slkinsey

Parmigiana di melanzane - real Italian food?? Not where we live! Do we need to talk about regional Italian cuisines? You know about regional Italian cuisines. Melanzana alla parmegiana wasn't being served at that trattoria for visitors from New Jersey or Staten Island. Parmigiana di Melanzane is in my handy DeAgostino "Ricette Regionali Italiane" as traditionally coming from Campania, FWIW. I have a feeling that "Melanzane alla Parmigiana" is an American construction.

I agree that the "regular" eggs in Italy are in general better than they are here. The eggs I buy at the Green Market, though, are totally organic, free range, etc. and yet I still can't make pasta fresca that tastes like it does when I make it in Italy. This is part of my point that Italian cooking, in general, heavily relies on the inherrent properties of the ingredients and it is therefore impossible to duplicate the Italian flavors and textures with American ingredients -- no matter how good the American products may be. Certainly it is the case that many Italian products are generally a lot better than they are in the US. And it is also the case that certain American products are generally a lot better than they are in Italy. On the whole, though, I agree that this equation is balanced in favor of Italy. That said, I think a lot of it has to do with geology. There is simply no way someone living in Nebraska is going to have access to the same diversity and quality of local ingredients someone living in, say, Lazio can have.

Oh, if only that were true... It's an unfortunately wide stream all too often. Points well made, BTW, Suzanne.

Yes, perhaps we have gone a little off on tangent here. Certainly there doesn't need to be any more exploration of cookware nomenclature on this thread -- even if it is fun. That said, I think that issues of versatility and price are certainly germane to this topic.

Cool. I bet it works really well for this. Esp for one-hand tossing. As cookware is a major interest of mine, I have made a habit of acquiring, testing and comparing most of the interesting brands of cookware available. I've also, as I think my eGCI class shows, gone to some lengths to understand the materials science behind why different cookware performs in different ways. I wouldn't say that my experience is absolutely definitive -- because not everyone may have the same preferences and criteria for performance that I have, which is a point I believe I made in my previous post -- but I will suggest that I know what I am talking about and have taken some trouble to make myself informed on this subject. As for the "worst offender," I thought I was fairly clear when I said "All-Clad, in my experience, is the worst offender in the business when it comes to overpriced cookware." That evaluation is based on an understanding of the materials used by All-Clad (i.e., how much of which thermal material you get) and comparing their prices to those of other manufacturers offering similar or better materials specifications. It's as simple as that. For example, I can compare a $190 ($127 for a factory second) 10.5 inch All-Clad sauté pan with 253.8 cm^3 of aluminum (113.4 in the base and 140.4 in the sides) to a $68 11 inch Sitram Profiserie sauté pan with 253.8 cm^3 of aluminum (all in the base). Understanding materials science and the sautéing process, there is no argument that may be made whereby the more expensive All-Clad pan is worth an additional 88% to 175% more on a "performance at a price" basis. My own experience -- albeit not definitive -- with both of these items confirms that prediction. Similar price disparities may be found across the board with respect to All-Clad's prices. To my mind, that constitutes egregious overpricing and makes All-Clad the worst offender when it comes to overpriced cookware. Others may feel differently. I have had conversations with people who have told me it was worth double the price to be able to throw All-Clad stainless pans in the dishwasher. That's cool. But it still won't change my opinion about their prices when it comes to performance. We can disagree on the naming thing too... that's fine with me and off topic for this thread anyway. Now, if I may put on my moderation hat for a brief moment... I don't think I have made any personal remarks about you -- whether you are being "disingenuous," "pretentious" or otherwise -- and would suggest that such characterizations don't have a place in discussion here.

Ah... you mean this thing. I used to have that pan, but somehow I thought they called it a wok. I stand corrected. It must be someone else who calls their curved sauteuse evasée a "chef's pan." Anyway, All-Clad's chef's pan is basically a flat-bottomed wok in clad aluminum with a handle. Fundamentally, it differs from a curved sauteuse evasée mainly by having a smaller flat cooking surface and more gradually curved sides. I am not sure this represents an improvement in either functionality or versatility. In terms of absorbing heat and conducting it to the food in a stir-frying situation, it has all the problems of the standard wok I described above when used over a normal heat source -- albeit somewhat better due to having an aluminum layer. It still proved, in my experience, to be less than satisfactory for stir frying on a residential stove. I found the larger flat cooking surface on my curved sauteuse evasée conferred significantly more versatility (indeed, I believe this is the most versatile pan in any kitchen) and eventually got rid of the All-Clad wok-ish Chef's Pan. This is not to say, of course, that some people wouldn't find it useful depending on their cooking style and practices. What do you use this pan for, other than stir-frying (or even incuding stir-frying), that you think it does better than you might be able to do using a large sauté pan with a triple-thick alumimum base? And, if one is considering budget, how do you think this functionality makes it worth an additional 75% to 150% compared to the sauté pan? I think it makes sense to call a pan by whatever happens to be its proper and most generally accepted name. That's why I say "chinois" and not "fine mesh conical strainer." The practice by which all the different manufacturers call their pans by different, and often contradictory names leads to too much confusion in my opinion (e.g., Calphalon's "omelette pan," which is really a fry pan and not an omelette pan at all). But, as they say: de gustibus non disputandum est.

