Food Directives From The Ridiculous To The Inane

Frank Bruni, in this Op-Ed piece in yesterday’s New York Times, reports being told one of the funniest things I’ve ever heard. He was dining at a New York City restaurant with a pricey, multi-coursed menu.

Bruni was served a specter of different (savory?!!) flavored waters with the waiter suggesting that he “make a memory of them.” You HAVE to be kidding me!

Never mind that Bruni described the drinks as “pond runoff” or that they were served lukewarm, which would make a bad situation even more dire, but the worst thing, it seems to me, is that the kitchen wasted so much time actually coming up with and THEN executing this dumb idea.

Bruni writes about all the crazy ways that food is served and the hoops you have to jump through to eat your meal the way the kitchen advises (commands) you to.

Didn’t this all start with molecular gastronomy with the chef telling diners that they had to eat the CO2 frozen shrimp eyeball BEFORE the Mississippi mud foam? Shouldn’t we worry about food that needs such explicit instructions to be palatable?

The only thing I disagree with Bruni about is THIS (although it is guffaw-inducing):

"Diners at the latest hot bistro or trattoria snap loving pictures of everything they eat, seeming to forget that it’s dinner, not “America’s Next Top Chicken Breast.” In New York, even the meatballs have paparazzi."

I’m a visual learner and, when I’m not reading the culinary literary greats, I personally prefer to read about food that I can see. (Of course, one of those exceptions was reading Frank Bruni’s reviews in the NY Times).

As far as tutelage in the WAY to eat, though, people don't need their hands held as they make their way through a menu.

Actually, the only time I think a diner needs instruction is when he or she is one of those people who has to eat one thing at a time and who segregates each item from its neighbor. They have a conniption if different foods meet on the plate. It doesn't matter that it all meets in the stomach, but on the plate, NEVER! Those are the people who need guidance...but from a different kind of professional, not the ones wearing a chef’s hat.

Hold on, Nellie! I just remembered the cheese sandwiches I ate as a kid. The cheese was never allowed to touch the bread. OMG! I’m one of them! I grew out of that long ago, but what possible reason could I have had for doing that? Maybe I just intrinsically knew that the (individually wrapped) cheese (food slices) would taste better when surrounded by turkey. Who knows?

But, really, are the chefs, who issue strict rules about how their food is to be eaten any different from the sick puppies who have to eat things in a specific order? Aren’t they both exhibiting the same desire to have some control over the often chaotic environment of modern life?

And does a fancy chef explaining WHY, WHEN and HOW you have to eat something make it any easier to bear? I personally have a bit of a rebel streak, so if someone tells me to eat something in a specific order, I’m more than likely to do the exact reverse. AND I would never stand for lukewarm water, from a pond or anywhere else.

The Storm Between Paula And Tony And Is This The SAME Tony Bourdain Who Gave It To Alice Waters For Being An Elitist?

Last week, I noticed that the dustup between Tony and Paula was getting pretty heated. It was even commented upon on the Op-Ed page* of the NY Times last week. I guess what the grand dame of heart-stoppingly good Southern cuisine and the bad boy of the professional kitchen have to say about each other must be pretty important.

To recap, Anthony Bourdain spoke ill of several Food Network hosts – Paula, Guy, Aunt Sandy and RR in an interview with TV Guide. He said, “The worst, most dangerous person to America is clearly Paula Deen. She revels in unholy connections with evil corporations and she's proud of the fact that her food is f---ing bad for you."

He doesn’t stop there:

“If I were on at seven at night and loved by millions of people at every age, I would think twice before telling an already obese nation that it's OK to eat food that is killing us. Plus, her food sucks."

We got Paula’s response on Page Six of the Daily News:

“Anthony Bourdain needs to get a life. You don’t have to like my food, or Rachael’s, Sandra’s and Guy’s. But it’s another thing to attack our character.“

Paula continues, "Not everyone can afford to pay $58 for prime rib or $650 for a bottle of wine. (BINGO, Paula!) My friends and I cook for regular families who worry about feeding their kids and paying the bills . . . It wasn’t that long ago that I was struggling to feed my family, too.”

