Originality, copying and inspiration

[Miss J]

Given how often the subject of chefs "copying" each other's recipes comes up, and how heated the conversations can be, I found the following article very interesting indeed:

Thoughts on Originality

I was reading it in relation to my work in interactive design, but was struck by how relevant Koen's thoughts on the topic are to food, cooking and art.

Miss J

[John Whiting]

Miss J -

It says something about the biases and preoccupations of eGulleters that no one has responded to this thought-provoking essay. I only wish that Mr. de Winter wrote better English. (It's also strange that a web site devoted to design should lay it out in two very long parallel columns which necessitate scrolling back to the top to finish reading it.)

Some parallel thoughts in the area of music are set forth in Richard Taruskin's _Text and Act: Essays on Music and Performance_. He demonstrates that performers of early music, in their attempts to achieve authenticity, only succeed in creating a totally new tradition which stands or falls on its own merits.

In the area of cookery, food historians such as Rachel Lauden have demonstrated that, up until well into the 20th century, "authentic" peasant cookery frequently meant crude combinations of cheap and plentiful ingredients and "seasonal" food could mean, for instance, a winter diet consisting principally of wormy chestnuts. "Cuisine du Terroir" has in some instances required the creative reshaping of history.

[Steve Klc]

I think it says more about the dense, leaden, poorly designed prose John.  It was rough going which you rightly draw attention to. (Koen would fit right in at that scholarly Gastronomica magazine.)

As rough going as some of Bjorn Lomborg's analyses of environmental studies, which may or may not say something of the biases and preoccupations of some eGulleteers as well.  In fact, most posts I find worthwhile say something about one's bias or preoccupation at that given moment in time--while general posts about the bias and preoccupation of others I rarely find rewarding.

I was grateful you posted it Miss J, slogged through it and 44 people did at least check it out.

I suspect most of us eGulleteers had pretty much put to bed the chefs copying/originality/inspiration issue as a canard on the previous threads and felt we didn't need to reopen it yet again.

[Miss J]

I only wish that Mr. de Winter wrote better English. (It's also strange that a web site devoted to design should lay it out in two very long parallel columns which necessitate scrolling back to the top to finish reading it.)

John, I wondered about the layout as well. Especially as I'd printed the article out to read on the tube on the way home, which meant that I had to read all of one column before flipping back to the beginning so I could start the other. An odd design choice, whether online or off.

Steve - I hadn't particularly noticed comprehension level (or lack thereof) at the time, but then I've been reading a lot of HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) papers recently and found it straightforward in comparison. And if that doesn't earn your pity, I don't know what does.

Miss J

[Steve Klc]

Pity well-earned Miss J.  Possibly topped only by finding yourself within the A Balic bio thread and unable to get out.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Now what does any of that have to do with cooking, or even creativity? The writer has a bias towards design that revolves around functionality. Nothing wrong with that although he doesn't ever really say what is wrong with an item revolving around its design and not its functionality other than he thinks functionality is more virtuous. As a foundation for his argument he points out that originality is a recent phenomenon (last 100 years.) But he fails to point out the true issue which is that people having enough money to choose between different types of lemon squeezers is a recent phenomenon. Heck, people having enough money to have lemons is a recent phenomenon in some quarters.

Before I collected wine, I bought a Philipe Starck corkscrew. It's still sitting here on my counter. But today I would never think of buying something like it. I want "real" wine tools because I consider myself a true wine afficionado. Personally I don't think anything is wrong with either approach. People who have a more casual relationship with things should be allowed to express themselves by buying fancily designed corkscrews. And people who own significant wine collections should be able to buy corkscrew contraptions that uncork a bottle in 4 seconds and cost hundreds of dollars.  But the writer obviosuly feels differently because he says,

"I have been intrigued with our continuous search for originality, our fascination and admiration for its results, and with the fact that reaching an "original" result has never been questioned against the real aim and goal of our profession: user satisfaction."

