El Bulli--From wonderful to absurd

[Boris_A]

Off Topic. I can't resist.

Hello Mongo Jones

in a game at the ... the nou camp.

Now I have to tell you a little anecdote:

There was a player with Barça (the Bulgarian Stoitchkov) which used to discuss with the refree all the time until he got a yellow or even red card. But he was maybe the most important attacker then.

So everytime when he started to discuss and complain, the whole Nou Camp made a "shhhht" to make him silent.

A roaring "shhhht" by 120'000 spectators"!. Must have been an incredible sound.

Regards

[mongo_jones]

oh, i am very familiar with the career of the brilliant (and brilliantly annoying) stoitchkov--i wish i could have observed cryuff's interaction with him at close range. he used to be one of my favorite footballers in the early 90s--he had an amazing sense of vision. he was also perhaps one of the biggest twats in the history of the game: lots of spitting incidents in europe and more recently in the mls in the u.s he broke the leg of a young college player with a needlessly rough challenge in an inconsequential game. what is it with barca and temperamentally unsound strikers? you also had romario and now kluivert.

anyway, how about that football cuisine eh? (desperate attempt to avoid the censors.)

[Jonathan Day]

Mongo, I'll start by saying that I am far from an expert on el Bulli. I've read two of Adria's books and dined there once. Others have dined at el Bulli far more often. But here are a few thoughts on your questions

as for the first point, i don't think you've fully addressed my question--which to be fair i may not have fully articulated. let me put it this way: does el bulli make sense without an immersion in particular traditions/idioms of cooking.

It's unquestionably the case that Adria himself started within a European tradition; he claims that it was during a stage with Jacques Maximin, a French cook, that he realised that he wanted to stop "copying". And many of his dishes are labelled with references to traditional French, Spanish or Italian preparations -- e.g. "raya beurre noir", a deconstructed version of the classical skate wing with brown butter and capers.

To me, at least, only a fraction of the interest in Adria's food is a result of the riffs on traditional dishes. Yes, these dishes are clever, rather like Thomas Keller's "coffee and doughnuts" dessert, or his "oysters and pearls". But, first and foremost, they are good. You could enjoy Adria's cuisine with no knowledge of European cookery.

what does el bulli, or adria, have to offer, for instance, to someone who has spent their entire life eating sichuan or bengali food? in other words, is the el bulli phenomenon (whatever you make of it) possibly understandable only within a particular european food context? if so, is this context really so important that goings on in it need to be talked about as embodying the future fate of all food?--i'm not saying that anyone here is directly making that claim; but it seems to me to be the surreptitious subtext of the conversation (not just on egullet): that high cuisine=particular european traditions.

Some people on eGullet -- in particular, some no longer with us -- made the claim that high cuisine was almost entirely a French phenomenon. Personally I think that claim is rubbish: "high" Japanese cuisine, just to name one I know a bit about, is every bit as intellectually interesting, elaborated (ramified) and developed as the French; and I suspect that some of the Chinese traditions may be even more so.

I can't imagine that Adria would see things differently. A number of his dishes attempt to connect with Asian methods -- e.g. the "viaje por el mundo" (no 752 in the 1998-2002 collection) and others reported here on eGullet. These are in the minority; I suspect that this is simply because of where Adria started.

from a less fraught angle i am trying to make sense of his rafa's comment. he says that is what he is trying to get to via his bleeding edge route. what does that mean? that rafa's evokes a sense of the purity and simple wonder of food and he is trying to surprise/shock people into returning to that point? well, does everybody require that surprise and shock--or is it only a particular set of diners (whether the adjective we use to describe them is highly aestheticized or decadent)?

It's hard to see how this sort of aesthetic shock would be limited to one set of diners. I remember similar experiences on first going to Japan -- and, after living there for awhile and eating nothing but Japanese food, on first returning to Western foods like milk and butter. I remember the first taste of French cuisine (suprèmes de vollaile à blanc, prepared from a Julia Child recipe) and, a bit later, really good French cuisine (Mère Allard's duck with green olives).

also, his chemical/culinary experiments to create food puns and hybrids (i'm making him sound like the dr. moreau of expensive food)--how are these qualitatively different from the long tradition in chinese cooking of making soy proteins and gluten resemble and taste like pretty much any meat you want? i'm not saying he's doing exactly the same thing but the idea itself has been explored in great detail and with great versatility in another culinary tradition (albeit one that doesn't usually get a seat at the banquet table of "high" cuisines). if it isn't the novelty or originality of his food camoflauge that's significant, what is?

