Fine Dining vs. Cheap Eats, Continued

[Robert Schonfeld]

Robert S. - Well I'm glad you intend on eating those things. I hope you enjoy them. But what that has to do with this thread I don't know. Anyone can eat those things. In fact anyone can make them. They don't exactly qualify as cheap eats as defined by Fat Guy. Nor would they be defined that way by me either.

Thanks for the good wishes, Steve. I know you mean it. I appreciate your tacit recognition of the grandeur that can be found in simplicity. Maybe, as the FG says, we can move on more thoroughly to cheap eats, or I can.

It's not true that anyone can make the pasta dish, Steve, unless you mean anyone can make it, but only a highly skilled and practiced individual can make it well. The noodles alone are a significant challenge. Then there's the combining of the ingredients in a manner such that they are placed before the diner at their optimum moment of readiness. And all that's assuming you can get the ingredients, which isn't exactly easy, either.

Anyway, it looks as if the FG has screwed this argument into his Vice Of Reason. It will be diverting to watch the handle turn.

[Steve Plotnicki]

"It's not true that anyone can make the pasta dish"

Robert S. - Well you know you and I are going to have a philosophical discussion about the meaning of the word anyone. When you say anyone, you are talking about people who can make the dish perfectly. But in the context of this conversation of cheap eats, anyone means anyone. Fact of the matter is that so many people can make the make pasta with mozz, tomatoes and sage there isn't a single chef in the world who gets paid alot to do it or is famous for doing it. Of course this does not speak to the enjoyability of the dish, nor the complexity of the ingredients if produced properly. But remember where we started. People are interested in things where the technique is ratcheted up a few notches. That they feel is an accomplishment. But wait to argue this through because I'm going to start a thread on whether pasta is worth eating or not.

Beachfan - What your really saying is that the cost of therapy from the guilt of eating the ham sandwich with milk ultimately makes the sandwich cost more. In fact a good bottle of Mouton is only 3-4 sessions and one needs many more sessions than that to work through the guilt. That's a sound argument. Okay next time I have a ham sandwich, I'll drink Rayas so I can save the money on therapy

Fat Guy doesn't scare me. I have yet to see examples of the demand side distort the price set by the supply side to such an extent so as to overcome inherent differences in quality between things. The odds of chopped meat costing more than strip steak are about as good as a $5 bill being worth more than a $20 bill.

[Robert Schonfeld]

Steve, it was handmade egg pasta with butter and sage; the mozzarella and tomatoes was another subject.

Handmade tagliatelle with butter and sage is just one example of an Italian masterpiece. It is a nearly perfect encapsulation of the Italian idea that great food is often achieved with the minimum number of the best possible ingredients, combined as simply as possible.

Given the ingredients (admittedly, no small feat), the dish depends entirely on timing and technique.

I'm amused by your hudspeh in intending to ask whether pasta is worth eating or not, and I look forward to seeing how you frame the question, but I feel comfortable saying in advance, as Jin already has, that this has to be a joke. If you can show me how I can learn something from such a discussion, I will be both surprised and pleased.

[Fat Guy]

The odds of chopped meat costing more than strip steak are about as good as a $5 bill being worth more than a $20 bill.

If the value relationship between chopped meat and strip steak was as mathematically certain as between a $5 and $20 bill, we'd use meat instead of money. Everybody would walk around with a backpack full of meat and when we bought stuff the clerk would say, "That'll be eight pounds of chopped meat, please." And we'd say, "Here you go, and by the way can you give me four pounds of chopped meat for a strip? Thanks." Of course meat is tough to carry, so eventually they'd print up cash and put all the meat in Fort Knox. After awhile, though, they'd get rid of the meat and just print the money. But we'd all know it really represented meat.

I have yet to see examples of the demand side distort the price set by the supply side to such an extent so as to overcome inherent differences in quality between things.

Filet and strip. Strip and filet.

[jaybee]

If the value relationship between chopped meat and strip steak was as mathematically certain as between a $5 and $20 bill, we'd use meat instead of money.

Inspired idea, FG. Then when you get hungry, you could just eat from your wallet. The vending machine people wouldn't like that too much. Hard to get those little bits out of the small slots. But, I'm gonna try giving the toll-taker on the GWB a big Mac today instead of money. Who'll pay my bail?

[Jonathan Day]

Yes, and if an Italian cook, as opposed to a French one, prepared some meat you'd given him in specie it would be thenceforth be worth less, since Italian cookery, indeed all non-French cookery, is by definition Not As Good As French. Hence countries other than France are the cause of global price inflation. QED.

