Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2005)

rich · August 4, 2005

Secondly, the review makes no sense. Service descriptions such as "epically absent-minded" and mentions of "unremarkable dishes on the menu" don't smell like a review of a two-star establishment, in my opinion.
←

Name one review of that former critic that did?

SobaAddict70 · August 4, 2005

Were I being charitable, I'd say his re-review of Babbo was on the mark.

One out of 52 isn't bad. :wink:

slkinsey · August 4, 2005

I think one of the things that Stan is saying is that the characteristic elements that go into what is Filiipino food and food culture do not lend themselves to the classic "NYT 2 Star model" (whatever that may now mean, given the past year). And that a restaurant would have to give up a certain amount of Filipino-ness in order to comfortably fit that mold.

There is no denying the fact that certain styles of dining and certain cuisines (notably French and neo-French) lend themselves to the "starred review" model than others. I have argued in the past that it would be somewhat difficult for a truly Italian restaurant to receive a four star rating in the NY Times. With respect to something like Filipino food is the likelihood that there is no well-understood native concept of "Filipino fine dining" as there is, say, "Chinese fine dining" (despite the dearth of restaurants actually exploring that in NYC). I can't say for sure whether there is a hairarchical dining structure with an identifiable native cuisine for wealthy people in the Philippine Islands, but I suspect that there is not one. This is similar to, say, Ethiopia, where there are not huge differences between "rich people food" and "regular people food" in terms of dishes prepared, etc. (obviously the rich people may tend to eat more food and more expensive foods like meats).

Nathan · August 4, 2005

Once more with feeling, it's not a Filipino restaurant serving authentic Filipino food. It's a restaurant serving food based on Filipino cuisine. Not only that, what is pad thai doing in a "Filipino" restaurant? Give me a break.
edit: I'm really saying two things --
In my view, it's difficult for me to conceive of a Filipino restaurant as meriting more than one star. That it rates two stars means that it's in a category reserved for restaurants of a certain nature. And to top it off, the descriptions don't match up to experience. Frank must know something I don't.
Secondly, the review makes no sense. Service descriptions such as "epically absent-minded" and mentions of "unremarkable dishes on the menu" don't smell like a review of a two-star establishment, in my opinion.

so..1. you're saying that it's not a Filipino restaurant...and; 2. that you don't think a Filipino restaurant could get more than one star. fine. so, considering your first point, how does that prevent Cendrillon from getting two stars? since it's not a Filipino restaurant I fail to see the problem.

now as to the review not making sense...that's a separate question -- whether Cendrillon actually deserves two stars I do not know.

SobaAddict70 · August 4, 2005

Once more with feeling, it's not a Filipino restaurant serving authentic Filipino food. It's a restaurant serving food based on Filipino cuisine. Not only that, what is pad thai doing in a "Filipino" restaurant? Give me a break.
edit: I'm really saying two things --
In my view, it's difficult for me to conceive of a Filipino restaurant as meriting more than one star. That it rates two stars means that it's in a category reserved for restaurants of a certain nature. And to top it off, the descriptions don't match up to experience. Frank must know something I don't.
Secondly, the review makes no sense. Service descriptions such as "epically absent-minded" and mentions of "unremarkable dishes on the menu" don't smell like a review of a two-star establishment, in my opinion.
←
so..1. you're saying that it's not a Filipino restaurant...and; 2. that you don't think a Filipino restaurant could get more than one star. fine. so, considering your first point, how does that prevent Cendrillon from getting two stars? since it's not a Filipino restaurant I fail to see the problem.
now as to the review not making sense...that's a separate question -- whether Cendrillon actually deserves two stars I do not know.
←

Cendrillon as a two star restaurant is on par the same as trying to conceptualize Sripraphai as a two star restaurant. It may be that either is a two star restaurant to someone for whom such cuisines are alien, but to put each in the same category as an establishment like Blue Hill or the Modern goes beyond the realm of believability.
←

All clear now?