There are similarities, for example the "parmesan spaghetti" we had, where they transformed cheese into strands resembling pasta, or the new "caviars" they are now making from apples, mushrooms and other substances.

i'm not trying to come down hard on el bulli--it sounds very interesting, if not entirely appetizing--just trying to understand the terms of the discussion. i'm sure these are not entirely original questions--i tried reading the entire thread but the rabbit brains excursus did me in--so please forgive me if i am retreading worn ground.

I still don't understand the fuss about rabbit brains. We eat rabbit. We eat brains of other animals. Nothing we had at el Bulli was unpleasant or disgusting, and most of the dishes were delicious. Is the worry about rabbit brains somewhat like the reaction that some Western diners have to certain Chinese dishes -- duck webs, fish maws, pigs' ears, preserved eggs? All of these things can be very tasty.

[mongo_jones]

jonathon, others, thanks for your considered responses. at the risk of over-extrapolation i continue:

To me, at least, only a fraction of the interest in Adria's food is a result of the riffs on traditional dishes. Yes, these dishes are clever, rather like Thomas Keller's "coffee and doughnuts" dessert, or his "oysters and pearls".  But, first and foremost, they are good. You could enjoy Adria's cuisine with no knowledge of European cookery.

okay--though the jury seems to be out on whether "enjoy" would be the right word. his dishes aren't just intellectual exercises then.

Some people on eGullet -- in particular, some no longer with us -- made the claim that high cuisine was almost entirely a French phenomenon. Personally I think that claim is rubbish: "high" Japanese cuisine, just to name one I know a bit about, is every bit as intellectually interesting, elaborated (ramified) and developed as the French; and I suspect that some of the Chinese traditions may be even more so.

and i'd add various indian cuisines to the mix as well. the question becomes one of how we define "high" and what gets to be "high" and why. on egullet, and elsewhere, there's a privileging of wine-pairing (indian food is often subtly decried for not going well with wine or on the flipside gourmands are constantly trying to find a good wine to go with indian food, as though the experience, perish the thought, couldn't be good without wine), an emphasis on particular notions of service, china etc. etc.

then there's also the fact that even most well-meaning and democratically minded gourmets don't bother to get to know the average asian (or african or south american) cuisine to the extent to which they study french or italian cuisines--when's the last time threads were begun here by people who'd gone to india just to eat at bukhara or dum pukht? that's partly because those experiences don't carry as much cultural capital. michelin and their ilk don't bother either--and we know how much we fetishize those stars. what we usually have instead is a recognition of indian or other asian cuisines as "progressive" or "exciting" only when they're re-articulated in a western idiom (we've had some good discussions on the india forum on this subject). other than that asian cuisines are celebrated for being "traditional" or "authentic"--europe is where "progress" happens--if you get my double meaning (for an indian restaurant to be "progressive" it almost has to make a journey of sorts to "europe"). but what might it mean for these cuisines to be contemporary or progressive on their own terms and in their own contexts?

I can't imagine that Adria would see things differently. A number of his dishes attempt to connect with Asian methods -- e.g. the "viaje por el mundo" (no 752 in the 1998-2002 collection) and others reported here on eGullet. These are in the minority; I suspect that this is simply because of where Adria started.

oh, i'm not saying that adria needs to start using more asian methods or ingredients. just wondering to what degree the fuss over him (pro and con) serves to once again center the discussion of "high" cuisine on europe and its traditions.