Well I'm glad he feels that way about it but it happens to be not true. He doesn't want to accept the fact that users often find highly designed but less than optimally functioning items as being satisfying.

That article is just one more explanation by an artisan who wants to order the world according to what he thinks is virtuous in his profession. And in spite of the fact that I happen to agree with him on the substance of his point, it makes no difference in the reality of how the world works. In our society people vote with their wallets. And as much as we try and legislate what their choices should be, there's no way to do it. It's great that we live in a world where the people who want to buy mixing bowls can choose between ones that have been designed for better functionality because they are able to rest on the heel of the base, and ones that are hardly functional because they are sculpted like a Rodin. Everyone has a mixing bowl that suits them. But what I don't see is why artisans who make mixing bowls of virtue need to comment about bowls who deal with functionality in a superficial way and which are more interested in aesthetics? If disfunctionality is a big issue for consumers they just won't buy the product.

[Wilfrid]

It made me reflect on something completely different: my regret that chefs either want to, or feel pressurised to, devise menus of new and innovative dishes rather than perfect the preparation of the established repertoire.

By the way, I managed okay with the columns.  I am old enough to remember newspapers.  

[John Whiting]

Steve, you've succeeded yet again in reducing culinary creativity to a capitalist model, a sort of mirror image of dogmatic Marxism in which every aspect of human interaction is redefined as a monetary transaction.

Wilfrid, you're in danger of being consigned to the scrapheap of history. (Along with me. Kindly move over.  )

[Steve Plotnicki]

John - I am starting to feel like the Israelis. Everytime you or somebody else brings up poliitics, morality or ideology as a reason for what makes something good or not, and I then point out that that those things have nothing to do with why something functions well or whether it tastes good, I get blamed for being the one to introduce politics into the discussion. If you or anyone else wants to keep pro-Capitalist politics out of the discussion, I suggest that other political models aren't credited or discredited for good and bad inventions. And that great things are discussed solely on the merits of their greatness. Not based on the failures of things which are similar.

[Steve Klc]

Wilfrid--your observation and "regret that chefs either want to, or feel pressurised to, devise menus of new and innovative dishes rather than perfect the preparation of the established repertoire" is fascinating--I wonder how much pressure you feel comes from the magazine and newspaper food media? How much is self-imposed--a feeling that in order to receive media coverage they have to be perceived as new or innovative?

For me, and I'd suspect Steve P. and you as well--it isn't tradition or inventiveness that makes something good or not.

[Wilfrid]

You're quite right, Steve.  I like to have the opportunity to eat traditional dishes, but I don't want to eat badly made ones!  

Maybe this is an effect exaggerated by the competitiveness of the Manhattan food scene, but I often have the impression that almost every dish on a menu has to have some new combination of ingredients, a new twist, even just an unusual garnish or presentation.  If the cooking is then not up to sctratch, I find myself wishing the chef could demonstrate a mastery of the established repertoire before attempting to improve it.

I could think of plenty of examples, but here's one: I would rather eat a well-executed duck a l'orange and a few fried potatoes, than an unsuccessful braised duck with marinated figs and eight spice sauce on a root vegetable puree.

I might start a thread about this one day...

[Priscilla]

Interesting article, Miss J.  Turgid prose has got its place.  

The Rosti mixing bowl the writer cites is a design classic, but the tilty-ring to which he refers, and notes with some anger consumer rejection of, really was an unnecessary conceit.  One of the beautiful things about a mixing bowl, conceptually, is that it is all of a piece, complete unto itself, nothing extraneous, separate, loseable.

Not that there can’t or won’t be design improvements on the mixing bowl.  As in cuisine, though, and I am sort of a Pollyanna on this account, innovation must justify its own existence.  It must make sense, it must propel us even a little further along the historical continuum, it must represent improvement.  The inescapable intrinsic subjectivity in defining all these ideas is assumed, fodder for continued debate.