What is Sripraphai doing that other Thai restaurants of possibly equal caliber (Klong, Pam Real Thai) aren't doing that qualified it for a two star rating?

To my mind, Cendrillon is a pan-Asian restaurant with Filipino flourishes. However, Mr. Bruni describes it as a "Filipino restaurant". (See his review, he actually says it in the first few paragraphs.) So, notwithstanding my opinion, what is Cendrillon doing that qualifies it for an increase in rating as opposed to other Filipino restaurants in the metropolitan area? That it dares to be different doesn't seem to be sufficient.

Frank must know something we don't. :wink:

Here's another take on my point. This discussion is from the 2004 Bruni and Beyond thread, in this case relating to Bruni's review of Sri:

I can't get my mind around the idea that there's a bright line between fine dining and street food.
←
There is no such bright line. You can even have a fine dining street food restaurant, also known as Spice Market. But you don't need a bright line to know that some things are in one category and some things are in another. Nor is the distinction terribly complicated or mysterious -- it's already pretty well defined in most cuisines that have haute cuisine equivalents. If you go to Thailand, nobody there is going to have any trouble distinguishing between the street food and the fine dining restaurants, just as nobody here has any trouble distinguishing between Gramercy Tavern and a burger joint. There may be some restaurants that challenge the distinction and defy the old categories, but Sripraphai isn't one of them.
←

(my emphasis)

The parallel argument I'm making is that if Cendrillon is a Filipino restaurant as Bruni claims it is, then the reason for increase in rating could be that the chef has decided to raise the bar in terms of the possibilities of Filipino cuisine. Fair enough, I'll concede that.

But then, it's not exactly Filipino cuisine anymore, is it? There's a huge world of disconnect between traditional adobo manok and the version in the review.

Edited August 4, 2005 by SobaAddict70 (log)

rich · August 4, 2005

Frank must know something we don't.
←

That, my dear friend, is a complete impossibility!

smgarsh · August 4, 2005

The parallel argument I'm making is that if Cendrillon is a Filipino restaurant as Bruni claims it is, then the reason for increase in rating could be that the chef has decided to raise the bar in terms of the possibilities of Filipino cuisine. Fair enough, I'll concede that.
But then, it's not exactly Filipino cuisine anymore, is it? There's a huge world of disconnect between traditional adobo manok and the version in the review.
←

You can make the same argument for Babbo. Is it exactly Italian cuisine? No its not but its origins are Italian.

SobaAddict70 · August 4, 2005

Perhaps, but in Babbo's case, the offerings on the menu are not jazzed up renditions of Italian classics. Pasta is still pasta, secondi are still secondi, and the last time I was there, testa is still testa.

smgarsh · August 5, 2005

Perhaps, but in Babbo's case, the offerings on the menu are not jazzed up renditions of Italian classics.

Pappardelle Bolognese, I think is a perfect example of a "jazzed up classic".

The way I see it, the cuisine @ Babbo is Batali's "jazzed up" version of classic dishes throughout Italy.

Pasta is still pasta, secondi are still secondi, and the last time I was there, testa is still testa.
←

I'm not even sure what you're try to say? 1st course is a 1st course, 2nd course is a 2nd course etc???

Todd36 · August 5, 2005

I think one of the things that Stan is saying is that the characteristic elements that go into what is Filiipino food and food culture do not lend themselves to the classic "NYT 2 Star model" (whatever that may now mean, given the past year). And that a restaurant would have to give up a certain amount of Filipino-ness in order to comfortably fit that mold.
There is no denying the fact that certain styles of dining and certain cuisines (notably French and neo-French) lend themselves to the "starred review" model than others. I have argued in the past that it would be somewhat difficult for a truly Italian restaurant to receive a four star rating in the NY Times. With respect to something like Filipino food is the likelihood that there is no well-understood native concept of "Filipino fine dining" as there is, say, "Chinese fine dining" (despite the dearth of restaurants actually exploring that in NYC). I can't say for sure whether there is a hairarchical dining structure with an identifiable native cuisine for wealthy people in the Philippine Islands, but I suspect that there is not one. This is similar to, say, Ethiopia, where there are not huge differences between "rich people food" and "regular people food" in terms of dishes prepared, etc. (obviously the rich people may tend to eat more food and more expensive foods like meats).
←

