bourdain

" Overdosed on drugs and went nuts and was found dead" I think it would be a very good idea to know what the hell you're talking about in this case--before blaming GR for that--or even suggesting that the event you're referring to had anything to do with his management style or behavior. Suggesting that "he drove him to drugs" is ignorant. And borderline defamatory. Bottom line on GR--and I'll say it again--is that when he left Aubergine--almost EVERY SINGLE employee--if not EVERY ONE also quit and went with him to what was then his own very risky start-up operation. Most of the people you see in Boiling Point (#1) who Gordon is speaking to so rudely are either still with him--or chefs in his other outlets. What--to outsiders--and nitwit reality show contestents--might seem brutal--is often seen as normal--even comfortably familiar--to insiders. I'd score GR as a more loyal, straighforward--and "better" leader/mentor than Ducasse (for instance) any day of the week. (See Delouvrier and Psaltis examples)And on the brutality scale--fairly low on the spectrum compared to far nastier practitioners who have half his talent or loyalty or interest in seeing their underlings move upwards.

I thought it was good, clean fun. Largely--and strenuously manufactured--but funny--and surprisingly (given the genre) entertaining (and even a little bit enlightening). Gordon was a complete pussycat here--laying off the obviously lame, halt and weak, encouraging the motivated but clueless--and saving his ramped up-for TV scorn for the dipshits who think they actually know something. (ie: the "executive chef"). He made a good choice in his first sacking (as did the team leader). She stood there like a lox--and had a bad attitude. Not giving the terminally useless Dewberry the boot was pure mercy. Most of the above comments are true--particularly that this is all one big stage set--and a TV show--and NOT a real restaurant. And it shouldn't be mistaken for one.But it's fun watching Gordon play--even if he's playing nice. It was instructive to watch the "customers"--particularly the recipients of the "Get back to plastic surgery" remark. An exercise in pure "I wanna be on TV" masochism. These two nitwits were practically wetting themselves with glee being "abused" by the master--even going back for more....Noone understands this better than Ramsay. It's pure candy--a guilty pleasure. Buy some cheap beer, some beef jerky, sit back on the couch in some cut-off sweat pants--and stop taking it seriously. I'm enjoying it...

Hey, Poppy! And greetings from Hong Kong. Long way from the Circle Bar.. Good to see you here. Tony

Currently sitting on my balcony at the Chateau Marmont thinking of you, Ruhlman-nothing more worrisome in my grey goose impaired head than whether to nibble on the complimentary cheese assortment washed down with Veuve--or stagger down to the Tikki bar and get seriously into negronis.. If Brad and Angelina don't keep me up all night again with that racket nextdoor, I'll probably drill out a few chapters before Sonny Barger comes over with the smoke and things get really crazy. And I TOLD the front desk: NO BROWN M&Ms! At least they got the thread count right this time. ...Cookbooks are great!

And note the time of Ruhlman's post: What is it--6:45 Cleveland time? And Michael's already slopped the hogs, milked the cows, hosed down the double-wide, knocked out 20 pages on pediatric phrenology for one book, 15 pages for another on 16th century Kurdish erotica--and he's now halfway through a festive description of tete du porc. as he pauses to dick around on line before filing that "Rocco Redux" story for Gourmet. THAT, my friends, is a motherfucking professional.

I watched the process at a small, high-quality producer's in France. I saw no rod being used. A couple of cranks of what looked like a food-mill with a long spout--and that was it.

Ruhlman, who really should not post while drunk, deserves this fucking award. I, regrettably, will not be attending the ceremonies--until the audience is at least 50% Mexican. Let's hope Aaron wins--and represents!

Ah..... Ruhlman. Without a doubt this year is your year. Like when they finally give Scorcese the Jean Herscholt Humanitarian Award--after overlooking a lifetime of good works, they'll finally take pity on you--and mitigate their own prior sins of omission. I dearly hope you do indeed take the grill bitch. She has, I believe, appropriate footwear in mind (Picture Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS) and your khaki-clad ass will surely end up chained to radiator. I am currently in Chicago, working on my sure-fire next-year's winning submission: "Mayonnaise Variations:The Next Big Thing?" Oh yeah...I'll be a shoe-in.