And what I was thinking of reading the essay was how Ikea is like a chain restaurant, knocking off and diluting and serving up lukewarm effigies of not-always-good design.  World-wide!

Priscilla

[John Whiting]

I assume that the "tilty-ring" mixing bowl is the sort which comes in nested sizes with a loose ring attached on either side. I've had a stainless steel set for forty years that I bought from Sears and which hang at eye level from a single hook under a shelf above the work surface. Convenient and instantly available, they're the ones I always go for -- I wouldn't be without them.

[John Whiting]

Maybe this is an effect exaggerated by the competitiveness of the Manhattan food scene, but I often have the impression that almost every dish on a menu has to have some new combination of ingredients, a new twist, even just an unusual garnish or presentation.  If the cooking is then not up to sctratch, I find myself wishing the chef could demonstrate a mastery of the established repertoire before attempting to improve it.

Increasingly it's the way that young chefs are taught in certain schools. In London, the Guild of Food Writers were "guests" at one such trendy establishment. The report I wrote for our newsletter deals, I think, with the question you raise:

GFW workshops should be educational experiences. Last night’s Evening at Butler’s Wharf Chef School with British Meat fulfilled this obligation,  exemplifying as it did the commercial hype and conceptual emptiness at the heart of London’s trendy restaurant scene.

The core of the evening’s exercise was “Inspirations”, a glossy little handout designed to sell fresh British meat to the typical housewife. The recipes were “inspired” by three minor “celebrities” – not even celebrity chefs, but obscure media figures who were handed their recipes on a platter by three students from Butler’s Wharf. Last night, it was these trainees who proceeded to give their grandparents a lesson in egg-sucking. In the course of it we learned where London’s top restaurants get their endless supply of budding structural engineers who are prepared to raise British cuisine to ever-greater heights. It’s the Leaning Tower of Pizza – if you can’t stomach it, then climb it.

Gymnastics aside, the second great lesson we learned was that British meat must be cut into tiny slivers and cleverly disguised as the product of a whole gazetteer of exotic countries. The list of ingredients must read like role call at the UN. Is there some tiny Pacific island that has been neglected? Then back to the spice rack!

Integral to such a randomly eclectic approach is an educational philosophy in which the would-be chefs learn, not a repertoire of essential foundation techniques, but a set of ultimately predictable improvisations in which a repertoire of briefly favoured ingredients pass like the little figures on the face of some curious clock. (Oh no! Not lemon grass again!) We leaned that this school has the closest of ties with some of London’s most trendy restaurants, who can rely on it for trainee staff who will be faithful followers of fashion.

Having been shown in tedious detail how to construct these student concoctions, we were then ushered into a dining area where we were invited to sit down and eat them – at a cost of twenty pounds a head. Thus, another valuable lesson, this time in the ineffable art of chutzpah. Twenty quid, plus wine and coffee? To eat advertising?

Someday this pretentious tower will collapse of its own weight. Out there in the world, those faithful few that still purchase raw ingredients are mostly using them for traditional meat-and-two-veg dishes, not to play Lego games with. Who really believes that the sales of British meat will be materially affected by a handful of confusion recipes dreamed up by the distasteful in pursuit of the gullible?

A couple of years ago, in Auch for a concert, I and the other musicians were taken for lunch to a local Ecole which included a training school for the catering professions. We were received, seated, cooked for and served by an earnest assemblage of 13- to 18-year-olds. The food was unexceptional but perfectly sound bougeoise cooking – the sort you’d happily eat in a decent local bistro. The service was solemn and self-conscious, but perfectly disciplined. They did their job well and we, as diners, did not feel in the least uncomfortable.

Perhaps after graduation only a tiny handful of those conscientious conformists will make names for themselves. But if they do, it will be on the solid foundation of having roasted, braised, stewed, parboiled and fricasseed before they stir-fried.

