Bux

Most all "fancy" restaurants in NY, and I expect in much of the US, are wine centric. I suppose this has a lot to do with how French food is perceived in relation to German or traditional British food. In Belgium, where they make very little wine, but great beers, I've found the "fancy," "fine," and "serious" restaurants are also wine and French cuisine centric. I recall having beer for most lunches and wine for fancy dinners. I have seen menus where fancy French food is paired with fine beers, but it's a rare thing. For what it's worth, I think an interest in beer as a fine beverage is growing in this country. A natural drawback to beer as a food drink, is that it's rather filling in relation to wine.

Well that clears up why my grandmother had a set of small silver plated gynecological instruments in her cabinet.

Kids and dogs are generally better behaved in adult settings in France than they are in the US. You are also more likely to see dogs in fine restaurants than kids. I don't have a great opinion of dogs in restaurants although because I am used to American customs, the first few times I saw large dogs in restaurant it seemed almost shocking--I've seen them sitting on chairs and with nose and paws on the table. After a while it seems natural. Health codes here generally forbid dogs in bars and restaurants although I've not noticed the French to be any less healthy than us. France a uniquely hospitable country for dog owners. We have friends who live part time in the Languedoc. They rarely take their dog to a restaurant, but it's quite easy for them to travel within France and they rarely bother to even ask if a hotel will take dogs. On the other hand, traveling with them in Spain was a bit of a pain as most hotels will not admit dogs and our selection of hotels was quite limited. I don't know the code in Philadelphia, but I'd be surprised if it permitted dogs inside restaurants.

I'd save that for pigeon legs and lamb chops where there's some good meat to be gained by picking up my food. Asparagus gain nothing by being eaten out of hand.

Eat asparagus with your fingers? Whaddya think they are French fries? Let's start with the proper disclaimer. I don't know nothin about etiquette, but I know what I like. I've never eaten asparagus with my fingers in the US or France except when I'm cheating and eating stuff before it gets to the table or when it's served as a crudite with dips at stand up parties. Is it really proper to eat asparagus with one's hands in France? I've never seen anyone do that, but I haven't looked closely to see if others are doing that. Most of the time I get asparagus in France they are sauced or in a dish with a composite garnish. I've always been served a knife and fork with asparagus in France, so I assume that eating with one's fingers would either be optional or home bound etiquette. I don't recall having asparagus in a French home. I am not above picking up food with my fingers and eating it in reasonably fancy restaurants in France. Mrs. B. is an even greater advocate of eating with her fingers, but says she would use a knife and fork for asparagus. Perhaps we should get testimony in the France forum. As for French fries. I think it's all dependent on the venue. I don't have a strict rule, but it would be dependent on the number or tablecloths under my plate and the color of the one on top.

No one's mentioned goose fat or geese. You can certainly make confit with geese and I suspect a duck confit cooked in goose fat would be fine. Geese have a lot of fat. Of course geese are pretty big and I don't think the breasts are tender enough for use like magret de canard. We usually braise a goose when we cook it, but I know we pull out gobs of fat and usually render a good bit of it. Potatoes cooked in goose fat are superb. They beat potatoes cooked in butter or bacon fat in my opinion. I don't recall goose fat ever going bad, as long it's been clean white fat. We keep some in the refrigerator and some in the freezer for longer term. Sorry I can't give you an exact length of time we've had unfrozen fat and used it successfully. It just seems like a long time. I also can't guarantee it's in prime condition after any length of time either.

I think this is actually a much more complex issue than it seems on an initial reading of Margaret's original post, but to answer what I see as basic premises of that post, a rave review--not only of a restaurant, but a movie, or almost anything that can be reviewed or enjoyed--will often set an anticipation level so high that my enjoyment of the restaurant, movie, book, event, etc., will suffer and be less than if I came upon it without any advance reading or knowledge. Yet at the same time, there is no one's word I can absolutely trust. I've thought I've had friends whose taste paralleled mine perfectly, at least until we've had a meal together and had opposite reactions. I've thought there were reviewers whose opinion I could trust, until they gave a rave review to a restaurant I've hated or or a bad review to one I loved. Not even the reaction of my daughter whose tastes I think I played a major part in forming and who has an incredible palate with an ability to deconstruct a dish as no one else I know, can accurately predict how I will find a meal. The more complex aspect of the original post for me is that if we take two different people who are likely to have two different reactions to a restaurant, and if have them read the same review, we are likely to end up with two different people entering the restaurant with two different levels of expectation which will temper or magnify the two different reactions they are likely to have anyway. If I follow Margaret correctly, she's also saying that these two people are also likely to read the single review with different prejudices or at least with different perspectives. If I haven't, I suppose I could fall back and note that much of this is all about what we come away from an experience or restaurant, with, rather than what anyone, or a chef, puts into it. The real problem is that if the two people eat on different nights and order different foods, there's no scientific control. How often does anyone find that two dinners at the same restaurant will bring the same reaction and memory? Over time, a pattern may develop that will allow me to predict a lot about my next meal, but invariably, my second meal at a restaurant I absolutely loved the first time, is a bit disappointing the second. I often wonder how much better a second meal might be at a restaurant that wasn't good enough to draw me back immediately. Marcus suggests that it's not popular here for people to say they trust Michelin or any guide book over and above what they may read here. Perhaps not, but one of the reasons I think this site is succeeding as it has, it s that it's quickly become much more than just a series of first hand restaurant recommedations. I think it's not so much finding a person whose opinions are similar to one's own--I'm already convinced, even those who seem to share my opinions will lead me astray at some point--but it being able to put the opinions in a context.