Why is this news? Bourdain’s been making negative comments about television cooking hosts forever. Actually, I thought Tony had slowed down his Rachael-Ray-is-the-most-evil-thing-on-the-planet rants (not that I totally disagree, but only about her cooking, not her personhood). I guess he has a new season of No Reservations to promote.

The real reason this particular back and forth has caught fire now is that Paula’s response has touched a nerve. She knows what it’s like to be on the other side of affluence – having been through a divorce, agoraphobia and economic worries. She may be living on easy street now, but no one can deny it was an uphill battle filled with hard work and sacrifice.

By portraying Tony’s diatribe as an attack on the have-nots by the haves, who casually order hugely expensive restaurant meals and think nothing of buying any ingredient they fancy, no matter the price, (as long as it’s politically correct), Paula has struck a chord.

The ironic thing is that Tony took Paula’s side of this argument against Alice Waters not so long ago. It must be inconvenient for him to remember that he railed against Alice Waters’ philosophy of supporting local farmers and pushing organic, farm fresh foods as being incredibly rarified and elitist. He said this in 2007:

"We're all in the middle of a recession, like we're all going to start buying expensive organic food and running to the green market. There's something very Khmer Rouge about Alice Waters that has become unrealistic."

Tony ends with this statement – “I’m a little uncomfortable with legislating good eating habits.” HUH?!!! Why the diatribe against Paula, then?

Why is it, when arguing against Alice Waters, that Tony feels we should have the choice to eat whatever we want? But he doesn’t allow the same freedom of food expression to Paula and her fans.

Our dastardly eating habits come from so many places. Paula is not the number one cause. I’d look to too much television time and paying too much attention to video screens as pretty high on the list of what we should change. Our sedentary lifestyle is the root cause for many of our obesity issues.

If we worked in the fields or paced factory floors or even walked up and down 20 flights of stairs a day, the story would be different. But many of us work and play (and eat) in front of screens and unless we’re bicycling or elliptical-ing at the same time, WHATEVER we eat is just going to sit there…no matter what it is.

No one home to cook or teach youngsters how to cook is another problem. It IS amazing how many people do not know simple kitchen basics. Adding a cooking curriculum to schools would be one great way to foster a healthier lifestyle in every family.

The list goes on and on. Bad food available cheaply and plentifully is another reason why so many eat so poorly. Lack of fresh food in many neighborhoods is a huge problem.

I can’t criticize Paula for all of our nutritional woes. I would feel as if I were saying something bad about a beloved aunt. Plus Paula has such a cozy way of welcoming us into her kitchen.

Anthony Bourdain is as warm and cuddly as a rattlesnake, even if I’m sure his culinary likes and dislikes are a lot close to mine than Paula’s are. I also like his sense of humor, although I do find him a bit scary. But does he really not see the contradiction in criticizing Alice Waters for demanding fresh, local food (especially to kids), and, at the same time, blasting Paula for cooking feel-good food and working with a company that gives loads of (okay, not the healthiest) food away every year?

Isn’t it obvious how incongruous it is that TODAY he’s playing the Alice Waters’ role and PAULA is playing his, by crying foul, that the normal person can’t afford high falutin’ baby squashes or rainbow colors of kale, whatever that is anyway.

Frank Bruni makes a good point in comparing Tony’s harangue to what’s going on in Washington. The tenor of the Tony’s remarks (actually they’re more like rants) is the opposite of an open-hearted, kind-spirited conversation to find common ground.

On the subject of food, at least, it’s a shame that something that can bring so much joy, not to mention actual physical sustenance, is being used as a way to demonize one’s opponents.

Of course, there are gads of tough practical issues and some moral ones too. What if KFC offered to give away millions of pounds of food to poor school children? What if they offered to supply free school lunches across America? Probably the people in charge would say no. But does that mean they would prefer kids to go hungry than to eat KFC?

