an instance where a restaurant was serving a dish that credits another chef, and the credited chef might not be too happy about it. He might assert that the second restaurant was making money using his name without permission, or that the reproduced dish was not faithful to the original or up to the standards of the original. Indeed, I imagine that this sort of complaint would be commonplace. From the chefs' perspective, I wonder if it is the case that they would like to be given credit where due, or if perhaps it is more the case that they simply wouldn't want anyone else making those dishes or working with those ideas but themselves.
-
Let us suppose for a moment that it were possible to collect royalties and mandate citations for substantially derivative "culinary works." Does everyone agree that this is a good thing? Where would we draw the line? The example I made above of the "fried onion flower" seems roughly analogous to copying Dufresne's prawn pasta. Do we agree that they are equally worthy of such ethical (and perhaps legal) consideration? Do we agree that the culinary world would be better if all restaurants serving a knockoff of JGV's molten chocolate cake had to pay a royalty and credit JGV on their menus? What level of imitation is acceptable and what is not? Do we agree that every uncredited food item on a menu is inherently claimed as an exclusive creation of that chef? Why do we feel that prawn noodles are worthy of such consideration, and yet luxe hamburgers with truffles and foie gras, or onions deep fried in a certain way are not?
-
Andy, that's a copyright issue. You can copyright the recording of an idea (be that on paper or tape) but you can't copyright the idea, or even necessarily the expression of the idea.
-
This is an interesting topic, Kent. On the one hand, it is sad in a way for certain cultural traditions and foods to be lost when families immigrate. On the other hand, to a large extent, the ultimate success of immigrants in their new country is dependent upon their success at integrating with the predominant and successful culture in that country. Cultures that have a history of great success in America have typically placed a high value on such integration, wanting their children to grow up as Americans and not as "Chinese (or whatever) living in America." My observation has been that it is not at all uncommon for first generation immigrant parents to deliberately emphasize American culinary customs and the English language, in the belief that it will help their children succeed here. This belief, I think, is one that is largely supported by empirical evidence. People from Asian cultures, in particular, seem to practice this upon immigration to the United States, and considering how widely different these cultures are from American culture, I have to believe that it has something to do with their remarkable success here.
I can't say I'd do any differently. If I had a family and we were to immigrate to Italy, I would want my children to be Italians. I would emphasize Italian language skills over English, and Italian culinary traditions over American. This is not to say that I wouldn't still try to preserve some traditions (Thanksgiving, for example). But the reality is that most of our "American-ness" would be lost by the third generation anyway.
-
If all the versions you see around the place are Vongerichten's recipe, why shouldn't he receive credit on the menu and royalties for every dessert sold? Totally impractical? Almost certainly, but theoretically the right thing to do. If musicians can recieve royalities for everytime their recordings are played on a jukebox in a bar somewhere then why not chefs when their dishes are served in a restaurant other than their own?
Well, first of all you're crazy if you think musicians receive royalties every time their recordings are sold or played in a commercial venue. There are several "bootleg" recordings of operas in which I performed a role available for sale, and I have never received a dime nor was my permission ever sought. Anyway, I digress. . .
The main problem with your comparison is that the two examples are not similar. A recording is a preserved example of the artist's work from the artist's own instrument. A recipe or conception is not. Now, if Vongerichten's staff were baking molten chocolate cakes in the kitchens of Jean-Georges and shipping them to various restaurants to be served, then we would have analogous examples. In that instance, I agree that it would make ethical sense for the restaurants to give credit to JGV.
I should point out, in case it is not clear, that I am playing Devil's Advocate here a bit. I do agree that there is a level of imitation that, in certain situations, necessitates credit. But there is some question in my mind as to where those levels lie, and whether we are guilty of a bit of conceit in applying these ideas so vehemently to this particular style of cuisine because the chefs style themselves "conceptual artists" working in a culinary medium.
Most people would agree that Daniel Boulud's db Bistro Moderne conceived (or brought to prominence) the idea of the "luxe haute hamburger." This, like the molten chocolate cake, has become a culinary meme, although not as strong as the cake meme. So. . . should Boulud receive credit, perhaps even a royalty, every time another restaurant serves a super-expensive hamburger with truffles and foie gras? At what degree of difference in execution does another restaurant's ethical obligation to Boulud cease?
