Trotter and Tramonto square off over Foie Gras

[Behemoth]

But I would still maintain that it's hard to prove that everything in the restaurant is cruelty-free. Sam's points about fish are good ones -- and I'll bet that a quick perusal of the larder (and the leather upholstery, and...) would turn up many products that aren't so easily cleared of moral terpitude.

The problem with this argument is that it is sort of like suggesting that since we can't end poverty we should stop giving to charities. Small steps in the right direction aren't a bad thing.

[Bux]

. . . .

I'd suggest to the pro-foie gras band in the US to work with legislation, not with tactics of guilt, name calling etc. There is no law against hypocrisy. There is a law against cruelty against animals. That is why they banned production of foie gras in California.

That is the simple answer, Bux.

←

It's not so simple an answer and I believe it's a matter of opinion that they banned foie gras in California because of cruelty to animals. An excellent case could be made that hysteria had more to do with the ban than serious thoughts about cruelty to animals. I would agree that people supported the ban because they believed they were supporting an anti-cruelty to animal measure and it was one they could support because they could live without foie gras unlike cheap chicken. It's my personal opinion that the majority of activists in the anti-foie gras campaign were opposed to the idea of allowing anyone to eat meat.

That the current law gives Guillermo Gonzalez, owner of Sonoma Foie Gras in California, quite a few years to continue producing foie gras not only with immunity, but without having to make any changes in the way he raises his ducks, is as much an indication that there's nothing simple about the reason the ban was enacted.

I sincerely believe the average duck raised for foie gras lives a better life than the average chicken raised for consumption by humans in this country. If a law is intended to decrease the raising of fowl in cages, it would logically be aimed at all poultry.

I have little course but to believe one side has persuaded enough people to think of ducks as having human throats and gullets. "Ducks naturally swallow grit and stones. The esophagus of a duck is lined with fibrous protein cells that resemble bristles and does not bear comparison to that of a human. The activists attempts at anthropomorphism are understandable when the intent is propaganda, not enlightenment." That's what I wrote over five years ago in response to an article in the NY Times about the cancellation of a panel discussion and tasting of foie gras at the Smithsonian Institute, and what I believe today. It was the tenor of the messages from the self styled "animal rights" activists that led the Smithsonian to cancel the even out of concern for the safety of the audience.

It's most unfair to accuse the defenders of the foie as name callers who use guilt as a tactic. The "animal rights" activists were not only there first with these tactics, but as they say, "sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never harm me." Some serious damage to life and property has been considered acceptable collateral damage by some of those activists.

[Colgate]

The whole article was rather comical to me in that I purchased a giant slice of foie gras terrine from Trotter's To Go a little less than two weeks ago.

[Chris Amirault]

But I would still maintain that it's hard to prove that everything in the restaurant is cruelty-free. Sam's points about fish are good ones -- and I'll bet that a quick perusal of the larder (and the leather upholstery, and...) would turn up many products that aren't so easily cleared of moral terpitude.

The problem with this argument is that it is sort of like suggesting that since we can't end poverty we should stop giving to charities. Small steps in the right direction aren't a bad thing.

←

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. Small steps matter.

That's why we shouldn't lord our superior, cruelty-free morality over those of others. "Fat," "dumb" others. In newspaper articles. Particularly when we cannot guarantee that we're actually cruelty-free.

[Chris Amirault]

The whole article was rather comical to me in that I purchased a giant slice of foie gras terrine from Trotter's To Go a little less than two weeks ago.

←

Photo puh-leez!

[Pan]

[...]Also, in my opinon, there has to be some benefit from being on top of the food chain. I have a personal pledge that if I'm ever caught and eaten by a lion, for instance, that I'll take it with good grace and consider it payback for all the animals I've eaten in my  life.[...]

←

Straw man! We don't get to hold you to it!

As for me, if I am caught by a lion, I will do whatever I can to break free and otherwise will doubtless scream my head off!

