malachi

Jesus! What's next? You can't yell at them because it might result in them developing a complex? Do cooks there get to work from comfy chairs in air conditioned kitchens? People need to be responsible for the consequences of their actions. I hate paternalistic systems like this. It's like the whole illegality of suicide thing and the helmet laws on motorcycles. Idiotic.

Exactly. And to be totally clear -- I'd have to say that being "less than Johnny On The Fucking Spot" due to your recent breakup with your girlfriend, or your insomnia, or your terrible hair cut or just some bad brain chemistry is just as likely to result in your ass being out the loading dock as any other cause (including but not limited to drug use). The thing I liked best about cooking in restaurants was the freedom. In theory (see the comments about "kitchen managers" in the "Who is a Chef" thread) restaurant kitchens are meritocracies. Can you do the job? Can you cut it under pressure? Who you're f*cking, what you're taking, what your personal kinkinesses are... doesn't (and I'd say shouldn't) matter -- as long as it's on your own time. On the other hand... I totally agree that (historically) one can assume that hiring a speedfreak is going to result in violence and hiring a crackhead is going to result in things walking out the back door. That's just learned knowledge, though of course it's unlikely that drugs like this are even kept to your own time. But I disagree with the idea that you can extend this to all drugs at a blanket level. Yes... cocaine is an evil drug, but I've worked with a lot of cooks who smoked a hell of a lot of pot and were not lazy, were not sloppy and in many cases were among the best on a line. I've also worked with at least as many who lived up to the bad reputation. Perhaps its brain chemistry, perhaps its tolerance. Who knows. But I have to disagree that alcoholics are either less of a problem for kitchens, or for that matter that they are more of a problem. Again, I've worked with alcoholics who can pull their weight -- but I've worked with at least as many who are unreliable, unstable f*ckups. As far as odds of being a problem - I'd put them as being less of an issue than crack, speed and coke, even with heroin and more of an issue than pot. I think, in general, you can't apply a blanket rule like "no-one who uses drugs can be an effective professional cook." You have to evaluate on a case by case basis. Thus... the meritocracy.

Umm... yes. Then again, I don't think I would be considered as part of a "normal" sampling given that I've recently driven 9 hours round trip (in one day) to have some good Korean food and pick up 12 bottles of beer.

Invento - You're confusing a moral stance with artistic professionalism. If you're honest with yourself, you'll see that this is the case. There is nothing wrong with being morally opposed to drugs, and nothing wrong with insisting that those who work for you don't use drugs. But don't lie to yourself about your reasons.

I can see arguing that smoking will affect your palate (though god knows how great French food ever came to be in that case). But I can't see how, for example, something like Demerol would. Or how adrenal analogues (stimulants of sorts) would be more likely to have an affect than adrenalin itself.

I'm not going to argue that your opinion isn't valid -- but I'm missing both the science and the logic. Just 'cause adrenalin is "natural" doesn't mean it doesn't affect you. Should women not be allowed to cook in restaurants during their period? How about those with Seasonal Effectiveness Disorder during grey and rainy periods? Should you be fired if you go for a long run right before work and have the resulting endorphins in your blood while cooking?

At the end of the day, if you're doing your job professionally and are overall a positive contribution to the business then I don't care if you're smoking crack, worshipping satan or dressing up in sheep costumes and getting paid for sex -- as long as its on your time and its not interfering with your job performance then it's all good and it's your business.

I don't think it is as simple as stress being the cause here. I fully agree that stress is a large part of it (as is, as noted above, the odd hours you tend to work and the inability to relax naturally before its too late to be part of "normal" society). But I think there is a kind of person who is attracted to cooking professionally, and that kind of person also tends to be likely to have an unhealthy attraction to things like drugs. Cooking professionally has its rewards. That is why people do it -- they get something out of it. There is the rush of a line working in sync under pressure, there is the sensual appreciation of the food, there is the satisfaction of giving people something they enjoy at a sensual level and the sensual enjoyment of that both making and eating food yourself and perhaps most of all there is that total and utter intensity of experience. People who cook professionally (as a serious generalization) are often people who try to live life very fully. There are, of course, other things that also bring these same rewards or rewards that are similar or appeal to a similar mindset. Drugs are just one of these. So combine a bunch of personalities looking for this kind of experience with a high degree of stress and an odd, "off the grid" lifestyle and then throw in easy access to drugs and alcohol and you tend to get a lot of people using drugs and/or alcohol.