I don't think anyone can make the argument that Italy or any European country has demonstrably better produce and other ingredients than those in the United States. Indeed, certain products (beef and wheat immediately come to mind) are considered the best in the world. What one can say is that they are often distinctively different. For example, I don't think it is possible to get better eggs anywhere in the world than the just-laid organic eggs I get at the Union Square Green Market every Saturday morning. That said, they don't have those deep golden yolks that Italian eggs have. Does that make the Italian eggs "better?" No, it doesn't. In fact, most such eggs I have bought in Italy were demonstrably inferior to the eggs I get at the USGM. However, the fact remains that even using better American eggs, I will still not be able to replicate the egg yolk pasta fresca I make in Italy. Similarly, I don't think the tomatoes I have had in Italy were demonstrably better than those I get here in season. But, it is also a fact that a sauce made with top quality heirloom tomatoes from Jersey won't taste the same as one made with tomatoes from San Marzano. This, in my opinion, is the major difference and goes a long way towards explaining why it is difficult to make "tastes like Italy" food in America. I think it is also often the case that Italians have access to fresher, more local ingredients than we do in the States. This is due to the huge geological diversity found in Italy over relatively small distances. Someone living on the coast of Abruzzo can have mountain-grown/caught/etc. products at his local market that didn't have to travel very far to get there. In the United States, on the other hand, we have have a huge ancient flood plain in the middle of the country that is relatively homogenous from a geological (and therefore agricultural) standpoint. Agriculture in the US, due to the fact that our geology tends to change over much larger distances, tends to be macroregional rather than microregional. One result of this is the fact that a significant percentage of American produce comes from far away. For example, in Italy, practically every area grows artichokes, whereas almost all the artichokes in the States are grown in on the West coast. So, there is just no way a New York restaurant can get artichokes as fresh and in such pristine condition as most any trattoria does in Italy.

Eh... Suzanne, I wasn't suggesting that everyone buy a piece of heavy copper. But, if I may correct a misconception, what All-Clad calls a "Chef's Pan" is classically (and, I would suggest, more accurately) called a "curved sauteuse evasée." As explained in my cookware class: These graphics may also be relevant in understanding this: This design is one that depends on having a straight gauge design, and as such it will never be a particularly inexpensive one. All-Clad, in my experience, is the worst offender in the business when it comes to overpriced cookware -- even at fairly steep discounts.

In my opinion/experience, most residential stoves comply cannot put out enough heat to make a wok useful as a cooking vessel. This is especially true of "authentic" carbon steel woks -- even those with flat bottoms designed for stovetop use. If you throw in any more than a tiny amount of food, the pan loses all of its heat and you are suddenly steaming your food in its own juices rather than stir-frying. The only wok designs I've seen that sort-of work on the average residential stove are the heavy cast iron woks by Le Creuset. For my own use, I've found a large stainless lined heavy copper curved sauteuse evasée, preheated for several minutes on high heat, works better than any of the many woks I've tried.

All those places down there used to be part of all the other places at one time or another. This is not odd from a historical standpoint. What is odd is tha fact that the borders have been fixed for the last 50+ years.

This, I think, is the salient point. The best cooking in italy is entirely tied to the growing season and certain locally-grown, raised, caught or produced ingredients. Due to the geographical nature of the country, there are literally hundreds of microclimates that lead to entirely different ingredients than another zone a hundred miles away. Even in Italy, it would be almost impossible to have a really good "Venetian-style" restaurant in, say, Napoli. I have always been able to make 100% Italian-in-Italy tasting food when I am cooking in Italy. We've got a lot of people on these boards, including myself, who spend a lot of time in Italy and have done a lot of cooking over there, and I would imagine that I am not alone in my inability to exactly replicate those tastes in the US. So, clearly there is something about being in Italy. The first and most important thing in making "like in Italy" Italian food is to have access to the same ingredients. This is simply impossible. For example, there is no American equivalent of the vacca rossa and so we cannot have a real Fiorentina here. Even if one were to import vacca rossa t-bone steaks from Toscana, the miles would take their toll on the meat and it wouldn't be the same (it would also become prohibitively expensive). Consider the fact that beef is a relatively robust ingredient when it comes to shipping, and imagine what effect that might have on vegetables and herbs. After that, one has to deal with the fact that American expectations, appetites and dining customs are different than those of Italians. And the bottom line is that the people who own Italian restaurants in America are in the game to make money. A typical cheap Saturday afternoon lunch in Toscana might be a mixed salad followed by grilled pieces of pigeon, guinea hen, turkey and rabbit drizzled with young olive oil. This sounds pretty good to me (and many of you , no doubt) -- but this is not something that will appeal to all that many Americans. Furthermore, it is unlikely such a meal in America can be priced (or will sell) to working people. It is also unlikely that such a meal is fancy or refined enough to sell at a higher price to the upper-middle class fancy restaurant set. This kind of thing presents a real problem when it comes to selling "authentic" Italian food to Americans. So what one is left with in terms of Italian style restaurants (as opposed to Italian-American style restaurants, which are much more common and a related but unique genre) are places like Felidia, Babbo, etc. These are places that prepare food with an Italian sensibility, but adapt to the use of American ingredients and American customers. These two restaurants in particular represent the two approaches I see in such restaurants as well as the two approaches restaurants use in Italy. Felidia serves largely traditional foods of Italy, with minor changes resulting from the use of American ingredients or adaptations to the locality. Babbo, on the other hand, seeks to forge ahead and create new dishes using the Italian approach -- almost treating New York as a new Italian region and creating a new regional cuisine based on the foods and people of that region. Neither one serves food exactly like what one finds in Italy. But I think both serve food that would be recognized as Italian in spirit were they transplanted to that country.