[jaybee]

Yes, and if an Italian cook, as opposed to a French one, prepared some meat you'd given him in specie it would be thenceforth be worth less, since Italian cookery, indeed all non-French cookery, is by definition Not As Good As French. Hence countries other than France are the cause of global price inflation. QED

This inequity would lead inevitably and inexorably to a common currency for all EEC countries. Call it the beefeuro, or b-euro for short.

[Bux]

The odds of chopped meat costing more than strip steak are about as good as a $5 bill being worth more than a $20 bill.

There are plenty of banknotes and coins, not to mention stamps, around that are worth far more than face value. I will grant that among any single rare issue, those in better condition will command a hgher value. I suppose you can slice and dice this anyway you want, but the value of things is related only to what people will pay.

[jaybee]

but the value of things is related only to what people will pay.

ah, finally, a truth I can wrap my mind around. Adam Smith couldn't have said it better.

[Steve Plotnicki]

"There are plenty of banknotes and coins, not to mention stamps, around that are worth far more than face value."

Bux - Yes but the market for them changes. They pick up the quality of collectability and they operate in a completely different market. It's like if someone were able to take a steak and mount it on a canvas and sell it to a museum. You aren't selling the steak, you're selling the art. Same with coin collecting.

"but the value of things is related only to what people will pay"

But I don't understand why any of you think people would pay for something if it didn't offer them requisite value? You all talk about it like Wonder Bread could sell for more money than bread from Poillane if someone created a craze for it. It just can't and it never will. It's like the story of the tulips that somebody around here always brings up. It isn't that tulips are ugly so the price paid for them was ridiculous to begin with. Tulips are beautiful. It's that they were priced disproportionately to their beauty as it relates to the beauty of ALL FLOWERS. Why pay $10 for a tulip when you can get a rose for $1? You couldn't muster up an argument about why that should be the case. The natural beauty of a tulip vs a rose doesn't warrant a ratio of 10 to 1. Of course the market for tulips will crash if that happened because people will just buy different flowers. But if you were to lay out all flowers in a line and allow people to buy them, a natural hierarchy based on their unique qualities would occur and tulips would fall into line proportionate with what they have to offer.

Robert S. - I think your profer about the noodles with sage being a perfect encapsulation of la stratagia that great food is acheived using the minimum number of ingredients is a bunch of hooey. To me it's an excuse contrived after the fact to defend a style of cooking that hasn't made any advancement in hundreds of years. And once again, that doesn't take away from how wonderful it can taste and how deep the flavors can be, but let's call a sparacedo a sparacedo okay. They still cook like that because they haven't been able to figure out anything better that was able to stick. But let's wait until I post my pasta thread and I will lay out the arguments there.

Fat Guy - Saying that it isn't mathematically certain doesn't prove that that what I'm saying isn't what always happens. And money does represent meat. $5 of it represents hamburger and $15 of it represents strip steak. That on certain days hamburger costs $6 and steak $14 doesn't change the basic concept. People eat hamburger when they are in the mood for that type of meal, same with steak. Price follows use and use follows quality.

[Beachfan]

Beachfan - What your really saying is that the cost of therapy from the guilt of eating the ham sandwich with milk ultimately makes the sandwich cost more. In fact a good bottle of Mouton is only 3-4 sessions and one needs many more sessions than that to work through the guilt. That's a sound argument. Okay next time I have a ham sandwich, I'll drink Rayas so I can save the money on therapy  

Relating to the original theme, I think it supports the following:

The simple, in terms of preparation, can be more complex in terms of being interesting to talk about. While it may be hard to draw the line between food discussion and psychological discussion, I think I can place the line far enough over to make the point.

[Robert Schonfeld]

Robert S. - I think your profer about the noodles with sage being a perfect encapsulation of la stratagia that great food is acheived using the minimum number of ingredients is a bunch of hooey. To me it's an excuse contrived after the fact to defend a style of cooking that hasn't made any advancement in hundreds of years. And once again, that doesn't take away from how wonderful it can taste and how deep the flavors can be, but let's call a sparacedo a sparacedo okay. They still cook like that because they haven't been able to figure out anything better that was able to stick. But let's wait until I post my pasta thread and I will lay out the arguments there.