[Colgate]

Oh I wish, but it was so delicious that I ate all of it! I'll try and see if I can find the receipt however....

[Bux]

. . . .

As for Foie Gras, both arguments can be made on equal footing I suppose… but what is more important to look at is why it is so crucial an ingredient to those who wish to keep it.

It’s one of the “crutch” ingredients, like caviar – one of those elusive and therefore seemingly extravagant ingredients that most people feel as though they could not prepare even if they could find it, a magic wand in the bag of tricks that by it’s very appearance can justify the high price tag of a meal in the mind of a diner.

. . . .

←

Crucial? Define crucial. I think Sam has already said enough on the importance of foie gras and of cheap chicken. The world would go on quite well if we stopped eating foie gras and chicken. Poultry, poultry products and poultry by-products aren't crucial, with the exception of eggs. I'd really miss eggs far more than foie or chicken. As a crutch ingredient, if it is one and I don't even care to argue it isn't, it will go out of fashion. It already has to a great extent, but as it's become less of a crutch in haute cuisine, it's gone populist -- albeit to a very small degree. In Israel I'm told, it's snack food. In the Perigord, it's seasonal and a part of every farmer's Christmas and New Year's traditions.

I do think we've gotten off target. The ethics and morality have been debated in a number of threads and we're repeating ourselves here. Trotter and Tramonto are the story here. Of course I only have the author's words to go by, but it seems an awfully great escalation to go from Tramonto's " "It's a little hypocritical" to Trotter's "Rick Tramonto's not the smartest guy on the block." Indeed, Trotter didn't stop there. "Dumb," "idiotic" and "fat" were all used perjoratively referring to Tramonto. Interesting article. It seemed pro-foie gras and fair. Given my sentiments on the subject, there's no contradiction there. Obviously the comments throughout the article were well chosen, and interesting to me.

[Behemoth]

Obviously the comments throughout the article were well chosen, and interesting to me.

I was wondering about that as well. He does come across as a bit off the proverbial rocker, not to mention unprofessional. Is there some history there that we are not being told about? It does make for an entertaining read though.

[SKinCA]

[...]Also, in my opinon, there has to be some benefit from being on top of the food chain. I have a personal pledge that if I'm ever caught and eaten by a lion, for instance, that I'll take it with good grace and consider it payback for all the animals I've eaten in my  life.[...]

←

Straw man! We don't get to hold you to it!

As for me, if I am caught by a lion, I will do whatever I can to break free and otherwise will doubtless scream my head off!

←

Busted!

But totally off topic, I'm sure that if the day ever comes when I am being eaten by a lion some idiot will have his videophone handy and then I'll be able to say with certainty.....

AAAAAARRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHHH!

[ronnie_suburban]

. . . Trotter and Tramonto are the story here . . .

←

I agree, Bux and I said as much back at the top of the thread. As good as much of the information we pass around here is, I don't think this is an issue where a forum discussion -- albeit a very focused and insightful one -- is going to change very many minds.

I'm curious if there's previous bad blood between these chefs and what the heck chef Trotter was thinking when he made the personal comments he did about chef Tramonto. If he made them here, his post would be deleted.

I can say that I'm considerably less eager to dine at Charlie Trotter's today than I was yesterday and it isn't because I can't get foie gras there. I enjoy his television show and he's always seemed like a charasmatic guy but this is about as unappetizing as adult behavior gets. I wonder if he'd be snickering about my size while I sat in his dining room. Fortunately, eating at Trotter's is about as critical to my well-being as eating foie gras . . . I can easily go without.

=R=

[noambenami]

Well, I feel vindicated - I didn't like Charlie Trotter, the restaurant, and now I have good reason to dislike the man, as well. What a schmuck.

But what I really wanted to do was compliment Bux on his postings. Clearly written and well thought out. In this world of hypocrisy and hysteria, I delight in hearing a reasonable voice. If you ever come out to Portland Oregon, drop by Hurley's for dinner and tell them who you are - there's a good bottle of wine with your name on it.