Or let's take it even further. . . what about the guy and the restaurant that came up with the widely imitated idea of a large mild onion cut on a special cutter, battered and deep fried so it comes out in the shape of a flower (e.g., the "Bloomin' Onion" at Outback Steakhouse)? Should every restaurant serving this preparation credit the originator? If not, then why not? Why is this idea any less worthy of such stringent ethical consideration than the dishes from Alinea, Moto, wd-50, etc? Could part of it be that the chefs at these restaurants are holding themselves up (or being held up by others, anyway) as "high culture creative artists" an their food as "conceptual art" while the guy who invented the fried onion thing is not? I should point out, by the way, that lowbrow pop musicians get paid royalties just the same as highbrow classical musicians, and in fact are much more likely to receive such compensation.
-
Okay. But still, the "chocolate cake with molten center" idea was conceived by Bras, and Vongerichten's iteration would seem to be derivative. At what point of "copying" do we draw the line? For that matter, "chocolate cake with molten center" has obviously become quite the culinary meme -- perhaps due more to Vongerichten's version than Bras's -- and yet one doesn't see any menus crediting either one, despite the fact that most versions are more or less straightforward imitations of the dessert from Jean-Georges.
-
I'm interested to hear thoughts on this one... The first job I ever had as a kid was working at a bakery in the Boston area. I can remember that one of our most popular cookies was something involving a lot of nuts that was baked all in one piece and then punched out with a cutter. The baker had learned the recipe at another bakery, that had conceived the recipe. Should our signage have credited the "inventor" of the cookies? Or, for that matter, what about "cookies & cream" ice cream? Should everyone making that credit Emack & Bolio's?
There is some difference, in my mind, between saying "I conceived this" when you did not, and simply not saying anything about who conveived something.
-
That one line seems a bit taken out of context to me. It conveys an altogether different feeling here:
In an interview with The Sunday Age, Wickens, 31, said: "It's not something I'm proud of. The main thing I've learnt is that you have to be careful about how you give credit. If I was to do it again, I would definitely put credit on the menu."I was excited to share with my kitchen staff some of the creative dishes that inspired me overseas. At no time did I try and claim that I invented any of the dishes."
A survey of past interviews shows that Wickens did refrain from claiming such credit in those interviews, although the Interlude website refers to "thoughtfully and masterfully created" dishes.
-
Well said, chef. I'd like to think that this discussion is about a lot more than the individual example that started it. It's not about assigning blame or levels of blame to one chef or one restaurant. It's about exploring some ideas and concepts, and how they relate to the restaurant and food world.
-
I'm not so sure I agree with the premise that reproducing something substantially inspired by, or even borrowed wholesale from another person without attribution necessarily constitutes plagiarism irrespective of the medium and the standards which are commonly accepted to apply to that medium. Clearly, for example, we don't feel that one has an ethical obligation to credit Escoffier or whoever when making a dish with one of his classic sauces.
In the music world, there is definitely a distinction made between a creative act and an interpretive act. If someone substantially copies a song, they are guilty of plagiarism (and copyright violation, for that matter). However, suppose I copy someone's interpretation? For example, Giuseppe di Stefano was famous for taking the high C at the end of the Faust aria in full voice and then doing a long sustained decrescendo to pianissimo. Does this mean that I'm a plagiarist if I do the same thing without holding up a little sign saying, "this decrescendo originally conceived and performed by Giuseppe di Stefano?" Of course not. That would be ridiculous.
Sizzleteeth makes an interesting and similar point about the meat enzyme. Is the idea of using the enzyme to make pasta out of meat a creative act or an interpretive act? Is everyone who does this ethically bound to clearly credit the inspiration to Dufresne (or whoever)? I think there is an argument to be made that taking an enzyme that was designed (by someone else) and used (by lots of people and companies) to stick meat together, and using that enzyme to create noodles out of meat is an interpretive rather than creative act. As such, I'm not convinced it's something that can be plagiarized, per se. If many or most of the interpretive elements that went into the dish are substantially copied, I would say that that makes the derivative work not very inspired -- just as I would find it uninteresting were a soprano to slavishly imitate Maria Callas's interpretation of Violetta in La Traviata. But I'm not sure I'd call either one plagiarism. Different ideas and different standards apply in different fields and disciplines.