It is highly likely that any country above a small minimum size is going to have some kind of fine dining tradition. I base that assertion on the fact that every country I know of has social stratification and socially stratified sociaties will have a wealthier class that is going to eat different, more expensive food than the rest of the population. I would also like to point out that we know based on historical fact that large chunks of "classic" French cooking is based on recipes imported from Florence (in Italy) when Catherine d'Medici married into the French royal family. Florence in the 16th century has plenty of social stratification. Most of us would probably agree that Japan has a very long fine dining tradition. But until the 20th century, most of the Japanese population was living off of boiled millet, preserved salted fish and pickles. Rice was expensive and not something many people could afford to eat. Japan also had quite significant social stratification, which explains why they have a very developed fine dining tradition. I strongly suspect that both Ethopia and the Phillipnes histoirically had social stratification, its tough to name a society that large that doesn't, and therefore have a local fine dining tradition that could be four star. It's just that none of us are familar with it.

Todd36 · August 5, 2005

There is no denying the fact that certain styles of dining and certain cuisines (notably French and neo-French) lend themselves to the "starred review" model than others. I have argued in the past that it would be somewhat difficult for a truly Italian restaurant to receive a four star rating in the NY Times. With respect to something like Filipino food is the likelihood that there is no well-understood native concept of "Filipino fine dining" as there is, say, "Chinese fine dining" (despite the dearth of restaurants actually exploring that in NYC). I can't say for sure whether there is a hairarchical dining structure with an identifiable native cuisine for wealthy people in the Philippine Islands, but I suspect that there is not one. This is similar to, say, Ethiopia, where there are not huge differences between "rich people food" and "regular people food" in terms of dishes prepared, etc. (obviously the rich people may tend to eat more food and more expensive foods like meats).
←

Another point is that there are a significant number of four star restaurants in the world that serve steak or chops with potatos and vegetables, with a quite simple preporation. Is that the real reason Alain Ducaisse fell from for stars, because he serves a steak? I have an ex-girl-friend who grew up in Manilla and went to one of those prep high schools in Manilla that sends its grads to Harvard etc (she went Ivy league herself). She might be wrong......but she thought that there was local fine dining food there.

tommy · August 5, 2005

Perhaps, but in Babbo's case, the offerings on the menu are not jazzed up renditions of Italian classics. Pasta is still pasta, secondi are still secondi, and the last time I was there, testa is still testa.
←

i've actually found Mario's testa quite notable. not sure what you mean when you say "secondi are still secondi", though.

SobaAddict70 · August 5, 2005

Perhaps, but in Babbo's case, the offerings on the menu are not jazzed up renditions of Italian classics.
Pappardelle Bolognese, I think is a perfect example of a "jazzed up classic".
The way I see it, the cuisine @ Babbo is Batali's "jazzed up" version of classic dishes throughout Italy.
Pasta is still pasta, secondi are still secondi, and the last time I was there, testa is still testa.
←
I'm not even sure what you're try to say? 1st course is a 1st course, 2nd course is a 2nd course etc???
←

Babbo isn't serving fusion cuisine. The dishes at Babbo, whilst Italian in origin, still retain an Italian identity. Their preparation and composition don't vary wildly from the classics they were grounded on. Paparadelle bolognese is not significantly different from the original, the only difference being the shape of the pasta that is served with the sauce. Look at any dish on Babbo's menu and you can be sure that the same argument holds true for most, if not all of them.