[Lord Michael Lewis]

...my regret that chefs either want to, or feel pressurised to, devise menus of new and innovative dishes rather than perfect the preparation of the established repertoire.

Without knowledge of that which has been before how can anyone genuinely innovate?

My own reflections on culinary creativity have brought me to the conclusion that the creative process is based on a discerning synthesis of input coupled with imagination and tempered by good-taste. If any of these elements are missing the result is the typical miasma to which Londoners have become so accustomed in recent years. The almost total lack of ability to distinguish actual creativity from its more common prosthetic renderings is the maddening hallmark of most of those who make their livings by commentating on the restaurant 'scene'.

[Steve Plotnicki]

"I could think of plenty of examples, but here's one: I would rather eat a well-executed duck a l'orange and a few fried potatoes, than an unsuccessful braised duck with marinated figs and eight spice sauce on a root vegetable puree."

Wilfrid - I know exactly what you mean but I find it's easier to find a good braised duck with figs than finding a good Duck a l'Orange. In fact, I have found that quite often classic dishes like that sound better than they taste, even if made well. There has to be a reason that certain dishes have fallen out of favor with the public. I often wonder if these dishes were ever good, or if we just didn't know any better, or if they just aren't made well anymore. Then there are other dishes like cassoulet that never go out of fashion so there must be a reason.

[Lord Michael Lewis]

I find it's easier to find a good braised duck with figs than finding a good Duck a l'Orange. In fact, I have found that quite often classic dishes like that sound better than they taste, even if made well.

Then there are other dishes like cassoulet that never go out of fashion so there must be a reason.

I would dispute Duck a l'Orange's claim to classic status. Indeed, fashionable dishes are by their nature non-classic. For most, this attribution is made retrospectively.

[John Whiting]

The weakness of canard a l'orange as usually served is that the recipe originally called for sour seville-type oranges, which provided a tartly acidic contrast to the rich fatty duck. When made with modern oranges, it merely adds sweetness to the fattiness, which ultimately becomes cloying.

[Wilfrid]

Okay, maybe it was a bad example - and of course I didn't mean I wanted to eat a badly made version of duck a l'orange.  I considered giving the example of a fancied up cassoulet I was once served, with odd ingredients and an unnecessary crispy potato waffle topping  - I kid you not - but thankfully I couldn't remember the details.  

But what did anyone think of the point I was making?  No, don't tell me here* - I should give it more thought and start a thread.

*Not an instruction, just a suggestion.

[Steve Klc]

Wilfrid--if you think this is "an effect exaggerated by the competitiveness of the Manhattan food scene," within the NY food scene, then imagine what happens when chefs from around the country, with less exposure, training, confidence and restraint, come to NY to cook and/or try to attract media attention for themselves?

Might there be more than just a little pressure to create and serve "more interesting" dishes than they ordinarily would feel at home? I'd suspect so.

[Priscilla]

I assume that the "tilty-ring" mixing bowl is the sort which comes in nested sizes with a loose ring attached on either side. I've had a stainless steel set for forty years that I bought from Sears and which hang at eye level from a single hook under a shelf above the work surface. Convenient and instantly available, they're the ones I always go for -- I wouldn't be without them.

The bowls you describe, John, sound like the classic Revere Ware stainless with the hanging ring, or similar.  Have a few myself I've picked up along the way--I like the shape of them for many jobs.

The Rosti bowls referred to are Melamine or another hard plastic, groovy colorways, instantly recognizable as Scandinavian.  Integral handles, no rings.  Pursued by collectors, nowdays.  At least one update came with a circular rubberized ring that sat on the counter, holding the bowl at an angle of the cook's choosing.

Priscilla

[John Whiting]

Steve P wrote:

John - I am starting to feel like the Israelis.

I may be fat, but I'm not Arafat.

I get blamed for being the one to introduce politics into the discussion.

Sorry I annoy ya. But don't let it turn into paranoia!