Fat Guy - Saying that it isn't mathematically certain doesn't prove that that what I'm saying isn't what always happens. And money does represent meat. $5 of it represents hamburger and $15 of it represents strip steak. That on certain days hamburger costs $6 and steak $14 doesn't change the basic concept. People eat hamburger when they are in the mood for that type of meal, same with steak. Price follows use and use follows quality.

I know that's what you think, Steve. Haven't you and I been down this road a few times already? I'll just say this: in my opinion, and I suspect there are one or two others who might agree, you just couldn't be more mistaken or narrow minded about this. But even more important, I don't care and neither do "they". "They" do not cook like that because they're stuck. "They" cook like that because they want to. Your paradigm is not a global imperative.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Robert S. - Italy has been stuck in a corrupt society for a few thousand years. Whatever the Church didn't manipulate, the mob did. When the population of Italy ever gets out of their shadows and truly speaks with a free voice, I'm certain they will update their cuisine. Until then, you can go on making excuses for them.

[John Whiting]

jaybee wrote:

QUOTE  

but the value of things is related only to what people will pay.  

ah, finally, a truth I can wrap my mind around. Adam Smith couldn't have said it better.

Are you sure you want to define value within such a narrow context? Bear in mind Oscar Wilde's definition of a cynic: "A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

Or have I missed a deliberately ironic intention?

[Robert Schonfeld]

Robert S. - Italy has been stuck in a corrupt society for a few thousand years. Whatever the Church didn't manipulate, the mob did. When the population of Italy ever gets out of their shadows and truly speaks with a free voice, I'm certain they will update their cuisine. Until then, you can go on making excuses for them.

We've also been here before, Steve. You know that a comment like your most recent does not advance the discussion. You also know that Italian culture does not need a nice Jewish boy from New York to make excuses for it, any more than that is what has been intended. So what say? Let's move on.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Robert S. - Wait a second. As I was walking home from my homeowners association meeting, I realized that it isn't that Italian chefs haven't tried to advance the ball of Italian cuisine, it's that they haven't been successful. At least if the measure of success is worldwide attention to their creations. Once upon a time it was thought thay Gualtiero Marchesi would lead the way but that petered out. Even though his Raviolo Aperto wasn't such a bad dish even if the star made from gold leaf was a bit excessive. But there are loads of famous restaurants and famous chefs throughout Italy. Arnolfo, Dal Pescatore, Enotecha Pinchiori, Baschi, Ai Sorriso etc. None of them have made an impact on the international dining scene. And I can't think of a single technique that they championed that has influenced other chefs in a significant way. You can correct me on this, but it certainly seems that way to me.

[Gavin Jones]

I wondered when connoiseur politics (Politnicks) would rear its head.

Italian food - dreadful due to corruption, extralegal social organisation &c

Spanish Food - Repressive regime 16thC to 1975

(Amazing that they managed halfway decent art - obviously food is not art)

France - a shining beacon of democracy & totally uncorrupt (just like the current presidential incumbent, or Mitterand, or Valery Giscard d'Estaing)

thus explaining its brilliant food.

Scandinavia - social democracy = excellent smorgasbord but dire eugenics activity means fails to win 3rd Michelin star.

China - Histoire de la longue duree account as essentially an imperial coalition means great regional cooking but no sense of proper identity to synthese great cuisine from the constituent parts

Iran - I think this should have great cuisine on this argument (all the unities) until fairly recently - my conclusion here the CIA deliberately destabilised Iranian food.

USA - should have the best food but at what cost?

Britain - we make the argument a l'inverse. As the polls clearly establish the UK has the worse food we can form some obvious conclusions about its political system. Clearly corrupt, anti-democratic.

What can a gagged population put in its mouth?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Gavin - Hey that was a good post. If you just corrected a few things it would almost be perfect. Like mentioning Catherine DeMedici and the influence she had on art and food, or the fact that when French food came into its own it was probably the most liberal society in Europe. Otherwise it's pretty good. I think you left out that short days caused too much depression among the Scandinavian populations to make them want to eat much more than a schmaltz herring. But it does make me wonder why Persian and Indian cuisine didn't have a little merger there. Because if you dig deep into Persian you start to see the Indian in it. Otherwise you did great.

[Toby]

"If you dig deep into Persian you start to see the Indian in it."

Steve, sometimes your gnomic expressions actually come close. The Mughals who ruled India had ties to Iran; I think Farsi was the court language in India during the Mughal reign. Also, note similarity between Indian miniature illuminations and Persian ones. Also, look at map (geography).