We keep our nose to the ground, our shoulder to the grindstone and our ear to the wheel. Believe me, it hurts.

I like to believe individuals have values, not cultures. It avoids stereotyping. I believe the issue was about needing to find intrinsic value.

There's no accounting for taste. In light of my preceeding post, I'd note that Daniel was largely the restaurant that trained me to appreciate Blue Hill. Mike Anthony worked at Daniel and Dan Barber shows his respect to that kitchen as well. The food is lighter and appears simpler at Blue Hill, but I think it's equally as complex, just in a gentler style. The atmospheres are different and I enjoy them for the difference. The food is the draw at both and my wife and I have used them almost interchangeably for meals we consider important.

Probably worth a new topic as you suggest, but let me put in a few words here. There is no single way, nor would I assume everyone is going to appreciate Trotter's. There is no list of ten restaurants and if there was one, it might well be a different list for each potential diner. Let's step back and assume not everyone wants to appreciate Trotter's. I think it's a safe assumption. Then we could ask why any prospective diner might want to appreciate Trotters. I'd like to assume no one who didn't want to appreciate it would go in the first place, but the possibility is there that people go because of social peer pressure and that they go in the hope of not appreciating Trotter's, but in the hope of finding reason not to go again. People do strange things and I don't need to be seen as picking on anyone by stating the fact that people do weird things. I suppose all the restaurants you've already eaten in will have a great role in determining the next ten, but as has already been said, sometimes you might have to go several times to get it. Not all things worth appreciating are immediately comprehensible. I know people who have come away from art history courses with a greater appreciation for the works discussed. The same goes for people who attend wine courses. There's something to be said for education. I never made a conscious decision to appreciate fine food. What I ate and what I read just led me in certain directions and soon enough I was eating in restaurants I would have argued I could not afford. Values of that sort are very flexible. As for going back to a restaurant I didn't understand the first time, it's probably happened to me, but more likely at the low (price) end of ethnic eating. Why did I go back if I didn't like it the first time? Curiosity. On many levels I'd argue that food in high places is no better than food in inexpensive restaurants, or places that might not even merit the term "restaurant." It's the same argument I'd use to argue that the paintings in the museum are no prettier than the pictures in your favorite magazine or those on your desk or piano. Some people accept the prices paid for these paintings. Others deride the museums, especially when they use public funds to buy "works of art." Having failed to answer your question, let me ask a couple anyway. As a relative newbie to find dining, where do you want to go next and where have you been recently that you liked, or didn't like. I suppose it would be interesting to know where you live and what's available in your area.

It's also worth remembering that many very talented chefs are no longer trying to create the ideal Michelin three star restaurant, though their aspirations in terms of food are really no lower than they were when they were cooking in two or three star restaurants. Every two star restaurant in France seems to want to be a three star and lived in hopes of achieving that status. There are significant one and no star restaurants today that are exactly what they want to be.

The cheese section must be amazing, although I suspect many of the best artisanal cheeses are distrubuted more directly and not through the large wholesale market. Any thoughts on this after seeing Rungis?

No doubt, but they're not providing the ambience or service of a restaurant. It's basically a take out store. It's one thing to take a quart home, but another to walk away with a single portion that's really more than one person wants to eat. If I'm walking down the street, I might opt for a single portion for even three dollars, but if it's five dollars and it's more than I want, it just seems wasteful. It's a pity they don't have a half size portion for $2.50. It could be sold in a cardboard up instead of designer plastic and possibly be more environmentally sound.

If Valenti's doing a pork shank, maybe it will become famous, but it's got a ways to go to beat out his lamb shank. I'd love to tell you more about Cesca and expecially its food, but as we got a lot of busy signals and only an offer of 5:30 and some late hour in the middle of the week when we finally got though, we didn't haven't eaten there yet. It appears to be doing a good business. I haven't eaten in Ouest in a while, but I've loved Valenti's food and it's great winter food in general so I guess we'll be making the extra effort.

You're not ready to move on to flambes I take it. I'm thinking one could soak the bread in Kirsch before making a grilled guyere and emmenthaler sandwich and have a fondue panini by the time you reached the flash point. I'd try it, but I don't think my homeowner's policy would cover damages.

My understanding is that the principle difference between bacon and pancetta is that pancetta is not smoked, although I've been told that some pancetta is smoked. If I were to use a veal or turkey bacon substitute, I might consider blanching it if it had a very smoky taste. I can't really offer a substitute I know would accurately replace the pancetta, but you might try corned beef that was fried to a crisp. The pancetta I buy is also a little peppery, so you might add some black pepper. The real problem is that the pork fat has a distinctive taste.

