Fine Dining vs. Cheap Eats

[LaNiña]

Part of the reason that this discussion is problematic is because we're arguing over points that are inherently subjective for each of us. Plotnicki saying "BECAUSE IT'S BETTER" has no real meaning, because, although most of us might agree with him, it is a matter of opinion. There is no winning or losing such an argument. Of course, if the arguing is for the sake of arguing, then argue on.

[Wilfrid]

Soba, you did go a bit wobbly towards the end there!

[John Whiting]

I'm willing to believe that you [steve] win most of your arguments, but I'm also willing to believe you win them on style rather than substance.

Or on persistence?

[hollywood]

I find lima beans kind of boring.

Yes, but if you call them fava beans........

[Steve Plotnicki]

" Part of the reason that this discussion is problematic is because we're arguing over points that are inherently subjective for each of us."

Nina - Well that is the problem isn't it. When I say France has better food, I say it objectively not because I like it more. Others do not seem to be using the same standard and that's why we keep arguing. For example I do not eat raw oysters. But that wouldn't keep me from acknowledging their greatness and the French superiority in cultivating them when evaluating their gastronomy.

Better doesn't mean better to me. It means better. Like cassoulet is better than cholent. It has pork. The rendered pork fat is a flavor that cholent can't replicate. So as good as cholent can be, it has its limitations. And ratatouille in the 6-8 hours of cooking needed to prepare it, gets secondary and tertiary flavors out of those vegetables that you just can't get out of a succotash. So it is.......

Come on you can do it too. Is DiFara's better just a matter of opinion? Is Sripaphai? Is Ali? Why do you get your kebabs from Ali as opposed to one of those kofte slingers down the block from him. He's better. Isn't that the answer? Is it really a matter of opinion? Not to say that there aren't arguments against those positions, but they don't undermine the original argument, they just present a different perspective on it. And it might be unPC of me to say this but, not every opinion has validity. I haven't been to DiFara's but I bet you that even if I went, I couldn't make a cogent argument against it being good. I might not like it the best but, I would evaluate in the context of *all pizza,* not just what I like (I already admitted to wanting brick oven and anchovy ) .

[LaNiña]

Of course I understand what you're saying, but in my old age, and having been slaughtered (like the tender little lamb I am) on Chowhound for this very thing, I am trying to be somewhat less egoccentric, ethnoccentric, and arrogant about this idea called an "opinion." Sure, I know with my whole being that Ali's kebabs are the best, objectively, and that DiFara is the best pizza (of its kind) anywhere, and that ain't nobody gonna have a papaya salad like the one at Sripraphai, at least not in this hemisphere. But I am an experienced eater of these foods, in general. I refuse to say that my opinion is more valid *for everyone.* Maybe for those who are as experienced as I am, but for those who have not eaten (or contemplated) these foods as I have, my opinion is meaningless in their context.

[LaNiña]

I find lima beans kind of boring.

Yes, but if you call them fava beans........

If you call 'em fava beans, you'd just be calling a lima bean by the wrong name. Lima is lima and fava is fava.

[LaNiña]

"When I say France has better food, I say it objectively not because I like it more. Others do not seem to be using the same standard and that's why we keep arguing. For example I do not eat raw oysters. But that wouldn't keep me from acknowledging their greatness and the French superiority in cultivating them when evaluating their gastronomy."

I just read that again. What horseshit. Of COURSE it's because you like it more. Someone who doesn't like it couldn't give a rat's ass about your professed "objectivity." What is this "same standard" business - are you saying that there is one single objective universal standard by which to judge all things culinary? Someone who thinks raw oysters are vile might very well think nothing of your magnanimous view of their superiority. Think about offal - I adore it. You know how many really serious eaters think that it's truly sickening?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Nina - I was just about to post something and then I read your last response. Okay, let's take it from the other direction.

Is every opinion about food valid? Do you not think that a certain expertise is needed to evaluate good food, or can anyone do it? How about music? Art? Literature? Is it all subjective? Does John Grisham write as well as Steinbeck because I say so?

[cabrales]

I'd appreciate members' input on what cuisine, if it is not French cuisine, would be viewed as the best and the reasons for that assessment. I think it might be difficult to come up with a reasoned alternative, which would tend to suggest that French cuisine is the best.

While an argument could be made by others for Italian, Japanese or Chinese cuisine, what other cuisines could approach the point of being considered? And how would members classify certain "high"-end restaurants that exist in Spain today?

[LaNiña]

Food is different than literature, because it involves an individual PHYSICAL response, ie taste buds, sense of smell, interacting with food. I can taste every type of food known to mankind, but I still might not LIKE certain things. If you and I come to the understanding that we have similar tastes, similar experiences, and similar goals, then your opinion will carry weight with me. But for someone who doesn't share your tastes, or has no interest in those experiences, it doesn't matter in any way.

I have a really good friend whom I consider one of the smartest people I know. Well travelled, well read, a great writer, blah blah. His opinion about food means NOTHING to me because he's culinary boor. But believe you me, there are a lot of people like him in the world - and those people's opinions matter as much as yours do WITHIN THEIR CONTEXTS.

