bourdain

I should probably credit the creative genius behind that title: Ian?

I knew what I was getting into. But knowing about it and actually experiencing it are two very different things. btw: I'm very proud of my mention of the film classic "Lumberjack Facials II" on the episode. I think that one slid by without notice.

Just finished writing a story about my Afterglo experience. Coming soon. I did not see the "beauty sommelier" referred to in the press kit during my visit. Probably for the best.

This horrifying idea of pairing real chefs with "personalities" was, of course, inevitable. It will undoubtedly result in ICUSA's Best Ratings Ever. A sign of the times. Next, they'll be pairing chef contenders with celebrity guests, sock-puppet sidekicks, cute kids.

Locations of completed shows soon to be aired: China (Beijing and Sichuan) Japan ( Osaka and Kiso Valley) South Florida ( Miami, Everglades, Key West) Peru (Amazonia, Macchu Picchu, Lima, Cuzco) Sweden (Stockholm, Lapland) Quebec ( Montreal, North north north with Inuits) Puerto Rico (all over but NOT San Juan) Shooting imminently: Ethiopia Beirut India (two shows) Korea Indonesia Mexican Border (from Dusk til Dawn show) Pacific Northwest Ireland and more tbd

"I dare say, Mimi's earned a credibility we can only aspire to. " I second that motion.

See the very funny article on Food Network as the New Porn in the new Harpers: A veteran porn producer deconstructs FN frame by frame, comparing and contrasting with her own works--coupled with a bittersweet goodbye to Sara Moulton--depicted metaphorically as an aging porn star--cruelly replaced by the younger, "hotter" Giada and Rachael. Funny, even frightening stuff--and with quotes from FN honcho, very revealing of current NetThink.

Apparently Ducasse allows his spokespeople complete free reign to go off reservation and say whatever they want. Sounds just like the freewheeling fun-loving devil-may-care "who cares what they say I said" kinda guy we know and love.. As far as "injecting (myself) into the news cycle.." Exactly how did I do that? I was called for comment--and gave one. The New York Magazine photo editor--it might be surprising to learn--is outside my sphere of influence. Must be difficult on Planet Fat Guy right now. Between Ducasse and a Hard Place.

More "innuendo" as Alain Ducasse and Jeffrey Chodorow join the cast of (to quote Mr. Brown) "detractors, partisans, boot-lickers and hired guns" repudiating the substance of the Psaltis book in today's New York Magazine. But hey, what do they know, right?

First of all, I'd like to applaud winesoma for reminding us what any responsible employer knows--and has to keep in mind when dealing with situations like the one alluded to. The kind of potential liabilities and implied and specific responsibilities one has. I'm surprised--and this is coming from ME fer Chrissakes, an old and old school graduate of the pro-hazing lobby--by the assumption that ANY physical contact which might be construed as angry or menacing could or would be acceptable. There IS a line never to be crossed. And Doug--if I understand his post correctly--has said he crossed it. That being said: I am NOT suggesting that people don't buy his book or read it. I obviously have serious doubts about the reliablity or gravity of some of the contents. Doug's apparent disingenuousness--and belated hang-out invite caution. I'm not saying that whatever's been said or revealed here means that his account of a "messy walk-in" isn't true. . Or that one omission or evasive statement necessarily should lead directly to believing the rest a lie. But the author has apparently been coy with us about his own failings--until pressed. That does--and should--be a factor in the reading of the book and evaluation of its contents. "WHO is this guy?" "WHO'S talking?" When you write a a book titled "Seasoning of a Chef" it would have been helpful--and more honest for the reader to have been provided a more candid picture of the author and his "seasoning" process. Author, subjects, readers--and supporters--would have been better served.

"After asking a few times, I slapped his hand away. It was stupid of me to allow myself to be baited into crossing that line, but to me it was a very light slap and when things calmed down I apologized for doing it and I meant it. Was it not the right thing to do, yes. But it was hardly the dramatic event it is being made out to be. I was several steps out the door when this happened, and this helped me to realize that I needed to get out of there."--Doug Psaltis So, Shaw. You're comfortable with this account? Untroubled by the after-the-fact admission that well...yes..there might be a little bit of history there? How about this line? "And this helped me to realize that I needed to get out of there." "Helped?" I'd think so. Most employers--hypothetically speaking of course, would have "helped" him right out the door. They must be a really really understanding bunch out there in Napa. Of course, they're famous for tolerating that sort of behavior out there--aren't they?

Really!? Fantastic! I know I got a galley--and wrote something for it (I'd thought). Then heard from a fan that it was on the book. Positively delighted to hear otherwise. Guess that's what happens when you turn into a Blurb-O-Mat. My feelings on the contents of the Psaltis book are unchanged--though I do feel a palpable sense of relief. Can't wait to bust Mario's balls. Going back to edit my previous posts.