[lizziee]

Miss J brought up the notion of chef's copying from other chefs. In the spring edition of Club Cigare, there was a long Q and A with Trama from Puymirol. Trama brought up the problem of copied ideas and has now resorted to taking photographs of his creations.

Cabrales was kind enough to translate it for me. My high school French is just too rusty.

Those Who Copy

"Michel Rostang visited [my restaurant]; my "Double Corona" dessert pleased him and he furnished a pale imitation of it. My "tear" [dish] as well as my "crystallines"[?] have been copied throughout the world.  It is normal to copy, but the source of the original must be known [is "acknolwedged" the intended meaning?]. Robuchon's Creme Brulee, of catalan origin, was prepared for the first time at the New York restaurant "Le Cirque". Now, to protect myself, I take photographs, which I date, [of dishes].  Creativity is a full-time activity, and a dish is 80% done [i.e., pursued] in one's mind; after that, it's technique that develops it."

Les Copieurs

"Michel Rostang est venu, mon dessert Double Corona lui a plu et il en a fait une pale imitation. Ma larme a ete copiee dans le monde entier, mes cristallines aussi. Il est normal de copier, mais il faut savoir d'ou vient l'original. La Creme Brulee de Robuchon,d'abord d'origine catalane, a ete faite pour la premiere fois

au restaurant "Le Cirque" a New-York. Maintenant, pour me proteger, je fais des photos que je date. La creation, c'est 24 h sur 24, et un plat se fait dans la tete a 80%, apres c'est de la technique de mise au point."

[Steve Klc]

Lizziee--I wonder what you think about this passage--you're not giving anything away?  If Trama is quoted accurately and not out of a much larger context, it's one of the dumbest things I've read--on several levels--attributed to an elite chef in a while.  Those "who worry about being copied" are as misguided as those who see copying as some sort of sin of commission and aren't able to talk about it honestly.

The last passage about dishes being developed or pursued 80% in the mind and then fleshed out by technique rings roughly true for the way I work.  It has nothing to do with the base of knowledge and experience and spirit which informs those processes.

Trama comes off as petty and insecure.

[jaybee]

This society has the right to be served well and, at best, it means that we can serve by making small, but innovative step in the right direction.

Amazing to hear an "artist" argue for incrementalism.  If his essential point is that innovation in products that doesn't result in improved functionality does not contribute to the social good, I disagree.  How many different ball point pens have I bought simply for the pleasure of holding and looking at an object that was new. Is pleasure not a social benefit?

The fact is "new" ideas are inseparable from what exists. Szent-Gyorgi said "discovery is seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought."

I think people often confuse "different" with "innovative." Uncreative people are often satisfied by being different rather than striving for truly creative innovation. Merchants offer products with a difference in the hope that people will buy theirs over others, even if the difference is trivial.  Sometimes that works, but most often not.  The trivial difference serves to attract attention momentarily, but eventually interest (and customers) evaporate.

My visit to Russell Wright exhibit yesterday brought home (pun intended)  the value and importance of "creative" design for mundane products.  The pleasure of looking at his ordinary products in new ways was startling to me.  If he had shared this author's view, and had his production people been like the Chinese, who refused to produce his new teapot, what a loss to society!

And yes, John, economics drives the vast part of human endeavor, individual and collective.  Self-interest is the most powerful drive after self preservation, and no system serves self-interest better than capitalism. Sure Van Gogh continued to paint and create new images without earning a sous for his work.  But I'm sure, other things equal, he would have preferred to collect a fat price for his paintings and been able to live better than he did.

To bring this back to food, for my money it makes little difference whether I am eating a dish prepared by its original creator or a fifth generation copy by a acolyte or opportunist chef, as long as what I am eating is the best that dish could taste.  Though if it hadn't been created in the first place, I would never have had the chance to eat the "copy."

So where has this gotten us?  Seems we took your bait, John. An interesting exercise.  Thanks Miss J.