It's hard to see how this sort of aesthetic shock would be limited to one set of diners. I remember similar experiences on first going to Japan -- and, after living there for awhile and eating nothing but Japanese food, on first returning to Western foods like milk and butter. I remember the first taste of French cuisine (suprèmes de vollaile à blanc, prepared from a Julia Child recipe) and, a bit later, really good French cuisine (Mère Allard's duck with green olives).

you misunderstand. i am not suggesting that you need to be from a particular culinary tradition to be "shocked" by experiments within it. my question was with regard to his feelings, as quoted by bourdain, on rafa's. if rafa's is down the street why do we need to go to el bulli to re-discover the rafa's experience? more precisely, who needs to go that circuitous route? i'm wondering if adria is aiming this at people who wouldn't ordinarily go to rafa's--whose horizons are so much within particular haute traditions that they need adria to re-orient them, as it were. i'm wondering if for someone like me, who can take french food or leave it, the experience adria wants me to have (not the specific food but the psychological-metaphysical one he points to in the rafa's discussion) might not be had more directly at rafa's. make sense? in any case your example of japan is one of going from one entirely different culinary tradition to another; el bulli's "shock" may well be only for people within his "tradition"--howsoever contested. my parents, who have never eaten spanish or french food, might not be shocked at all, not having the normative context to guide them. they might just think that's what crazy french and spanish food tastes and looks like.

I still don't understand the fuss about rabbit brains. We eat rabbit. We eat brains of other animals. Nothing we had at el Bulli was unpleasant or disgusting, and most of the dishes were delicious. Is the worry about rabbit brains somewhat like the reaction that some Western diners have to certain Chinese dishes -- duck webs, fish maws, pigs' ears, preserved eggs? All of these things can be very tasty.

i don't mean to suggest that i was put off by the discussion of rabbit brains because it involved rabbit brains. one of my favorite north indian dishes is brain curry--usually searingly hot and dangerously oily (oh the memories of kake da dhaba in its heyday on connaught circus). i was put off more by the increasingly petty bickering and point-scoring as the thread devolved for a while.

[Bux]

then there's also the fact that even most well-meaning and democratically minded gourmets don't bother to get to know the average asian (or african or south american) cuisine to the extent to which they study french or italian cuisines.

In various guises this has been the subject of previous threads on one forum or another here, and I suspect will contine to be at the base of many threads in the future. The centrality and universality of French cuisine in the professional kitchens of the western world cannot be disputed. To be a French chef in a kitchen almost anywhere in Europe and the Americas was a mark of distinction. One need not acknowledge any superiority of the actual cuisine to acknowledge the respect it got.

we know how much we fetishize those stars. what we usually have instead is a recognition of indian or other asian cuisines as "progressive" or "exciting" only when they're re-articulated in a western idiom

I've heard Italians complain about how we re-articulate their food as well.

We're back to the same point. Any culture is going to best appreciate those things that most relate to what they already know. That applies to individuals as well. Would a resident of the Indian subcontinent, who was not a world traveler, been able to appreciate the differences between Monet and Manet? Would he have understood the contributions to western painting these artists made? I suspect not, just as I know that those westerners who followed the history of western art understood the contributions better than those who didn't pay much attention to it. We are all a product of our environment and shape our environment in turn. That's why cultures become self propagating and insular.

[mongo_jones]

We're back to the same point. Any culture is going to best appreciate those things that most relate to what they already know. That applies to individuals as well. Would a resident of the Indian subcontinent, who was not a world traveler, been able to appreciate the differences between Monet and Manet? Would he have understood the contributions to western painting these artists made? I suspect not, just as I know that those westerners who followed the history of western art understood the contributions better than those who didn't pay much attention to it. We are all a product of our environment and shape our environment in turn. That's why cultures become self propagating and insular.

yes, well there's at least one good reason why the average resident of the indian subcontinent didn't move around the world too much in the late 19th century. it starts with colo and ends with nialism. in any event, most french people in monet and manet's time didn't care too much about the differences between them either--they preferred to look at pretty pictures of boats on the sea. i don't really get that analogy.

anyway, the point is that we don't live in those times. the average first world gourmet has a far greater mobility and access to the entire world than at any point in history--you don't have to be fabulously wealthy to do it anymore (which seems to also be theme of many an egullet thread); nonetheless, when it comes to haute cuisine the movement seems to be only in particular directions. i'm not surprised that being a french chef (or being generally in or out of that tradition) carried a mark of distinction in the western world; i'm a little disappointed in the degree to which it continues to monopolize a certain kind of recognition.

