Jump to content

  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Dish Names That Make You Run in the Opposite Direction

Chris Amirault

By Chris Amirault
in Food Traditions & Culture

 Share

Recommended Posts

Dakki

Dakki

Posted
Posted

Turducken.

C'mon!

This is my skillet. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My skillet is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it, as I must master my life. Without me my skillet is useless. Without my skillet, I am useless. I must season my skillet well. I will. Before God I swear this creed. My skillet and myself are the makers of my meal. We are the masters of our kitchen. So be it, until there are no ingredients, but dinner. Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mjx

Mjx

Posted
Posted

I'm afraid that I prefer a fairly flat-footed, descriptive approach to naming dishes (with exceptions made for dishes commemorating someone, e.g. Caruso), so virtually anything affected gets my goat. I've even bailed on eating at places that ridiculously misappropriated certain terminology (sorry, a 'pizza amuse bouche' is... not amusing. Especially when it is a doughy knot the size of my fist).

I particularly loathe the terminology used at Starbucks ('venti'? 'latte'?! Just say 'twenty' and 'milk', and have done with!), and would avoid the chain even if I liked their offerings.

Slightly unrelated: If a restaurant insists on using the nomenclature of a language spoken by none of the staff, they should commit to it to the extent of making certain they've nailed the spelling and usage... 'paninis' and 'beef borgonion' just do not inspire confidence. And also make me run as fast as possible in the other direction.

Michaela, aka "Mjx"
Manager, eG Forums
mscioscia@egstaff.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault

Posted
  • Topic Starter
Posted

X Y Ways, where X is an ingredient and Y is a number between two and infinity, usually three.

Interesting. Is it the name or the concept you are opposed to? If the name, what alternative system to describe this would you propose?

The name. It's a cliché at this point, implying a dated reference to Thomas Keller, and yet, when I see it on the menu, it's not because I'm at French Laundry. It's the nomenclature version of horizontal plating.

As for another name, I'd suggest X.

Chris Amirault

eG Ethics Signatory

Sir Luscious got gator belts and patty melts

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thirtyoneknots

thirtyoneknots

Posted
Posted (edited)

X Y Ways, where X is an ingredient and Y is a number between two and infinity, usually three.

Interesting. Is it the name or the concept you are opposed to? If the name, what alternative system to describe this would you propose?

The name. It's a cliché at this point, implying a dated reference to Thomas Keller, and yet, when I see it on the menu, it's not because I'm at French Laundry. It's the nomenclature version of horizontal plating.

As for another name, I'd suggest X.

A menu listing simply "Duck" isn't terribly informative to a diner, though. To be a useful a menu should convey, ideally in a relatively concise way, both the item being prepared and the method(s) of preparing it, if the method is not intrinsic to the dish. "Duck Two Ways" at least hints that a variety of preparations are being employed. It would seem to me that if the rather straightforward name of the concept is cliche or dated then the concept itself must be as well--a somewhat different issue.

I'm not trying to nitpick the fun out of the topic (believe it or not :raz:) but while "oven-fried chicken" would make me run away from a misguided and inferior preparation method, "Duck (or whatever) Two Ways" would provide a subtle mix of information and intrigue, if the menu were well-written. Hardly something to run away from I'd think.

Edited by thirtyoneknots (log)

Andy Arrington

Journeyman Drinksmith

Twitter--@LoneStarBarman

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault

Posted
  • Topic Starter
Posted

We'll have to agree to disagree. I think that you can say "duck breast, confit, and cracklings" without saying "three ways." And if you say "three ways," someone's gotta explain what the three ways are, making the name redundant.

Chris Amirault

eG Ethics Signatory

Sir Luscious got gator belts and patty melts

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mano

Mano

Posted
Posted

Why is "Chicken One Way" absurd but "Chicken Three Ways" interesting?

You're right that there has to be some description.

But there are exceptions:

Wife: "Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex three ways."

Husband: "I'm at the front door now!"

versus:

"Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex one way."

Husband: "I'm at the front door now!"

Okay, bad example.

Husband: "Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex three ways."

Wife: "I'm leaving now!"

versus:

"Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex one way."

"Did you pick up the dry cleaning like I asked?"

“Watermelon - it’s a good fruit. You eat, you drink, you wash your face.”

Italian tenor Enrico Caruso (1873-1921)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thirtyoneknots

thirtyoneknots

Posted
Posted

Why is "Chicken One Way" absurd but "Chicken Three Ways" interesting?

For the same reason that it's weird if the menu says "Red-wine Braised Chicken with Bacon, Mushrooms, and Pearl Onions" instead of "Coq au Vin". Most menus have subheadings that allow for more complete descriptions, which is the typical place to elaborate on what Coq au Vin is to the uninitiated, or what the three ways of duck cooking are to the curious. The name of the dish itself shouldn't test the diner's attention span, though.

Agreeing to disagree is ok, too :)

Andy Arrington

Journeyman Drinksmith

Twitter--@LoneStarBarman

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thirtyoneknots

thirtyoneknots

Posted
Posted

Why is "Chicken One Way" absurd but "Chicken Three Ways" interesting?

You're right that there has to be some description.

But there are exceptions:

Wife: "Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex three ways."

Husband: "I'm at the front door now!"

versus:

"Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex one way."

Husband: "I'm at the front door now!"

Okay, bad example.

Husband: "Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex three ways."

Wife: "I'm leaving now!"

versus:

"Honey, when you get home we're going to have sex one way."

"Did you pick up the dry cleaning like I asked?"

Ok this is a far better line of reasoning.

Andy Arrington

Journeyman Drinksmith

Twitter--@LoneStarBarman

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...