1) sounds like PR and damage control to me. I'll believe it when I see him fire a rock-solid sous the Saturday evening after the grill cook burned his hand and with a full book of reservations on tap, just because the sous tested positive. Yeah, right. And he'll call up a temp agency to find someone to fill in. 2) I want to see one of you people who are clucking about the evils of drugs and the weaknesses of those doing drugs in the kitchen without having experienced it try and live the life for even just a few months. I'll put it this way... I knew people who worked back of the house and didn't do drugs. We called them alcoholics. There are a lot of reasons, but trust me -- it takes more than just "firm moral fiber" to stay clean working in a kitchen. 3) For perspective... I've worked construction (including insulation and roofing in the dead of summer), I've worked in high-tech startup management, I've worked all sorts of high stress jobs. The most stressful days I had working outside of a kitchen (like when we couldn't meet payroll at a company I was president of) were a f*cking walk in the park compared to many average-bad days in a kitchen. Seriously. 4) If they didn't let cooks and chefs do drugs they'd have to pay them.

Not to be a bastard or anything, but you should really avoid serving good beer in a chilled glass. As the beer hits the chilled (or "frosted") glass, condensation will occur which will dilute your beer and thus your appreciation of its flavor. In addition, the optimal temperature to taste a beer, while depending upon the style of beer, is invariably higher than the temperature of a chilled glass (the one exception being beers like Coors that you'd be better off not tasting). When you pour the perfect temperature beer into a cold glass, the result is a beer that is too cold to taste well. Beer tends to develop more flavour, and more complexity of flavour, at a higher temperature than what is usually served here in the US. For what it's worth, and to give you an idea of what I'm talking about... optimal serving temp for strong beers (barleywines, tripels, vintage ales etc.) is between 55F and 60F, while you're best off tasting ordinary ales (IPAs, dobbelbocks, lambics, stouts, etc.) at between 50F and 55F and only the lightest beers (lagers, pilsners, wheat beers, etc) should be served at a refrigerated temperature (between 45F and 50F). General rule of thumb is that the higher the ABV, the higher the serving temp and vice versa. In any case, however, the lowest you should taste a good beer is at around 45F.

D'oh. Both of you beat me to it. I need to type faster.

If you're a Chef, you are also a good cook. It's a requirement. You don't need to be a great cook, but you do need to be a good cook. Perhaps more importantly, you need to be an experienced and professional cook. There are more people out there calling themselves "Chef" without the experience or professionalism to back it up than there are who can't make a decent meal at home. Oh... and too further muddy the waters... there are those food service employees who run kitchens and can't cook. They're called Kitchen Managers, not Chefs. And finally... (personal issue) a Pastry Chef should be called a Pastry Cook or better yet a Pastry Baker. They, also, are most surely NOT Chefs.

Personally, I don't really understand people's dislike of cuts like flank, skirt and hanger. In many ways they're my favorites - incredibly flavorful and with an intensity that is wonderful to work with. The idea that these steaks need to be marinated or tenderized or in some way "hidden" in order to be palatable seems very odd to me.

If you ever get the chance, taste the Silo Cab. IMHO, it's another "spoiler" for over-hyped wines like the SO, Opus etc (though sadly I fear it may have been "discovered" at last as I've heard people mentioning prices in excess of $30 for it now - sigh).

Brooklyn Brewery Mug's Ale House

Rub both sides with a smashed clove of garlic. Season with coarse salt (sea, kosher, whatever you choose to experiment with) and a small amount of cracked black pepper. Refrigerate for at least 6 hours (or as suggested above, overnight). Remove one hour before cooking and let come to room temp. Cook. Eat. Enjoy.

Panko-crusted and Bresola-wrapped Halibut with shaved paragianno and a Port reduction Haricot verts with butter and sea salt

The V-10 is fabulous. Not exactly a "tripel" in the traditional sense of the word. I liken it more to the Unibroue 10. I guess I'd go with the generic "Artisanal Strong Pale Ale" category (grin). Overall I find the Golden Monkey to be near to the quality of the Ommegang Hennepin, though perhaps a little less balanced. I'd say it's a bit superior to the straight Ommegang. Similar in quality to the Allagash Double, but I vastly prefer the Allagash Tripel Reserve (perhaps my favorite US belgian style ale). I find that the Golden Monkey is, overall, unbalanced. It's as if they decided to make a BIG beer but lost site of the actual style they were emulating. It's a good beer, don't get me wrong, but I find it one dimensional and overly hoppy with a mediocre appearance and head.