and i don't think the italian cuisine analogy works either (with the caveat that i haven't seen the discussions here about it that you cite): there is a strong understanding of the differences between italian cuisine in italy and italian cuisine in the u.s. your average american egulleter--especially of the gourmet variety--knows these differences; perhaps has even made trips to italy to eat at both traditional and modern restaurants. with the exception perhaps of japan, and maybe parts of china, this isn't the case with most of asia or other parts of the third world.

the truth of the matter is that egullet is a hetereogeneous beast. the kind of thing i am critiquing is probably only relevant in these general forums and in the european ones. the asia forums--especially the indian one--are largely dominated by people from within those traditions so different kinds of narratives prevail--though not always dissimilar.

[mongo_jones]

i should add that i don't mean to imply that any of these other cuisines in any way require first world recognition for validation--they're doing just fine by themselves (though some proponents of these cuisines--especially when they come to the u.s-- do seem to develop certain anxieties that map onto the kind of thing i am describing). since i live in the u.s, however, and have access to particular situated narratives here i am critiquing those.

[Jonathan Day]

if rafa's is down the street why do we need to go to el bulli to re-discover the rafa's experience? more precisely, who needs to go that circuitous route? i'm wondering if adria is aiming this at people who wouldn't ordinarily go to rafa's--whose horizons are so much within particular haute traditions that they need adria to re-orient them, as it were.

I'll let those who know Rafa's speak, because I have not been there. But Adria, for all his admiration of Rafa's simply grilled, perfectly fresh seafood, has invented a new, different and far wider culinary language, one embracing all sorts of preparations and techniques. The experience is not only that of the simple and perfect but also of endless creativity, ingenuity without gimmickry, surprise.

Apprendre une langue, c'est vivre de nouveau, says a proverb: to learn a new language is to live once again. That is what many have experienced at el Bulli -- and have enjoyed fine service and delicious (if strange) food at the same time. But nobody needs to go there.

[pedro]

Aren't we starting this discussion from a wrong assumption?. Is Adrià really trying to get to Rafa's way of cooking?. I seriously doubted. He could well be trying to do so in certain dishes, perhaps the almonds that have been described elsewhere, but I don't see that's his general trend.

[docsconz]

I don't understand the cultural insularism on either side of this thread. I think the matter of what makes El Bulli unique and great is really quite simple no matter the cultural background.

It is a restaurant in a beautiful setting preparing and presenting novel beautiful and by most accounts delicious food in such a way that sets the tradition from whence it comes on its ear. In addition, the process is one that is also unique in its approach and documentation. I am not aware of any other restaurant in the world with this approach or that has so successfully redefined its own cultural tradition. I would be excited to find restaurants in other cultural traditions that are as successful as El Bulli is in its cultural tradition.

One restaurant that comes to mind as a possibility is Susur in Toronto, although that does not come from nor represent a purely Asian tradition.

[Bux]

Mongo, I think we would agree that whatever prejudices are held by anglosaxon eaters and particularly by the dominant culture in the US are the result of history and not the product of a fair, intellectual and rational process.

I'm afraid that this discussion is moving towards the politics of colonialism. I do not support colonialism, but I am not going to get involved in a discussion of why one culture was homebound when I state that the average Indian citizen in 1900 was not likely to understand the revolutionary aspect of Impressionism. My point could just have well been made by noting that the average American today is not going to understand a social or cultural change in India. My references are to the separation of cultures and lack of cross understanding, not to illustrate that one is better in any manner. I will grant that it may be unfair that the US has a Eurocentric culture in all things, not just food, but that will not change the result. Every group of people and possibly on a smaller scale, everyperson who has come to this country has changed the culture a bit, but the culture is what it is and it changes slowly.

My guess is that in India, French cooking is not held in the same esteem it is here? Am I correct?

NB: This subthread seems to have very little relevance to El Bulli and should it continue, we will have to move it elsewhere.

