Bux

I assume that was addressed to me. I have no idea of how far the nondisclosure agreement ranges, but I think it's safe to assume that you'll never know exactly what he thinks of the whole thing. He did not get to see the show last night and he asked about the judges' comments. Either he didn't get to see and hear either of the chef's presentations or he expected some severe editing. I gather at the time, Alex felt there was a discrepancy between the scores and the judges comments. I had to think hard to remember any negative comments, then I remembered that Jeffrey thought the tortilla was a bit dry and not holding together. I thought the latter was interesting as the egg is the glue in the matrix and the woman next to him said she couldn't taste the potatoes for all the egg. For me one of the most telling comments made, and I think it applies to the entire series so far, was when Brown (at the left) said the first course was "wonderfully mild." That's not the kind of food that comes across on television. That same judge went on to say "knockout" and "unbelievably good" about other courses. He also recognized the first course as a wonderful way to start a meal. I thought they were wonderful comments from a self professed "hash browns kind of guy." Then again I love hash browns. Jeffrey's comment about the tortilla being dry was followed by something to the effect that he could eat the whole tortilla. The contrast with his comment about Cat's octopus being too chewy to eat was all too glaring. I don't think anyone ate much of the potato ice cream. I gather it tasted much like I thought it might, that is like ice cream mixed with mashed potatoes. The way the two chef's approached including potatoes in dessert said a lot to me about how well they understand food. I think Cyrille feels good about the calls and e-mails he got from the people whose opinion he respects. I don't know the other sous chef works with Alex at this current position, but I know Cyrille and Alex had a good time preparing for the show and for all the pressure, I sense it was a good adrenaline rush for both of them. To a great extent, they are both old school chef's chefs and not guys eager to be interviewed. I suppose it would be easy enough to put oneself in their shoes if you had strong feelings about the credibility of the outcome.

I certainly didn't mean to imply you were at fault, but I am surprised that Michelin didn't check their own press release a little better. I didn't look through the entire guide either, but a couple of two stars that were two stars at least two years just popped right out at me and I quickly checked them against last year's guide and they still had two stars last year. That drove me to check a few more of the two stars and most of them were inaccurately identified as new. This called into question the entire release. I'm sure some of it is correct and I'm sure some of it is inaccurate. All I can say at this point is that it's not reliable. I'm not sure the Michelin web site is reliable either, but it shows Jardin des Sens as having three stars and the page says © Michelin 2001 - 2005.

In about five minutes my son-in-law will be on Iron Chef America backing up Alex Lee. This is the one-two team that worked together at Daniel for years. Alex was often in charge of the Daniel kitchen and Daniel Boulud was quoted as saying that he felt comfortable leaving the restaurant in Cyrille's hands when he and Alex took off for Lyon as reported in Leslie Brenner's The Fourth Star: Dispatches from Inside Daniel. You may dismiss my comments as less than disinterested, Cyrille is my son-in-law, and Alex is a friend, so I'll just say that there are probably two of the more talented chefs cooking NY. I will also say that I haven't seen anyone on the show so far, Iron Chefs included, who I'd rather have feed me than either of these two guys.

I don't how or where Chez Pim got that press release, but it's full of inaccuracies. The firs thing I noticed were that some two star restaurant in which we've eaten some time ago were shown with the "N" for new (nouveau). I just checked the 2004 Michelin and find that many of those "Ns" are misplaced. Meurin in Béthune was already a two star last year. As were Jeffroy in Carantec, Centenaire in Les Eyzies-de-Tayac, Cheval Blanc in Lembach, L'Oasis in La Napoule, Hauts Loire in Onzain and others. There are too many minor errors to assume this list is correct. We need to listen to those who have seen the new Guide.

I haven't seen the 2005 Michelin, but I thought I read it had lost a star. Perhaps it was a misreading of something Françios Simon wrote about it. The current Michelin web site clearly shows Jardin des Sens as having three stars. With all the troubles Michelin has been having, it would not be the greatest surprise if the web site and Guide were out of sync, but it still seems unlikely. I have very fond memories of several meals there, all some time ago. I haven't been back since they got their third star. I've been hearing mixed reviews for some time now.

I don't think the concept of an hors d'oeuvre is unreasonable. Bear in mind that the translation of "hors d'oeuvre" is outside the work, or apart from the meal you came to eat. Free or not, presumably you were prepared to pay the listed price for each of the dishes you've ordered and when you're finished eating, you'll know if you received value for your money and whether you'd like to come back based on the total package. While I can find no fault with the concept, it can be disasterous in excepcution. In a one star restaurant in France, I was once served an amuse I enjoyed, but which later proved to be the garnish on my main course. The whole main course suffered as a result. I felt I was eating leftovers. It was like watching a movie and seeing the opening scene again. I felt it was time to go home. There was a cook of little talent in terms of dining.