Analyzing the review, I can only conclude that the cuisine at Cendrillon, while based on Filipino cuisine, is really Filipino fusion. Chilis are rarely used in Filipino food, yet Thai chili pepper makes an appearance in the adobo manok. Bibingka is traditionally a rice cake cooked with coconuts or with coconut milk. Chef Doraton has adapted the recipe and turned it into a souffle-like dish with "ground rice, eggs and coconut milk", then tops it with Gouda and feta cheese.

If that's not fusion, I don't know what it is. But it isn't Filipino food any more, at least as I know it.

Going back to my original argument, which Sam helped explain (thanks Sam :wink: ), I sincerely believe that serving something like dinuguan (offal and pork stewed in a sauce of vinegar, garlic and pig's blood) would require significant alterations to be served in a restaurant of Cendrillon's caliber. It is for that reason that I believe -- I could be wrong, and welcome the chance to be proved wrong -- that Filipino restaurants have a difficult time going past a one-star rating, at least in this country. You either have to serve Filipino fusion or be true to your roots. There isn't a middle ground.

Chef Doraton *should* be praised for his efforts to showcase the cuisine, and should be proud of the rating. My beef is and has always been with the review, not the restaurant.

Edited August 5, 2005 by SobaAddict70 (log)

slkinsey · August 5, 2005

You can make the same argument for Babbo. Is it exactly Italian cuisine? No its not but its origins are Italian.

Actually, I would argue that the cuisine at Babbo is Italian. It's not the same as you would get in Italy, because Italy is highly regional/microregional not only in cuisine but in cultural outlook. The cooking at Babbo is no more different from "Italian food in Italy" than the cooking in Milano is different from the cooking in Napoli. What Batali has attempted to do is create a restaurant that treats New York City, including its people and its ingredients, like "another region of Italy" and to cook Italian food that reflects that regionality. This is exactly what an Italian chef might do who left Pisa to open up a restaurant in Modena. Unlike the Italian-American cooking at, say, Carmine's, I think most Italians who dine at Babbo would recognize the food as being "Italian" even though it does not attempt to slavishly duplicate dishes from Italy out of context.

It is highly likely that any country above a small minimum size is going to have some kind of fine dining tradition. I base that assertion on the fact that every country I know of has social stratification and socially stratified sociaties will have a wealthier class that is going to eat different, more expensive food than the rest of the population. . . . I strongly suspect that both Ethopia and the Phillipnes histoirically had social stratification, its tough to name a society that large that doesn't, and therefore have a local fine dining tradition that could be four star. It's just that none of us are familar with it.

I am by no means an expert on Ethiopian culture, but I am given to understand that there is no longstanding tradition of "fine dining" as distinct from "regular people dining" (including more elaborate preparation and presentation, more expensive and perhaps unique or rare ingredients, more highly developed dining rituals, etc.) the way there is in, say, France. This is to say that the rich people in Ethiopia may have been eating better, more expensive versions of the dishes that "regular people" were eating, but fundamentaly they were still eating more or less the same dishes or the same kinds of dishes, and that the overall style was the same. But let's stay closer to home. Is there a longstanding, nonimported tradition of "Mexican fine dining" where rich people in Mexico are eating Mexican foods, including unique dishes, ingredients and styles of preparation and service, and otherwise dining in a context that is distinctly different from the way the "regular people" are eating? Looking at China, on the other hand, we have clear evidence that there was a distinctly different, nonimported traditional luxe dining culture for the aristocracy.

smgarsh · August 6, 2005

Babbo isn't serving fusion cuisine. The dishes at Babbo, whilst Italian in origin, still retain an Italian identity. Their preparation and composition don't vary wildly from the classics they were grounded on. Paparadelle bolognese is not significantly different from the original, the only difference being the shape of the pasta that is served with the sauce. Look at any dish on Babbo's menu and you can be sure that the same argument holds true for most, if not all of them.