[mongo_jones]

NB: This subthread seems to have very little relevance to El Bulli and should it continue, we will have to move it elsewhere.

you're the moderator and are free to move these threads as you see fit but i don't think this discussion is unrelated to el bulli--recent replies have brought it directly back into the conversation

I'm afraid that this discussion is moving towards the politics of colonialism. I do not support colonialism, but I am not going to get involved in a discussion of why one culture was homebound when I state that the average Indian citizen in 1900 was not likely to understand the revolutionary aspect of Impressionism.

it is possible we are talking past each other. i didn't raise this to rant about colonialism but to point out that there is a much more direct reason why the average indian of the 1880s would know less about france than perhaps the average frenchman might know about india (thanks to orientalist scholars): restricted cultural mobility. the point is that in our present age people have far more access to information and movement, and yet the patterns of these flows (from the first world) and the way they are coded remain similar.

My guess is that in India, French cooking is not held in the same esteem it is here? Am I correct?

not really. a large percentage of indian gourmets and foodies look to the west for their cues. they too fetishize wine, single malt scotches, french techniques etc. often times this elite indian love for these things is cited by them and by others in the west as proof of their universality (as with shakespeare)--when the fact remains that artefacts of certain cultures get to travel everywhere (and in first class) and those of others don't (or go in the baggage compartment).

to return to el bulli:

pedro asks:

Aren't we starting this discussion from a wrong assumption?. Is Adrià really trying to get to Rafa's way of cooking?. I seriously doubted. He could well be trying to do so in certain dishes, perhaps the almonds that have been described elsewhere, but I don't see that's his general trend.

pedro, you may have a point. as i stated in my first post my initial thoughts were provoked by bourdain's citing of a conversation with adria in which he made certain comments about rafa's. if that assumption doesn't hold perhaps much of the conversation about adria in this thread since i got involved is moot. but it doesn't alter the issues in the larger discussion of the cultural politics of haute cuisine. in any case, i didn't read bourdain as suggesting that adria was trying to replicate rafa's actual dishes (in terms of taste or mouth feel) but the metaphysical experience of experiencing simple, pure cuisine like that again. this is what made me wonder if he was aiming his experiments at rejuvenation of palates that didn't/don't know they're jaded.

docsconz says:

I don't understand the cultural insularism on either side of this thread. I think the matter of what makes El Bulli unique and great is really quite simple no matter the cultural background.

It is a restaurant in a beautiful setting preparing and presenting novel beautiful and by most accounts delicious food in such a way that sets the tradition from whence it comes on its ear. In addition, the process is one that is also unique in its approach and documentation. I am not aware of any other restaurant in the world with this approach or that has so successfully redefined its own cultural tradition. I would be excited to find restaurants in other cultural traditions that are as successful as El Bulli is in its cultural tradition.

i'm not sure why you think my position displays cultural insularity. i live in the u.s--i've eaten a lot of good french food and enjoyed it (though if i had to pick, god forbid, one cuisine to eat for the rest of my life i'd pick a couple of chinese, a couple of indian and a couple of italian cuisines before i'd come to french). if i had the money and means i'd be very interested in trying el bulli multiple times. i have said before that i am not knocking el bulli or trying to undermine adria from the conservative, reactionary perspective that argues that experimentation is meaningless or that his food must taste like shit. i'm trying to engage with his theory--once again as reported by bourdain--and simultaneously musing about the larger cultural politics that seem to me to inevitably get enmeshed in how people talk about these things. personally, i don't think it is healthy to separate these two things but i'll bow to the power of the moderator's toolbox.

but your last statement is what i am getting at: is it the case that restaurants such as el bulli don't exist in "other cultural traditions"? or is it the case that despite the massive access that multi-national capital affords to first world travellers in the third world, and the massive amounts of information flow, no one has bothered to check? we all know about el bulli and its cookbooks, but even the most informed among us (and i think egullet site managers qualify) are still wondering abstractly about "other cultural traditions".

[mongo_jones]

I'll let those who know Rafa's speak, because I have not been there. But Adria, for all his admiration of Rafa's simply grilled, perfectly fresh seafood, has invented a new, different and far wider culinary language, one embracing all sorts of preparations and techniques. The experience is not only that of the simple and perfect but also of endless creativity, ingenuity without gimmickry, surprise.

it is possible, perhaps, then that adria's own fetishization of rafa's displays some sort of anxiety/desire on his part--a desire to situate himself at least partially in a different kind of tradition (folk spanish, sushi) than classical french? "i may be wild and crazy and out there but i'm also here"

[docsconz]

docsconz says:

I don't understand the cultural insularism on either side of this thread. I think the matter of what makes El Bulli unique and great is really quite simple no matter the cultural background.