Very happy to see Gina Mallet nominated for the excellent and provocative LAST CHANCE TO EAT. And the always fabulous Dara Moskowitz...Harold McGee--well, duh! Man deserves a Pulitzer for that book...Congrats to Robb Walsh................ and of course warmest kudos to Cleveland's Most Notorious Bar Brawler, amateur taxidermist (he's building a dream friend in his cellar from spare parts), synchronized swimmer and glue-sniffer, Michael Ruhlman. The Bouchon book is an amazing accomplishment--particularly considering Ruhlman's daily intake of pysychoactive chemicals. I look forward to Michael's typically drunken, beligerent and confrontational acceptance speech at the awards ceremony. No doubt leading off with "I see Amanda Hesser is here tonight..." before leading into the kind of protracted, ill-considered and career-killing rant for which he's famous. Don't miss this year's awards kids! It's gonna be a bumpy ride!

I say that with sadness--not menace.

"Ok, people. Think what you may..but there is a code in the kitchen. In professional kitchens, you DO NOT tell the chef what to cook. You DO NOT tell him how to cook it. You DO NOT criticise the techinique. " The world after culinary school is going to be a very, very hard place for this writer.

For a thorough exploration of the above dishes, see episode 3 of the upcoming "NO RESERVATIONS" on Travel Channel. Putrified shark...mmmmm.

The Charlie Trotter FaustianBargain, in progressive leaps of far-fetched (and some might say borderline-deranged) logic portrays is a lamentably insignificant creature: Too lacking in stature in his tiny little Chicago eatery to affect public attitudes or political will on the issues, too dumb and unsophisticated to know he is talking to a reporter or understand the process, too mindless to have his own opinions or resentments--only a dimly insinctive impulse to "react" innocently when another chef makes (measured) critical remarks. This Chef Trotter of FB's construction is also too docile to ask good friends to consider his feelings--or the fact that his NAME IS ON THE DOOR. Too unimportant a cog in the operation to take credit or blame for a joint menu served in his eponymous restaurant. He appears--if FB is to be believed, a witless, near comatose victim--a mouth-breathing, easily intimidated passenger, only dimly aware what's going on in his place--or in the outside world. This depiction does no justice to the issue, to the general discourse, to any reasonable appreciation of reality--or to Chef Trotter himself. Charlie Trotter is--as anyone who's spent any time at all with him is fully and explicitly aware, is a highly intelligent, fully engaged, media savvy chef, author and entrepeneur/businessman of long standing. A man legendarily demanding of his associates and employees--and a guy with no small ego or presence.Agree or disagree with what he says and does. Like or dislike his food or his works. But for Christ sakes! Stop blindly "defending" the guy in such a way as to paint him as a submissive, half-conscious bivalve. You don't rise to Trotter's level of success without knowing how the world works. Or shrinking from the occasionally unpleasant task of vetoing the wishes of others or bending others to your will--as anyone who's worked with Charlie will be happy to tell you. As any CHEF will tell you. Deconstruct all you like. We have long ago disappeared down the rabbit hole ..and left the real Trotter behind. I believe I saw a reference to FB being a chef? I disbelieve it. Unless chefs spend all day on line.

