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.

Charlie Trotter's


adrober
 Share

Recommended Posts

If I did, I trust I might understand why no one was laughing.

"No one" is too strong. Many of us, including myself, were laughing WITH Adam. I found his write-up of his experience very amusing and look forward to more of his writings on his food experiences. :smile:

"These pretzels are making me thirsty." --Kramer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the longest time I resented the work of Stephen Sondheim.  I considered it obnoxiously inaccessible, self-indulgent, and far too brainy for its own good.  Eventually, though, I forced myself to listen to "Sweeney Todd" straight through, reading the liberetto along with.  It soon after became my favorite musical.

When a neophyte in any field is presented with a work that challenges, the temptation is to fault the work.

I guess this goes to the heart of my objections to your piece, Adam. There are plenty of things -- musical, culinary and otherwise -- that I don't enjoy. But I don't see any reason to "fault" either myself or the creator. I don't much like Phillip Glass' music, but I sure as hell don't "resent" him for composing it, as you say you used to resent Sondheim. I don't like Rocco DiSpirito's food, either, but I don't resent him for dreaming it up.

Trotter's offers a particular kind of experience. You don't like it, that's fine. But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, anything to resent. If you elect to buy a specific experience -- whether it's dinner at a particular restaurant or tickets to a particular show, or whatever -- the "value" lies in whether the experience lives up to its billing, in how well the experience fulfills the promises it has made. You wanted Trotter's to be an entirely different kind of experience; you're faulting it because it wasn't Babbo. But it never claimed to be. And by your own admission, you don't have the experience to evaluate Trotter's in terms of what it DOES promise.

At the risk of reading way too much into your posts, you seem to think that your tastes -- in music, in restaurants -- should define what's offered, and that anything on offer that doesn't conform to your tastes is worthy of resentment. That strikes me as kind of stunningly self-absorbed.

I think your missing his point. He's fessing up to initially resenting Sondheim but now he thinks he's the greatest. My take is that he is admitting that the temptation is there to fault CT but he learned his lesson with Sondheim so he won't.

Also, I think some of us are taking this site a little to seriously. It's a food site. Comparing it to religion in any way gives me the creeps.

No, I think you're missing my point. Whether Adam has or hasn't learned to appreciate Sondheim isn't the question (for me at least). What's at issue is why he felt entitled to resent Sondheim for composing music that he didn't like.

And -- as Bux has already pointed out -- it was Adam who brought religion into this thread in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bux clearly used an analogy comparing a poor attempt at a restaurant review on egullet with a religious parody at a church social. That is SPECIFICALLY what I am referring to.

"These pretzels are making me thirsty." --Kramer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I think some of us are taking this site a little to seriously. It's a food site. Comparing it to religion in any way gives me the creeps.

:smile:

Respectfully sammy, I believe you may be missing the point. (all IMHO)

To quote Bux:

No, Adam made a mockery of haute cuisine and them came to the wrong place to poke fun at it.

For the sake of clarification, my assertion of his jumping right into eG with his personal review of Charlie Trotter's, on post no. 1 and has become a "baptism by fire" was an expression regarding the various points of view expressed herein, debatable or not, and not in any way a comparison to religion.

What folks at eG take food seriously? (!) :shock:

:wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bux clearly used an analogy comparing a poor attempt at a restaurant review  on egullet with a religious parody at a church social. That is SPECIFICALLY what I am referring to.

Context sammy!

That is one sentence to demonstrate a whole. Re-read it slowly and carefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't attempting to divert the thread, I only felt the Mark Silverstein comment set a tone that colored the whole shebang. Someone else used the word contempt, and maybe that's what made me uneasy. Context is what it's all about, in food, religion and a whole bunch more of life. Obviously, a lot of folks love Charlie Trotter and a more introspective tone about why he didn't might have been more well recieved than the all out rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"No, Adam made a mockery of haute cuisine and them came to the wrong place to poke fun at it."

Adam did not make a mockery of haute cusine, the cusine has accomplished that without any help from Adam.

The 'wrong place'? You have got to be kidding! Because someone does not agree with your viewpoint, does that make them wrong and this the wrong place to voice that opinion?

I came from an academic background where each opinion was valued and considered, apparently this is not the place according to some. -Dick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam did not make a mockery of haute cusine, the cusine has accomplished that without any help from Adam.

The 'wrong place'? You have got to be kidding!

Whoa budrichard!

Charlie Totter's haute cuisine is a mockery because it is haute cuisine?

Really???????? Now isn't that just brill.

This *may* be the wrong place entirely! There is plenty of eG'ers that respect, dine and enjoy haute cuisine. ahem.

:hmmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Adam made a mockery of haute cuisine and them came to the wrong place to poke fun at it.

I gotta go with Mick Jagger on this one: "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."

I'm on the pavement

Thinking about the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning: An extensive knowledge of Rolling Stones lyrics may be an indication that you are old enough to intimidate younger diners at upscale restaurants.

I'm on the pavement

Thinking about the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning: An extensive knowledge of Rolling Stones lyrics may be an indication that you are old enough to intimidate younger diners at upscale restaurants.

Im feeling a little brainwashed. Lets change the band. How about Leftover Salmon?

Future Food - our new television show airing 3/30 @ 9pm cst:

http://planetgreen.discovery.com/tv/future-food/

Hope you enjoy the show! Homaro Cantu

Chef/Owner of Moto Restaurant

www.motorestaurant.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phish? Leftover Salmon?

Please, I've just eaten. The mention of two awful jam bands in two consecutive posts is making me feel a little queasy. What next, the string cheese incident?

You're all sick...at least mention a good band - Like The Jam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I think some of us are taking this site a little to seriously. It's a food site. Comparing it to religion in any way gives me the creeps.

Perhaps you take your religion too seriously.

Robert Buxbaum

WorldTable

Recent WorldTable posts include: comments about reporting on Michelin stars in The NY Times, the NJ proposal to ban foie gras, Michael Ruhlman's comments in blogs about the NJ proposal and Bill Buford's New Yorker article on the Food Network.

My mailbox is full. You may contact me via worldtable.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bux clearly used an analogy comparing a poor attempt at a restaurant review  on egullet with a religious parody at a church social. That is SPECIFICALLY what I am referring to.

Specifically what I was referring to was making fun of something in front of people who take that thing seriously. What you see as a poor attempt at a review, is something I see as a parody of a review mocking the subject. For it to have been a review, the reviewer would have had to show some understanding of the medium he was reviewing and offer some insight to the reader. I learned nothing about find dining or CT. A few people seem to have had their prejudices pandered to. I thought he treated the people who worked there rather shabbily in that piece. By extension he was making fun of all those who appreciate that sort of restaurant and that sort of food. Quite simply there's no real need for that and if you're going to write that sort of parody, it has to be brilliant or it's just offending to many people.

Robert Buxbaum

WorldTable

Recent WorldTable posts include: comments about reporting on Michelin stars in The NY Times, the NJ proposal to ban foie gras, Michael Ruhlman's comments in blogs about the NJ proposal and Bill Buford's New Yorker article on the Food Network.

My mailbox is full. You may contact me via worldtable.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...