You see you don't know that the bolognese is original. He could have altered in a way he sees fit. No one would be the wiser. Unless someone has observed and documented the way bolognese is cooked at Babbo, we assume its authentic/original. And quite frankly, I don't really care if its 100% authentic. If its good, I'll eat it.

Weissman · August 6, 2005

Babbo isn't serving fusion cuisine. The dishes at Babbo, whilst Italian in origin, still retain an Italian identity. Their preparation and composition don't vary wildly from the classics they were grounded on. Paparadelle bolognese is not significantly different from the original, the only difference being the shape of the pasta that is served with the sauce. Look at any dish on Babbo's menu and you can be sure that the same argument holds true for most, if not all of them.
You see you don't know that the bolognese is original. He could have altered in a way he sees fit. No one would be the wiser. Unless someone has observed and documented the way bolognese is cooked at Babbo, we assume its authentic/original. And quite frankly, I don't really care if its 100% authentic. If its good, I'll eat it.
←

I AGREE! :biggrin: It should be about taste and not about the fluff!! :rolleyes:

Todd36 · August 6, 2005

I am by no means an expert on Ethiopian culture, but I am given to understand that there is no longstanding tradition of "fine dining" as distinct from "regular people dining" (including more elaborate preparation and presentation, more expensive and perhaps unique or rare ingredients, more highly developed dining rituals, etc.) the way there is in, say, France. This is to say that the rich people in Ethiopia may have been eating better, more expensive versions of the dishes that "regular people" were eating, but fundamentaly they were still eating more or less the same dishes or the same kinds of dishes, and that the overall style was the same. But let's stay closer to home. Is there a longstanding, nonimported tradition of "Mexican fine dining" where rich people in Mexico are eating Mexican foods, including unique dishes, ingredients and styles of preparation and service, and otherwise dining in a context that is distinctly different from the way the "regular people" are eating? Looking at China, on the other hand, we have clear evidence that there was a distinctly different, nonimported traditional luxe dining culture for the aristocracy.
←

I suspect the source of your query is the traditional lack of fine dining restaurants in many countries. In countries with social stratification, in particular poorer countries, labor costs are cheap and the well off tend to operate their own internal restaurants, its called live-in-help. If you get tired of your own cook(s), you go over a friend's house for dinner and try out his/her cook. With a reasonably large circle of friends and party invites, you don't need a restaurant to go to. 99.9% of the people living in your country have no idea what the rich eat, only the rich get dinner invites. Rich people with their own cooks who have time and money to experiement creates fine dining. Europe didn't really have restaurants until after the French revolution, before then, the rich ate at home. The closest thing to a restaurant was an inn/pub, which generally wasn't a place the rich were eating in most of the time. The French Revolution rearranged the economy, and also created a large pool of unemployed chefs of the former rich, who proceeded to open restaurants to service the increasing middle class. But France had fine dining in 1700, just that few people had access to it. This is covered in several reference books, don't have a title handy. My friend who grew up in the Philipines had I think 6 servents, at least 2 of whom cooked. She says they didn't eat out much, except at friends houses, who also had their own cooks. She wasn't eating what you would think of as traditional food, but I would bet it was traditional, if you had money. Anthony Boudin makes the same point in one of his books, he wants to experience fine North Africian dining and that requires visiting a wealthy persons house, he describes the compound and courtyard in detail, and waiting as the servants and women of the household prepare a fancy meal. In that kind of place, you can only get the local fine dining in someone's home, and you and I are unlikely to get an invite or even know what is being served. You can also look at some cookbooks to get some local flavor, for example, Shizou Tsuji's cookbooks clearly show high end Japanese cooking is not what most people think. Seen Snowdrift Tilefish with Silver Sauce or sake simmered mackeral or yellow flower shrimp or stuffed crab or shrimp wafers on a a Japanese menu in NY recently? I haven't, not even in a place like Sugiyama. Might also show that middle-brow Japanese cooking isn't what you think, beef negimaki which seems like a very Americanized dish really isn't, it's one of several similar dishes, one of which is beef rolled around burdock. There is not enough market demand in NY for a true 4 star Japanese restaurant in NY, but the indingious cusine in Japan can clearly deliver 4 stars.