It is a restaurant in a beautiful setting preparing and presenting novel beautiful and by most accounts delicious food in such a way that sets the tradition from whence it comes on its ear. In addition, the process is one that is also unique in its approach and documentation. I am not aware of any other restaurant in the world with this approach or that has so successfully redefined its own cultural tradition. I would be excited to find restaurants in other cultural traditions that are as successful as El Bulli is in its cultural tradition.

but your last statement is what i am getting at: is it the case that restaurants such as el bulli don't exist in "other cultural traditions"? or is it the case that despite the massive access that multi-national capital affords to first world travellers in the third world, and the massive amounts of information flow, no one has bothered to check? we all know about el bulli and its cookbooks, but even the most informed among us (and i think egullet site managers qualify) are still wondering abstractly about "other cultural traditions".

El Bulli is a unique restaurant certainly within its cultural tradition, but I would also think outside of it as well. While there may be other chefs working on a level similar to Adria's from whatever cultural framework they may come from, I would expect that they would be familiar to at least some members of this forum and therefore promoted as such. I do not believe that this forum is so ethnocentric as to ignore great and creative food of any origen. There are many wonderful dining experiences to be had all around the world, traditional and non-traditional, all of which goes to make the world a better place.

Mongo, you seem to be trying to make a point about "the cultural politics of haute cuisine", but I'm not sure what it is. As far as "the most informed among us...still wondering abstractly about other cultural traditions", what are you talking about?

[mongo_jones]

Mongo, you seem to be trying to make a point about "the cultural politics of haute cuisine", but I'm not sure what it is. As far as "the most informed among us...still wondering abstractly about other cultural traditions", what are you talking about?

ah well. i am at the point (may already have crossed it) where all i'll be doing is repeating myself tiresomely--so, i'll let it drop. i've tried to be clear--obviously i have failed. for whatever reason.

(edited to add a missing article)

Edited November 30, 2003 by mongo_jones (log)

[vserna]

Goodness gracious, what a complicated subthread.

Ferran Adrià is far out into futuristic creativeness, but he's no fool and he won't eat his own food 100% of the time. He craves a nicely grilled red mullet as anyone in Mediterranean Spain does. And his buddy Rafa has the perfect raw materials in his little bar, and he prepares them simply and flavorfully, so Ferran is there all the time to sample some of those simple delicacies.

The rest is heavy intellectual speculation.

[Jonathan Day]

I'll let those who know Rafa's speak, because I have not been there. But Adria, for all his admiration of Rafa's simply grilled, perfectly fresh seafood, has invented a new, different and far wider culinary language, one embracing all sorts of preparations and techniques. The experience is not only that of the simple and perfect but also of endless creativity, ingenuity without gimmickry, surprise.

it is possible, perhaps, then that adria's own fetishization of rafa's displays some sort of anxiety/desire on his part--a desire to situate himself at least partially in a different kind of tradition (folk spanish, sushi) than classical french? "i may be wild and crazy and out there but i'm also here"

Perhaps. Or perhaps Adria just enjoys eating superbly fresh langoustines, beautifully grilled.

The one aspect of Spanish cuisine that is well suited to Adria's style (though I do not know the direction of causality) is the small plates of "tapas" or "snacks", a genre that (apart from amuse-gueule and the like) doesn't really have much of a place in classical French cookery. These small plates seem to turn up on the menus of other avant-garde practitioners as well: Gagnaire, Blumenthal, Achatz.

Why, I wonder, is the tasting menu so well suited to the avant-garde? You could do three courses in the style of el Bulli. But it somehow works better with many courses.

[mongo_jones]

Why, I wonder, is the tasting menu so well suited to the avant-garde? You could do three courses in the style of el Bulli. But it somehow works better with many courses.

perhaps the avant-garde works better in little doses? ever tried to watch all of warhol's "empire" or "sleep"?