What if Cool Whip were offered in every shelter and soup kitchen? Obviously, to that one I would say no and hope a more healthful alternative could be found. But that’s easy for someone with a full refrigerator (before the hurricane, at least) and pantry stocked with extras to say. To folks with few alternatives, free ham or cheap hamburgers at least fills them up to fight another day.

It’s hard to disagree with Tony that people should eat better and make better choices. I’ve always agreed when Alice Waters has said the same thing. But the best way to make that happen probably does not include accusing sweet Paula of crimes against humanity and berating the food so venomously that she offers with such love and affection.

*And isn’t it interesting that The Times now has TWO food-centric writers on their Op-Ed and Opinion pages? Frank Bruni AND Mark Bittman.)

Top Chef DC - Restaurant Wars: A Ridiculous Outcome And Frank Bruni Yells Coco Chanel’s Name

Maybe yelling is a slight exaggeration, but in response to a fashion question, Frank rushes in with the answer, “Coco Chanel”. More about that later and it IS amusing to hear who it was that brought up the style icon. Hint: It wasn't the former model who hosts Top Chef.

The Quickfire Challenge is the seen-before tag team cook-off. It's a good one. The chefs have 40 minutes to make a dish, with each one taking a turn to cook for 10 minutes. The chefs are blindfolded until it’s their turn, so they can’t be sure what went on before.

The blue team with Kenny at the helm gets off to a very strong start. He sets out everything like a road map and there is no wondering what to do.

Angelo’s red team wasn’t so lucky with Alex oversalting the fish. The blue team, Kenny, Kevin, Kelly and Amanda won. No immunity but they split $10,000.

The judge was Nancy Pelosi. I like her, but she did stride into the room with a bit of a queen-like manner. Plus, I’m not so sure Madam Speaker garnered herself any votes. I’ve never seen so much equivocating.

Oh wait, she’s a politician. Of course, she hemmed and hawed. Pelosi said she liked both dishes, but after a bit of sputtering, she finally admitted that the red team’s dish was too salty, so she gave the win to the blue team.

The Elimination Challenge is Restaurant Wars. I don’t know why, but it just didn’t seem as exciting as in past seasons. Did they have more chefs in the past?

Alex is kicked out to the dining room, because none of his teammates want him ruining the food.

It seems like we’re being setup for a shock, because the Blue Team is working together beautifully and calmly, in a very organized fashion. The Red Team is running around panicked that Alex will ruin anything he touches.

Flash forward to the unbelievable results.

They call the Red Team in first which is startling to the Blue Team. The Red Team seems pretty surprised to be in there too. HOW did they get to that decision? They don’t even mention the dishes that they didn’t like. What is going on? Ed wins. Whatever, this is NOT making sense.

The Blue Team goes in. They are as confused as the viewers. When Padma tells them they are the losing team, even SHE doesn’t sound convinced. Kenny says that their communication in the kitchen was spot on and that he’s really surprised to be there.

Then Gail pipes in that they don’t care what was going on in the kitchen. They just care about the food and SERVICE. Well, apparently not.

Frank says he liked Kelly’s hosting; they didn’t like her soup. They liked Kevin’s fish; didn’t like Amanda’s meat - but did like Amanda’s sauce. Okay, we know all this. But WHY was the Blue Team worse than the Red Team?

There are no satisfactory answers. And I think Kevin and Kenny are REALLY brave when they enlighten the judges about what was going on with the other team regarding Alex. How is it fine that Alex did nothing and did NOT contribute a dish, which would have possibly changed the outcome?!!

Tom actually asks Kevin if he thinks Alex should go home and Kevin says YES…almost grateful that the long Alex nightmare could be over.

They go back to the stew room while the judges deliberate. Kenny and Kevin actually tell the Red Team TO THEIR FACES how unfair their strategy was.