Noam

[FaustianBargain]

Fascinating thread. Surely someone can get to the bottom of those bizarre comments by Trotter. What's up with that?

Meanwhile, this foie gras tiff seems to miss the forest for the trees. Can anyone -- Faustian? -- respond to this paragraph by Sam?

Trotter wants to ban foie gras and refuses to use it in his restaurants?  Fine.  Well, he ought stop serving chicken and beef and lamb in his restaurants as well, unless he can demonstrate that the animals slaughtered for his restaurants have a substantially better quality of life than ducks raised for foie gras.  And hey, while we're at it, let's talk about "line caught" fish, which are dragged through the water by a hook piercing the jaw and then "drowned" to death in the air.  If Trotter thinks all the animals he served at his restaurants live "suffering free" lives, by his definition, he's sadly mistaken.  Does he suppose every piece of beef he serves came from a cow raised as the beloved pet of an Amish family until it was lulled to sleep with a reading of Charlotte's Web and then gently, lovingly killed as it dreamt of sweet clover?

←

This makes sense to me: since Trotter claims to want to run a restaurant that is cruelty-free, how can he go about proving this to his clients -- and, now that he's gone ballistic in the paper, to those of us who think of him as an insulting, moralistic blowhard? It's tough to make the negative case, but if you're going to stand on a soapbox, you'd better be sure it's damned sturdy.....

←

What is there to say? Everyone is so sure that they can dictate and direct what others can do.

derricks: When did you visit? Is it possible that the conditions were different before 2003. The evidence presented in court supposedly related to the time before 2003.

Edited March 30, 2005 by FaustianBargain (log)

[bourdain]

NEWS FLASH:

I can now report with authority that only a short while (within the last few weeks) before sanctimoniously slamming Rick Tramonto, Trotter was serving multiple courses of foie gras with fellow chefs Tetsuya Wakuda and Heston Blumenthal at his restaurant. Apparently--when Charlie says he's against serving foie gras, he means he's against serving it to his regular customers. It means he's against OTHER people serving it.

My source on this is first hand. Meaning one of the two chefs.

Bad enough abandoning his fellow chefs in their time of need (see the Manrique incident). And giving comfort and succour to the enemy. But he is now clearly and indisputably full of shit.

Let Trotter now publicly flop on his belly and fess up. Tramonto was right. He IS a hypocrite.

Edited March 30, 2005 by bourdain (log)

[FaustianBargain]

Gourmet Cruelty is clearly focused on foie gras, but for groups like PETA and Viva!, foie gras is just one of many campaigns they run. But which ones get the press? Not the Viva! investigations of Grimaud, or their campaigns against pork factory farming (for the record, Viva!'s a pretty together group in my mind, as is the Animal Welfare Institute). No, the press only wants to touch foie gras, for probably a number of reasons. (and as Carolyn points out, I'm guilty as well)

←

I think Gourmet Cruelty is more visible than the other groups because of the pictures on their website. I think some of those pictures are from a slaughterhouse near LA, but some of them are clearly marked Sonoma Foie. Until, Sonoma Farms come up with their own visual/photographic evidence of their 'spacious' duck dwellings, the impression that their ducks are being illtreated will not disappear.

I was wondering if you were allowed to take photographs. Surely, 25sq.ft (25x25 ft, right?) with 10-12 ducks wandering inside that space is a lot.

[FaustianBargain]

He IS a hypocrite.

Why? I know vegetarians who dont eat meat but they cook it because it is their livelihood. Surely you dont think that the Moslems and Jews who cook pork and serve it to others without eating it are hypocrites?

[bourdain]

Hypocrisy: "a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"

[FaustianBargain]

Hypocrisy:  "a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"

←

Well?