Across the river in Brooklyn is Mugs, one of the greatest beer bars in the US. Mug's Ale House, 125 Bedford. About a block away is Brooklyn Brewery. Also in Brooklyn is Bierkraft, a good beer store (191 5th Ave in Park Slope). And out on LI in Huntington is an amazing beer store called Shoreline Beverages (645 New York Ave, Huntington). At 518 Hudson is Blind Tiger, which though no Mug's, is probably the best bet for a beer bar in Manhattan.

I think you'd have to futher sub-seqment into English (traditional) IPAs and American (new wave) IPAs.

I'd suggest you try Alesmith (Anvil and XPA), Allagash (Tripel Reserve and White), Ommegang Hennepin, North Coast (Old Rasputin and Red Seal Ale), Lagunitas Maximus, Hair of the Dog Fred, Brooklyn Brewing (Black Chocolate Stout, Blanche de Brooklyn), Victory Brewing (Storm King Stout, Prima Pils), Rogue (Shakespeare Stout, Dead Guy Ale). These would just be to start to be honest, but any and all should give you a good idea of what is available from US brewers that is a) flavourful, b) consistent and c) dramatically superior to anything Sierra Nevada produces. That is not to slight Sierra Nevada. For a "semi-macro" brewery they do a good job. But they simply cannot compete with the micro Craft breweries when it comes to quality.

Drie Founteinen Oude Gueuze

Hmmm... I wonder what round trip tickets are running these days. Is there a hip hotel within walking distance? My hit list: Abbaye des Rocs Gran Cru, Achel Bruin, Ayinger Brau Weisse, Caracole Saxo, Crystal Diplomat, De Ranke Pere Noel, De Regenboog Wostyntje, Unibroue Ephereme, Golden Pheasant, Hampshire Pride of Ramsey IPA, Hannsen's Meade the Gueuze, Hopback Summer Lightning, Rogue Imperial Stout, the mystery beer, Nethergate Old Growler, Reinaert Flemish Wild Ale, New Belgium Dubbel, Chimay Cinq Cents, De Dulle Teve, Fantome Pissenlit, Hair of the Dog Fred, Hitchino Nest Beer White Ale, Gouden Carolus Triple, Lucifer, Maudite, Maredsous, Lagunitas Maximus, Hair of the Dog Rose, Tripel Karmeliet, New Belgium Tripel, Urthel Tripel

They're both Belgian style Ales. The Chimay is perhaps my second favorite Tripel (after only the Westmalle). It is an absolute classic and well worth seeking out. The Golden Monkey is a US made Belgian style Tripel. It's a good deal (quite a bit cheaper than the true Belgians) but IMHO has some weaknesses in terms of execution against the style. A good beer, but not on par with the true Belgians or the top American Belgian style ales (Allagash and Ommegang for example).

Random Factoids: Fourteen out of the fifteen strongest beers in the world are from the United States. Pilsners, in general, are between 4% and 5% ABV. Lagers, in general, are also between 4% and 5% ABV. Belgian Tripels, in general, are between 7% and 10% ABV. Imperial Stouts, in general, are between 8% and 10% ABV. Stouts, in general, are between 4% and 7% ABV. Porters, in general, are between 4% and 6% ABV. Belgian Dubbels are, in general, between 6% and 8% ABV. US Mass Market Beers: Amstel Light is 3.5% ABV. Budweiser is 4.9% ABV. Coors is 5.0% ABV. Hamm's is 2.49% ABV. Miller Light is 2.02% ABV. US Craft Beers: Victory Golden Monkey is 9.5% ABV. Alesmith Speedway Stout is 12% ABV. Brooklyn Black Chocolate Stout is 8.5% ABV. Sierra Nevada Porter is 5.6% ABV. Allagash Double Reserve is 7% ABV. Various Foreign Beers: Harp is 5.0% ABV. Lowenbrau is 3.24% ABV. Chimay Cinq Cents is 8.0% ABV. Maredsous 10 is 10% ABV. Young's Luxury Double Chocolate Stout is 5.0% ABV. Guiness is 4.1% ABV.