In the music and food worlds, I think there is a built-in assumption that interpretive works are substantially influenced by and built upon what has come before, and that no work is entirely original in either conception or execution. Certainly, even in a restaurant like ADNY or Per Se or wd-50, I wouldn't necessarily have the expectation that every dish has been created out of thin air by the chef. And clearly certain dishes and ideas reach a certain level of ubiquity where no one feels that they need credit anyone. Are all the restaurants in NYC serving "crudo" giving credit to Pasternack at Esca?
-
To me there's a difference between a bagel with a schmear and a bagel with cream cheese. A schmear involves less cream cheese.
"Would you like a bagel with cream cheese?"
"Just a schmear."
That is, in my experience, the way the word is commonly used in NYC. A "bagel with cream cheese" often seems to have a half inch thick layer of cream cheese, whereas a "bagel with a schmear" has just the small amount that can be spread with a swipe of the knife.
Going further into bagel terminology, there was a funny bit in the NYT Metropolitan Diary a week or two ago. A customer was standing in line for a bagel at a place near the UN, and heard someone ordering a "Kofi Annan bagel." It is not uncommon here for sandwiches and the like to be named after prominent figures, so the customer figured it might be the Secretary-General's favorite bagel preparation. Since the place was so close to the UN, perhaps he was a regular there. Maybe it featured some ingredient from Ghana? Upon reaching the counter the customer inquired as to "what constitutes a 'Kofi Annan bagel.'" The counterman replied, "the same thing it always constitutes -- a coffee and a bagel."
-
It appears to be temporarily offline. Try: http://groups.msn.com/drinkboy
-
Member countries of the IOOC include Algeria, Croatia, the EU, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Lybia, Morocco, Serbia & Montenegro, Syria and Tunisia.
I was surprised that France, Greece, Italy and Spain were not listed as members, but a visit to the websited confirmed that theyare indeed members - founding members, in fact.
France, Greece, Italy and Spain are all part of the EU, so there is no reason to list them individually. The EU didn't exist when the IOOC was founded, which is why individual EU countries are listed as founding members. For the record, the EU includes Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. These are all member countries of the IOOC by virtue of being in the European Union.
Reading further on the IOOC site, I see the following that refers to the international legal underpinning of the IOOC's various specifications (referringm in this instance, to the original agreement of 1956): "Like all the international commodity agreements, it was legally underpinned by the principles recommended by the United Nations Economic and Social Council and embodied in chapter VI of the Havana Charter."
The US, Canada, and more than a dozen other countries are listed as IOOC "observers."Unfortunately, as far as I am able to tell, observers are only that: countries that send delegates to observe the sessions of the Council. As nonmembers, they are not bound by the agreement.
Since there are very few olive groves in the US (if indeed there are any at all), I would imagine that any of the major US olive oil producers -- like Baltimore's Pompeian -- would "substantially process" the oil they get.[...]Is there something special that differentiates a grove from some other type of stand of olive trees? I ask that because I thought that a lot of olives were grown in California. Is that untrue?
The most recent official statistics I was able to find were for 2002, when they harvested 103,000 tons of California olives (66,300 Manzanillo, 23,500 Sevillano, and 11,500 other. They estimated that only around 10,000 tons were used for "olive oil and other specialty products." Oil yield can vary widely depending on the variety of olive and method of cultivation, from ten gallons of oil per ton of "green over-watered Sevillano" to fifty-five gallons of oil per ton of "very ripe, deficit-irrigated Mission, Picual" (source). In 2004 there were 383,000 gallons of California olive oil produced, constituting 99% of US olive oil production and <0.1% of worldwide olive oil production (source).
-
I would guess that "substiantial processing" is pretty broad. Certainly it would include things like pressing the actual olives into oil. But it could also include things like blending, which is likely to happen at any level, and filtering, etc.