Are vegetarian/Moslem/Jewish cooks/chefs hypocrites if they cook and serve food that they deny for themselves in order to adhere to a belief system?

[Osnav]

Rick Tramonto and Gale Gand used to work at Trotter's for a while.  Although I have no facts to base my forthcoming idea on, I personally belive that Tru came upon the Chicago dining scene after Trotter opened the doors for refined innovative cuisine in a notorious meat and potatoes town.  Perhaps, Trotter has always had a little disdain towards Tramonto for opening a very similiar restaurant such as his, a little copy cat work.  Just a thought.

←

That could be part of it. Also, Charlie hasn't gotten much "ink" recently in Chicago. Everything has been Grant Achatz or Homaro Cantu and now Rick T.s new Osteria...

This is the first time I've seen Charlie's name in the paper in quite awhile.

[Osnav]

Well well, it seems they are human after all and not robots being fed by some wireless uplink from a central database.

I never thought I’d live to see the day.

Perhaps after years of holding their tongues and being relegated to having their edges clipped as to fit into the square hole so that the surface can be smooth and free of cracks,

we are beginning to witness some assertion of individuality not in accordance with the unwritten laws of the non-disclosure agreement ridden world that has been created around them.

That in conjunction with the convenient pointing out of new “trends” in recent articles in the food media may possibly signal the beginning of the breakdown of the old system?

I suppose that will remain to be seen.

There may even come a day when someone in a white toque will not automatically command respect by simply wearing such a garment – regardless of whether they can toast bread or not – though I doubt I will live to see that.

As for Foie Gras, both arguments can be made on equal footing I suppose… but what is more important to look at is why it is so crucial an ingredient to those who wish to keep it.

It’s one of the “crutch” ingredients, like caviar – one of those elusive and therefore seemingly extravagant ingredients that most people feel as though they could not prepare even if they could find it, a magic wand in the bag of tricks that by it’s very appearance can justify the high price tag of a meal in the mind of a diner.

Do not be fooled - that is a huge part of this… money and class distinction. I would venture to guess much more than just about any other element involved on the “for it”side - and who knows what ulterior motive lurks within certain parts of the “against it” side.

Interesting to say the least.

BTW, for those of us who would like to order Foie Gras for their home since you can’t get it at your local grocery store – you can buy it here:

http://earthy.com/e_d_gran_viandes.htm?EDI...67b6349be7dc19e

For those of us that would not like to buy it…. then we shouldn't.

←

Nice piece. I really like your quote.

[albiston]

Hypocrisy:  "a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"

←

Well?

Are vegetarian/Moslem/Jewish cooks/chefs hypocrites if they cook and serve food that they deny for themselves in order to adhere to a belief system?

←

No, but it's a quite different issue. Stating the following (from the Tribune's article, my emphasis):

Trotter said he stopped including foie gras on his menus about three years ago but only is talking about the decision now.

and then, as Anthony Bourdain reports:

...only a short while (within the last few weeks) before sanctimoniously slamming Rick Tramonto, Trotter was serving multiple courses of foie gras to fellow chefs Tetsuya Wakuda and Heston Blumenthal at his restaurant.

seems fit to be labelled as hypocrisy. If you stop serving Foie in your restaurant, why then do such a U-turn for your chef-buddies in that very same restaurant?

[bourdain]

I'd say that a prominent chef who loudly and publicly foreswears foie gras on supposedly "moral" or "ethical" grounds--and who publicly and sanctimoniously chastises an entire industry--and other chefs for continuing to serve it--yet serves it himself is indeed a hypocrite. By any definition. Foie gras is hardly Trotter's "livelyhood". It's private behavior that contradicts a very public stance. Much like a loudly anti-gay moral majority mouthpiece who privately buggers cub scouts.

There is absolutely no comparison to a muslim or a jew who--to support themselves--choose to handle pork as part of a daily job.