SobaAddict70 · August 6, 2005

Babbo isn't serving fusion cuisine. The dishes at Babbo, whilst Italian in origin, still retain an Italian identity. Their preparation and composition don't vary wildly from the classics they were grounded on. Paparadelle bolognese is not significantly different from the original, the only difference being the shape of the pasta that is served with the sauce. Look at any dish on Babbo's menu and you can be sure that the same argument holds true for most, if not all of them.
You see you don't know that the bolognese is original. He could have altered in a way he sees fit. No one would be the wiser. Unless someone has observed and documented the way bolognese is cooked at Babbo, we assume its authentic/original. And quite frankly, I don't really care if its 100% authentic. If its good, I'll eat it.
←

That's not the point.

It's not fusion cuisine by any stretch of the imagination.

Apicio · August 6, 2005

Addressing Todd36: Exactly my observation about my experience with dinner invitations in affluent homes in the Philipppines (in another thread about Filipino cuisine.) This concept of familial fine dining is in fact gaining acceptance even in places where the range of choices is truly an obstacle (like in NY) as witness the recent number of articles about cooks who opt to practice their art privately for well heeled clients. It likely parallels a preference among people who can afford to do so to garb themselves in bespoke clothes. A dedicated cook is not very different from a trusted tailor who caters to your total needs (personal or social, etc). An off-the-rack suit, even by as highly acclaimed manufacturer as Kiton, would not quite measure up. The goals are just different.

smgarsh · August 6, 2005

That's not the point.
It's not fusion cuisine by any stretch of the imagination.
←

Your description of Bibingka = fusion. But I would not put the fusion label on a restaurant because of a few dishes. Take a look at shun lee's menu @ http://shunleepalace.com/

What category would you put Shun Lee in? It's not 100% chinese and its not 100% fusion. For every "authentic" dish they have, they also have a Ostrich Steak Hunan Style, or a Sweet Breads with Black Mushrooms. And I'm not even sure if their authentic dishes don't contain non-traditional ingredients.

I believe that these restaurants (Cendrillon, Shun Lee etc.) have to tweak their menus in order to appeal to the masses. But I would not call it fusion though. I think something like 66 and spice market would be a better representation of a fusion cusiine.

tupac17616 · August 7, 2005

What Batali has attempted to do is create a restaurant that treats New York City, including its people and its ingredients, like "another region of Italy" and to cook Italian food that reflects that regionality.

Well said. I agree with ya.

Todd36 · August 7, 2005

I don't think "fusion" and traditional cusine are unrelated. The Japanese still call Ramen "Chinese Noodles", they've only been popular for the last hundred years or so and they did come from China and Tempora was picked up by the Japanese from the Portuguese (and either they got it from Italy or the other way around). If you want to go on, more than half the stuff on a typical menu in a traditional Japanese restaurant is fusion in nature. It's very difficult to find a cusine that is "pure" and non-fusion, you're going to have to find an isolated culture. Staff gets passed around a lot; the Japanese Navy picked up Curry from the British Navy, who in turn picked it it up in India. By the time it hit House and S&B pre-pack, it doesn't look much like Indian curry. I also think that recipes and ingredents are less standard than you think. People have written comparative cookbooks on this, for example, James Beards "American Cookery." Even something like meatloaf comes in dozens of "traditiona" variations. Like olives baked on top of yours? Ketchup, tomato based or brown gracy based sauce. Not to mention what kind of meat(s). Also, with todays markets, things spread very, very fast. The Japanese traditionally had one kind of onion, its a long thin non-bulbing type. Think that's all you'll find in Japan today? Before we comment on "fusion" cusine, we have to understand what the "traditional" cusine is. For example, northern Chinese eat steamed bread, not rice. I've never seen that one on a menu in NY, although I had in NY. I can see someone not knowing better calling that fusion cusine....True fusion cusine to me is when someone takes unrelated cusines and combines them in ways that the local people don't. For example, Japanese don't use Basil, although Shiso leaves serve a similar function....