For the record: I would like to publicly eat my words. I regret my earlier, more measured comments on this board. When you take on big game like Thomas Keller you better kill him with one clean shot--and from an unimpeachable position. A reminder of "who's talking" and "what kind of history" there might be would have been appropriate--especially when casually slagging one's betters. And slagging one's betters is something in which I have some experience. The alleged "missing elements" of the Psaltis story throw a queasifying light on the other chapters. I have serious reservations about Psaltis' earlier "limited hang-out" on this thread. Too little. Too late. And I don't buy it. And I don't find Brother Ruhlman's question inappropriately prosecutorial. He is being, I believe, carefully carefully diplomatic.

stay tuned

..more tk

I think it's best to look at the book as one man's account of a career in the business. It's inevitable--when you write a book--that you have an "agenda" (to write a book that will hopefully entertain and maybe even sell). When writing a memoir, one can hardly help (knowingly or not) shading events--making friends look better and foes worse. Leaving out that which might come back to bite you. Glossing over your uglier moments. Especially when you're a chef of Psaltis' stature--and with his kind of ambitions. I had an advantage when writing Kitchen Confidential of not giving a shit about my future. Of not having the burden of three star expectations. A mixed blessing for sure...but there it is. Psaltis, for better or worse, did not have that luxury. I liked the book--think it's a valuable account of a career in some very good and very important kitchens. Do I think Psaltis was a tad too diplomatic and coy about his Ducasse experience? Yes. I do. Do I buy as gospel his account or his opinion of the French Laundry? Absolutely not. But that's not the point is it? It's his story as he saw it and felt it. It's hardly a definitive account. Undoubtedly, there will be other versions of Psaltis' Last Day at the Laundry--and the infamous Bay of Pigs at Mix and we can mull those over as well. In the classic Japanese film Rashomon, ALL the stories were interesting. Which version (or combination of versions) one chooses to believe are half the fun. When reading a first person memoir--as opposed to history--one must first and foremost remind oneself: "Who's talking?" I didn't allow Psaltis' dim view of the French Laundry (however reliable or not) to diminish my enjoyment of the book--just as I didn't allow Jeremiah Tower's megalomania to detract from my enjoyment of his juicy and often malicious tome. Ten cooks from the same kitchen tell the same story ten days later and you'll have ten different stories--many of them unrecognizable. That's the grand oral tradition we work in. I say relax, read the fucking book-- and make up your own mind.

The best man won. Michael had all the qualities necessary for a chef: Talented, hard working, even, steady temperament while working, not easily flustered, handled pressure well, good skills, crafty, resourceful, manipulative. Didn't let his (decidedly large) ego get in the way. His restaurant was perfectly suited for the environment. Ralph's was decidedly not. His motivational cards were ludicrous--and probably counterproductive. Ralph found himself jacked up, outflanked, outmaneuvered--with second-best cooks--and his food was never very good. Michael's was always more daring and creative.He continued to take risks--successfully--whether sabotaging Ralph--or by planning more ambitious menus. Michael was particularly smart to pick Jimmy first. Not the obvious choice--but the shrewd, observant one. . Elsie and spikey-head both flamed out quickly in classic style, running around like headless chickens. Okay..So maybe Mikey's evil and maybe even insane. He was smart enough to do the math and figure that working with Gordon--even with one of Gordon's proteges--will be better long term value than owning a restaurant for which he is not prepared now.

Most of absinthe's bad rep stemmed from the fact that prior to its wide popularity (following its use as a curative during war time), most of France prefered to drink wine. Absinthe marked the first time that large numbers of people switched to cheap--and higher alcohol spirits. In cold, mostly unheated Paris, people preferred spending large amounts of time in relatively warm cafes--and unsurprisingly--now that they were drinking liquor--got noticably drunker faster. And began to enjoy staying that way. Absinthe was the focus of a concerted smear campaign by the French wine industry who were alarmed by the growing popularity, affordability (and brand loyalty) of the competition. Did absinthe deserve its notoriety? Frankly, no. As far as close-captioning of the show: I'm surprised and dismayed to hear that cc is not offered--and will bring it to the attention of Travel/Discovery. Here's hoping...

Thanks, all... And btw: I was very happy with the Times review. We all were. And Les Halles is correctly pronounced "Lay- Al". Believe me. The "H" , though nearly silent, counts as a consonent.