We're arguing about egocentricity and ethnocentricity here.

[LaNiña]

And is that hooked on classics crap that you sell any less "good" than real classical music? A lot of people like it, even people (like you, if memory serves), who appreciate the "real" thing.

[cabrales]

Nina -- I agree with you that a particular diner's preferences are intimate and subjective. That a given diner may not prefer French cuisine, or conversely adores French cuisine, does not address the broader question of whether French cuisine is the "best". While my subjective preference is for French cuisine by an immense margin, it is the prevalence of that subjective preference among many other diners interested in cuisine that is one of the factors supporting the superiority of French cuisine.

[LaNiña]

You hit the nail on the head, Cabby: "...among many other diners interested in cuisine...." That's not a great big percentage of the world's population, right? Listen, I'm a snob and an elitist and I don't apologize for it. And I believe fully in the superiority of French cuisine, in so far as it ranks as culinary artistry. But it doesn't *move* me the way certain other cuisines move me as an eating experience. I can appreciate the technical mastery of certain painters, for example, but it doesn't mean that those paintings will have as much meaning for me.

[SobaAddict70]

Plotnicki-san: WELL (hmph), since you put it that way, of course ratatouille is better than succotash. Anyone can see that....unless they're Puritans, in which case what you have is a no-win situation.

[Steve Plotnicki]

"Food is different than literature, because it involves an individual PHYSICAL response, ie taste buds, sense of smell, interacting with food. I can taste every type of food known to mankind, but I still might not LIKE certain things."

But all that says is that you can't view food objectively. But there are people who can. Just like there are people who smell perfume for a living. It isn't based on their preferences, but on their ability to discern subtle differences in the fragrances. Same with wine tasting. It's not about liking it, it's about having the ability to differentiate between terroirs on tasting.

Quality isn't a matter of opinion, it's a matter of meeting objective standards. It has nothing to do with things like liking offal or oysters. Those are just complex tastes that some people might like, and some people might not like. But whether you like veal kidneys is a wholly different question than is this particular one of good quality, and has it been prepared well? Those aren't really measured subjectively. They are measured objectively.

[Toby]

I find myself becoming increasingly verbose -- truly scary. However, I feel compelled to write briefly about what may seem political, but is only meant to discuss the ways that individually we can clear a little space from the ugliness in the world around us.

Trying to formulate what has been so provoking about the need to prove French cuisine dominant (aside from uninformed guesses about historical processes), I think what bothers me is the need to make one thing be #1; the terminal point of this is fundamentalism. In this bloodied world, and in this wounded city and country, I believe it's imperative that we just accept that we can like and believe in what we like and believe in and let others do the same. We can make our case for why we love/respect French/Chinese/Mexican, whatever cuisine without having to deny someone else the right to make their case. There are so many intelligent people here at egullet, and each of us has some area we know alot about that others might not. So in learning more deeply about what we like and what others like, we enrich ourselves and our culture and maybe make this world a less hateful place. If we ever want to be that shining city on a hill (no matter if that hill is in the U.S. or anywhere, because isn't that really the point of the U.S. in its most realized idealism?), we have to abandon this need to be dominant. Everyone said after September 11 that everything was changed; then why not change it in a better way rather than just making it bloodier? The only axe I have to grind here is why don't we just put away our axes.

[cabrales]

But all that says is that you can't view food objectively. But there are people who can. Just like there are people who smell perfume for a living. It isn't based on their preferences, but on their ability to discern subtle differences in the fragrances. Same with wine tasting. It's not about liking it, it's about having the ability to differentiate between terroirs on tasting.

Steve P -- Could you discuss of whom you are speaking, in referring to people who can view food objectively? How can, taking a cuisinier whose food you like, one objectively evaluate a Pierre Gagnaire dinner, for example?

Toby -- Discussion regarding the dominance of one cuisine over another, for me, is not being conducted with a view towards denigrating cuisines that are not dominant. It is with a view towards articulating what I perceive to be a rather generally accepted matter among many (but not all, of course) diners "interested in cuisine". And Nina is observant in highlighting my use of that qualifier on the pool of diners I am considering. It is fortunate that we in a position to be able to analyze food as other than a need-meeting commodity, and the events of and following 9/11 have not, presumably, been forgotten by many of us. However, to assert that French cuisine is best is not an indicium of intolerance.

[Robert Schonfeld]

I went to the gym instead of having lunch. Now I'm really hungry.

Cabrales and Steve, I respect each of you as dedicated perticipants on egullet. Without even putting it to a test, I would admit that each of you has greater experience with French cuisine (which is not to say that I don't have any). At the same time, without meaning to be immodest, I do have a certain amount of experience with the subject of taste, both in the mouth and in the brain. I promise this is the last time I will say this, in this discussion, at least: to say that a particular cuisine is better than another is to misuse the word "better", or at least to waste its use. To say that a particular cuisine is better because it tastes better is embarrassing. Complexity does not equal better. There's all kinds of better.