Trotter is a public figure--a chef of international prominence, with successful businesses, who chose to make news of his supposed moral choice. The ripple effect of that decision (on other chefs, in his industry--and to foie gras purveyors and producers) was--as he surely knew--significant. That Trotter feels it's okay to continue serving foie while publicly criticizing others for the same act defines the word hypocrisy. It's that simple.

Hypocrisy:  "a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"

←

Well?

Are vegetarian/Moslem/Jewish cooks/chefs hypocrites if they cook and serve food that they deny for themselves in order to adhere to a belief system?

←

Edited March 30, 2005 by bourdain (log)

[bourdain]

"I just said, `Enough is enough here. I can't really justify this,'" Trotter said. "What I have seen, it's just inappropriate. There are too many great things to eat out there that I don't believe that any animal would have to go through that for our benefit."

And that he chose to take this postion (abandoning his fellow craftsmen) at a time when a comrade (Laurent Manrique) was being terrorized by anti-foie activists is particularly loathsome.

Edited March 30, 2005 by bourdain (log)

[Carolyn Tillie]

It does make for an entertaining read though.

←

That THAT explains why the article was written by an ENTERTAINMENT reporter and NOT someone from the food section!!!!

[FaustianBargain]

I'd say that a prominent chef who loudly and publicly foreswears foie gras on supposedly "moral" or "ethical" grounds--and who publicly and sanctimoniously chastises an entire industry--and other chefs for continuing to serve it--yet serves  it himself is indeed a hypocrite.

I only read that he is uncomfortable about serving it anymore. I did not read that he "publicly and sanctimoniously' chastised an entire industry. I went back to read and re read the chicago tribune article. I definitely did not see him:

1.chastising an entire industry.

2.chastising other chefs for serving it

Also, what is the background of this chef-chef dinner thing? Who organised it? Was it a personal invitation from Trotter to Heston.B and Tetsuya at his home?

At the end of the day, it is a personal decision. If noone spits on your plate, what do you care?

What I find particularly interesting is that Trotter comments are narrated by the chicago tribune journalist as if he was there when they were uttered. Was he an eyewitness? You cannot put someone's words within quotes unless you are reporting the comment verbatim. Journalism rules. So, where is this coming from? What were the circumstances under which this report was penned? When did this exchange take place?

By any definition. Foie gras is hardly Trotter's "livelyhood".

Yes. That is why he can afford to not serve it and make a statement about it. If he were a new kid on the block, he'd probably have to serve Foie Gras regardless of how he feels about the issue.

And I doubt the likely comped meal he served Tetsuya and Blumenthal constituted badly needed revenue.  It's private behavior that contradicts a very public stance. Much like a loudly anti-gay moral majority mouthpiece who privately buggers cub scouts.

What is a 'comped meal'? If 'comped' is roughly translated as 'reimbursed', who is 'comping' it? If it is being 'comped', how is 'private behaviour'?

There is absolutely no comparison to a muslim or a jew who--to support themselves--choose to handle pork as part of a daily job.

Why not? Are personal beliefs valid only when it is backed by religion? Does Trotter pay his bills with accumulated karma? His restaurant is there to make profits, right? I am sure you know how it is to squeeze profits from running a restaurant. The bigger an establishment and the fancier the ingredients, the more difficult it is to sustain it.

Trotter is a public figure--a chef of international prominence, with successful businesses, who chose to make news of his supposed moral choice. The ripple effect of that decision (on other chefs, in his industry--and to foie gras purveyors and producers) was--as he surely knew--significant.

I couldnt agree with you more. I am sure Trotter didnt say all this in a press conference.

I searched Google extensively after Carolyn pointed out something interesting. This is a Chicago Tribune exclusive. No other publication is following this piece.

That Trotter feels it's okay to continue serving foie to his buddies while publicly criticizing others for the same act defines the word hypocrisy. It's that simple.

Gosh! I have read it a few times already, but can you point to me the bit where he criticises others?