paul o' vendange

Thanks for the ideas, guys.

I’ve really enjoyed goat when I’ve had it, which has usually been as barbacoa in Chicago Mexican eateries.

Thanks. I was looking to spend less for the fillet knife - the Wusthof being the upper end at $110. Could be I'm thinking of semi-flexible, of which I have a few, but none of which I'm truly happy with. I've seen flexibility in different widths, many wider than a standard "sport fishing" profile fillet knife. Expensive, I know, and thinner, but MAC for instance, fairly wide:

Whoops, missed your second line. Thanks, will look them up.

Sure. First is Matfer's "couteau filet de sole," A flexible blade, wider: Second would be Wusthof's "Grand Prix II Flexible Filet de Sole." Flexible filet blade, with a more dramatic sweep and narrower blade. It is also flexible (v. "semi-flexible" or "rigid": I know Wusthof makes an 8" model, 4518-7/20, which looks good. It isn't cheap, and I'm wondering if anyone has been happy with lower cost knives for filleting large flat fish, salmon, etc.

I will often do a fruit sauce with flying game - typically, something local if I can, stock (game - specifically, the game in question, if I can), sometimes herbs, and an acid that works. Poivrade family, of course. I had a venison plate with a twin-saucing of juniper-syrup (acid contributed by Sauv. Blanc - not too cloying) and a pomegranate jus. People enjoyed it

Hello all, I send my best hopes you are safe and well during this terrible time. I've a need for a better fish fillet knife. I've a host of old knives for boning and filleting ranging from semi-flexible to rigid, among them older Chicago Cutlery and restaurant-chewed up Sysco blue handles. I know they are fantastic, but at this time anyway not looking for a Deba style. Of the flexible-bladed knives, I do like the wider knife, less the narrower style. Thanks for any thoughts.

Weinoo, Sorry for such a late reply. I have substantial medical issues and I've been out of commish. Just to say thanks for your posts. I've a better idea now.

Yeah, I did use it a bit loosely in terms of common usage. It's used interchangeably with rondeau; also braiser. I have an army of various sauteuses, sautoirs, etc., large (28 qt.) stock pots, and a massive rondeau, don't recall the size but I used to braise 4 lamb shoulders at a time in it, mostly what I used it for. I just don't have an idea of scale for home on the rondeau. I do have a few Le Creuset heirlooms from my wife's side, which are beautiful. I was looking at Vollrath Intrigue's 12 quart, but it sounds like maybe that's overkill. Thanks for your post.

Hello, I have a lot of cookware, but it's all vastly oversized for home use. Generally I've always gone with Vollrath Intrigue on stockpots and my large rondeaus. I've been collecting smaller items over time. At home, what size/capacity braziers do you use? Brands (will have to stay with Vollrath range, i.e., Matfer Bourgeat is out). Thanks all.

I wrote on another site that one can find the fact his mashed potatoes may be his most remembered dish as either very trite or extremely profound, depending on one's viewpoint. I learned so much technique in just this one simple thing, I'm forever grateful. Loving Eric Ripert and knowing what it was to pass through Chef Robuchon's kitchen, he was a lion, but a titan of monumental importance. Too many this year will be forever missed. Thank you, Chef.

I love my 2001 LaRousse ("Red."). In fact, it's bedside now. Inspires me when down, or I need a certain term I've lost, or to just generally learn or refresh on something. I find it a really valuable book. I see the current issue, 2009, is coming in at $45, my edition, the 2001 edition, is coming in right around $15 on Amazon. Just one reason I've found it valuable (like Escoffier, which I'm still trying to work through). Grant Achatz: “It is critical to have a sound understanding of traditional culinary principles before attempting to push boundaries in cuisine. Larousse Gastronomique helps me execute the progressive cooking we do at Alinea.” —Grant Achatz

Re-reading Daniel Boulud's Letters to a Young Chef for the umpteenth time. Have not cooked in consistent reality in over 10 years. 57. Can I be a, ahem, young chef, to be lettered? 🤔

Totally agree, Suzi. That was incredible and typical of Anthony. Thanks for doing that, and for the post reminding me of that.

I really didn't know where to put this. Anthony was obviously a universe more than food media. I'm sure like all of you, I'm still really grieving him - my wife and I watch and re-watch Top Chef and were as surprised as the contestants to have him suddenly come on and fill in for Tom as a guest judge on an episode last night. I'm tearing up as I write this. It's impossible to accept yet. We're trying. I myself am still trying to find a way back into cooking. It occurs again right now that maybe Anthony, as frank as he was, was also as compassionate as I've known; a soulful whisperer. If you haven't seen it, just a little bit from CNN.

I love and have re-read both books several times (in fact, on a sort of CIA bender lately, so read both over the last few weeks. Re-reading TPC as well). I liked Jonathan Dixon's foreword, in which he gives hommage to but distinguishes his book from M. Ruhlman's book; his as slightly more of a subjective study, Michael's more objective as a writer coming from outside to learn the experience. I don't think either falls so neatly into Dixon's distinction, but it was a nice way to sort of bookend both texts. I could re-read both (and will, I'm sure), dozens of times. I've got a mountain bedside. Guess I'm on a bender in general. Mourning Anthony, can't quite get to his books again yet, so reading Eric Ripert's books again (On the Line, the Le Bernardin Cookbook), and also finished 32 Yolks, which I absolutely loved. Wonderful. So much in a tight little tome, draws me to him all the more. And enough 2 a.m. reads of inside, ludicrous things that happen in the trade, that as I bust out laughing and wake my wife up, get me in fitting trouble.