One day walking in Jerusalem, my wife spotted something and went over to a tree. As I watched, she gave the trunk a good kick, bringing to the ground a clatter of pods, which she gathered up. Coming back over, she handed me one and said "chew it". It was carob. Around the corner, we came upon a fig tree, black figs, ripe to the point that the base of each fruit had just split and begun to ooze honey. They were as big as your fist. We sat on the ground, eating carob and figs. That was the best.

[LaNiña]

I find myself becoming increasingly verbose -- truly scary.  However, I feel compelled to write briefly about what may seem political, but is only meant to discuss the ways that individually we can clear a little space from the ugliness in the world around us.

Trying to formulate what has been so provoking about the need to prove French cuisine dominant (aside from uninformed guesses about historical processes), I think what bothers me is the need to make one thing be #1; the terminal point of this is fundamentalism.  In this bloodied world, and in this wounded city and country, I believe it's imperative that we just accept that we can like and believe in what we like and believe in and let others do the same.  We can make our case for why we love/respect French/Chinese/Mexican, whatever cuisine without having to deny someone else the right to make their case.  There are so many intelligent people here at egullet, and each of us has some area we know alot about that others might not.  So in learning more deeply about what we like and what others like, we enrich ourselves and our culture and maybe make this world a less hateful place.  If we ever want to be that shining city on a hill (no matter if that hill is in the U.S. or anywhere, because isn't that really the point of the U.S. in its most realized idealism?), we have to abandon this need to be dominant.  Everyone said after September 11 that everything was changed; then why not change it in a better way rather than just making it bloodier?  The only axe I have to grind here is why don't we just put away our axes.

Toby, while I'm sure your intentions are good, you must understand that this argument is, at its core, one that the participants are thoroughly enjoying. It is not acrimonious. I do not want to be told to "put away my axe." I'm not yielding an axe, nor is anyone else who is involved in this discussion, as far as I know. Nobody is denying anyone anything. It's a discussion among consenting, opinionated adults. It's great sport.

[SobaAddict70]

Nina,

Amen, sister!

Toby: Thanks for the thought, but the discussion isn't as bitter as other, more recent, similar discussions that come to mind. Again, thanks for the sentiment but things are ok. Really.

SA

[LaNiña]

"Quality isn't a matter of opinion, it's a matter of meeting objective standards."

But whose objective standards???? Standards of any kind have meaning only when likeminded people view those standards, or choose to behave within their constraints.

Take the argument about appropriate dress, for which I'm still villified on CH. I argued that there IS a standard for appropriate dress in fine restaurants, but man, a lot of people do NOT agree with that.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Sorry Cabby I was talking to Nina. In fact that's her quote up there. If I understand the rest of your question, it has to do with acknowledging Gagnaire's contribution to cooking, outside of the context of liking the cuisine. I thought I managed to do that in reviewing Arpege as the style of cooking is not one I'm predisposed to liking. Yet, one can only view it through the lens of what Passard is trying to accomplish and to assess whether it's valid, whether he's successful at it, and how does it taste within those parameters. Sure one's own subjective likes and dislikes colors their opinion. But somehow if you want to try and be objective, you have to overcome that bias for the sake of tasting it correctly.

Robert S. I completely agree with you. But it's one of the problems when discussing things that are arbitrary in the context of questions that are framed like they aren't. Once someone asks "Why is French food dominant?" In the context of that question to say it's better isn't so far out of line. You should have come to lunch instead of the gym. It tastes better.

Toby - I don't think this thread has caused the level of dissension you are picking up. It's actually a rehash of a number of different arguments where Wilfrid doesn't really want to admit that French food is superior. Notice I didn't say he wont admit it. He will. He just doesn't really like to But thanks for caring the way you did.

Nina - Well the dress code thing is a moving target. But let me try one on you for size. Is Difara's pizza better than Domino's because of someone's opinion or is it that they use the top quality and freshest ingredients?

[John Whiting]

And is that hooked on classics crap that you sell any less "good" than real classical music?

The defining difference for me is between what was composed in order to communicate (for whatever reason) and what was put together for purely commercial reasons. (Not that commercial necessity never played a part even in what Mozart chose or was compelled to write.) In the angry words of Ezra Pound, "Nothing is made but to sell, and to sell quickly."

[Toby]

Yes, Nina, and I'm enjoying it too, up to a point. If I'm learning something

than it's enjoyable; otherwise, arguing has diminishing returns.

Speaking of succotash, I made one once with butter beans and fresh-picked corn, grated off the cob with their milk. I cooked the cobs in some chicken broth, sauteed some diced salt pork and then cooked the strained stock down with the salt pork. Added the butter beans, corn kernels, corn milk, some thinly sliced green onions, seasonings and finished off with a little heavy cream. It was so good on a summer night with sliced heirloom tomatoes, salt and pepper fried chicken, and cymlings sauteed in a little bacon fat with peach and berry cobbler for dessert.