I thought it was written by a reporter. Sometimes reporters are entertaining. Sometimes they provide food for thought. Both of these chefs are celebrities in Chicago. I didn't see anything in the article that indicated it required the special services of a food writer. I know of at least one prominent food writer who started as a sports writer. There's nothing in the article that indicated to me that Caro didn't know what he was talking about or that he wasn't acurately reporting the comments made by two grownups already familiar with being in the media spotlight.

I have also been known to eat out of intellectual curiosity even when I've not been hungry.

I agree that Valencia is a city worth visiting for its cuisine and for it's other attractions, but I didn't get to La Sucursal. That was someone else's recommendation and I'm glad to have it for my next visit.

One of the things I found interesting at El Gallo Azul was that many of the tapas were plated in a contemporary style with squiggles of sauce decorating the little plate. I suspect it's the sort of thing some might find pretentious and offensive, but I thought it was done with some style rather than pretense and found it effective. As Mark mentioned, part of its appeal is its location and the way it seems to be used by locals to meet briefly for a short drink. It's hardly devoid of tourists, but Jerez is not a major overnight stop for all that many tourists in Andalucia unless I'm mistaken. As long as you're not intent on looking for celebrities, it's a good place for people watching. One evening we stopped there for a drink intending to move on and find some other places. We became so engrossed in the scene, which by hip American standards was an anti-scene, that we just ordered another drink and some more food.

Sorry, we're getting off topic here, which is really about what was reported as being said between two well known Chicago chefs. I now better understand your point that greater familiarity with foie gras in its traditional presentations by a larger audience is driving chefs to find creative uses athough raviloi and other stuffings is a very old use of foie gras. My sense is that if one doesn't agree that foie gras is a food we should be raising and marketing, it can't be treated with respect in the kichen. If one finds it a reasonable product, a chef should have as free a rein as with any other food. I'm not exactly on Tramonto's side. I believe that even if one raises and slaughters animals for food, there is an ethical way to treat them before they're slaughtered. I've spoken my thoughts on the raising of fowl for foie gras in this thread and in a number of other threads. I understand why some people find the thought of slaughtering any animal for food to be cruel. As these ducks and geese are slaughtered for consumption, I understand some will find everything about their domestication cruel. On a larger scale, I find the "force feeding" -- and that's a particularly poor term to have been chosen for the French term gavage -- is one of the least cruel practices inflicted on poultry in this country. On the evidence, I believe these ducks lead a better than average life for domestic poultry. Battery chickens are raised and processed in an environment that is cruel to the animals and humans who work there. Again, this argument has raged and will rage again in many other threads. That people's reaction to the words exchanged between Tramonto and Trotter are highly influenced by how they view the consumption of foie gras makes it hard to avoid in this thread, but that's really the heart of the topic in my opinion.

touaregsand, you've noticed that he seems not to be at home in fine restaurants. That he's an unadventurous eater was clear from the get go. Great qualifications for a food writer.

I sense a very narrow view of food in that statement. I've had foie gras ice cream, deep fried foie gras and some of the most magnificent raviloli in the world that was stuffed with foie gras and served with a truffle sauce. Moreover, I can tell you that all three dishes were to my taste some of the most refined dishes I've ever had. No chef has ever treated a product more respectfully in my humble opinion.

Decidedly a prime spot for tapas. We spent a couple of days in Jerez two years ago -- Jerez isn't that much of a destination town, but it was a convenient place to catch our bearings and from which to make a lunch in Sanlucar de Barrameda. El Gallo Azul was our return to spot at odd hours. From my notes of the things we ate and liked: Cod (carpaccio) on …onions?… on slice of bread Meatball of squid and shrimp Cod croquette (pasty potato, but crisp and dry) Hamburger of monkfish and langoustino with salmorejo sauce Boiled potato slice with minced pig’s foot on top Slice of rolled lamb breast stuffed w/cepes. Deep fried brik triangle of fresh cheese with leeks

Depending on where you are in the 10th, you might also look at adjacent arrondissements. I haven't been in Chez Michel on rue de Belzunce iin years, but it still seems to get good mention in the forum. I'd also recommend traditional brasseries such as Flo and Julien. All three are mentioned in this thread on restaurants near the Gare du Nord.

Excellent observations and suggestions. A good part of adapting to one's environment is looking for substance over style.

Why do people become painters? For some I'm sure it's the opportunity to make people's homes cleaner and brighter. For others it may just be the desire leave masterpiece works for posterity in museums. I'd never find it unreasonable for a chef to believe that pandering to people's personal tastes isn't a fulfilling way to nourish either the diner or the chef's life.

It's right next door to Excellent Dumpling. It's mostly a meat and rice, noodles, and soup as well as congee place. Chinese vegetable and oyster sauce may be the only vegetable dish on the very short menu. Excellent Dumpling used to be a place I liked, but I've stopped going a long time ago.