Is there actually a glimmer of hope that the judges will do the right thing? No, they call them back in and amazingly send Kenny home. What?!? AND they absolutely do not give a reasonable explanation of why. I’m kind of fed up.

Let’s rewind and look at exactly what the judges’ reactions were to the two team’s restaurants and dishes. Note: Frank Bruni was the guest judge.

Alex is really unpleasant to the wait staff and does not greet the judges as they come in. Oh, and the Red Team named the restaurant EVOO, pronounced E-VOOOOO (not the usual Rachael Ray way). That name is sooo dumb.

They say the food will be Mediterranean. Does that mean that an American restaurant should be named Ketchup? Or a Chinese one Soy Sauce or a French one Butter? Oh wait, THAT IS a good name. Never mind….except about the EVOO.

ANGELO

CONFIT OF TOMATO SOUP, SQUASH & OLIVE CROUTON

Frank says he eats "that and I think I want to taste Angelo’s cooking. I think his cooking could take me in some interesting directions.”

Tiffany

Crudo Of Black Bass & Yellowtail Snapper With Meyer Lemon Caper Relish

Gail: ”Tiffany missed the subtlety here. It is amazingly salty.” Tom: “I think it’s borderline.”

They wait SO long for their entrées that Padma asks, “How we doing?!!” She actually says, “I want my second course.” Shouldn’t they have lost on the spot? Tom actually gets on his phone. To order takeout, I wonder?

Tiffany

Striped Bass, Stewed Spinach, Chorizo & Clams

Gail: “A little bit overcooked.” Frank thinks it’s a nice recovery from the first course and he likes “the chorizo presence”.

Ed

Slow-Baked Turbot, Eggplant Caviar & Black Olive Jus

Frank: “I really, really like Ed’s fish dish. There’s nothing overly aggressive about the way it’s sauced and seasoned.” Tom: “It’s really nice.”

Alex

Pan-Seared Lamb Chop, English Pea Puree, Smoked Bacon & Parmesan Foam

Frank: “I thought the lamb was beautifully cooked,” but he wishes there were texture in the dish.

Alex introduces the next dish as a PORK chop. Ninny.

Angelo & Ed

Seared Rib Eye Steak, Crushed Walnut Potatoes & Balsamic Fig Reduction

Tom does not love the steak, but he doesn’t mind the walnuts and potatoes. And Frank adds that he’s not getting the Mediterranean from their dishes and that’s their theme.

Frank says the service has been hit and miss. Y’think??? Alex is neither efficient nor warm. Frank also reminds the judges of Alex’s mistake at calling HIS entrée a pork chop.

They get up to leave and are interested to see if Alex will bid them farewell. Nope, no goodbye either, and he’s just standing there looking clueless and doesn’t move.

The Blue Team’s restaurant 2121 (the number of the Top Chef house) gets off to what we’re supposed to think is a better start. Kelly greets them warmly and shakes hands with everyone.

Kenny (back in the kitchen) says he created dishes to fit in with their American progressive concept, not to fit in with his ego.

Kelly

Chilled Sweet Corn Soup With Maryland Blue Crab Salad

Tom: ”Not a lot of corn flavor. Also it’s very thin. There’s noo flavor in this dish.” Gail: “I do like that Kelly used crab, so there’s this seasonal localness.” But she points out that the corn isn’t seasonal at the moment. They agree that in a couple of months, this soup might have been A LOT better.

Kenny

Beet Salad With Warm Chorizo Citrus Vinaigrette

(Why did they keep saying last week that Ethiopian food was everywhere in DC? I’m getting a definite Spanish vibe with all the chorizo being used.)

Frank: “Kenny has loaded the salad with A LOT of stuff.” And your point is?

Tom wonders who said “in fashion” one should always take off one accessory. In a split second, Frank offers that it was Coco Chanel. Tom: “I think he needed 3 or 4 accessories taken off this dish.”

BUT Tom hasn’t actually said anything was badly prepared in Kenny’s dish and he criticized Ed last week for ONLY having Steak, Rice and Beans in a dish. WHICH is it, Tom?