SobaAddict70 · August 7, 2005

That's not the point.
It's not fusion cuisine by any stretch of the imagination.
←
Your description of Bibingka = fusion. But I would not put the fusion label on a restaurant because of a few dishes. Take a look at shun lee's menu @ http://shunleepalace.com/
What category would you put Shun Lee in? It's not 100% chinese and its not 100% fusion. For every "authentic" dish they have, they also have a Ostrich Steak Hunan Style, or a Sweet Breads with Black Mushrooms. And I'm not even sure if their authentic dishes don't contain non-traditional ingredients.
I believe that these restaurants (Cendrillon, Shun Lee etc.) have to tweak their menus in order to appeal to the masses. But I would not call it fusion though. I think something like 66 and spice market would be a better representation of a fusion cusiine.
←

It's fusion to me, as someone who grew up eating genuine, authentic Filipino food, having been born in, and lived in the Philippines. Even the owner says that it's not 100% Filipino (although Frank describes it as such).

We'll just have to agree to disagree. It is what it is.

Bux · August 7, 2005

. . . . True fusion cusine to me is when someone takes unrelated cusines and combines them in ways that the local people don't. For example, Japanese don't use Basil, although Shiso leaves serve a similar function....
←

I tend to agree and to distinguish that from the way a cuisine is modified as it travels or as new ingredients are brought into play. A tomato sauce in Italy doesn't qualify as fusion to my mind just because tomatoes were originally foreign to Italy. Meatballs and spaghetti doesn't qualify either just because it's not native to Italy. Perhaps it's an Italian-American dish, but like Tex-Mex, it's not fusion like say Pacific Rim cuisine. Although in another class perhaps, I don't think I'd classify the watering down of a cuisine for foreign local tastes or the substitution of local products in a dish cooked overseas for locals of the overseas country as fusion. In fact, I think of fusion cuisine as a term coined to cover a specific philosophy and group of concepts common to many creative chefs in the last quarter of the 20th century.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Bux (log)

Todd36 · August 9, 2005

A tomato sauce in Italy doesn't qualify as fusion to my mind just because tomatoes were originally foreign to Italy.

Most food crops are very regional in origan, which means if you take a broad view (which I don't), everything becomes fusion.

New world foods include:

corn

tomatos

peppers

potatos

many types of beans (kidney/lima/butter/pole/kidney/navy/haricot/snap/string)

many types of squash (pumpkin types)

peanut

sweet potatos

Until about 500 years ago, none of the above was known outside of America. All are widely used, which means European and Asian cooking look very different now than they did 500 years ago. No hot pepper in your Tai cooking for example.

People argue about where rice comes from, but whether you think it's Himalayan or Chinese in origen, it's not native to southeast Asia or Japan. The southern Chinese and Japanese were eating millet before they knew what rice was.

Cabbage comes from the Mediterranean and Asia Minor...that includes Asian types.

The cause of this thread is time and orthodoxy. Time, becuase things spread really quickly these days (although hot pepper spread very, very quickly to Asia when first brought to Europe) and orthodoxy, because people think cooking has some standard identity, which usually isn't true. Everyone has some relative famous for some dish made in a "non-standard" way. Does that make it not real? Becuase it's non-standard and a bit unusual? And to go back to Bruni, I think any regional cusine is capable of a four star restaurant. If Jean George himself were operating a lobster shack, would you not go on the theory that steamed clams, corn on the cob and losbter rolls can be made by any fool and could never be four star cusine? So Bruni liked a place that natives think is inauthentic. Well, yellowtail scallion rolls are not very authentic either....but tasty.

Sign In

Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2005)

Recommended Posts

Similar Content

Recently Browsing 0 members