Without blowing the most disturbing, humiliating and painful episode EVER, I can tell you that after a Midnight Express-like traditional "massage" in an Arab-style Hamam (bathouse) in Samarkand, I will likely require powerful muscle relaxers and pain-killers daily for the duration. That I am not at this moment, in a neck brace, truss and feeding tube is a miracle. "Complainent alleges that the defendants, Zero Point Zero and Travel Channel, did knowingly and with reckless disregard for his personal safety, induce/coerce him into a situation which could and did directly cause grevious personal injury, harm, and personal embarressment. The ensuing damage to his health--and the reputation destroying and disturbing implications of the resulting images have and will cause irreprable damage to his career and ability to seek other employment. Mr. Bourdain seeks redress in the amount of 22 billion dollars for damages, lost income, pain and suffering. Which is to say it really fucking hurt." Okay. I'll settle for a Whitman Sampler.

Ambien, muscle relaxers, a couple of stiff drinks, avoid the food..

Okay...Just back from Uzbekistan. Roaring heat, dodgy food, many adventures--not all of them pleasant. I'll try and knock down as many of above questions as I can quickly--as I've got a date with some Immodium and a soft, flat surface. Will show air in Canada? I'm guessing yes--on a Discovery affiliate. Don't know details and don't know for sure--but my guess would be that's where it'll end up. The Adria doc: We'll likely be physically selling DVD's at the South Beach Food and Wine--probably in tandem with the US publication of the 1st El Bulli book. But you can be sure that if we go the trouble and expense of creating copies for sale--that we'll also be selling them on-line and elsewhere. Will let y'all know when that happens. Putrified shark? It tastes exactly like you'd think; Putrified, slimy, rotten, with a sharp overtone of pungent acid. Unspeakably awful--with absolutely NO saving grace notes. Worst thing I've EVER put in my mouth. That should tell you something. Cadaver's ass. GM foods? Well. we've been modifying crops and foods in "genetic" ways since the beginnings of agriculture and livestock. Messing with mother nature every way we can since the beginnings of time. Certainly the world--and crops look a lot differently than they did before we started cross-breeding, grafting, fertilizing etc. So I have no theoretical problems with the scary sounding term "GM" in principle. The question for me is: At the end of the day, do the negatives for the planet outweigh the positives. Does the dilution of flavor and quality, disruption of traditional farming methods--and general "unnatural" character of GM food production outweigh the very real need to feed millions and millions of people who are--right fucking now--starving to death. I don't see how we can answer that question without further research--and I think the nature and seriousness of that question (even if it means enriching Evil Agri-Empires) demands at very least that we not close our minds to the possibilites. Worst Thing Ever--or a Good Thing? We just don't know yet--and I'd like to know more. Arguments based on morality, philosophy, current notions of quality--and general suspicion about intent (however reasonable) seem pretty thin--when you've been to India and Cambodia and Africa where millions need food--ANY food--NOW. I'm not suggesting we embrace GM with open arms. I suggest careful, incremental further research, an open mind--and strict oversight and study of results/effects. I thoroughly respect your suspicions and cynicism about the good intentions of Monsanto and Con Agra and the like. Vegetarians in India. I'm surely more tolerant--in fact, respectful, of a culture that is traditionally vegetarian--for religious reasons. I'm less respectful of body-worshipping, smug, self-important hippies who have the priviledge of travel and choose to behave just like squeamish tourists--terrified of impurity. unhealthy food and "strange" cultures. They're no different than the ugly American tourist who eats every meal in the hotel coffee shop. Plus it seems rude and insulting to your host to decline anything offered--especially in an older culture than our own. Try announcing you're a vegetarian in Uzbekistan--or Portugal--or Vietnam--and see how many friends you make over dinner. May as well stay at home.

Book. 1st person accounts...

Coming in October, DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME--a collection of culinary meltdowns, humiliating clusterfucks, worst moments, misadventures, low-points and absurd confrontations from: Ferran Adria, Jose Andres, Dan Barber, Mario Batali, Michelle Bernstien, Heston Blumenthal, Daniel Boulud, yours truly, Jimmy Bradley, Scott Bryan, David Burke, Sam Clarke, Tom Collicchio, Scott Conant, Richard Corrigan, Tamasin Day-Lewis, Tom Douglas, Wylie Dufresne, Jonotahn Eismann, Claudia Fleming, Gabrielle Hamilton, Fergus Henderson, Paul Kahan, Hubert Keller, Michael Lomanoco, Pino Luongo, Mary Sue Milliken and Susan Feninger, Sara Moulton, Tamara Murphy, Cindy Pawlcyn, Neil Perry, Michel Richard, Eric Ripert, Alan Sailhac, Marcus Samuelsson, Bill Telepan, Laurent Torondel, Tom Valenti, Norman Van Aken and Geoffrey Zakarian. How do you spell schaudenfreude?

Uh..He's doing it in New York later this year.