"It seems to me that you are trying to sell your case by exploiting the travesty that happened to Chef Laurent Manrique. Shame on you, bourdain. " Rather than jump down your throat over this...I'll explain: I am genuinely outraged by what happened to Manrique--a friend, and a chef I admire. I am not an advocate. I'm not "selling" my case. I have every expectation from the get-go that I will lose "my case". But I don't have to like it. When fellow chefs are terrorized--and under threat--it goes down hard when comrades choose not to stand with them--even if they have reservations about the ethics of foie gras. As far as eating vegetarian in India? Just got back from there. And you are of course, exactly right. Plenty of good vegetarian food. Nothing wrong with it. I cite the ludicrous Harrelsson example as someone who won't even eat most vegetables. Who cheerfully--and with the happy assurance and confidence of righteous certainty--can sit in Thailand, a centuries old culture with an amazing tradition and variety of people and cuisine (including vegetarian), and not even be curious or interested. Fear, contempt, squeamishness and a total lack of curiosity about this big beautiful world are not qualitites I admire. In fact, I find them dangerous. To my craft--and to the world. To build a beautiful cookbook around such an ascetic, hermetic world-view seems (to me) vaguely treasonous. A clean colon is the last thing a chef should be concerned with.

..and the picture of Charlie Trotter, "opening a can of whup-ass" on anyone other than a geriatric dachsund is pretty fucking hilarious.

" "I know it's not making it easier for chefs, but is that a bad thing?" Trotter said. " from today's Trib piece. Let's understand what we're talking about when he says "Not making it easier for chefs" We're talking about people sneaking into Laurent Manrique's back yard--while he's at work--and VIDEO TAPING HIS WIFE AND INFANT INSIDE HIS HOME--then sending him the video tape. We're talking people breaking into his store and trashing and flooding his business. These are the folks who are getting their way. These have been their tactics so far. And their tactics--rather than being punished and prosecuted--are rewarded. Chefs are yanking it from their menus to avoid "problems" Laws are being changed. The bad guys are indeed, winning the day. It's against this background of very real threat that some high profile chefs have chosen to do an about face. And it is, I think, completely understandable that many of their peers resent it. As far as my comments on RAW: I urge one and all to read Klein's intro; Her example of Woody Harrelson, sitting in THAILAND--that's THAILAND, folks--eating the same raw salad every single day--as an inspiration for her mucus-free, pleasure-free, risk free, hygenic "pure" philosophy is terrifying. That Charlie lent his considerable skills, talent and reputation to such an inherently anti-human, anti-food product makes him a deserving target for ridicule anytime I get him in my sights. Trotter--without question--is a significant entity in the world of cuisine. Arguably, he's a genius. He runs a very very fine restaurant. And he's been nothing but good to me. Hannah Arendt talks about the banality of evil. Trotter has--on two occasions--chosen to stand with people I consider dangerous to my fundamental concept of how to cook, how to eat, and how to live in this world. A proponent of evil? Maybe not. Just another shopkeeper--going along--while they drag away the neighbors.

All the above being true--re: the Times piece--I do hear that the author's a really nice guy. Let's hope that it was just a bad day at the office and that the Times gives this whole issue--particularly the Laurent Manrique backstory--a more incisive look. To me, that's the real story. Not so much that the bad guys are winning the day, but HOW they've been winning it.

I'm really surprised at the Times editorial. Not so much by the writer's position--but how spectacularly uninformed and behind on the story he is. "He kept quiet about it, but the conspicuous absence of foie gras from his menus led to rumors in the restaurant world, and he was outed last Tuesday in The Chicago Tribune." Rumors? Ridiculous. Every chef and serious foodie--and (one would think) serious food writer in the country has known about Trotter's change of heart for years. He's spoken about it before. It's been written about before. And the anti-foie activists have done some public gloating on the subject. A total non-fact. Dramatic--but seemingly manufactured. "Other chefs, perhaps fearing the unthinkable, have jumped all over Mr. Trotter, calling his gesture hypocritical grandstanding by a media hound (and author, so you know, of "Charlie Trotter's Meat and Game," with recipes like Foie Gras Five Ways and Sweet-and-Sour Braised Lettuce Soup With Foie Gras and Radishes)." Uh..no. Most chefs only started jumping all over Trotter when he unloaded on Tramonto--and was then revealed to have served foie in his restaurant. He cooked with foie in the past? So what? He says he changed his views. And as much as many found that distasteful--or disagreed with his position--I think most chefs took him at his word. I certainly did. "He says foie gras is cruel, but he could have also called it boring - a cliché slurped by too many diners who, we suspect, would swoon just as easily over the velvety succulence of Spam or schmaltz on rye, if they were prohibitively priced and listed on the menu in French. " That makes for funny prose--an easy, elitist yuck--making fun of the rubes. But I seriously doubt the writer believes it and neither does anyone else serious about food. And who the fuck is "we", anyway? It's a willfully (one would hope) ignorant piece; the author should fully own up to his opinions.