Although the US is not a member of the IOOC and as a US company can therefore label the oil however they like for sale in the US, I note that their bottles do not say "Italian" or "Tunisian" (or wherever) olive oil. According to my interpretation of the IOOC specifications, these oils would have the United States as the country of origin if they are blended, etc. in the US. But again, since the US is not a member, US olive oil companies don't have to worry about any of that stuff.
OK back from the supermarket and guess what all the 'extra virgin olive oil' bottles were marked with "superior category olive oil obtained directly from olives and solely by mechanical means"This makes sense, given the UK law, don't you think?
-
I sent an email to the IOOC. We'll see if I hear back, and if so, what they say.
-
Right. I understand that the local UK law may be different from the IOOC specification. What that suggests to me is that olive oil produced in a nonmember country (such as the US) could be sold in the UK as "extra virgin" even if it did not meet the IOOC specification. However, if the olive oil comes from an IOOC member country, I think this is rather less likely. The point of the IOOC regulations is that the member countries are voluntarily saying that they are going to adhere to those specifications. I'm not sure what kind of legal teeth these specifications have in other countries, but since olive oil is not produced in the UK it stands to reason that they don't need to legislate any strict labeling standards. Oils imported from member countries should conform to the IOOC standards, and I guess they don't care whether oils imported from nonmember countries conform to those standards are not.
According to my reading of the IOOC standards, if an olive oil is labeled "Tuscan extra virgin olive oil" then it is an indication of source, and is therefore only allowed if the oil was produced, packed and originating exclusively in Tuscany. I'm not sure whether this would apply to an "Italian extra virgin olive oil." That seems to indicare source as well. I think if you take a look, though, you'll see that most dodgy olive oils will say something more like "imported from Italy" or similar. This is indicating the "country of origin" rather than the "source" according to the IOOC standards.
-
The designation "extra virgin" has no official meaning according to United States law.
I should also point out that the terms "first pressing" and "cold pressed" and all that have no real meaning either. This is because there is no way to verify whether these things are true. What can be verified is the amount of oleic acid present in the oil. The International Olive Oil Council, which is the multinational body governing labeling of olive oil, says that "olive oil" must be obtained only from the fruit of the olive tree (Olea europaea); "virgin olive oil" must be extracted from said fruit exclusively by mechanical means, and must have a free acidity of not more than two grams of oleic acid per hundred grams; and "extra virgin olive oil" must have a free acidity of not more than 0.8 grams of oleic acid per hundred grams.
According to the IOOC, olive oil "containers intended for direct sale to consumers" must include, among other things: the name of the product; the designation of olive oil quality (extra virgin, etc.); and the country of origin, with this interesting caveat: "When the product undergoes substantial processing in a second country, the country in which such processing is carried out shall be considered as the country of origin for labelling purposes." It may only include an indication of source (country, region or locality) or appelation (where such exists) only when allowed to do so by the country of origin and "when such virgin olive oils have been produced, packed and originate exclusively in the country, region or locality mentioned."
Member countries of the IOOC include Algeria, Croatia, the EU, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Lybia, Morocco, Serbia & Montenegro, Syria and Tunisia. Unfortunately, the United States does not seem to be a member. What this suggests to me, however, is that olive oil from one of these countries that is labeled "extra virgin olive oil" has a very high likelihood of conforming with the IOOC standards. I don't get the impression that the IOOC allows its member countries to slap any old designation of quality on a bottle of oilve oil so long as it is intended for sale in a non-member country. Some manufacturers will try to cheat, of course, and all bets are off with respect to olive oil produced in nonmember countries.
The long and short of this is that, if you buy a bottle of "Tuscan extra virgin olive oil," you should be getting just that.
-
I've had lots of good luck with brining pork shoulder, although normally for conventional slow cooking rather than smoking (I live in NYC).
How (in)direct is your heat going to be? Unless you have an on-the-side smoke box, I would be cautious about using something with a lot of sugar like Coca-Cola. I'd be concerned that the sugars would burn long before you were ready to take that sucker off the heat.
One thing you can always do is make tea by boiling various herbs and other flavorings (say, sage, thyme, rosemary and garlic) and then using the cooled "broth" as the liquid portion of your brine. Not sure how well that would stand up to smoke, but there's only one way to find out.
Another idea would be doing a citrus brine. Use lime juice and orange juice (plus some water, if you like) as the liquid component of your brine.