[Boris_A]

Another interpretation:

El Bulli may be very well regarded as "classical French cuisine" from a certain point of view.

Change, cretitivity, innovation, progress and surprise is the hallmark of French (haute) cuisine since Carême and Escoffier and especially since the mediatisation of the Nouvelle Cuisine. I don't know of any other national/regional cuisine where "progress" is heralded like in "classical French cuisine". In this respect Adrias "reactionary strike" is a "Freudsch'er Versprecher" indeed.

This would explain the enourmous attention Adria is gathering. Because he fully complies with the paradigm of "haute cuisine" in the French interpretation. In this sense "a strike against classical French cuisine" is just the label/brand to sell it to innovation hungry French cuisine adrorers . And it would explain that as long as you are prepared (better: asking) for (hopefully revolutionary) innovation on your plate and palate, you are completely satisfied with Adrias work.

Any culture is going to best appreciate those things that most relate to what they already know.

And El Bulli is the most appreciated restaurant in western culture. qed.

The main underlying concept is that creativity and change are qualities per se and that they are so important that a higher rate of innovation is "better" than a lower rate anyway. From a Taoistic view I'd object that change is inevitable anyway (pantha rei) and that it's without merit to try to slow down othe change or to try to accelerate ist.

The experience is not only that of the simple and perfect

What do you want more than simplicity combined with perfection, really?

but also of endless creativity, ingenuity without gimmickry, surprise

Well, comply to a well established paradigm is the logical answer.

In this sense Adria interprets the classic believe of the 20th century world: that we are able to make progress by acting a lot or at a frenetic speed. Progress is our religion and Adria is the priest. Not less, but not more.

[Bux]

I think there's little question but that the 20th century put a premium on creativity above craftsmanship in the arts from the beginning of the century and that food began to be seen as more of an art than a craft at the end of the century. I don't mean to imply this is either a good thing or a bad thing. It can be both or either. A book printed on cheap paper that will yellow and crumble in 20 years is still worth reading. A painting that will fall off the canvas in twenty years may be worth looking at and appreciating for the momentary visual effect, but food that has eye appeal, or intellectual appeal, but that is neither well made nor tasty is of no use to a diner. Adria scores well with me, because in the end, I've enjoyed eating his food. The enjoyment is heightened by the thoughts it provokes and even more so by the discussion it provokes at the table. It's not that you must think about the food, but that doing so heightens the pleasure. Does it ever taste better than a simply, but perfectly grilled langoustine or bowl of peasant pea soup perfectly made with a ham bone? No, or at least no more than any painting in a museum or gallery appears better than a wonderful seashell or majestic landscape.

[vserna]

El Bulli may be very well regarded as "classical French cuisine" from a certain point of view. (...) In this sense Adria interprets the classic believe of the 20th century world: that we are able to make progress by acting a lot or at a frenetic speed. Progress is our religion and Adria is the priest. Not less, but not more.

Very deep, all this. Have you ever been to El Bulli?

[Boris_A]

Very deep, all this. Have you ever been to El Bulli?

No. The killer argument #1 so soon?

Regards

[vserna]

It's not a 'killer argument'. It's that I am a very basic, very old-fashioned, very unimaginative food writer: I never theorize on a restaurant and its place in the grand scheme of things until I can sit down and eat a proper meal in it. Obsolete attitude, I know...

[balex]

It's not a 'killer argument'. It's that I am a very basic, very old-fashioned, very unimaginative food writer: I never theorize on a restaurant and its place in the grand scheme of things until I can sit down and eat a proper meal in it. Obsolete attitude, I know...

I think you are over-scrupulous -- I am happy to theorize about rape, the reform of the House of Lords and the Rugby world cup, without having participated in any of these activities. You have however hit on one of the main reasons why people want to go to El Bulli -- so they can join in these conversations without suffering supercilious put-downs like yours.

[vserna]

Food and wine are things to be experienced (and, it is hoped, enjoyed) before they are discussed. We're not talking nuclear physics here - some comparisons simply don't apply. I'm not being supercilious, I'm just trying to point out that a great undertow of groundless silliness seems to pervade the whole subject of Ferran and his way with food.