"Even Charlie Trotter cannot tell Heston.B or Tetsuya what to cook. Or what not to cook. That is disrespectful. Heston.B crosses an ocean to show off his two signature dishes and to prepare them for a fundraiser as a gesture of friendship..and you tell him, NO? I dont think so." Ridiculous. Tetsuya and Heston are two of the nicest chefs in the business. Neither would hesitate, I'd care to venture, had their host and good friend Charlie said, "Look, I'm uncomfortable with your choices--they'll make me look like a hypocrite--and conflict with my deeply held(and publicly stated ) personal beliefs. Please come up with something else." Tetsuya's "signature" dish is his sea trout. And I'm just guessing--but I gather Blumenthal has a somewhat wider repertoire than foie dishes. To Charlie's credit (and I have this from him) he chose to stray for reasons of friendship and personal loyalty. That's nice. There's something to be said for violating one's principles in favor of friendship. What he said about Tramonto, however, was not so nice. And he's just going to have to suck it up and endure the blowback from an ill-considered comment. As well as the embarressment over the timing.

And the Sun Times. http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/c...ws-stein30.html

Trotter is good friends with both Blumenthal and Wakuda. And it is no more imaginable that Trotter would be "contractually obliged" to provide 3 courses of foie gras dishes for a meal in his restaurant than it would be for Martin Scorcese to find himself "contractually obliged" to make a XXX Anal Rampage Trilogy or a Vin Deisel vehicle. Ludicrous. Trotter is a big boy. And a master of his own destiny. He made a decision to serve foie gras in his restaurant. And now he'll have to live with that decision--as we all do.

The troubling dishes( photos to follow): Quail jelly, Pea Puree, Cream of Langoustine&Parfait of Foie Gras, Truffle Toast and Oak Film Salad of Langoustine with Foie Gras and Echalot Tarragon Vinaigrette Roast Foie Gras, Cherry Amaretto&Chamomile, Almond Fluid Gel

I don't think I'd refer to either Tetsuya Wakuda or Heston Blumenthal as "bush". This is not about comped meals, or who ordered the foie--or who touched the foie or who actually ate the foie. It's not about jews or muslims. As to my rather free reference to "ethicists". Perhaps I should re-state for the irony-impaired: The question here is not "Is serving foie gras ethical?" Nor is it even "Is it ethical for Charlie Trotter--given what he's said--to serve foie gras in his restaurant?" The question is: "Is Trotter full of shit?" or "Given the heap of personal invective he unloaded on Tramonto over this issue, is Trotter especially full of shit?"

Latest info in a developing story: I got a key fact wrong: Blumenthal and Wakuda were in fact cooking with Charlie at his restaurant--not guests (though one of the principles I spoke with described being fed foie gras there). The event was a Trotter-hosted 450 dollar a plate event for about 100+ friends of the house--including some gurus from Dom Perignon, Town chef Geoffrey Zakarian and the CEO of Fiji water--among others...Foie gras figured in multiple courses. Menu--and photos to follow. Whether this diminishes or increases the hypocrisy factor, I leave to the ethicists. My take? His house? His rules.

"I just said, `Enough is enough here. I can't really justify this,'" Trotter said. "What I have seen, it's just inappropriate. There are too many great things to eat out there that I don't believe that any animal would have to go through that for our benefit." And that he chose to take this postion (abandoning his fellow craftsmen) at a time when a comrade (Laurent Manrique) was being terrorized by anti-foie activists is particularly loathsome.