[Steve Plotnicki]

Toby - Well if you go Patog, my favorite Persian restaurant in London, and had their stupendous kebabs made from organic meat and poultry, there is a large similarity to the way they make a sikh kebab in an Indian restaurant. Not the spicing regimen, but the way the meat is chopped and minced. If you went around the corner to the Edgeware Road and ordered a kofta kebab in any number of the Lebanese restaurants that are on the street, the texture would be completely different. Also, there is something in the Persian Chelow or Pilau that makes one thing of Indian cuisine. An Uzbekistani Pilau reminds me of Indian food as well except it's much closer to a European style dish. But if you changed the spicing regimen to something more like Indian, it could almost pass for Indian food.

[jaybee]

John Whiting:  Or have I missed a deliberately ironic intention?

Saved by the bell.

[jaybee]

Steve Plotnicki ,  Robert S. - Wait a second. As I was walking home from my homeowners association meeting, I realized that it isn't that Italian chefs haven't tried to advance the ball of Italian cuisine, it's that they haven't been successful.

Interestingly, the largest exhibit by far at the Fancy Food Show was the one from Italy. It dwarfed every other country's. An area equivalent to four times the floor space of the next largest exhibitor was occupied by themed booths flying the colors of Italy. Cheeses, oils, olives, pastas, meats, and a variety of other food stuffs were on display and sampled. Four or five varieties of cured hams and cooked hams, wines, and numerous restaurant supply foods. So there is no lack of effort here to keep the profile of Italian foods very high. And the quality of ingredients samples was by far better than those from other areas or countries.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Jaybee - Foods from Italy are by far the predominant foods exported into the U.S. They are much more popular than French foods are here. And the quality of the food is great. But we are talking technique here. Name me one Italian chef who is considered among the greatest chefs in the world?

That's right, there are none. Robert S. would say that the reason for that is the quality of the food is so good, they don't have to prepare it any better than they do now. And I say hogwash to that. The French have ingredients that's every bit as good and it doesn't stop them.

[Bux]

jaybee wrote:

QUOTE  

but the value of things is related only to what people will pay.  

ah, finally, a truth I can wrap my mind around. Adam Smith couldn't have said it better.

Are you sure you want to define value within such a narrow context? Bear in mind Oscar Wilde's definition of a cynic: "A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

Or have I missed a deliberately ironic intention?

Indeed. Caught again using "value" where I meant "price" as if I didn't value my reputation. Call it unintentional irony.

[hollywood]

Hollywood - I love responses on the merits

Wall to wall carpet will never have the depth and complexity that a nice hand woven rug will have. So what happened? The market corrected itself to the better quality item. Same with hardwood floors. 

I think you have just raised a different demand side argument than the ones that have been raised. Because even when wall to wall carpet was in vogue, a well made area rug was still profoundly beautiful. Less people might have been educated to that 40 years ago and they might have been cheaper to buy than they are now, but their beauty and quality wasn't ever in question.

But if your point is that wall to wall carpet in its heyday sold for more money than an area rug, surely you must know that isn't true.

You know you can point to "the herd" as an example that people do stupid things, but that doesn't mean they have any impact on determining the price or quality oif things that are not stupid.

Steve,

Likewise, I'm sure on the merits. Never intended (as I'm sure you are aware) to compare anything to area rugs--a separate issue, which seems to be why you raisied the matter? Even Stephen Weed could appreciate the joys of area rugs from the Hearst collection. In short, area rugs--red herring. Back to spaghetti, specifically.

Disagree about the carpet generalizations, generally. Seems like people got sold on so-so wall-to-wall only to realize that hardwood with an area rug of quality was superior. Just a case of salesmanship. Sometimes it works; sometimes, it's an Edsel.

Think you (knowingly) underestimate the herd. By definition, herd is so large as to have a profound economic effect. You can't dis herd out of one side of your mouth and not choke on it at the same time. Need the Heimlich?

Again, what about fads, trends, conformity, etc.? Where would pop journalism, boards like this, etc. be without some portion (hoping for more) of herd?

Here's something to consider (aside from capitulation on spaghetti): where's the food in all this? Your rejoinders seem cut from the medium is the message cloth, not on some butcher block. Is it all about food, or is it about clever writing?

Herd or no herd, show me that lowly shaghetti hasn't leapt in price without any Platonic basis therefore. Admit it, this organic talk is just self-serving b.s. Interesting, but still just b.s.