I hadn't meant to say that the way foie gras was seen in other countries were examples of it becoming populist food here, just that it doesn't always have the connotation of haute cuisine. I've never been to Israel, but Michel Ginor of Hudson Valley Foie Gras, in his book Foie Gras, A Passion says you can buy a sandwich of grilled foie gras rolled in a flat bread at a take out window of a popular restaurant in Tel Aviv. I don't know when it will show up in Peoria, but I've read at least one article that noted the spread of it's appearance to restaurants not competing for four stars, and in cities where such restaurants don't exist. At the same time, according to the article, it's been declining in the top restaurants simply because it's been over exposed. Perhaps it's all levelled off by now, but little of this is relevant to the exchange between Trotter and Tramonto except to say that foie gras hasn't achieved populist standing quite yet as is evidenced by the Chicago articles. I'll bet that here in NY, there are more people who haven't had foie gras, than those who have. Maybe I'll start asking my friends and acquaintances and take a poll. I noted that it's populism was to a very small degree.

derricks, Thanks for the link and than you as well to Chris Holmes.

I have to side with Nullo, and as he says, if the free thing is not a goodd thing, pass on it. I have a friend who has a severe allergy to fish and seafood. He passes on the free scallop. If his wife isn't on a diet, she gets two. Otherwise I get two. No offense taken by anyone at the table or in the kitchen. In truth, if it's not good, it's still not much of a loss. I mean it's better than if the main course is not to your taste. I've had courses served in an eggshell. I've not had a problem. If his friend had a problem, it's the eggshell not the fact it was an amuse. As fan of dining, I don't get upset when the meal is longer especially if I'm not sitting there hungry with nothing to nibble on. It almost seems as if Cuozzo is railing against the graciousness of fine dining and it's appearance in our daily restaurants. Bless the chef who sends me a little treat and I don't care if I'm the only one in the house to get it, or if everyone else gets a little canape just to prove I'm a nobody. Maybe it's that I'm not a restaurant and get to choose my restaurants or maybe I just choose more wisely than Cuozzo but my amuses are generally a treat. Still I share Nullo's attitude about a free chance to try something new. Bah humbug to ingrates. I thought it was going to be parody, but he seemed serious.

I don't agree. But I would agree that a character fault is far worse than a physical fault. Calling someone a hyprocrite is an accusation, usually based on something the person has said or done. It is an invitation for the accused to explain the apparent hypocrisy. To instead reply with a childish insult is an indication that the accuser was correct and that accused has no defense for his/her actions. ← Tramonto called Trotter a hypocrite when this fundraiser dinner was not an issue. You can thank bourdain for bringing that up. In my opinion, it is still not an issue as at least 2 out of the 3 foie gras dishes were definitely not Trotter's creation. Trotter was very clear that he wouldnt use foie gras because the birds were not treated well. Tramonto responded by calling him a hypocrite as 'all animals are raised for slaughter'. This is absolutely irrelevant as Trotter's rationale isnt based upon the philosophy of vegetarianism. Trotter didnt invite Tromonto for a debate. Trotter didnt attempt to persuade others to follow his beliefs. He is carrying on in his own restaurant. ← You've made some careful distinctions in this thread and I think Tess did as well here. Trotter's an adult and responsible for the consequences of what he says and does. Whenever he speaks and whenever he acts, he's aware of what he's said and done before, even if he's not aware of what he's going to do next. Shifting blame on Tony is an argument that says Charlie wouldn't look so bad if we didn't know all the facts.

Did I say that the Jewish religion advocates the avoidance of pork on the basis of morality? It is about beliefs. Beliefs can be faith based(like religion) or value based. The nice thing about beliefs is that one can choose to adopt or discard them. There is necessity and then there is free choice. Sometimes, choice can be based upon necessity too. Sometimes, one chooses a certain path because..well..he can. I'm sorry, you made a comparison to a situation where morality was at the heart of the issue. You're on a slippery slope here because I believe you are dealing with beliefs I believe don't exist in the Jewish religion and then interpreting them to make some sort of comparison I don't believe can be made. We reach common ground if you're insinuating Trotter can conveniently adopt or discard his beliefs at will. The heart of this matter is that Trotter made some highly unprofessional remarks that were reported in the Chicago Tribune. It's not a local paper of a small community. If those remarkds were not made by Trotter, we'll hear about it soon. If they were, he sets himself up for scrutiny such as is being done in this thread.

You almost make it sound as if there's no hypocrisy involved in a famous chef lending his name to a shop seeling food whose preparation he neither contols or supervises. The suggestion that its stock of foie gras dates back as far as his decision to no longer trade in foie gras, seems almost slanderous.

Why not? Are personal beliefs valid only when it is backed by religion? ← Excuse me, but as I understand it, there is no morality involved in the avoidance of pork in the Jewish religion. It is simply a matter of contract between a Jew and his god that does not involve gentiles. Nevertheless, I do see a parallel. An observant Jew would not serve pork in his house, even to gentile friends. I believe Bourdain's point was that Trotter did not serve foie gras recently to support himself, but to entertain and perhaps impress two friends in the industry. That many of us would assume this meal was comped (i.e. free of charge to the diners) just reinforces the fact that the meal was not in any way similar to what someone might do that was distasteful in order to support himself or his family.