Gotcha. I was assuming the solids were out of the pan and that the question was only about adding wine before stock or wine and stock at the same time. In fact, your later post regarding osso bucco was precisely what I had in mind in terms of order.

Quite obviously. I allowed my misconception of a little bird I never liked to miscolor the quick look I took at a couple of web pages. I regret the display of both ignorance and laziness. I owe you better. (That's an editorial "you.") Less obvious to me at the time I posted, but in retrospect I'm inclined to agree that with other things on my mind, I allowed some name calling to goad me into posting in haste and with a more hostile tone than necessary. I'll repent in liesure. It was not my intent to escalate the hostility which I sensed entered the thread with the initial post. Hostility is un-needed here and I apologize for mine. Baphie's reprimand is well deserved and an excellent example of how to keep it impersonal. He doesn't need to know if I've been wrong in the past or if I'll be wrong again in the future, nor does there seem to be glee in proving me wrong. For that his post is undeniably to the point. By the way, I've been wrong before and it's likely I'll be proven wrong again. Better men than I have also been wrong.

Of course you wanted to. I take issue with the notion that all things worth appreciating in life are obvious and apparent to the most untrained senses. Not every painting, not every musical piece and not every dinner is going to appeal to the untrained eye, ear or palate. That you remembered the chicken as fishy is a curious thing. One doesn't have to be an expert to have a valid view, but one has to have some insight and the view must demonstrate that insight to the reader. My opinion that the world is flat is undeniably a view, but it has no validity in a discussion of geography. More honest? Maybe more detatched and less passionate, but I would hope that a positive passion would actually enrich a review of le Bernadin and make it more intersting as well as more useful. Poussain is a sexless chicken? Weird thought indeed. I'm a poor speller myself and understand why greater minds have trouble with little things like spelling, but it hinders communication sometimes. Poussain is likely a last name in France, or maybe Cajun country. Poussin, to the best of my knowledge, is a little chicken--bred that way rather than just young. Capon is a desexed (castrated?) rooster. The confusion here doesn't speak well about the depth of your interest in food. Most of us might rather be unsophisticated, all of us would like to be seen as telling the truth. Are you trying to say you're not pretentious or a poser and that your critics moan with pleasure at the sight of duck feces? Am I mistaken or would you care to support this?

First, no one writes to anyone else in the public forum. It's all subject to public criticism. If anyone here feels their messages should not be subject to public comment, it shouldn't be posted. Then, let's all remember to focus on what's said and the validity of the statement rather than pretending we can establish a lesser level of validity by associating intelligence, education or social class with what one does or who one is.

Gersh, I can hope you believe I was not intending to raise issues about the post. In fact, the issue I was raising is that posting on eGullet is not the same thing as standing on a street corner and stopping people as they rush to work. For me, your reply confirms my point. What are the issues here? I'm not sure they've been defined or that I am prepared to do it well. Some might well say the newspaper replaced the street corner as the means of exchanging the latest information. If that's so, it might prove to be that the internet replaces the newspaper. I'm not implying the newspaper is dead anymore than I'm saying the street corner is dead or that people don't meet on the street and exchange information that way anymore, but the dynamic about how information is exchanged is changing all the time. If I was in the habit of exchanging information with some ten thousand or more people with simlar interests, why would I want to privately comunicate that information to someone who might publish it in a few days rather than just publish it immediately in a medium I know is being read by my hard core audience? I'm not saying there are no reasons, or that I have all the answers about how information should or will be exchanged. I am not offended by your request here, but issues were raised in my mind about the future or even the present state of communication and role of the Internet and newspapers. I'd also stress that the Internet is not eGullet.com anymore than the press is the NY Post. The Internet and the press are terms that encompass a whole lot of different activites. Bux

Why am I not surprised that the request for a source of 300 to the pound chocolate chips gets a positive answer on eGullet.

I think it's realistic to think most specials should be at approximately the same range, or at least within the upper range of comparable dishes on the menu. I think it's unrealistically naive to think they would be in the same ballpark. I'm not fond of ordering specials in restaurants I don't know well precisely for that reason. Half the time, I don't even listen to the specials. I often make it a point of asking about the price however, even when I'm not interested. Sometimes there's a reason for the price increase. The last time I ordered a special, it was because the chef told me he was saving an order for us. I didn't ask the price, but suspected it was going to be the most expensive thing on the menu that night, as it was. It was worth the price, although it was also more food than I wanted to eat. I was not told the price and didn't ask. I also noted that only one other table in the room seemed to have been told about that special. It was clearly special and apparently offered only to regulars. It was, I suppose, one of those if-you-need-to-ask-the-price-you're-not-likely-to-think-it-was-worth-it kind of things. Back to your question. Is this a NYC thing? I don't know. I live here and often find it annoying. I'm making a mental note to remember to ask the price more often, just because.

Your lunch at GT was it in the front tavern room or the dining room. I've often expressed the opinion that the tavern room is one of the best food buys in the city. The food in the dining room is better however and you get tablecloths and that sort of thing. When I say the food is better in the dining room, I mean that they tend to use better cuts of meat and offer more complex dishes. The level of care that goes into all the food is excellent across the board.