Amanda

Oakwood Grilled Strip Steak With Roasted Sunchoke & Maitake Mushrooms

Tom: “It’s cut too thin, so you can’t get that rich crust on the outside.” Frank: ”You can look at it and know that you’re not going to get the pleasure from it that you want.” They like the sauce.

Kelly comes over to check on them. Apparently, in her restaurant (which looks really good from the website), she’s in the kitchen and her husband is in the front of the house.

Kevin

Pan Roasted Halibut, Fennel Marmalade & Tomato-Fennel Emulsion

Frank: “I think this is really pretty. Kevin should paint.” Tom: “I think there is a lot of flavor in here. I think the fennel flavor is sooo present in this dish. It’s a really good sauce.”

Kenny

Crispy Aged Goat Cheese & Strawberry Rhubarb Relish

Gail: “Is it me or is that a massive piece of goat cheese to serve for one person?” Frank: “This is awful.” (Tell us how your really feel Frank.) “It’s a horror show.”

Kelly

Dark Chocolate Ganache Tart & Blackberry-Chocolate Chunk Ice Cream

Gail: “I love the salt in Kelly’s chocolate tart. I love the crust on Kelly’s chocolate tart. The ganache was creamy and silky.” Frank: “The ice cream had NO flavor.” Killjoy.

Before the judges leave, they agree that both teams had better luck with fish than meat. Frank hates the EVOO name and he says that BOTH teams had dishes that were embarrassments. And they agree that the service was much better at 2121.

So this seems to be the deal: They liked 4 of the Red Team’s dishes (but with quite a few provisos) and said 2 of them were bad.

And the Blue Team? They REALLY didn’t like 2 dishes, Kelly’s soup and Kenny’s goat cheese. But they loved Kevin’s fish and Kelly’s tart (but not her ice cream), and they liked Amanda’s sauce but not her meat. Even though the judges thought Kenny’s salad had too many ingredients in it, they never said they thought it was poorly executed. AND, again, they thought the service was really good.

Perhaps the Red Team had a tiny edge with the food, but that had to have been lost with the horrible, inadequate service.

During the Red Team’s service, Padma was sitting there complaining about the service; Tom was on the phone, so how could that NOT count hugely in the overall decision?

I’ve said this before - HORRIBLE service makes a HORRIBLE evening, NO MATTER HOW GOOD THE FOOD IS. And fantastic service can make just about anything taste better.

Since they didn't show us more of what went on between the judges, we're left wondering why the complete lack of decent service didn't count more against the Red Team. THEN they could have logically sent Alex home.

They are really risking antagonizing their viewers big time. I promise you NOONE wants to see a finale between Alex, Amanda and Ed.

I really wanted to see the judges go rogue and kick off Alex, even though his team won...which it shouldn't have.

As I was about to post this, I checked out Tom’s excuse for this week’s outcome. He snarkily reiterates (as if we were children) that Alex was on the winning team and so he wasn’t going to be eliminated AND that they ONLY judge on the current challenge.

I don’t mind the snarkiness (that would be mightily hypocritical on my part), but I’ve always hated the judging-only-on-the-current-dish thing. Surely Tom remembers one complete loser who was chosen Top Chef as a result of that dictum.

Eric’s reaction was interesting. His best point was that the failure of Kenny’s dishes had nothing to do with Alex’s shortcomings. And even if you’re the Executive Chef, you still have to taste your dishes and send out good food.

I’d kind of love it if the ratings went WAY down next week, so Bravo could understand that we weren’t ready to get rid of “The Beast”.

Oh, and I spied this in TINY print at the end of the episode; “Winning and elimination decisions were made by the Judges IN CONSULTATION WITH producers. Some elimination decisions were discussed with Bravo.”

Tom even says that the producers were not happy with the decision to eliminate Kenny. I wonder if they actually had to get the producers’ permission to send Kenny home. Bad call!!!