I would have suggested you cut it into small pieces and make fried rice. But, alas, it is too late...

Dude, forget the standing bib roast. I'm making saddle of lion, or... what do you suppose is the chance they have walrus chops back in the walk-in?

Man... one day I really have to order the lamb chops as an appetizer. That's the real old school way to do it!

Yea, you have a point there. I guess I'm saying I don't mind so much that a lot of people didn't/don't have a great experience there. I like to think that restaurants and other establishments not-for-everyone still have a place in this world. Yea. What is with that stuff? It just isn't good.

Hee hee hee! Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's bread. I'll have to make a point of checking out the bread the next time I go over, because it's been uniformly horrible thus far. But... maybe I'm not going to the right places.

This is a good point... although I was able to act like an "insider" the first time I went to Peter Luger by reading all about it in the web (Fat-Guy.com in particular, as chance would have it). Even the first time I went there, I knew what to order and didn't ask for a menu. In fact, almost everything you read about the place says that everyone gets the same thing anyway (not that there are all that many things from which to choose), so you're better off putting yourself in the hands of your waiter -- which they are always happy to do. I've always had a great time there and never found the waitstaff anything other than friendly to me. Personally, I kind of like the quirky, old, gruff New York atmosphere at the place. Those of us who like it for what it is are comfortable with the way things are, and I admit to enjoyingit a little that some people are put off by the atmosphere. If they put tablecloths down, started serving gussied up side dishes, hired young, friendly, attractive waiters who introduced themselves and explained the menu items, put a bunch of fancy wines on the menu, etc... for me, some part of the experience would be lost.

As others have noted, black eyed peas are a traditional "lucky" food in the South. They must work, because all three of the children in my family were conceived after my parents had eaten black eyed peas (which were not easy to get in the New England of my youth and were generally sent from Texas by my grandmother).

When it comes to figuring out how to pick the best cookware for your needs and budget, I'd like to toot my horn and suggest ny eGCI class as a resource.

It has to do with cooking on an Aga cooker.

Anodized aluminum, by any chance? Nope, Calpholon Tri-Ply. I'm on my third one, and I'm tired of taking them back. The 5-qt saute is a big pan, much bigger than the burners on my stove. I believe the uneven heating is why the center regularly buckles and becomes convex on the bottom. That's interesting. How wide is the pan? (I don't understand why some manufacturers size their saute pans by volume, which really isn't very meaningful.) Also, do you have any way of measuring how thick the pan is? I've been curious about Calphalon Tri-Ply's specs. You know... for less money than one of the Tri-Ply pans, you could have had one of these or one of these.

Anodized aluminum, by any chance?

Interesting. I could never do that, because I make too much pasta (need to have a pasta pot for that) and I cook too many things with an acidic component. That said, I could probably get by (albeit with constraints on what I could do) if I removed everything from my list but the chef's knife, a wooden spoon, a saute pan and a stock/pasta pot.

This is very hard to say, because cooking styles and needs change so much between users. Many people, for example, will likely mention a wok whereas I don't have one and don't feel a need to acquire one. For me, they are: 12" chef's knive Paring knive End-grain cutting board Several heat-proof rubber spatulas Several wooden spoons Apex spatula 1 small saucepan - straight gauge 1 medium sized tall saucepan - heavy disk bottom 1 large stockpot with pasta insert - heavy disk bottom 1 large (11" or more) saute pan or curved sauteuse evasee - heavy disk bottom 1 11" frypan - straight gauge 1 11" nonstick frypan -- straight gauge 1 large enameled cast iron casserole

Um... all of them? There is something about making a meal where the primary focus is something other than making the food taste great that tends to produce... well food that doesn't taste great. The only low-whatever meals that are actually good are those where the low carb/fat/calorie/whatever-ness is incidental.