I'm very sorry I can't offer any current or substantive suggestions as to places to go, just wanted to throw this out there - if you haven't read it - is Lawrence Durrell's Prospero's Cell. I'm not as big a fan of his fiction, which I find overwritten to some extent, but I'm really fond of his non-fiction travel writing. Among them, Prospero's Cell is exceedingly beautiful in its narrative of the life, land and sea of the island. Granted, from another, more innocent time, but I just wanted to toss it out as you might draw some enjoyment from it, before your trip. Happy travels.

Hey Paul - Actually, I said white stock, not white sauce. It's the second stock after estouffade (and his chicken is the same thing, with the addition of additional giblets and/or carcasses, and "three boiling fowls" - that's a lot of bird per gallon of water!!). I've worked across many spectrums, all of them, really, classically based. But I've never cooked entirely true from Escoffier's work, to the word. I'm doing it because until I do, it's just a thought experiment, you know? I can't know what it is, until doing it verbatim, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. But I really am tripped out by not just the use of salt (I don't in my stocks, but many do - two immediately come to mind, Paul Bocuse, Judy Rodgers/Zuni Cafe Cookbook - lost her book years ago, but I seem to recall not only that she salts her stock, but against all orthodoxy, doesn't skim it at all - let's it cool scum and all overnight, then skims, if memory holds), but man - that's a lot of salt, or so it seems to me! It will be nice to make some velouté and derivative sauces from this, to see how it works. Partially, I'm just trying to feel the Belle Époque - and imagine, their palates demanded a richer, fuller experience. Partially, I love culinary history, the underlying reasons of why a certain gastronomy was as it was. But here, as well, just curious if anyone else has literally worked Escoffer, and what their experience of this use of salt is. Edit: Equally astonishing, at least to me, is that I haven't found any discussion of this anywhere on the web. I would have thought that given Escoffier's importance, and the importance of these stocks to French cuisine as we know it, there'd be more on this. I just find it kind of jarring, but then I admit I can go in fits of obsession, when nature allows.

Hi all, I'm puttering a way back in. I've read Escoffier but in all my life, though I've used, as many of us have, a world of techniques and recipes, etc., passed on by traditions following from him, I've never replicated much from the book. Starting from the beginning. I've NEVER put a grain of salt in any stock. What he calls for in his white stock seems crazy to me. I gulped and added the full measure (though I made chicken stock, which calls for additional carcasses, whole boiling hens, etc., which I did). It's a luscious stock. Absolutely rich and an entire paradigm apart from the chicken stock I regularly use, which is a wetting agent, a braising liquid, a lighter basis for derivative sauces, etc. As this stock stands, I would use it in potage, but cannot imagine reducing it for sauce purposes. The salt is palpable, though it's "nice," I guess I'd say. The stock tastes great. I also find it interesting Escoffier doesn't typically call for salt in his small sauces. So it seems, salt in stock, watch it in saucemaking. I've tried finding discussions about this on the web, even in French, and I came up empty - which also really surprises me. Anyone else make his white stock? Anyone else use salt in their stock? Anyone else use it in this kind of ratio (60 g/12 litres water)? Thanks.

Hahahah - I love it - "Tongs Embargo." Good explanation, too, thanks Paul. I'll try to dig that up, interesting subject.

That would be great to find out, Paul. The gram thing I hadn't heard, but I guess I'm not surprised. I did know of the tong thing - if I'm not mistaken, he uses fish turners wherever possible and tongs are basically persona non grata.

Hey Paul, Interesting thought, and of course there are a million variations on ratios, components and techniques on any stock. What piqued me, however, is that for both the veal and "primary," let's call it, chicken stock, both recipes, with few exceptions, are identically worded. So much so, in fact, that I presumed Bouchon's was merely repeated from TFL, until I saw this halving of both the veal bones, and in essence, the time. Add to this that TFL does a remouillage and obviously, you end up with a substantially thinner sauce. Radically thinner, I'd think, though I've never made the Bouchon version. At any rate, just caught the difference today and found it interesting. In terms of what they're doing today, can't know, of course. My gut actually tells me this primary stock and the way it's made is really the soul of Keller's cooking, the essence of his cooking philosophy, written in the words of a recipe. I actually imagine nothing's changed at all. Would be interesting to know.

Sorry to resurrect, but obsessing. Randomly - Have long considered Thomas Keller a demi-god and tried to learn all I can from him. "My" veal stock was "his" veal stock, no interpretation whatsoever, for years. I have a hard time breaking from anything he does, but I've always found the stock a bit red for my truthful taste, and a bit sweet. I've made Escoffier's stock-espagnole-demi-glace for decades, and it wasn't till coming to TFL and Keller's way, that anything changed. Just your thoughts: TFL uses 10 lbs bones, remouillage, a lot more time, to get to 2 quarts. I only realized today that Bouchon uses half the bones and only 4 hours, to get to the same result - 2 quarts. Is this a typo, anyone? I feel like I'm missing something. TFL has aromatics working a total of what, 12 hours? Yet it works, in my opinion; I don't taste "dead." It goes against orthodoxy ("....add in and simmer for one more hour....."). Thoughts?

Thanks, Baron. Believe it or not that method is one I used, but it's easily been 25 years or better and with my memory issue being what it is, it literally dropped off my map. Not even sure where I picked it up, but it was definitely a French chef or other French source. Sincerely grateful to you for mentioning it as it does work fantastically well. Wish I had the "Recettes Originales" in the original, to see what they write there. Just seems crazy, so agree all, it's likely a typo or mistranslation.

So would I, which is why I've always been so puzzled. Goes against everything one is taught, etc. But these are the Troisgros's, and I don't know if this is a mistranslation or not (I only have the English version, would be nice to see the original).