-
I'm telling you, for fig flavor this stuff is the shizznit.
-
For most drinks, I think some effort should be made to ensure that imbibers don't have to strain anything through their teeth. The only time I want any plant matter of that size floating around in my cocktail is when it is something like citrus cells in a country-style muddled drink like a caipirinha.
You shouldn't have to pick pieces of mint out of your teeth when you drink a Mojito, and if this is a problem then it is not a well-constructed drink. There are several easy ways to avoid this problem: First, the mint leaves don't have to be (and shouldn't be) muddled so hard that they're crushed into straw-clogging, tooth-sticking shreds. Second, after the mint is muddled and allowed to infuse into the liquor for some period of time, the drink can be strained into a glass and garnished with fresh mint after the ice is added in a way that is unlikely to offend (I like sliding a few fresh mint leaves down between the ice and the side of the glass, but a sprig works well too). Third, if one feels that it is absolutely necessary to keep the lightly muddled mint in the glass, add the ice on top of the mint and do not stir up the drink once the ice is added. This will keep the muddled mint on the bottom of the glass, and fresh whole mint leaves can be used as an additional garnish. Fourth, one could shake the drink hard with ice for a few beats and then strain into the glass. This will result in a few inoffensively decorative mint flecks finding their way into the body of the drink, which can be further garnished with fresh mint. If a Mojito has shreds of muddled mint floating around in the body of the drink, clogging the straw and getting caught in your teeth when you sip from the glass... I say it's not a well'made drink. But, then again, I can't stand pulpy orange juice either.
-
Were I in your shoes, I'd be using the fig-infused simple syrup on ice cream.
-
Yea, I'm with Christopher in not being too excited about vodka. On the other hand, it can be useful for times when you really want to taste the essence of the flavoring (fig syrup, in this case) precisely because it doesn't bring anything to the table but dilution of flavor and alcoholic bite. This might be an issue worth considering with respect to Linda's fig syrup, because the fig flavor might not be all that strong. It's very possible that it would be entirely obscured were it mixed with something like Rittenhouse bonded rye or even a soft gin. It's sometimes a difficult reality that the drink is too sweet by the time you've added enough of your sweet modifier that it can be discerned in the mix. Most good modifiers for cocktails are quite strongly flavored, and it is partly this property that makes them useful modifiers. It doesn't take very much oregat syrup or Apry, for example, to make its presence felt alongside a flavorful base spirit. I have some Calabrian fig syrup that might work well in a cocktail, but it is thick, black and almost molasses-like, with a flavor that's much more concentrated than what I imagine Linda's to be (her's sounds more like what I might call "fig-infused simple syrup").
There's a reason I have been using the word "modifier" above. The idea of using, for example, a touch ot Calabrian fig syrup together with rye whiskey in making a cocktail that tastes of "rye with a little fig flavor" is one thing (actually, that might make an interesting Old Fashioned variation). The fig syrup in this case is modifying and enhancing the flavor of the rye, and the cocktail isn't really all about the fig syrup. Really, I'm not so sure I'd be all that excited about a cocktail that's designed to feature fig syrup as the main flavor. It's like making a chicken dish that's all about the parsley.
-
In general, you do not want a steel with any "cut" at all. Those steels are designed to be used with soft steel butcher knives that are roughly steeled many times a day and will wear out in fairly fast order.
For a good home kitchen knife, you want either a smooth steel or a very fine grit ceramic steel. The best place to buy is HandAmerican. Get their ceramic and polished steel rods in the 14 inch length. You can even get a glass rod from HandAmerican.
-
You can get Saba in NYC supermarkets. I don't know about middle America, though.
Pictorial: Steamed Live Oyster w/ Garlic Blk Beans
in China: Cooking & Baking
Posted
Looks delicious!
Ah Leung, one small suggestion on opening an oyster: The technique for opening an oyster and opening a clam are the opposite. When you open a clam, you slide the knife in between the shells at the side where the shell comes open, and work the knife back towards the hinge severing the muscles. With an oyster, you stick the point of the knife down in between the two shells at the hinge, and then pop the two shells apart using the knife as a lever.
http://www.jacquespepin.net/members/techni...openoyster.html